M8 Upgrade costs and the declining Economy

wgcho said:
Interesting, I called up THE leica dealer here in Seoul, and was told that you can walk in with an M8 and get it upgraded out the door next day. Too bad the price is now quite expensive due to the currency rate spike (was 1.4M KRW in Feb, now 2.4M KRW ~ $1500 USD for full upgrade)
Click to expand...

1.5 grand for an upgrade? bwahahahahahah!!!!!
 
I always figured that the high markup price on Leica cameras and lenses was the result of the meticulousness in their design and crafting and their reliability. That a Leica is a camera you buy once every 20 years or so rather than a new one every 3. And that when something goes wrong, there's great customer service behind it. That to me, is worth the hefty price premium.

I had the rewind release lever on my M7 just fall off one day and lost it. And I called Leica and they sent me the part in the mail free of cost. I've dropped my M7 from waist high, knocked it into dozens of things, carried it in the rain more than once, and it still works perfect.

As for the M8. I think it's fantastic Leica is offering a cheaper route to get new features on a camera rather than forcing me to buy a whole new one.

I was initially going to do the upgrade trifecta. Shutter/framelines/glass LCD. But then decided to only get the shutter and frameline upgrade. Then I noticed that the price increased dramatically. And I thought awhile about getting the upgrade while I still had the option to pay the lower price. I considered the price changes, usefulness and resale value. But in the end I decided against it. Pennies have to be pinched somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
Dear Tim,

As I pointed out earlier, Andreas Kaufmann has put his money where his mouth is and (I believe) is turning the company around. To point to Leica's problems in past years is a bit like saying that Chrysler is a success today becaise it was a success years ago. Companies' fortunes change.

I don't know how to turn Leica around, and it doesn't sound like you do. Surely this suggests that there's not much point in either of us complaining that they're getting it wrong, when we can't offer any useful suggestions on how to get it right.
Click to expand...

I certainly hope your optimism is well placed.

But you and I will have to disagree on whether there is any point in complaining about what they're getting wrong. I believe customers should do everything they can to let a company know what they think about that company's products and its decisions. That is one of the ways we help the company find its way.
And sometimes good things can happen.
Case in point is Leica's decision to include the discreet mode for M8s in the most recent firmware update. That came after a heavy volume of requests/complaints from M8 users.
We complained. Leica listened. Good for everyone.

I wonder. Do you think fans of a football or soccer team have no business second-guessing the team's coaches and owners? If we want to complain about something, do we have to be willing to buy the team first?
 
As for the M8. I think it's fantastic Leica is offering a cheaper route to get new features on a camera rather than forcing me to buy a whole new one.

I guess that depends on how one defines "features" and "cheaper".
 
swoop said:
I always figured that the high markup price on Leica cameras and lenses was the result of the meticulousness in their design and crafting and their reliability. That a Leica is a camera you buy once every 20 years or so rather than a new one every 3...

...As for the M8. I think it's fantastic Leica is offering a cheaper route to get new features on a camera rather than forcing me to buy a whole new one.
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose that's part of the problem right there. An M Leica is a camera that you pay for and keep for 20 years or so without replacing it. Digital cameras are (at least at this point) developing at a rate that requires or warrants their replacement in a much shorter timeframe. That you can upgrade an M8 is certainly beneficial, but the cost is rather extraordinary indeed, and if more upgrades keep coming for the m8 at these prices, the argument of paying more up front because it is going to last doesn't really continue to hold water. Eventually, a Leica M digital will be built with a higher-resolution sensor, with a lower-noise sensor, and God-willing a full frame sensor too. That'll probably require investing in a new camera. But how much money will have been spent, at that point, on a fully-upgraded m8?

While these incremental upgrades will certainly be worth the money to many consumers, it doesn't alter the fact that the old "pay plenty now, keep it forever with minimal investment" philosophy has gone away. That's the nature of digital, and not Leica''s fault, but that certainly doesn't help their position any.

...to say nothing of the fact that one of the "improvements" should really be a free upgrade. A new shutter and indestructible screen represent real product development in my mind. "Improved framelines?" After more than 50 years of making these cameras, I'd have thought Leica had frameline accuracy down cold by 2006.
 
I'm with folks on the "criticizing a company" thing.
I mean, I complain about the government, how things are done here at work, the transit system in our city etc. etc. etc.

Do I "own" any of these things? Nope - I mean I have a vested stake in my workplace because, hey, they pay me and I'd like to ensure the company remains viable. The government? well, I vote, therefore I feel it's my right to either complain or praise as I see fit. The transit system? Well, my property taxes help pay for that, so I again have a vested interest in it.

The local sports team?
I complain but I don't own stock, don't own the team nor does it end up mattering a big deal if they win or lose in the grand scheme of things. I do enjoy watching a game now and then but that's not going to make a big difference in my life if I never see one again.

I would say the same thing goes for Leica.

I'm more curious why Leica's pricing always brings out such vitriol (at least that's how it appears at times) in some folks.

My first Leica was used.
My second and third were used.
My Leica lenses are all used. (and yes... I do own Zeiss and Cosina glass too.. )

The only Leica I ever owned "new" was an M8 and even that I sold after it served its purpose for me. Leica only ever made money off of me with that one purchase.. 🙂

Would I have paid for the upgrade? Nope - but then again, the stuff that's getting upgraded doesn't matter to me. 😀
Would I have complained about the price of the upgrade? Nah...there are bigger/better things to go on about in this world.

Do I wonder if Leica will be around in the future? Who knows..... there are folks out there who thought GM would never be in trouble.... and look at their size and history in comparison to Leicas..

Cheers,
dave
 
Wiyum said:
...An M Leica is a camera that you pay for and keep for 20 years or so without replacing it....
Click to expand...

You are generalizing. That's not my expectation regarding my M8. I bought it because it's a digital RF, not to have a camera that lasts 20 years. I give it 4-6 years. If it last longer I will be happy, if not then I will not be disappointed.
 
tom.w.bn said:
You are generalizing. That's not my expectation regarding my M8. I bought it because it's a digital RF, not to have a camera that lasts 20 years. I give it 4-6 years. If it last longer I will be happy, if not then I will not be disappointed.
Click to expand...

Less generalizing than loosely quoting a previous post's argument. Still, it was often said in the days of the film M bodies, and at that time, it was true. In a digital world, longevity isn't a way of selling the high price tag anymore. Lack of competition, nor of used "previous models," does help I suppose.
 
kevin m said:
I'm just surprised you're still playing the "I have inside information you peasants don't have" card in these discussions, that's all.
Click to expand...

Dear Kevin,

And I'm a bit surprised at your interpretation. Yes, I do have more information than some -- but 'some' includes just about anyone who bothers to do any research at all, instead of just mouthing off.

Cheers,

R.
 
dcsang said:
I'm with folks on the "criticizing a company" thing.
I mean, I complain about the government, how things are done here at work, the transit system in our city etc. etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Dear Dave,

Vote. It's that simple. Politically, the vote is free. With a company, buy the product -- or not. That's the vote. Whingeing, if you don't vote, is of limited value. At best you can hope they listen, but if you don't present a better alternative to their ideas, and merely complain tnat they were wrong, why should anyone listen to you?

(Of course, "you" is a general term here, not just Dave.)

Cheers,

R.
 
Wiyum said:
...to say nothing of the fact that one of the "improvements" should really be a free upgrade. A new shutter and indestructible screen represent real product development in my mind. "Improved framelines?" After more than 50 years of making these cameras, I'd have thought Leica had frameline accuracy down cold by 2006.
Click to expand...
I wonder. Do you work for free? Well, I don't and neither does Leica. And about frameline accuracy. Well, obviously you do not understand the theory behind it. The framelines on the original M8 are accurate -at 0.7 meters. The ones on the upgrade are accurate - at 3 meters. Framelines on a rangefinder are accurate at one distance only. Some users were unable to wrap their mind around that basic fact, thus they consistently got their framing wrong. Now users have a choice according to their taste. That is all.
 
jaapv said:
I wonder. Do you work for free? Well, I don't and neither does Leica. And about frameline accuracy. Well, obviously you do not understand the theory behind it. The framelines on the original M8 are accurate -at 0.7 meters. The ones on the upgrade are accurate - at 3 meters. Framelines on a rangefinder are accurate at one distance only. Some users were unable to wrap their mind around that basic fact, thus they consistently got their framing wrong. Now users have a choice according to their taste. That is all.
Click to expand...


What were they thinking putting in framelines accurate at .7 metres? Is the 8.2 standard at three metres I gather with no option for .7?
 
Yes, afaik the 8.2 is three meters. Leica were worried they would get customers complaining about cutting off part of the image at for instance 1m, so they decided to make them accurate at the shortest focussing distance and thus too wide at infinity. Not a really unreasonable decision imo. So now you cut off at the shortest distance and they are still wide at infinity......
 
jaapv said:
I wonder. Do you work for free? Well, I don't and neither does Leica. And about frameline accuracy. Well, obviously you do not understand the theory behind it. The framelines on the original M8 are accurate -at 0.7 meters. The ones on the upgrade are accurate - at 3 meters. Framelines on a rangefinder are accurate at one distance only. Some users were unable to wrap their mind around that basic fact, thus they consistently got their framing wrong. Now users have a choice according to their taste. That is all.
Click to expand...

You got me dead to rights... I wasn't clear on the nature of the upgrade. I remember a few reviewers complaining about inaccurate framelines, then there was an upgrade option, so I jumped to conclusions about what was wrong and what the fix was. My mistake.

Had I been right, I still think that it would have fallen under the umbrella of product recall, not $1,100 luxury. A moot point, I recognize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom