Would you buy a new M9 in 2012??

[SuperUJ]

Leica's main market today is east Asia, mainly China. Any new Leica camera will be purchased there simply for the pride of ownership as a luxury product irrespective of price.

There are quite a few assumptions and generalization in only a couple of sentences. They reminded me about a number of posts in photo.net, which I haven't logged on for years.

John

 

[willie_901]

Fair enough, if Leica purchase is based on features and value, then why would someone pay $2000 for X2 and not go for Nex-7, OM-D, X100, Xpro1 or any other APS-C compact camera? At least these alternative have an EVF not to mention interchangeable lens mounts.

Why would anyone in their right mind buy a X2 and not the Fuji X100? At half the price.

This is a mystery to me as well.

I can only speculate the Leica brand is simply an overpowering factor for some photographers. Hats off to Leica for creating and maintaining such a high level of brand loyalty.

 

[SuperUJ]

Additionally, the X2 is still simpler than both of the Fujis and is smaller and lighter than all of them.

John- I saw someone using a X2 on the Fifth Ave mid-town NYC the other day. I felt G.A.S. inside me, especially it has the leather case on it. I went home and decided not to go back to that part of the city for a very long time.

John

 

[jsrockit]

John- I saw someone using a X2 on the Fifth Ave mid-town NYC the other day. I felt G.A.S. inside me, especially it has the leather case on it. I went home and decided not to go back to that part of the city for a very long time.

John

John, you certainly don't need a X2. It is quite beautiful though...

 

[jaapv]

Leica's main market today is east Asia, mainly Leica'sased there simply for the pride of ownership as a luxury product irrespective of price.

Leica does not care about any other camera company, because Leica competes on brand equity and not features and utility... In short, Leica prices will keep going up even if it means cheap FF cameras are released by other companies, but at the same time used digital Leica will be sold more cheaply since those cameras no longer have their brand new luxury product attraction to east asian market.

Leica's main market is still Germany...

 

[jsrockit]

Are you sure of that jaapv? Most of the american dealers seem to think China is the most important market to Leica these days. I'm just asking, because I really do not know either way.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Even if VC made a full frame bessa, people are not going to pay $7000 for it, even if it was a better camera than M9. A good proof of this is film bessas.

Leica sells the Leica experience and Leica pride of ownership; therefore, it can charge a premium.

IF it were a better camera, they might.

But you know as well as I that it wouldn't be, just as a film Bessa isn't a better camera than an M (and I have both), so why indulge in a meaningless fantasy?

What, after all, is 'the Leica experience'? I'd suggest that it's owning the best RF camera you can afford. Or, if you have lots of money, the best RF camera available.

Reflect upon the fact that no-one makes a better RF camera, at any price.

Cheers,

R.

 

[SuperUJ]

Leica's main market is still Germany...

John,

Both jaapv and the US dealers that you'd talked to could be right. Blaming it on the day job, I went look at Leica Camera's financial disclosure in its 2011 annual report. Although it did not break down its revenue by country, it went by region except for Germany:

Germany: 11.9% of total 2011 revenue
Europe (not including Germany): 34.1%
Asia and Australia: 33.0%
North America: 20.5%

If China was the 2011 single most important market by country, I believe that Leica Camera would have been reported revenue from the Chinese market separately, like they did for Germany's.

The US dealers that you'd talked to might have referred China as a high growth potential country for Leica Camera, i.e., marketing importance. But, the Japanese market has also been one of the very important markets to Leica in recent years despite the lost decades in economic terms.

John

 

[Roger Hicks]

Are you sure of that jaapv? Most of the american dealers seem to think China is the most important market to Leica these days. I'm just asking, because I really do not know either way.

The difference here might be 'American dealers' vs 'Leica'. Or, possibly, how you define 'the most important market'.

Cheers,

R.

 

[thegman]

IF it were a better camera, they might.

But you know as well as I that it wouldn't be, just as a film Bessa isn't a better camera than an M (and I have both), so why indulge in a meaningless fantasy?

What, after all, is 'the Leica experience'? I'd suggest that it's owning the best RF camera you can afford. Or, if you have lots of money, the best RF camera available.

Reflect upon the fact that no-one makes a better RF camera, at any price.

Cheers,

R.

Roger, I've owned both a Leica MP, and a Zeiss Ikon, personally I found the Ikon the better camera. My reasons are the usual ones that people give for liking the Ikon, but I'd probably disagree that no-one makes a better RF camera at any price.

I think "better" is just too subjective though, I don't blame you for a second for preferring your MP, it's a beautiful camera.

At the moment though, I'm considering whether I want to shoot 35mm film at all, if that becomes the case, then the Bessa III/ GF670 will be a much better RF for me than anything Leica has made.

Again, purely opinion from me though.

 

[jsrockit]

If China was the 2011 single most important market by country, I believe that Leica Camera would have been reported revenue from the Chinese market separately, like they did for Germany's.

I would have to agree after seeing that. However, perhaps Germany was seperated because Leica shares trade on the Frankfurt exchange (not counting OTC US markets)?

The US dealers that you'd talked to might have referred China as a high growth potential country for Leica Camera, i.e., marketing importance.

This is most likely what they meant. During the time when all desirable Leica stuff was not in stock in the US, a few Leica dealers blamed it on China too. Perhaps China is just everyone's latest target...(good or bad)

I did read a story about China's luxury taxes and that luxury cars cost 2-3 times more than usual due to the tax. Supposedly the cars were even more popular with a certain segment after the luxury tax was implemented. Not sure how accurate the story was though or what it was based on.

 

[Jeff S]

While a small percentage of Leica sales, Stefan Daniel did mention (I think during an M9 launch interview) that sales of film Ms...the M7 and MP...were strongest in Asia. He specifically commented on Japan as being the most 'traditional' in this regard.

Jeff

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger, I've owned both a Leica MP, and a Zeiss Ikon, personally I found the Ikon the better camera. My reasons are the usual ones that people give for liking the Ikon, but I'd probably disagree that no-one makes a better RF camera at any price.

I think "better" is just too subjective though, I don't blame you for a second for preferring your MP, it's a beautiful camera.

At the moment though, I'm considering whether I want to shoot 35mm film at all, if that becomes the case, then the Bessa III/ GF670 will be a much better RF for me than anything Leica has made.

Again, purely opinion from me though.

Highlight: absolutely.

Frances prefers the ZI too. I cheerfully concede "better in some ways, not as good in others." But my real point (badly made) was that no-one makes an RF camera which makes a Leica (or indeed a ZI) look like a Bessa. In other words, both Leica and ZI define the top end of the market. Once you take into account 'feel' (and the awful ZI meter), Leica wins easily for me; and, I think, for most people.

But it's not like comparing (say) an Omega with (say) a Vacheron Constantin.

Cheers,

R.

 

[fstops]

Well, for one thing, the Nex-7 and OM-D do not have dedicated knobs and aperture rings (for the most part). The menus are convoluted as well. Additionally, the X2 is still simpler than both of the Fujis and is smaller and lighter than all of them.

I prefer the X100 as well... but the X2 is more elegant and is still smaller and lighter. These things matter to some.

I think what you need to realize is that what you expect from a camera, or what you think is important in a camera, is not the same for everyone. Also, people buy and use multiple cameras... so it isn't a this versus that argument most of the time. Lastly, some people just have a lot more cash than others. The difference of $1000 might seem like a lot to us, but could be nothing to someone else.

If someone is willing to pay $1000 more for an under-featured camera but with better dials and 'feel", then its very hard to argue with that rationally; however, there is nothing wrong with that. The whole luxury goods market will collapse if people begin to rationalize their purchases.

 

[fstops]

IF it were a better camera, they might.

But you know as well as I that it wouldn't be, just as a film Bessa isn't a better camera than an M (and I have both), so why indulge in a meaningless fantasy?

What, after all, is 'the Leica experience'? I'd suggest that it's owning the best RF camera you can afford. Or, if you have lots of money, the best RF camera available.

Reflect upon the fact that no-one makes a better RF camera, at any price.

Cheers,

R.

A Leica M is better made and better engineered (some might say over-engineered) compared to a bessa, but with the same lens and film, it will be very hard to find differences in their image output... But when it comes to lenses, that's where Leica's reputation is impeccable. M9 might not be the best digital camera but its the only camera to use Leica M lenses without any crop and imo that's its main selling point.

 

[thegman]

Highlight: absolutely.

Frances prefers the ZI too. I cheerfully concede "better in some ways, not as good in others." But my real point (badly made) was that no-one makes an RF camera which makes a Leica (or indeed a ZI) look like a Bessa. In other words, both Leica and ZI define the top end of the market. Once you take into account 'feel' (and the awful ZI meter), Leica wins easily for me; and, I think, for most people.

But it's not like comparing (say) an Omega with (say) a Vacheron Constantin.

Cheers,

R.

Fair enough, while I think it's possible to make a "better made" camera than Leica, I doubt it's possible to open up a real gulf of difference.

I never had a problem with a ZI meter, but it was my first "real" camera, so I had nothing to compare it with.

All the best

Garry

 

[Griffin]

Perhaps so many people are waiting untill after the release of the M10 that the used market for M9's will have a shortage, and therefore high prices.

 

[leicashot]

Everyone thought M8 prices would drop like crazy when the M9 came out but the higher retail price of each succeeding M, enables prices to remain longer than other manufacturers. When will people realise this? The M10 will retail for $8995 or $9995, making the M9 and M9-P a great cheaper alternative M that people have been waiting for, LOL

 

[NeeZee]

Would i buy a new M9 in 2012?
No, definitely not.
Would i Have bought a new M9 in 2010, 2011?
No, 7000$ for a camera (a digital one, that is), are you kidding me?
​

 

[jsrockit]

If someone is willing to pay $1000 more for an under-featured camera but with better dials and 'feel", then its very hard to argue with that rationally;

People pay more for less all of the time... classic designs stand the test of time as do quality materials. Some of us prefer an uncluttered interface that doesn't get in the way. Also, again, dropping $1000 for some is like spending $2 on a hot dog for us.