What difference will Steven Lee's Departure make?

[newsgrunt]

I guess we should split the pros into daily/wire shooters and those who work long term projects/ essays. The needs of the two are not necessarily the same. The latter tend to work the wide to normal range.

Those who work in daily news choose dslr's primarily for their versatility. Long is where these cameras rule but even that is changing slowly imo. My go to lens is Nikon's 24-70. This range is covered by rf easily.

Having said that, if there were a digital rf from Leica with a 24x36 sensor, I could most likely make the case to buy one in the next round of purchases. The higher ups don't really care as long as the work is up to their standards and within their budget (spending big $$ on gear per shooter, each upgrade, doesn't faze them where I work).

Among my circle of daily shooters, if there were such an M camera today, there would be no question, they would be used as well.

For personal work off the clock, it's almost 100% film. I'm not dropping 10k of my own coin on a camera that may not be ready for prime time. For me, it has to be ff.

To get back on topic, I'd love to know what Herr Kauffman's plans are vis a vis film and digital.

 

[gavinlg]

I'll put in my 2c....

At the shop that sells leica stuff (only one in the whole state of queensland mind you), an m8 is $7295AUD, which converts to $6742us.

Alternatively you can buy a Nikon D3 for $7199AUD - less if you offer it... I was told around $6800 which converts to $6200us.

Lets compare the cameras for a second:

Nikon has the most advanced autofocus system in the world, precise viewfinder, ability to accurately manual focus with every nikon lens ever made + some zeiss and cosina lenses, is completely weather sealed over a light but extremely strong magnesium body. The batteries have been reported to last to over 2000 shots pretty easily.

Leica is manual focus, has very imprecise frame lines in the VF, able to be used with all M lenses, not weather sealed although built under a metal body. Not having weather sealing in a 7K electronic camera is inexcusable. Battery life is under 500 shots

Nikon has a full frame sensor capable of achieving good results even at 25000 ISO, Ergonomics to die for (all external switches and buttons - everything readily accessible at the flip of a switch), voice recording notes - just about every feature under the sun.

Leica has a crop sensor capable of achieving acceptable results at 2500 ISO, Excellent ergonomics BUT to even change the ISO you have to dig around in the menu (inexcusable for a $7000 camera.) Likewise with exposure compensation.

The nikon can readily be chucked in a bag, dropped, used in the rain, mud, sub zero and extremely hot + humid conditions without fail or doubt.

The Leica can not be used in any of the above extreme conditions without fail or doubt. Hell, some of the M8s that came out can't even be used in normal conditions without multiple problems.

A top notch nikkor 85 1.4 with AF comes in at $1600AUD or about 1400us, or a top notch 24-70 f2.8 comes in at about 2500.

A Leica 75mm 1.4 summilux comes in at $5934AUD, and they have no zoom lenses for the m line.


After reading that - why the hell would ANYONE buy a leica m8? Just getting an m8 and a lens in Australia.... 1 lens... would be over $10,000AUD!!!
And what are you getting for your $10,000? A camera system without professional support, with flaky reliability, NO WEATHER SEALING, no ISO button on camera, menu based exposure compensation, average battery life, average high ISO performance, average white balance performance etc etc etc.

I realise that the M camera is advantageous in it's small size, ergonomics, good lenses etc etc, but the gap is just so big between it and the nikon d3 - no pro in hell is ever going to consider the M8 over the D3....

They need to make a Cheaper M as well - get it built in japan or thailand. My d300 is built in thailand and is tough as nails. It needs to sell for the same amount as the d300 and 40d etc. It needs a FULL FRAME sensor or at least a 1.3 crop. It needs to be very small, and extremely intuitive ergonomically. Needs to be weather sealed. Keep the m8 as the flagship german - weather seal it (this is a must). Put a full frame sensor in it. Find out how nikon got such great ISO capability in the D3 and copy it!

To add more, I've never seen leica advertise in Australian magazines, newspapers, tv. In fact, when I did a photography course in University, 1 out of 60 or so students knew what a leica was! The rest of them thought it was a vintage camera, asked if it was "one of those cheap chinese digitals that looks like a film camera", thought it looked cute etc.

Everybody knows what an Apple computer is and looks like, and even know why they're better than a PC. Because apple actually advertises and has creative marketing to sell something that costs MORE than a PC. Leica need to do the same - they need to focus on the simplicity of the M camera and turn it into something of a specialty - something like what lomography did with the Lomo LCA. Do you know how many kids and people have bought into lomography? Because it's a lifestyle, not just a camera - the concept itself is brilliant.... If you don't know what I'm talking about, just look it up on google.

Leica needs to find a greater niche, and if they can't find it - they need to build it. Once they do that, and then create demand and desire for their product, the M line will be revitalized.

 

[Keith]

I'll put in my 2c....

At the shop that sells leica stuff (only one in the whole state of queensland mind you), an m8 is $7295AUD, which converts to $6742us.

Alternatively you can buy a Nikon D3 for $7199AUD - less if you offer it... I was told around $6800 which converts to $6200us.

Lets compare the cameras for a second:

Nikon has the most advanced autofocus system in the world, precise viewfinder, ability to accurately manual focus with every nikon lens ever made + some zeiss and cosina lenses, is completely weather sealed over a light but extremely strong magnesium body. The batteries have been reported to last to over 2000 shots pretty easily.

Leica is manual focus, has very imprecise frame lines in the VF, able to be used with all M lenses, not weather sealed although built under a metal body. Not having weather sealing in a 7K electronic camera is inexcusable. Battery life is under 500 shots

Nikon has a full frame sensor capable of achieving good results even at 25000 ISO, Ergonomics to die for (all external switches and buttons - everything readily accessible at the flip of a switch), voice recording notes - just about every feature under the sun.

Leica has a crop sensor capable of achieving acceptable results at 2500 ISO, Excellent ergonomics BUT to even change the ISO you have to dig around in the menu (inexcusable for a $7000 camera.) Likewise with exposure compensation.

The nikon can readily be chucked in a bag, dropped, used in the rain, mud, sub zero and extremely hot + humid conditions without fail or doubt.

The Leica can not be used in any of the above extreme conditions without fail or doubt. Hell, some of the M8s that came out can't even be used in normal conditions without multiple problems.

A top notch nikkor 85 1.4 with AF comes in at $1600AUD or about 1400us, or a top notch 24-70 f2.8 comes in at about 2500.

A Leica 75mm 1.4 summilux comes in at $5934AUD, and they have no zoom lenses for the m line.


After reading that - why the hell would ANYONE buy a leica m8? Just getting an m8 and a lens in Australia.... 1 lens... would be over $10,000AUD!!!
And what are you getting for your $10,000? A camera system without professional support, with flaky reliability, NO WEATHER SEALING, no ISO button on camera, menu based exposure compensation, average battery life, average high ISO performance, average white balance performance etc etc etc.

I realise that the M camera is advantageous in it's small size, ergonomics, good lenses etc etc, but the gap is just so big between it and the nikon d3 - no pro in hell is ever going to consider the M8 over the D3....

They need to make a Cheaper M as well - get it built in japan or thailand. My d300 is built in thailand and is tough as nails. It needs to sell for the same amount as the d300 and 40d etc. It needs a FULL FRAME sensor or at least a 1.3 crop. It needs to be very small, and extremely intuitive ergonomically. Needs to be weather sealed. Keep the m8 as the flagship german - weather seal it (this is a must). Put a full frame sensor in it. Find out how nikon got such great ISO capability in the D3 and copy it!

To add more, I've never seen leica advertise in Australian magazines, newspapers, tv. In fact, when I did a photography course in University, 1 out of 60 or so students knew what a leica was! The rest of them thought it was a vintage camera, asked if it was "one of those cheap chinese digitals that looks like a film camera", thought it looked cute etc.

Everybody knows what an Apple computer is and looks like, and even know why they're better than a PC. Because apple actually advertises and has creative marketing to sell something that costs MORE than a PC. Leica need to do the same - they need to focus on the simplicity of the M camera and turn it into something of a specialty - something like what lomography did with the Lomo LCA. Do you know how many kids and people have bought into lomography? Because it's a lifestyle, not just a camera - the concept itself is brilliant.... If you don't know what I'm talking about, just look it up on google.

Leica needs to find a greater niche, and if they can't find it - they need to build it. Once they do that, and then create demand and desire for their product, the M line will be revitalized.

There's nothing in this post that I can find to disagree with Gavin. I like my M8 in a lot of ways but I know that if I'm photographing the exhibition opening on Tuesday night and it dies or does something errant I'm up sh*t creek ... as we say in Oz! 😛

Then .... then .... I would be facing the prospect of not having a camera for however long it takes to get it to Solms and have it repaired and back to me in Oz. All this for as you say $7000 plus! 😱 It is ridiculous! :bang:

I would like a digital rangefinder by Leica to be around $3000.00 and for it to be in my bag next to a Nikon D300 for the shots where a rangefinder will have an advantage over the DSLR. Whoever controls Leica in the future needs to understand that this camera needs to cost the same as the D300 ... as you said! It would then become a complementary tool for a photog along side his/her DSLR and every smart photographer would have one!

With this approach they would sell tens of thousands of them very quickly ... get them made elsewhere if they have to ... who cares ... just DO IT! 🙂

 

[newsgrunt]

I wish they would get off the collectible train or at least pay a bit more attention to users. As Keith and Gavin noted, who's going to drop that kind of money for a camera, even if it has the L word. They need to get it into hands of users and that means wooing pro shooters who can give it back it's reputation as a camera that captures defining images, not as a pricey trinket.

 

[tbarker13]

newsgrunt, pros could choose Leica right now. They choose Canon and Nikon.

If we are talking about photojournalists - very few of them have any choice in the matter. Newspapers tend to choose systems and cameras - knowing they will have to buy multiple kits for multiple photographers. The standard kit is going is a pair of Canons or Nikons and 3-4 lenses.
Leica has a long way to go if it wants to work its way back into widespread use by photojournalists. Particularly when you consider that most of them would have to buy the camera and lenses themselves. Just not something that's going to happen overnight.
Most of the photogs at my paper have heard of Leica, but it is rare that one of them (particularly the newer crop of shooters) has ever even touched one. The older ones, however, still talk lovingly of the M-Line.

 

[Ororaro]

While we're in the modernity thing, why not a Leica M9, full frame, for 48 easy payments of 29.99 or lease 48 months @ 1.9%with max 2000 clicks per year + purchase option?

 

[Keith]

I hate to have to hark back to such an old chestnut but the IR issue the camera had when it was released was an indication of things to come I feel. Don't get me wrong ... I'm not an M8 knocker because I own one and like it but management practices that could allow something like that to slip through a loophole are astoundingly poor when you have a good think about it! 🙁

 

[Sam N]

I'll put in my 2c....
A top notch nikkor 85 1.4 with AF comes in at $1600AUD or about 1400us, or a top notch 24-70 f2.8 comes in at about 2500.

A Leica 75mm 1.4 summilux comes in at $5934AUD, and they have no zoom lenses for the m line.

That "Leica glow" is easily worth $4334! 😛

But seriously, for most enthusiasts (that includes most of us I'm guessing), photography is not a means to an end. It's about the process. A lot of people enjoy taking photos more than developing / printing / looking at them.

 

[gavinlg]

I don't think they need to change the digital M that much, just build a market for it. Done through marketing of course. The other major thing is to outsource it to an asian country for manufacturing. Nikon did it and is doing it well. Olympus is doing it too. 2 top notch camera companies. Split the M line into 2... the base one outsourced to thailand for cheaper production, light weather sealing, smaller, using the m8 1.3 crop sensor - or a panasonic one if it would be cheaper, external iso and ev compensation buttons, ISO up to 2500 as per now, etc.
Then have the m8 as the flagship expensive one to satisfy people with the need and means - build in germany - full frame sensor - ISO up to 6400 or 12800 with excellent quality - completely weather sealed - new external interface building upon the old one with better usability and more "Camera functions" rather than being like a computer with menus and a lens - much higher battery life - 2 card slots - Make a motor winder that when attached activates a tiny tracking sensor on the camera body to be able to track moving targets once focus is achieved on them and increase frame-rate a little... This is just off the top of my head - I'm sure camera engineers could think of better things.

I personally think going with the flagship M to an electronic viewfinder would be a bad idea - electronic VFs have been really bad in low light so far, and lack the dexterity of looking through an optical window. Yes they need to make advancements but they need to keep the core values of the M system intact. Light, superb low light shooter, small, high quality, no compromise on IQ etc. If they go to electronic viewfinders and strange electronic autofocus they are no better than panasonic (horrible electronic VFs), and are missing out on what makes leica GOOD. The only reason most people think DSLRs with autofocus is so much better than manual focusing is because it's shoved down their throat by the companies that ONLY MAKE autofocus cameras and lenses (eg - all of them). Ever let an amateur photographer with a canon XTI or a nikon d40 look through an olympus om1 viewfinder? Their reaction is hilarious! They suddenly realise they're looking through a drinking straw hole rather than a real VF, and that manual focusing with something like an om1 is actually extremely satisfying and easy. Leica has a point of difference right now, and with the right marketing they can make it their selling point - a high demand item for photographers. Half the reason no body has held or knows what a leica is, especially the younger generations, is that leica doesn't advertise anywhere! They need to make something which stands out and then advertise and promote the bejesus out of it. Find their selling points and cram them down peoples necks, like apple does every day.

 

[Terao]

Absolutely - the process for me is just as important as the final image. Call me a masochist but I like the fact my process is difficult, and I like the fact that sometimes I miss a shot because I screwed up (not the camera or the software engineer). The effort required to take the photo is part of the value of the photo to me. I suppose its the difference between making an object on a CNC milling machine or making it by hand.

 

[gavinlg]

Sitemistic - that's true, but in mechanical terms, camera makers took great glee in the fact that they could (after manual focus was disappearing) design viewfinders to be tiny and dark. The focus rings on AF lenses are extremely unsatisfying and difficult to work with. Photographing with most digital cameras around today is less of an art and more just a case of knowing how to turn it on, and how to press the shutter button. 80% of cameras sold have a shutter button sound that comes from a speaker in the camera! When my friends have a play with my manual camera, each one, including girls, are interested and intrigued by the satisfaction they get from cocking the shutter/advancing the film and then releasing the shutter. I think you'd find if manual focus was marketed for it's strengths - especially in the leica rangefinder format - toward younger people as well as the older, it would create a serious niche for it. I know people who get in to photography because the whole retro side of it is viewed as being quite cool - a lot of the arty alternative kids love film and mechanical cameras. Most people with any inclination to buy an expensive camera can understand the appeal of the leica rangefinder if given one to use for a while, or if presented with the option of buying one within their price range. Think about Lotus with their elise and exige cars. They're basically small, extremely light, extremely simple sports cars with just the basics of what makes a good sports car - rear wheel drive, front engine, high revving naturally aspirated engine, good balance, insanely good handling. Most of them barely have electric windows, and yet they're priced quite high! A lot of people buy them. Theres 6 just in my town.
The potential is there...

A rangefinder with autofocus isn't leica's niche. It could be, but what they have (as we all know) is pretty special simplicity and purity that is largely lacking in the photographic world today. It took over 1.5 hours to read the user manual for my d300. I've had it for 6 days and I'm still configuring it.

 

[Socke]

You can't have autofocus in a rangefinder. Rangefinders are not autofocus cameras by definition.

Who says?

In geman we call them Messsucherkameras, i.E. measuring finder cameras. This means that the viewfinder doubles for measuring. If you turn your lens to align two fuzzy images or have a contraption to turn your lens by aligning two fuzzy images doesn't make a difference there.

And a "Entfernungsmesser" is a device to measure distance, it may be used to aim guns or build bridges or even to focus a lens 🙂

A Barnack has a viewfinder and a rangefinder but is no Messsucherkamera since it doesn't have a combined finder. A Contax G is a Messsucherkamera since it has a combined finder for framing an measuring the distance.

But hey, what do we germans know about Messsucherkameras anyway 🙂

 

[Socke]

There are rangefinders and "rangefinders". Nothing is set in stone for a clever company.

Apple saw that they had a disaster in the making with their computers, they did an abrupt about-face and switched from PowerPC chips to Intel chips.

Everyone knew you "couldn't have an Intel chip in a Mac". Suddenly, they're selling hundreds of thousands of them a month.

What young kid would pay $500 for a cell phone? Or $400 for a fancy MP3 player? Oops.....MILLIONS of them......

This makes sense to me, I know a lot of young people, mid 20th to early 30th, who bought Leica branded Panasonic P&S cameras because they like them. Most of them are students and will have enough available income to buy a more expensive Leica camera sooner or later.

Until then, the cash flow from rebranded/reengneered Panasonics keeps Leica afloat.

 

[tomasis]

Sitemistic, I dont agree that autofocus are RFF.. Rff is that you use lens coupling to vf with the patch. Autofocus cameras are simply belonging to P&S cameras category like Canon g9 or Contax G series. Look how much "success" had Contax G? It just ran downhill though very good lenses.

I don't se my own Rollei 35S as a rangefinder. Much close to this yes but not a real one. Leica I (A) can do as a rangefinder when you mount distance measure accessory. I can accept this as a rff when later models came with the same body but added with coupled vf.

It is sometimes difficult to put clear line betweeen P&S and rff cameras.

 

[gavinlg]

I read the owners manual on my D30 (no, not the 30D) when I got it. But I've never opened the one for my 5D's. Or any of the previous models of DSLR's I've owned. And my point in saying that is not to say I'm particularly bright (I'm not), but that DSLR's are not complex cameras if you don't want them to be.

I've had many canon DSLRs as well - I read about the d300 being complex and thought... "oh yeah just guys that don't know enough about cameras or settings" etc, but the amount of customizable options on the camera means you actually need to test it out to see what works best... For instance at the moment I'm actually using JPEGs instead of RAW for general shooting. I never would have done that 6 months ago - just the d300 is so good with JPEGs it's hard to ignore. The d300 is much much much much more complex than the 5d. It can be basic yes, but to get the best out of it you need to know it and know what it's capable of.

By the way, the d300 owners manual is 421 pages long, all in english.

 

[gavinlg]

As I said,

It can be basic yes, but to get the best out of it you need to know it and know what it's capable of.

the d300 is MUCH more complex than the 5d if you want to utilize it's advantages....


Anyway, Back to leica!

 

[italy74]

Hi guys
if none posted it before, there's now an interesting article by E.Putz:

http://www.imx.nl/photo/viewpoint/leica_angst_and_the_departu.html

 

[M. Valdemar]

Trying to compete with Canon and Nikon with an uber-expensive line of DSLR's seems like utter madness and a squandering of company resources. It's doomed from the starting gate. Who on earth is going to buy these things?

Producing a "cool" line of M-compatible cameras that are not stratospheric in price would seem to be a good strategy.

In the M-compatible arena Leica would rule the chicken coop.


.

 

[Holmz]

... Think about Lotus with their elise and exige cars. They're basically small, extremely light, extremely simple sports cars with just the basics of what makes a good sports car - rear wheel drive, front engine, high revving naturally aspirated engine, good balance, insanely good handling. Most of them barely have electric windows, and yet they're priced quite high! A lot of people buy them. Theres 6 just in my town.
The potential is there...

A rangefinder with autofocus isn't leica's niche. It could be, but what they have (as we all know) is pretty special simplicity and purity that is largely lacking in the photographic world today. It took over 1.5 hours to read the user manual for my d300. I've had it for 6 days and I'm still configuring it.

Good analogy ! (by the way those Lotus are mid-engined).

Further along those lines...
If you took the average person they would likely be much faster around a track in a car with traction and stability control, as that protects them from using the vehicle improperly. The benefits are only useful for someone that has a good handle on how to use the car properly and understand the limitations, and not believing that it will get them out of all sorts of trouble by virtue of it's badge.
There was no stability control, ABS, or airbags to keep it all safe. The inherent safety is always first and foremost with the driver being aware, and no band-aiding the vehicle to account for poor technique or lack of knowledge.
It is sublime for driving, but was not made to haul kids and groceries around and do everything like a station wagon does.

For a manual rangefinder it is similar, for instance:
Auto-focus - if you don't know how to focus than AF is will be your best friend most of the time.
Or auto exposure - If you understand when to over and under expose - or when your meter will be reading something other than an 18% grey - then you know the fundamentals about how to use the camera as a tool to get pictures.

A rangefinder is similar in that there are usually not a lot of extra help features to do it all for you... It is a basic and more like a sports car than a station wagon.

If you want to sell cameras that require some knowledge of photography, process, and technique, then you either have to find those sorts of photographers, or assist those interested in learning photography in how to use the camera as a tool.

For many people they just want results, as is exemplified by "that guy whose name and web site I forgot". He says get a D40 and shot pictures, and don't worry about technique.

But you can't make people want to learn... You can only make it affordable for those want to be involved in it, but have financial limits.

That's my opinion. (But I don't think AF would ruin the camera either)

 

[gavinlg]

Mind slip on my behalf, the lotus's are indeed mid engined - fantastic concept for a car. Even better now that they use toyota motors....

We all agree something needs to be done at leica yes? I'm not sure that it's going to happen... Someone said the pace at which they progress is morbid... Thats just the best explanation. It seems to me as if Mr Lee was trying to get them to look to the future and carve a niche, and they didn't like it. Someone correct me if they think otherwise please!