YYV_146
Well-known
Today's SL announcement was deeply disappointing to me for a number of reasons. As far as I am concerned, Leica has not provided a single reason why this camera is fundamentally superior or more attractive than a number of other options.
Practically, who is going to buy this thing at $7,500? The first native prime in the system is due a whole year from now, and (in my opinion) the SL's size is far too large to comfortably use most M lenses.
Of course, we like to argue that Leica doesn't really care about photography or the photographers in its customer base. But it does seem reasonable for them to care about continuing the photography tradition in some way...reputation inevitably wears down without new, reputable photographers getting into the Leica game. Of course, that might just be the economist talking nonsense to the marketing guy.
So why not give a tiny bit more to the old-school rangefinder folks? A digital RF with some kind of simulated focusing aid? A new film RF that isn't $3,000? Actually updating some of the relatively weaker M options instead of churning out $7,000 super-lenses?
As for the "new age" crowd, I don't get Leica's strategy either. The fixed-lens bodies have been hit-and-miss. The Leica Q is objectively an awesome camera, but it's been out of stock for months and I don't even know how to get one. The Leica T looks good on paper, but ultimately prices itself far out of its league. And I think Leica realizes the importance of getting to "professionals", but will any professional ditch their trusty SLR system for a $12,000 package with one available lens?
I'm not a Leica hater by any stretch of imagination...to the contrary, I've invested deeply into the M system as a source of fast, exotic optics. And I would seriously considering buying a Q if I didn't have to put down a deposit and wait indefinitely for one. So what are the good people in Solms (or is it now Wetzlar?) thinking?