Why would AF be such a sin?

[NickTrop]

Nick, I think the only reason Leica is in business is because they didn't try to be a player in the mass produced DSLR game. They are selling all of the M9 cameras and M lenses they can make and are profitable... why would they change that?

Easy - rangefinders are a niche product, SLRs are not. Rangefinders died when SLRs came out, were killed again with zoom lenses, were killed again with autofocus. The last production rangefinder wasn't even a rangefinder (taking about the Contax G 1, 2). Not, of course, knocking them but... Back to DSLR - the body is the razor, the lens is the blade. Give away the razor (sell at cost), make money on the blades (the lenses). Partner with Panasonic (as they have been) and crank out a good DSLR... let Panasonic sell the same camera with a different name - as they have been. Let suckers flagrantly pay 20% more for a $0.50 red dot stamped on the body (as they have been). Then sell autofocus R glass at a premium. You now have 100's of thousands of Leica users just a-dyin' for a pricey Summilux (or something...) I'll never understand why Leica never came out with a digital "R" DSLR.

Design it, Panny manufactures it, sell tons of pricey glass. Leica has a built-in margin. Or, the short answer is... Leica would sell a helluvalot more DSLRs - saturated market or not, than M8s or M9s, for which to sell lenses to.

 

[FranZ]

Sony's "Focus peaking" technology IMHO seems to be a nice example of blending "old" (manual focus M) glass and new technology.
Surely Leica can choose to implement a similar manual focusing aid in new products, offering an enhanced user experience and cater for a new user generation, safeguarding revenue in the future.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Easy - rangefinders are a niche product, SLRs are not. Rangefinders died when SLRs came out, were killed again with zoom lenses, were killed again with autofocus. The last production rangefinder wasn't even a rangefinder (taking about the Contax G 1, 2). Not, of course, knocking them but... Back to DSLR - the body is the razor, the lens is the blade. Give away the razor (sell at cost), make money on the blades (the lenses). Partner with Panasonic (as they have been) and crank out a good DSLR... let Panasonic sell the same camera with a different name - as they have been. Let suckers flagrantly pay 20% more for a $0.50 red dot stamped on the body (as they have been). Then sell autofocus R glass at a premium. You now have 100's of thousands of Leica users just a-dyin' for a pricey Summilux (or something...) I'll never understand why Leica never came out with a digital "R" DSLR.

Design it, Panny manufactures it, sell tons of pricey glass. Leica has a built-in margin.

Dear Nick,

Quite hard to kill conclusively, then. Or a flexible definition of 'killed'.

It's a niche market. Fine. Why try to turn it into mass crap?

Cheers,

R.

 

[dave lackey]

Nick, I think the only reason Leica is in business is because they didn't try to be a player in the mass produced DSLR game. They are selling all of the M9 cameras and M lenses they can make and are profitable... why would they change that?

I reckon that pretty well sums it up. Somehow I think Leica knows what they are doing.

 

[jsrockit]

Or, the short answer is... Leica would sell a helluvalot more DSLRs - saturated market or not, than M8s or M9s, for which to sell lenses to.

Probably a good way to kill a unique company though... since it is doing well based on its uniqueness. Perhaps Leica is fine with being small and isn't as interested in being a mass produced / mainstream product?

 

[MC JC86]

Just producing a DSLR doesn't guarantee solvency or continuity of brand. Contax N digital, Sigma's on again off again attempts et al suggest that Leica sticking to what they do best (Binoculars, Funny looking cameras, over priced lense ) probably makes the most sense.

 

[flip]

It really sounds like a branding debate to me. If the owners of Leica wanted to go that route, would they be better off doing so under a subsidiary entity or using Leica? I rather doubt it would enhance the brand to become more in line with the pack. Better off to buy shares and get on the Nikon, Fuji, or Sony board. ;-)

 

[jarski]

almost every other camera system out there has AF these days. MF-only cameras are breath of fresh air + range finder focus patch also differentiates them from "everything else".

personally, ability to focus lens closer than usual 0.7m would be nicer to have than AF.

 

[wgerrard]

are we sure we (leica owners) want af?

The thing to ask is how much of Leica's business is selling new cameras to their existing customers. If an M-camera really is good for a lifetime, then Leica has little financial incentive to care what current owners want.

 

[wgerrard]

Easy - rangefinders are a niche product, SLRs are not... Back to DSLR - the body is the razor, the lens is the blade. Give away the razor (sell at cost), make money on the blades (the lenses). Partner with Panasonic (as they have been) and crank out a good DSLR... let Panasonic sell the same camera with a different name - as they have been. Let suckers flagrantly pay 20% more for a $0.50 red dot stamped on the body (as they have been). Then sell autofocus R glass at a premium. You now have 100's of thousands of Leica users just a-dyin' for a pricey Summilux (or something...) I'll never understand why Leica never came out with a digital "R" DSLR.

Design it, Panny manufactures it, sell tons of pricey glass. Leica has a built-in margin. Or, the short answer is... Leica would sell a helluvalot more DSLRs - saturated market or not, than M8s or M9s, for which to sell lenses to.

I agree. If there's money to be made from little p&s cameras with the Leica badge on them, then odds are there's money to be made from selling a premium consumer/prosumer DSLR and a line of lenses with that same badge. Nothing would impact the M community. In fact, it's the M's reputation that stands behind all those other camera.

 

[cosmonaut]

I for one agree there should be a finder upgrade. Maybe an MP upgrade I hope the development of their film cameras are not over. AF or not. Just like the M7 and MP were sold at the same time I thought Leica could make both an M AF and MF. Making a whole new mount just for AF? Why when you could easily have both?
But I can also see from the reaction the backlash it would cause.