No New M9 but M8-2 - Leica Announcement

[Tuolumne]

How much does Leica make everytime an M3 sells on EBay? Now you know why they are doing this.

Leica's CEO has said in the past that 20% of the Leica market (maybe more, can't remember the exact number but it is large) is for used equipment that Leica gets no direct financial benefit from. He also added that Leica has plans to do something about this. That led to speculation that Leica may be getting into the refurb business. No way. Looks like this is what they had in mind all along. Pretty brilliant piece of stratgey planning and execution, IMHO.

/T

 

[nitrox1]

As a new M8 owner, I'm thrilled with the news that Leica plans on supporting the M8 with upgrade options vs. coming out with a new body every couple years.

If I want or feel I need an upgrade, great I'll get it. If not, I won't. At least they are stating that they are commited to the M8's future.

Looks like I'll be doing my first firmware upgrade this week also.


Thank you Leica.
John...

 

[kevin m]

Spot the smiley...

This is a smiley: 🙂

This is what you used: 🙄

 

[dcsang]

As an FYI: a "rolling of the eyes" smiley hardly infers a meaning of "jest" just as if rolling ones eyes in real life also wouldn't suggest "jest".

Perhaps the "rolling of the eyes" smiley was a "knee jerk reaction" 😀

Now.. back to topic - I don't get where Leica's coming from wrt "20% of the Leica market (maybe more, can't remember the exact number but it is large) is for used equipment that Leica gets no direct financial benefit from" - it's not that I doubt this fact but, in all honesty, SO WHAT?

Honda isn't making any money off of it's used cars that, in all honesty, can last a long time (not as long as an M3 no doubt 😀). Neither is Toyota.
If I sell my MacBook privately today - to the best of my knowledge - Apple isn't making a dime on that sale either. I don't hear any of those companies whining about it.

It behooves me to understand why Leica feels it has to (but obviously wants to) make money off of products that are not in their current product line and have no final impact on their bottom line sales of the M8.

Someone please don't hesitate (as I'm sure you won't) to explain this to me.

Thanks,
Dave

 

[Tuolumne]

...ever held an M3...?🙄

Regards,

Bill

Quite to the point. Look at an M3. Now look at an M8. Spot any difference? Not right away and not at all from certain angles. The Leica M camera is just a black box of a certain kind. What if the innards were totally modular and could be replaced with almost anything? Then you could upgrade the box forever just by replacing the innards. Is this what Leica has done with the M8? I don't know, but that's what they want it to sound like.

The Apple analogy doesn't work because the outards of the M camera haven't changed at all in the past 60 years, except for a brief and abondoned foray into M5 space.

I doubt that Leica will never introduce a new digital camera in the future, but the current M8 "platform", and that's what Leica is trying to make it, should be ugradeable for a long long time. How? Well suppose Leica could get a 1.3x crop factor Nikon D3 sensor and put that into the M8. Would people upgrade to that? Probably almost everyone. Would you care that the camera had a 1.3x crop factor if it had that quality? Some would, many would not. And for those who wanted a full-frame sensor, that would be the time to introduce the M9, while continuing the upgradeability of the M8.

Is this what Leica has in mind? Who knows. Is this M8 platform an "architecture" or a "marketecture"? Or a cross between the two? It's just the uncertainty that partially makes this such a master stroke.

How can Leica best spend it's marketing dollars, as the old RFF question goes?

INTRODUCE A MARKETECTURE!

/T

 

[kevin m]

It behooves me to understand why Leica feels it has to (but obviously wants to) make money off of products that are not in their current product line and have no final impact on their bottom line sales of the M8.

The answer is contained in this thread. Go back and read how many times the M8 is referred to as an "investment," as if it were a company stock, or real-estate, and not a depreciable consumer good.

The M8 will eventually die out, as will the customer base that's buying it, but Leica will follow its current customers to the grave if they don't come up with some new ideas.

 

[Tuolumne]

As an FYI: a "rolling of the eyes" smiley hardly infers a meaning of "jest" just as if rolling ones eyes in real life also wouldn't suggest "jest".

Perhaps the "rolling of the eyes" smiley was a "knee jerk reaction" 😀

Now.. back to topic - I don't get where Leica's coming from wrt "20% of the Leica market (maybe more, can't remember the exact number but it is large) is for used equipment that Leica gets no direct financial benefit from" - it's not that I doubt this fact but, in all honesty, SO WHAT?

Honda isn't making any money off of it's used cars that, in all honesty, can last a long time (not as long as an M3 no doubt 😀). Neither is Toyota.
If I sell my MacBook privately today - to the best of my knowledge - Apple isn't making a dime on that sale either. I don't hear any of those companies whining about it.

It behooves me to understand why Leica feels it has to (but obviously wants to) make money off of products that are not in their current product line and have no final impact on their bottom line sales of the M8.

Someone please don't hesitate (as I'm sure you won't) to explain this to me.

Thanks,
Dave

Dave,
The auto market is huge and growing. Plus the sale of after-market parts is very lucrative for auto manufacturers. Ever calculate what it would cost to replace a new car part by part? It's an astronmical number. Well, the RF market is small and probably shrinking. If you could expand it 20%+ that would be huge. Plus, there is no market for after-market parts in the RF business. All of this points to dollars you would want to capture in some other way from the used market as a RF manufacturer.

/T

 

[dcsang]

Dave,
The auto market is huge and growing. Plus the sale of after-market parts is very lucrative for auto manufacturers. Ever calculate what it would cost to replace a new car part by part? It's an astronmical number. Well, the RF market is small and probably shrinking. If you could expand it 20%+ that would be huge. Plus, there is no market for after-market parts in the RF business. All of this points to dollars you would want to capture in some other way from the used market as a RF manufacturer.

/T

Ahh.. understood... but just to be devil's advocate :angel: (there's no "devil" smiley....so just imagine that angel as a devil.. or the devil's lawyer.. or what have you 😉 ) - there is (or was) an after-market parts market in the RF business - CV saw that niche and filled it and, imho, grew quite well by doing so - something that Leica may have been able to do had they the foresight.

Granted that the RF market likely is shrinking - I mean, really, look at who is using the RF camera these days. I think I'm "young" when you look at some of the other folks here who are so vigilant in their statements against all things DSLR - and, who used to be against digital in general, before the M8 came into being. The "young folks" don't even know about film (refer to Sitemistic's thread in one of the other forums here) but have been inundated with digital point and shoot cameras - CHEAP digital point and shoots.

Heck, even the new Canon Rebel "upgrade" has spot metering now - gosh darned 8/10's of the folks using it won't even know what or how to spot meter but jeez.. that thing's got it and it's rather "inexpensive" in comparison to a Leica M8.

I wonder if Leica has ever given thought to, perhaps, maybe "splitting" their camera line up to have a more "consumer friendly" (from a price point and perhaps feature point perspective) and a more "pro friendly" line.

If they really want to continue to stay alive, they're going to need new customers - not just continually milking the now retiring baby boomers and senior citizens for every penny that their 401K's and RRSP/RRIFs can spare 😀

Cheers
Dave

 

[Tuolumne]

Dave,
I don't know where spare parts come from in the RF market (probably cannibalization) but I don't think Leica is making any spare parts for M3, M2, M4, M4-P, M5 or M6 cameras. Plus, most repairs require fixing one small broken part, not replacing it, or machining a custom one. No revenue to Leica from any of that.

/T

 

[kevin m]

I wonder if Leica has ever given thought to, perhaps, maybe "splitting" their camera line up to have a more "consumer friendly" (from a price point and perhaps feature point perspective) and a more "pro friendly" line.

They could market the R-D1 as the "Leica CL-D" and I'd buy one. All I want is a relatively decent digital sensor to attach my M and LTM lenses to. This "ne plus ultra" nonsense is killing them slowly.

If they really want to continue to stay alive, they're going to need new customers - not just continually milking the now retiring baby boomers and senior citizens for every penny that their 401K's and RRSP/RRIFs can spare

No fooling. It's instructive to remember that it was the steerage passengers on the Titanic who were subsidizing the first class cabins, and not the other way 'round.

 

[dcsang]

Dave,
I don't know where spare parts come from in the RF market (probably cannibalization) but I don't think Leica is making any spare parts for M3, M2, M4, M4-P, M5 or M6 cameras. Plus, most repairs require fixing one small broken part, not replacing it, or machining a custom one. No revenue to Leica from any of that.

/T

Good point

I would concur re: cannibalization - Perhaps then Leica could make spare parts available as another revenue stream? I mean, after all, they can make still make a fully mechanical Leica (MP) and one that's got all the new fangled electronic do-dads (M7) not to mention that futuristic "instant" camera that lets you see the photo RIGHT after you take it without using paper or developer or nothin' like that (M8) 😀

But really, they should be able to make those parts available (at a price of course) and that would help them in their quest to stay afloat.

Dave

 

[BillP]

This is a smiley: 🙂

This is what you used: 🙄

Gosh.

Really?

How silly of me. I see it all now.

The fact that all of the emoticons are labelled "Smilies" on the right side of the screen as you post has clearly escaped your notice during each of your 939 posts. Feel free to PM me if you wish to continue your petulant pedantry, but let's keep it out of the forum.

Now, getting back to the point,

The M3 is, as Tuolumne has observed, an appropriate exemplar. The M-series did not spring full-formed - as Mr Darwin said, evolution did it's thing - but the M-shape has remained essentially unchanged (with the honourable exception of the M5) for more than 50 years. There's a reason for that.

Regards,

Bill

 

[Kim Coxon]

Again - Let's please keep it civil and on the subject of the M8-x and not on each other. 😉

Kim

 

[infrequent]

couple of notes:

-- the "if you don't want the upgrade, you don't have to upgrade" line doesn't wash at all. if m8 is an "investment", not upgrading means your m8 is now worth less.

-- i would rather buy (err..."invest" in) an improved / superior m9 rather than perpetually buy upgrades for my m8. i am sure there are others who will see more value in this idea. unless of course you are high on the leica koolaid.

 

[amateriat]

About an hour ago, at the York Street F train station (heading back from a painful tech gig...coaxing a bratty old Win98 box to cough up OE data to put in a client's new PC), I spotted someone with a Canon D-something over his shoulder, and an M8 'round his neck. It had me thinking about this thread where I'd last left off. Now I'm catching up again. 🙂

Obviously, the M8 has cut out a niche for itself, and Solms wants/needs to build on that in relatively short order. An "upgrade" program by and of itself makes some sense...it's been a decent chunk of Leica's raison d'etre for decades (don't they still offer some, if not all, parts for most of the M line, new and old, in the event of a reapir, either by them or any of the esteemed indiie Leica techs? Seems like there's money to be made there, unless they've decided to can that part of the business). But I can't help the feeling that Leica is sort or making it up as they go along, which would worry me a bit. Thinking on one's feet is generally a positive attribute, but this has me thinking of another aphorism: Think fast, but think first. I really hope that's what's going on and that I just haven't bought the right clue yet.

As far as new-product intros go, I agree that it's high time for a CL successor. In fact, they should have both a film and digital edition of the same new platform. The introduction of their new, less expensive (saying "cheap" would guarantee a lightning strike from somewhere in the heavens) lens line, I've been hoping that this means such a new camera platform is in the making. This would be a vote of confidence in the M platform's general relevancy (I'm not talking about us...we obviously grok itall), and serve nicely in heading Zeiss and Cosina off at the pass in the moderately-priced dRF market.

Leica can do this if they want to, while maintaining its current M line (which I'd like to see remain...in fact, its health is all but directly tied to taking such action). The question is, do they want to do this?


- Barrett

 

[RIVI1969]

They could market the R-D1 as the "Leica CL-D" and I'd buy one. All I want is a relatively decent digital sensor to attach my M and LTM lenses to. This "ne plus ultra" nonsense is killing them slowly.


so you think your photography will be any better if a red dot is sticked to the RD1?

 

[Trius]

so you think your photography will be any better if a red dot is sticked to the RD1?

No, he thinks an RD-1 successor by Leica would not be orphaned.

 

[mas]

It seems that Voigtlander would be the most likely company to make a digital CL. They're already making the contemporary film equivalent.

 

[mas]

Two points
1. If I invest $1700 in my $5000 camera, will I have a $6700 camera? Who would pay me for that?

2. It seems reasonable that Leica would want to put a scratch resistant screen and quite shutter on the camera; those are the kinds of things we paid $5000 for in the first place. I would rather have the $1700 refund at this point.

Michael

 

[amateriat]

The more you pay, the more it's worth. - Don McLean


- Barrett