mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I certainly think Leica should continue to produce M-system cameras and lenses for as long as its economically possible. I'd like to think they could come up with a more modern non-reflex camera for the digital age that would provide a "Leica-like" experience but brought thoroughly up to date, in addition to their more traditional film and digital Ms. If they don't I hope somebody else does. Maybe that's what Sigma is trying to do with the DP-1(2, 3...?), but if so I don't think their concept has gelled yet.
...Mike
...Mike
Jonathan R
Well-known
What aspects of the M series would we want Leica to compromise in a new series? Durability? Lens mount? Size? Format size? Quality? Reliability?
mr_phillip
Well-known
myoptic3 said:
Why the past tense? Not only are Morgan still producing the classic models, but they continue to innovate and explore new technologies. And they manage this without resorting to badge-engineering Japanese mainstream models.
If Leica were run half as well as Morgan I'd be a great deal more confident of their future.
Jonathan R
Well-known
Today's news:
The classic car makers Morgan have created the world's first green sportscar. The hydrogen-powered vehicle, which has a top speed of 90mph, has been released to celebrate the centenary of the Morgan Motor Company.
The classic car makers Morgan have created the world's first green sportscar. The hydrogen-powered vehicle, which has a top speed of 90mph, has been released to celebrate the centenary of the Morgan Motor Company.
FX trading
Established
Perhaps Leica should manufacture two distinct product ranges-one boasting traditional construction, limited upgradeability (at some stage a viable digital back will be made available), and an expansion of the "luxury product placement concept" (probably best met by emphasizing the "a la carte" offerings) , based on the existing M-range. Additional services could be developed ("certification" and overhaul of used M-cameras, training, lifestyle events (for new markets), and promotion of photographic standards- sort of an upmarket version of what LOMO have done. This would ensure the continued viabilty of the M-system going forward.
The second, more challenging concept would be to find a stable long-term range for the digital market, whose underlying technology is changing so rapidly. This Leica must resolve some of the current weaknesses (not insubstantial) inherent in rival digital product offerings.The Leica digital top-end offering should most definitely not be a me-too product - this has been made amply evident (commercially, at least) with their SLR range over the years. Not easy, but Leica are probably quite well placed to think "outside the box", especially as they would not really be weighed by the legacy issues challenging their competitors.
In fact, Leica's strengths have historically originated from it's optics, and the interoperability and upgradeability of it's system. Taken to a logical conclusion, this should mean that any new range should incorporate a cohesive imaging capture and delivery unit, able to take advantage of the latest developments in electronics, without the need for built-in obsolescence. This would require upgradeability through dedicated modular components, separating the photographic from the electronic capturing units. While such an approach would also work with traditional M's, it is likely that a newly-designed range, optimized for digital, would be required in the long-term. Looked at in the right context, Leica's expertise (and German engineering background) should be really able to develop such a unit in-house.
Selling the range would be relatively easy-the main values and qualities of Leica-made products would be maintained, however with an assurance of forward operability and acceptance of future technological updates. With an exciting and well-developed design, sales will far exceed anything possible with an M8/M9.
The second, more challenging concept would be to find a stable long-term range for the digital market, whose underlying technology is changing so rapidly. This Leica must resolve some of the current weaknesses (not insubstantial) inherent in rival digital product offerings.The Leica digital top-end offering should most definitely not be a me-too product - this has been made amply evident (commercially, at least) with their SLR range over the years. Not easy, but Leica are probably quite well placed to think "outside the box", especially as they would not really be weighed by the legacy issues challenging their competitors.
In fact, Leica's strengths have historically originated from it's optics, and the interoperability and upgradeability of it's system. Taken to a logical conclusion, this should mean that any new range should incorporate a cohesive imaging capture and delivery unit, able to take advantage of the latest developments in electronics, without the need for built-in obsolescence. This would require upgradeability through dedicated modular components, separating the photographic from the electronic capturing units. While such an approach would also work with traditional M's, it is likely that a newly-designed range, optimized for digital, would be required in the long-term. Looked at in the right context, Leica's expertise (and German engineering background) should be really able to develop such a unit in-house.
Selling the range would be relatively easy-the main values and qualities of Leica-made products would be maintained, however with an assurance of forward operability and acceptance of future technological updates. With an exciting and well-developed design, sales will far exceed anything possible with an M8/M9.
Last edited:
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
Let me answer the question another way. If I were running Leica? I would keep the M7 in production for now, but I would not authorize development of another M film body.
I think, although I may be mistaken, that recent history suggests that alternative lower-end product lines (in the digital realm, at least) have not been a big success. (The CL might indicate otherwise, though.)
I think, although I may be mistaken, that recent history suggests that alternative lower-end product lines (in the digital realm, at least) have not been a big success. (The CL might indicate otherwise, though.)
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
waileong said:
Apt and well made points. Leica has been struggling against the used market for generations...
BillP
Rangefinder General
FX Trading, PLEASE stop writing in pale green italic! it is almost illegible on a white background. You may be saying something interesting but I can't be bothered to decipher it.
Thank you.
Regards,
Bill
Thank you.
Regards,
Bill
FX trading
Established
BillP said:
Hi Bill, sorry-changed it to red, which I hope works better- and will leave it on default from now on
Last edited:
Kim Coxon
Moderator
Why not just leave it on default. It is much easier on the eye. 
Kim
Kim
FX trading said:
johnastovall
Light Hunter - RIP 2010
Gabriel M.A. said:There's always Canon.
Just everyone remember what the reaction was when Canon killed the FD mount.
Vics
Veteran
BillBlackwell said:
How about a DIGITAL VISOFLEX? I mean an add-on that allows M-shooters to shoot the occaisional didipix. Keep making M cameras, though!
Vic
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
Vics said:
I was suggesting that Leica could design a lightweight visoflex housing for current (and future) digital M cameras instead of coming out with the R10 dSLR.
A modern viso could utilize current R lenses.
Folks are already using the old Viso II and III on the M8. And sooner or later there will be a full-size digital sensor on an M (either through an upgrade or the M9).
The concept is here already; it just needs to be refined. And it could still be used on film M cameras.
Last edited:
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I guess the stock price for Vaseline is going to go up next year :angel:amateriat said:Um...oh, yeah! M9 in '09, or it's my butt on a spit! Just you wait.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
They shouldn't have; great lenses. Nikon has been smart to keep their mount after so many decades, no matter how many variations on variations on variations on the theme the latest acronym is.johnastovall said: