Poll: Let's get real

[Ronald_H]

I buy new Nikon stuff all the time. I have suggestions for improvements, but how would Nikon listen to me? Or Leica for that matter? I have several ideas though, I'd be very happy if either company would listen.

My only Leica so far is an M2. Complaining about that would be a bit daft. I don't think I'll ever buy Leica stuff new. As a matter of fact I can afford it, but for that amount of money (I said it before) I can also get everything I currently own and then some. And I don't believe for a second that my results would be better with an M8 + lenses.

 

[Roger Hicks]

This is a public forum, you get to see all kind of people and personnalities. As a reflection of that, some threads might be provocative, sarcastic and displease you but not everybody will perceive it the same way. If you don't like a thread (and the person starting it), then you are probably better off not participation, but insults lead nowhere.

I'll drink to that.

Then again, today was the monthly dinner for the Societé des Ainés Ruraux, so I have been drinking to it; home-made pineau for an aperitif, red wine with the meal, sparkling Fleur de Muscat with the dessert, eau-de-vie artisanale with (or instead of) coffee.

I feel no pain...


Cheers,

R.

 

[rolleistef]

A lot of people here complain about the price of a Leica. It's expensive for sure, but it has always been the same price since the M3 was launched. 250$ in 1954 were more or less 3000€.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

Jeezus. Yet another layer of stratification? I didn't think there could be more elitism associated with Leica, and now we have a 'proposal' toward defining a "true Leica photographer" with even more qualifications. Neat.

So, yeah, like some of the others above, i'm in the 50/50 category. Further, what if some of my stuff was bought in 'demo' condition, and warranteed by Leica? I guess i get 64/100 of an opinion?

How about this: show your PHOTOGRAPHS, and we'll decide how much YOUR opinion is worth.

This is the kind of thought that fits nicely with the Humidor/Coffin built for the "Last 100 Noctilux" special edition.

 

[morphomir]

Any chance that they get into the condoms business ??

HA! I'm sure that'll "expand" their business. ;-)

 

[Ororaro]

How about this: show your PHOTOGRAPHS, and we'll decide how much YOUR opinion is worth.

To who are you talking to?

This is the kind of thought that fits nicely with the Humidor/Coffin built for the "Last 100 Noctilux" special edition

Of course!

 

[Roger Hicks]

How about this: show your PHOTOGRAPHS, and we'll decide how much YOUR opinion is worth.

Your ability as a photographer is completely irrelevant to how much you spend with Leica.

Continuing the 'logic' of your post, the opinion of a brilliant photographer who uses Nikons, and has never used a Leica in his life, should be more important to Leica than a lousy photographer who has spent $20,000 a year on Leicas for the last 10 years.

If I were Leica, I know who I'd listen to first.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[dcsang]

I really don't think Leica is listening to anyone.... ok.. maybe they're listening to collectors (LHSA folks) and, obviously, the Sultan Of Brunei or whichever rich political dignitary they feel can help the marketing of their cameras as being luxury items.

Maybe I should rephrase the above initial statement and say that I really don't think Leica is listening to any photographers who actually use their products daily but can't afford buy such things brand new from an authorized dealer.

That's Leica's prerogative.
It's also each photographers prerogative to criticize whoever they want to and to use whatever equipment they feel they can afford and enjoy.
Last time I checked, most of the Internet (and the world), free speech is still allowed.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[Ororaro]

If I was a dictator, I'd ban free speech. Only logical.

But I am not a dictator and I'm all for freedom of speech. This is why I posted a poll

 

[yanidel]

Maybe I should rephrase the above initial statement and say that I really don't think Leica is listening to any photographers who actually use their products daily but can't afford buy such things brand new from an authorized dealer.

So we need to answer the following question : why did they enter the P&S and Digilux 3 business then ?
Leica is not a stupid company, they have marketers and so on. So I am convinced that they do listen a lot their customers. Their problem is more where to place themselves in the photography segment, being profitable in a highly competitive market where economies of scales are important. Maybe being the only high luxury brand is the only niche that is left.

 

[visiondr]

There are two areas of concern to a consumer of camera gear: quality and price. Few (if any) would suggest that Leica's products are of inferior quality. So, it comes down to price alone. Obviously, the higher cost of Leica products is due to the higher cost of manufacturing in Germany versus elsewhere. Now, you who bemoan the high prices of Leica goods; would you buy new Leica gear made in Taiwan? I sincerely doubt it.

 

[yanidel]

There are two areas of concern to a consumer of camera gear: quality and price. Few (if any) would suggest that Leica's products are of inferior quality. So, it comes down to price alone. Obviously, the higher cost of Leica products is due to the higher cost of manufacturing in Germany versus elsewhere. Now, you who bemoan the high prices of Leica goods; would you buy new Leica gear made in Taiwan? I sincerely doubt it.

I would tweak a bit your statement : the cost of Leica products is due to high cost of R&D not compensated by high volume sales. Manufacturing must not be that much higher, Germany has seen a tremendous boost of its productivity over the last few years. And the ramp-up costs to train highly-skilled labor costs would still be very high with a much higher risk to ruin quality and reputation.

 

[bob338]

But I am not a dictator and I'm all for freedom of speech. This is why I posted a poll

i was thinking you posted this poll to make sure we all knew that you have a noctilux.
the last thing leica users need is a bigger gap between them and non-leica users. thanks for making us seem like bigger *ssholes.

 

[visiondr]

I would tweak a bit your statement : the cost of Leica products is due to high cost of R&D not compensated by high volume sales. Manufacturing must not be that much higher, Germany has seen a tremendous boost of its productivity over the last few years. And the ramp-up costs to train highly-skilled labor costs would still be very high with a much higher risk to ruin quality and reputation.

Point taken. Well said.

 

[Ororaro]

i was thinking you posted this poll to make sure we all knew that you have a noctilux.
the last thing leica users need is a bigger gap between them and non-leica users. thanks for making us seem like bigger *ssholes.

I am the first and biggest *sshole according to your logic, then, and it doesn't even affect me. I bought the Noctilux used. I also bought my M7 and M8 used.

The difference between me and you is that I don't pretend that Leica will listen to me. I don't bash Leica. I'm a second hand user and I know my contribution to Leica is nil. Which is sad, really. This is why I plan to purchase a brand new lens in the near future.

 

[Paul T.]

Actually, if it hasn't been pointed out already, second hand users are just about as crucial, as Leica customers, as those who buy new. This is because a prime attraction of Leica is the resale value of the cameras and lenses.

Even for a pro, discount the tax, which you can claim, and the costs of ownership are pretty low (or at least, on a par with the Japanese cameras!). Without second-hand buyers, this wouldn't be the case. It's a very similar situation to Volkswagen, who for years have used the low depreciation on their cars as a reason-to-buy, and it's been very successful.

 

[dcsang]

So we need to answer the following question : why did they enter the P&S and Digilux 3 business then ?
Leica is not a stupid company, they have marketers and so on. So I am convinced that they do listen a lot their customers. Their problem is more where to place themselves in the photography segment, being profitable in a highly competitive market where economies of scales are important. Maybe being the only high luxury brand is the only niche that is left.

Maybe I should have clarified further.
I should have stated that I believe that they don't listen to any photographers that actually use their M-mount cameras / lenses.

That said, this is just what I believe or think; I, obviously, have no proof of that, just as no one else here could claim that they truly know if Leica is or is not listening to anyone - it's all conjecture and to the best of my knowledge there is no one on this board that actually works for Leica.

I agree with your statement regarding their placement in the photography segment and that we do, in fact, need to have someone or some company out there producing a high luxury brand of camera gear. As you said, it seems it may be the only niche that is left.

Cheers,
Dave

 

[Robin P]

Well as we're already regularly off topic in this thread....

-today was the monthly dinner for the Societé des Ainés Ruraux,
Cheers, R.

Roger, my French is usually passable but I do get caught out by the occasional unfamiliar noun. I remember you writing in A.P. about your local "Derby & Joan" club but thought to try "Societé des Ainés Ruraux" with Babelfish - the usual howler! "Company of the Groins Rural" .
Google offered to translate the web page of a similar society in Biesheim, a far better explanation with addendum - "rural elders: active players, not forgotten by society"

So, back to cars and then cameras.
The closest I ever got to buying a new car was a 2 year old one that had lain on the forecourt unsold and had 50 miles on the clock, £4000 instead of £6000. It did last a few more years than it took me to pay back the loan so no real regrets there but since then I've reverted to buying cars I could afford that have lost 70 or 80% of their original value.

Cameras, another mixed bag. In the early 80's I weighed up the choice between a new Contax SLR or a new Rolleiflex SLR and borrowed the money to get the Rollei because it had the option of a converter for M42 lenses. Rollei went bust the next year and dropped 35mm production, I exchanged the Rollei for a SH Pentax with the promise of easily available K mount lenses. Kept the Pentax for over 15 years.
I've had 4 DSLRs, the first 2 SH but sold at a profit, the third new and sold with no loss and the fourth new but sold at 2/3 what I paid for it. With the pace of change in digital cameras today they can hardly be regarded as long term investments so for the time being my only digital camera is a P&S for eBay sales pics.
An old, quality, film camera has had "free upgrades" over the years as film (its "sensor") has improved, now that we can't expect much more improvement in film I'm enjoying the annual price drops in good scanners.

Leica is in a unique position among camera companies and one can only surmise that the M9 will have to be modular to ensure its longevity - keep the body and change the sensor block/electronics every few years.

Sorry for the long ramble, strictly speaking I shouldn't even be looking at this thread but it just goes to show that the Leica legend has a fascination even for those that don't realistically aspire to owning one.

Cheers, Robin

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . a prime attraction of Leica is the resale value of the cameras and lenses.

Dear Paul,

Maybe for some, but not for others.

Sure, I've bought used gear cheap to sell dear (to fund more gear...). But that's not the same as new.

I suspect that with the exception of collectors (God bless 'em), anyone who buys new Leica gear buys it to USE, without worrying too much about the resale value. If they were that worried about saving a few hundred pounds or dollars or euros, and were thinking of re-selling, surely they'd buy used.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[dcsang]

<snip>I suspect that with the exception of collectors (God bless 'em), anyone who buys new Leica gear buys it to USE, without worrying too much about the resale value. If they were that worried about saving a few hundred pounds or dollars or euros, and were thinking of re-selling, surely they'd buy used. </snip>

Roger,

I can definitely agree with you on that statement.

Anyone who <i>is</i> concerned about resale value would (or could) know that, just as with automobiles, there is some depreciation between "new off the lot" and "gently used".

Buying a new lens or new body only to know that you really couldn't afford it to begin with, and you're going to end up selling it at a loss after the fact, makes me think that you shouldn't have bought that new lens or new body in the first place.

Cheers,
Dave