jarski
Veteran
that wont mean decision is always very good one. my name needs three repetitions, every single time, when am traveling outside my country and saying who I am :bang: so I can relate to poor Typ 240 Leica!
Why? why is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12
- Thread starter jaapv
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 36
- Views 3K
that wont mean decision is always very good one. my name needs three repetitions, every single time, when am traveling outside my country and saying who I am :bang: so I can relate to poor Typ 240 Leica!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Just Leica M. Diffrentiating between the types is pure discrimination!! 😀 😀
maitani
Well-known
1
i think it was for pure aesthetics reasons, a 2 digit number just doesn't work after the M.
2
imo also to not make m/mp owners feel 'inferior' after a new model is released after they have spent 8k on a camera body, investment protection 😉
i think it was for pure aesthetics reasons, a 2 digit number just doesn't work after the M.
2
imo also to not make m/mp owners feel 'inferior' after a new model is released after they have spent 8k on a camera body, investment protection 😉
N
Ned Bojic
Guest
You might be right. A 2-digit number doesn't work while 3-digits work beautifully: "M240"
And 6 characters is even better: "M tip 240".
Leica messed on this one. And no, it is not "german thinking".
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Yes - the reasons may be all or none of the above, but why should anybody persist in calling the camera by an non-existent name, confusing the issue and messing things up in Google for non-Leica-cognoscenti?
If the M240 is AKA M10, Why is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12?
If the M240 is AKA M10, Why is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12?
well jaapv, thanks for opening up Leica's mis-branding fiasco back for discussion! Leica's corporate mis-step with the M240 name makes for great discussion and Leica entertainment.
wow, so many questions in this thread.
"Why Is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12? (And ME not AKA M9-1/2 btw.?)" To me the answer is obvious and in your own words, so I tried to have some fun with it, asking you again the same question. The answer to your question is that M-P, M60 and ME were never AKA "Also Known As" the M11, M12, M9-1/2. In contrast the M240 most certainly was known as the M10 for 6 months or more all over internet leading up to Leica corporate's public announcement of the new M240 naming scheme.
As the new camera that became officially the M240 was called the M10 on the internet prior to Leica revealing the M240, I see the term "M10 AKA M240" as entirely and historically accurate because the M240 was indeed known as the M10.
"I prefer my original question... And do not quite see why you had to edit it. If I did that on one of the forums I moderate all hell would break loose. My point was not discussing Leica's naming convention and I won't in this thread -surely a parent has a right to name his child- but the strange phenomena that a few people on this planet persist in mislabeling the M (Typ 240), and not other M cameras."
I edited the title of your thread by adding your own words "why is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12" to the enigmatic "Why?" As a matter of form enigmatic titles not identifying thread content at RFF are discouraged, please see Accurately Title and post your New Thread! http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130536
While Leica corporate is free to make Leica decisions, Leica fans are also free to protest corporate decisions when Leica corporate blows it. That includes moving Leica corporate to Solms, only to move it back to Wetzlar again. That includes replacing black paint with black chrome, only to go back to black paint. That includes removing the Leica script engraving from top plates only to bring it back again. That includes replacing the vulcanite covering with a very non vulcanite covering, only to bring back a vulcanite body type covering once again. That includes silly commemoratives that damage the Leica brand with new from the factory paint brassing. That includes misnaming products which depart from tradition and confuse the product line. All that Kaufman's board threw out with the M10 name was Leica tradition going back 58 years (2012-1954) and close to 1,000,000 Leica M3 to M9 designated cameras. I am surprised any long time Leica owner like yourself would be good with that, but OK.
Personally I see no possible benefit to Leica in breaking with tradition using confusing camera designations with a perpetual "M" camera with changing type designations -- other than possibly encouraging confused customers to visit Leica stores for product explanations.
Jaapv, if anyone wants to ignore Leica tradition (ironic with a brand that is so closely bound to tradition) simply because one particular set of corporate Leica board members proclaims something is so, so be it.
Likewise I would hope Leica fans like yourself accepting the M240 could also accept a more traditional view of Leica M monikers as well. Leica board members, and board decisions, come and go. If Leica can move back to Wetzlar for tradition, perhaps one day Leica corporate will rediscover Leica tradition along with the M10 as well.
If the M240 is AKA M10, Why is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12?
well jaapv, thanks for opening up Leica's mis-branding fiasco back for discussion! Leica's corporate mis-step with the M240 name makes for great discussion and Leica entertainment.
wow, so many questions in this thread.
"Why Is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12? (And ME not AKA M9-1/2 btw.?)" To me the answer is obvious and in your own words, so I tried to have some fun with it, asking you again the same question. The answer to your question is that M-P, M60 and ME were never AKA "Also Known As" the M11, M12, M9-1/2. In contrast the M240 most certainly was known as the M10 for 6 months or more all over internet leading up to Leica corporate's public announcement of the new M240 naming scheme.
As the new camera that became officially the M240 was called the M10 on the internet prior to Leica revealing the M240, I see the term "M10 AKA M240" as entirely and historically accurate because the M240 was indeed known as the M10.
"I prefer my original question... And do not quite see why you had to edit it. If I did that on one of the forums I moderate all hell would break loose. My point was not discussing Leica's naming convention and I won't in this thread -surely a parent has a right to name his child- but the strange phenomena that a few people on this planet persist in mislabeling the M (Typ 240), and not other M cameras."
I edited the title of your thread by adding your own words "why is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12" to the enigmatic "Why?" As a matter of form enigmatic titles not identifying thread content at RFF are discouraged, please see Accurately Title and post your New Thread! http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130536
While Leica corporate is free to make Leica decisions, Leica fans are also free to protest corporate decisions when Leica corporate blows it. That includes moving Leica corporate to Solms, only to move it back to Wetzlar again. That includes replacing black paint with black chrome, only to go back to black paint. That includes removing the Leica script engraving from top plates only to bring it back again. That includes replacing the vulcanite covering with a very non vulcanite covering, only to bring back a vulcanite body type covering once again. That includes silly commemoratives that damage the Leica brand with new from the factory paint brassing. That includes misnaming products which depart from tradition and confuse the product line. All that Kaufman's board threw out with the M10 name was Leica tradition going back 58 years (2012-1954) and close to 1,000,000 Leica M3 to M9 designated cameras. I am surprised any long time Leica owner like yourself would be good with that, but OK.
Personally I see no possible benefit to Leica in breaking with tradition using confusing camera designations with a perpetual "M" camera with changing type designations -- other than possibly encouraging confused customers to visit Leica stores for product explanations.
Jaapv, if anyone wants to ignore Leica tradition (ironic with a brand that is so closely bound to tradition) simply because one particular set of corporate Leica board members proclaims something is so, so be it.
Likewise I would hope Leica fans like yourself accepting the M240 could also accept a more traditional view of Leica M monikers as well. Leica board members, and board decisions, come and go. If Leica can move back to Wetzlar for tradition, perhaps one day Leica corporate will rediscover Leica tradition along with the M10 as well.
pepeguitarra
Well-known
Not good for marketing!!
Not good for marketing!!
They would be already in the ....M17 or so? People will clearly see which one is the latest model and will go for it. By mixing M-Ps, M246, M, ME, customer gets a little confused and evaluate them not based on which one is the latest. I have a friend that is always buying the latest, while returning the previous one the bought. They love him at the Leica stores, all of them. I keep telling him, I cannot keep up with the Watermans. I sold my M8 to get the M9, and kept the M9, but went and bought an M8.2. This last one for sure give me much better photos in B&W when using the old and new lenses. The hamburger place IN & OUT in California was known to price the burgers for $2, $3, and $4. Not, $1.99, or $3,98, as other do. So, it is easy to go an know what you want. But people will notice when the price change mostly to $2.50, or $3.50. While if the price is $3,89 and they change it to $4.37, almost none will notice.
Not good for marketing!!
They would be already in the ....M17 or so? People will clearly see which one is the latest model and will go for it. By mixing M-Ps, M246, M, ME, customer gets a little confused and evaluate them not based on which one is the latest. I have a friend that is always buying the latest, while returning the previous one the bought. They love him at the Leica stores, all of them. I keep telling him, I cannot keep up with the Watermans. I sold my M8 to get the M9, and kept the M9, but went and bought an M8.2. This last one for sure give me much better photos in B&W when using the old and new lenses. The hamburger place IN & OUT in California was known to price the burgers for $2, $3, and $4. Not, $1.99, or $3,98, as other do. So, it is easy to go an know what you want. But people will notice when the price change mostly to $2.50, or $3.50. While if the price is $3,89 and they change it to $4.37, almost none will notice.
N
Ned Bojic
Guest
Yes, the funky naming scheme permits many cameras to be introduced with no real upgrades but rather sideways and meaningless modifications.
The bottom line is that it's SHADY marketing and has nothing to do with a so-called "german thinking" (now there's another leica myth in the making) and everything to do with modern american marketing.
The bottom line is that it's SHADY marketing and has nothing to do with a so-called "german thinking" (now there's another leica myth in the making) and everything to do with modern american marketing.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
At any rate, Stephen, I seriously object to you editing the content of my post (not the title) to reflect your own bias. I consider that unethical moderating which causes me to think seriously about my membership of this forum. Yes, I am that pissed off.
As for this M10 business, my opinion on it, which I tried -unsuccessfully, it seems- to convey several times in a less blunt manner is that it is the kind of Luddite behaviour that occasionally makes Leica fans the laughing stock of the photographic world.
Leica has set up a perfectly logical naming system across their present-day product line. Why should they be dragged back to the middle twentieth century, when they had just two products, sometimes even one? The place for maudlin nostalgia is not the modern business world, and certainly not on the say-so of a bunch of self-styled internet prophets, even if they have been speculating for six months. Speculation is not knowledge. Instead of AKA you should write ASO: As Speculated On.
As for this M10 business, my opinion on it, which I tried -unsuccessfully, it seems- to convey several times in a less blunt manner is that it is the kind of Luddite behaviour that occasionally makes Leica fans the laughing stock of the photographic world.
Leica has set up a perfectly logical naming system across their present-day product line. Why should they be dragged back to the middle twentieth century, when they had just two products, sometimes even one? The place for maudlin nostalgia is not the modern business world, and certainly not on the say-so of a bunch of self-styled internet prophets, even if they have been speculating for six months. Speculation is not knowledge. Instead of AKA you should write ASO: As Speculated On.
I copied "is the Leica M-P not AKA M11 and M60 AKA M12" from your post to your thread title. If any changes were made to your post, it was my error and not intentional.
If Leica's M240 type model system works for you, wonderful. That does not mean the M240 naming system works for everyone else.
I think Leica fans are laughed at more for sheeplishly accepting questionable Leica corporate decisions
like brand new brassed black paint cameras without question than anything else.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Ok, if the it was unintentional I can of course accept that, let's put the matter behind us. I retract my strong words in that case.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Actually, why should a naming system work or not work for anybody? A rose by any other name etc. This kind of naming scheme works for many other reputed brands, like Mercedes with their whole sequence of SL's etc.(although I suppose a big thing could be made out of the silliness of renaming the Benz brand after a pretty daughter of a dealer) or to get more into Leica Territory, Morgan, the 4/4 is called 4/4 regardless of year and drive train.
I, and most others I know, have no problem at all, and do not need invented names confusing the issue.
I, and most others I know, have no problem at all, and do not need invented names confusing the issue.
Kwesi
Well-known
At this point the Leica M type 240 has been in production for 3 years and the model is nearing the end of its product cycle. Looking back, we all thought it would be called M10.
It wasn't. Most of this planet has moved on. Here at RFF also, this is the case.
Our Head Bartender likes the M10 moniker, this is his forum and he gets to name his forum headings. This is just the simple fact of things. I kind of think its somewhat endearing and a bit of an inside joke for us hear at RFF.
It wasn't. Most of this planet has moved on. Here at RFF also, this is the case.
Our Head Bartender likes the M10 moniker, this is his forum and he gets to name his forum headings. This is just the simple fact of things. I kind of think its somewhat endearing and a bit of an inside joke for us hear at RFF.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
All silliness aside. I do rather wish Leica had retained a naming system at least similar to the old M naming system (i.e., M10, M11, M12,...) And, I would have liked to see variants or small model upgrades designated like they started to.....(i.e., M8.2). Thus, I'd be plenty happy to find myself purchasing an M11.2 (you know, the M11 with the sapphire LCD cover and extra-thick black paint). In any case, I admit I'm not a fan of the "Typ" sub-naming convention.
But regardless what they're named, all my Leica's work well and give me images that sometimes, when I'm lucky, look pretty good. Depending on the audience, I'm not often asked which model Leica I used to take the photograph.
But regardless what they're named, all my Leica's work well and give me images that sometimes, when I'm lucky, look pretty good. Depending on the audience, I'm not often asked which model Leica I used to take the photograph.
N
Ned Bojic
Guest
ferider
Veteran
Really ? Current Mustang Models:
- FORD Mustang Shelby GT500
- FORD Mustang Shelby GT350
- FORD Mustang 2.3 EcoBoost 6AT
- FORD Mustang 2.3 EcoBoost 6MT
- FORD Mustang 3.7 Ti-VCT V6 6AT
- FORD Mustang 3.7 Ti-VCT V6 6MT
- FORD Mustang 5.0 Ti-VCT V8 6AT
- FORD Mustang 5.0 Ti-VCT V8 6AT
- FORD Mustang 5.0 Ti-VCT V8 6MT
- FORD Mustang 5.0 Ti-VCT V8 6MT
Corolla is even more complicated.
Roland.
pepeguitarra
Well-known
I trust the LEICA brand because it is German...!
I trust the LEICA brand because it is German...!
Well, until the Volkswagen fraud was found, I now have doubts! I hope Leica is being managed as it should be.
I trust the LEICA brand because it is German...!
Well, until the Volkswagen fraud was found, I now have doubts! I hope Leica is being managed as it should be.
Similar threads
- Article
