Thorsten Overgaard on the M10

[semilog]

Originally Posted by Araakii

Germany has one of the highest wages in the world. Sure, Leica can move the production to China or Vietnam and cut the prices by 50%, but why should they do that?

That's adorable.

You do realize that Leica does as much work in Portugal as possible, and then does enough final assembly work in Germany to stamp that country as the country of origin, don't you?

And it's not as though Japan has low wages.

[Ryan1938]

At the end of the day what it comes down to FOR ME is that for the first time since I've been into photography, I'm actually distracted from my typical "I want a digital Leica M at any cost" drive. I think that distraction comes from not only the cost to entry continually and ruthlessly rising, but the company's admitted and announced goal of edging the fashion world.

[willie_901]

I think the M9 does have ground breaking technology.

Somehow Leica shoe-horned a modestly competent 24x36 mm sensor into a camera that is faithful to the M body aesthetic. I personally don't find this to be important for my photography, but I do resect Leica for their determination and engineering prowess to succeed at such a difficult task.

Why is important or even desirable for the body had to be indistinguishable in size to a film M camera is a completely different matter. I mean would it really matter if the camera was a bit thicker than the thickest M film camera? Would the Leica faithful rather have a state-of-the art sensor or a camera body that is slightly thicker than the M7? How many M8 owners would have tolerated a marginally thicker camera in order to avoid the necessity for IR filters for color work?

No matter. Leica made it happen and that is ground breaking in my opinion.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by victoriapio

Harry, i hope for your sake you are right, but I have my doubts about this. I just can't imagine a business model that would make this work financially for Leica. That being said, it is Leica making the decision on the supposed M10 and while in the past business often seems to take a back seat to Leica's decisions, I don't think that will be the case this time..

As much as I love film I've basically talked myself in to the inevitable transition to digital. I'm not worried about getting my Leicas serviced 5-10 years from now, but the Nikons and Rolleiflex bodies are going to be a problem. Scanners are a whole other story.

The money is going to be the hard part. There is little doubt that Leica will bend us over and have it's way with us, no matter how much we squirm. $7000-9000 is a lot of cash for just a body. Two bodies, which really is what anyone doing serious work is going to need is pretty insane, unless you are rolling in cash or can recoup that outlay through work.

Who, knows. Maybe I'll just have to keep shooting Tri-X until Kodak goes to the big darkroom in the sky or I hit it big. That or I'll just buy a Nikon.

PS: Anyone want to take bets on the status of weather sealing for the M10? After all it's supposedly a professional camera. I hope that Leica realizes that their new BFF at Magnum can't just retreat to the golf course clubhouse if a shower should appear. In the case of the Magnum shooters that clubhouse could be on fire.

[Nigel Meaby]

The M8 and M9 are thicker than the film bodies. It's not really a problem but it does alter the experience of holding the camera. For my hands, film bodies just seem to "fit" really well.

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by semilog

That's adorable.

You do realize that Leica does as much work in Portugal as possible, and then does enough final assembly work in Germany to stamp that country as the country of origin, don't you?

And it's not as though Japan has low wages.

I doubt that the Cosina manufacturing process in Japan involves much manual labor at all. And Leica did make the budget Summarit line, although not as inexpensive as the Zeiss ones. The bottom line is that the margin is probably comparable between the two companies. Leica's net income was only about 10% of revenue, far less than Apple's 40% or 50%. Somehow Leica gets blamed for its high prices when Apple makes a lot more profit but is treasured as a National darling.

But oh well, people who don't like the prices will always not like the prices. I personally don't care what the prices are. I just pick the lenses I like and shoot with them.

[dave lackey]

Well, the debate goes on, doesn't it?

While following the wristwatch thread, I am salivating over the Omega watch and, of course, anything else in the mechanical watch world.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...47#post1875347

Then it struck me...the same Leica bashers have yet to turn on other luxury goods products such as Omega, BMW, Mercedes. It is definitely a functional luxury piece at a high price.

But then, the last I looked, Nikon has cameras priced about the same as Leica M bodies. And Hasselblad. Where are the blad bashers? Or Phase I? There are a lot of expensive photography items out there.

Face it folks, the argument about Leica and high prices isn't going away. This arguing is worse than the film v. digital crap.

If you don't like the prices, buy what YOU want. I am happy with with a 60-year old IIIF. I am elated owning a 50 year old M3. I do lust for an M9 but I am patient. May never own one but that is just life.

For those that CAN buy an M9, please do and like I said above, take care of it, as it may be MY camera one day.

[daveywaugh]

Originally Posted by dave lackey

Well, the debate goes on, doesn't it?

Thanks for putting some sanity (and perspective) back into the discussion Dave!

[MCTuomey]

Originally Posted by semilog

The assertion, straight from the top, is that Leica won't make superb products at reasonable cost even in cases where it's technically feasible to do so.

Of course not. Why would they do so when it clearly conflicts with their mission and primary marketing concept? You appear to be indignant about the assertion you quote, although it's only an expression of a business model designed to preserve the most important asset Leica owns: its name.

Making "superb products at reasonable cost" is certainly not the objective of luxury goods producers.

[Gabriel M.A.]

Originally Posted by semilog

The assertion, straight from the top, is that Leica won't make superb products at reasonable cost even in cases where it's technically feasible to do so.

Bentley's superb products at reasonable "pre-owned" costs.

Nikon (synonym for "superb product") to reasonably increase their reasonable costs.

[jippiejee]

I have this feeling Thorsten knows a lot more than he can disclose. But I think his hint that the M will be the basis for a future variety of different cameras including something 'CL-like' is interesting...

[Paul Luscher]

I admit I cringed when I saw the bit about Leica wanting to be known as a "luxury brand." That'll just add to the idea that people who buy and use Leicas do so for snob appeal and status displays. The old joke about Leicas being the toys of retired doctors.

Do think It's a shame Leica doesn't try to make a lower priced model, so that up and coming photogs could get into rangefinder photography (yeah, yeah, I know there's the Zeiss Ikon. But that ain't quite the same as a Leica). Seems a shame the M is often seen as the camera of the rich...and rich old geezers (hey, I'm one--at least as to the geezer part).

Have to see what the M10 offers. Price will be an object for me. M9 cost a bundle, and put a dent in my savings account. If the M10 gets to be $10K or more, well, I'll just hang on to the M9.

Re using film Leicas vs digital Leicas: No real difference in use, though obviously the digital has more features...and no film advance. M9, however, is slightly less aesthetically appealing than a film M, because it is somewhat fatter. There is something about the slim compactness of a film M, for lack of a better phrase, that makes it just right.

Only other thing to add is that Leica M9 gets flak because of its "lack of features," as opposed to a DSLR. But I think Leica knows that its customers want it that way, that they want a "hands-on" camera in which they're in control of setting up and getting the shot, rather than leaving everything to a bunch of integrated circuits. Kinda like the motorcycle racers I see on their stripped down,manual-everything bikes--the last thing they'd want is a loaded-up Honda Goldwing....

[jarski]

Originally Posted by jippiejee

I have this feeling Thorsten knows a lot more than he can disclose. But I think his hint that the M will be the basis for a future variety of different cameras including something 'CL-like' is interesting...

yes. text seems carefully worded, and at parts a little repetitive. anyway, not a long wait anymore.

[Ryan1938]

Originally Posted by dave lackey

Well, the debate goes on, doesn't it?

While following the wristwatch thread, I am salivating over the Omega watch and, of course, anything else in the mechanical watch world.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...47#post1875347

Then it struck me...the same Leica bashers have yet to turn on other luxury goods products such as Omega, BMW, Mercedes. It is definitely a functional luxury piece at a high price.

But then, the last I looked, Nikon has cameras priced about the same as Leica M bodies. And Hasselblad. Where are the blad bashers? Or Phase I? There are a lot of expensive photography items out there.

Face it folks, the argument about Leica and high prices isn't going away. This arguing is worse than the film v. digital crap.

If you don't like the prices, buy what YOU want. I am happy with with a 60-year old IIIF. I am elated owning a 50 year old M3. I do lust for an M9 but I am patient. May never own one but that is just life.

For those that CAN buy an M9, please do and like I said above, take care of it, as it may be MY camera one day.

I'm a watch guy too... I used to love Breitling watches and still have one. However, the brand took a major turn towards fashion in the past 20 years. What used to be a tool watch for pilots is now more of a fashion statement for rappers and style moguls. Huge pieces that place functionality second to style.

I'm now more into Sinn watches. A german company that is absolutely focused on function before anything else. And, of course, you pay for it...

I hope Leica isn't heading the way of Breitling. I don't mind the crazy prices if the focus remains on the simplicity and elegance of taking pictures with a hand made mechanical piece. If the M10 is essentially just an M9 with an upgraded sensor, I'd be happy.

I'd be even happier if they'd limit the number of different special editions and other shenanigans Leica has become famous for. I think it would actually be great for the company to focus on their glass, real production numbers, and a smaller line of digital bodies... Focus on photography, not style or fashion... but what do I know...

[dave lackey]

Thanks for the Sinn watch reference...they look very nice!

I happened onto these recently and please, don't get started on watches!

http://www.botta-design.de/en/einzeigeruhr-uno-24.html

[furcafe]

I don't think Leica has much of a choice. They're in a position similar to the mechanical watch industry, as others have mentioned.

Judging from old advertisements & price sheets dating back to 1920s, Leica always marketed itself to the wealthy, it's just that back in the days of mechanical cameras, all good cameras were expensive & 35mm was even more of luxury product (Zeiss Ikon Contax cameras, for example, were more expensive than Leica). With the advent of the SLR (easier to manufacture than RFs), electronics, etc., people now can get a good camera for much less money. So while Leicas, after adjusting for inflation, don't cost much more (if @ all) than they did in the past, the competition has gotten much cheaper.

Originally Posted by Paul Luscher

I admit I cringed when I saw the bit about Leica wanting to be known as a "luxury brand." That'll just add to the idea that people who buy and use Leicas do so for snob appeal and status displays. The old joke about Leicas being the toys of retired doctors.

Do think It's a shame Leica doesn't try to make a lower priced model, so that up and coming photogs could get into rangefinder photography (yeah, yeah, I know there's the Zeiss Ikon. But that ain't quite the same as a Leica). Seems a shame the M is often seen as the camera of the rich...and rich old geezers (hey, I'm one--at least as to the geezer part).

Have to see what the M10 offers. Price will be an object for me. M9 cost a bundle, and put a dent in my savings account. If the M10 gets to be $10K or more, well, I'll just hang on to the M9.

Re using film Leicas vs digital Leicas: No real difference in use, though obviously the digital has more features...and no film advance. M9, however, is slightly less aesthetically appealing than a film M, because it is somewhat fatter. There is something about the slim compactness of a film M, for lack of a better phrase, that makes it just right.

Only other thing to add is that Leica M9 gets flak because of its "lack of features," as opposed to a DSLR. But I think Leica knows that its customers want it that way, that they want a "hands-on" camera in which they're in control of setting up and getting the shot, rather than leaving everything to a bunch of integrated circuits. Kinda like the motorcycle racers I see on their stripped down,manual-everything bikes--the last thing they'd want is a loaded-up Honda Goldwing....

[icebear]

The envious discussion and bashing will never end. There are indeed lots of people who just buy a Leica because they want to show off that red dot. Leica welcomes their money, too.

Their small numbers (batch size) does not allow for competitive pricing. They are in a luxurious niche and have to try to survive. There are a lot of used lenses out there that can be used on a M9. My prime FD glass (1.2/85L) was last usable on my 2 T90's and that was that. New system, new lenses, sadly enough...

The first thing I did when I unpacked my (used) M9 was to tape over the dot with black tape. I put a Giotto screen protection (0.5mm Schott glass) over the screen and am a happy camper having saved $1000 for not buying a M9P. A grip, a thumbs up and a self made sling complete the set up - ahhh forgot that dark red Tom A. softie .

Going on and about a street music festival last weekend, no one but a professional photographer exhibiting prints for sale recognized that thing as a M. Lot's of folks out there lugging around big SLR's carrying them like a baby with two arms because they are too heavy for one hand. And of course almost all had there sunshade attached in reverse, not to increase the bulkiness of there camera and zoom combination even more.

[Paul Luscher]

Originally Posted by icebear

The envious discussion and bashing will never end. There are indeed lots of people who just buy a Leica because they want to show off that red dot. Leica welcomes their money, too.

Their small numbers (batch size) does not allow for competitive pricing. They are in a luxurious niche and have to try to survive. There are a lot of used lenses out there that can be used on a M9. My prime FD glass (1.2/85L) was last usable on my 2 T90's and that was that. New system, new lenses, sadly enough...

The first thing I did when I unpacked my (used) M9 was to tape over the dot with black tape. I put a Giotto screen protection (0.5mm Schott glass) over the screen and am a happy camper having saved $1000 for not buying a M9P. A grip, a thumbs up and a self made sling complete the set up - ahhh forgot that dark red Tom A. softie .

Going on and about a street music festival last weekend, no one but a professional photographer exhibiting prints for sale recognized that thing as a M. Lot's of folks out there lugging around big SLR's carrying them like a baby with two arms because they are too heavy for one hand. And of course almost all had there sunshade attached in reverse, not to increase the bulkiness of there camera and zoom combination even more.

That's one of the funny things about a Leica. It's supposed to be a status object, but hardly anybody even notices it when you're using one. Took a filmer M out the other day, and nobody bothered to look-even when I was shooting up close. To most folks, it just looks like some kind of winky-dink "happy-snapper".

Hmmm...ya could argue the if you wanted an ostentatious status display and/or to impress people that you're a "serious photographer," you might do better to carry around a monstrous Canikon with a huge lens mounted on it.....

[buzzardkid]

I was going to post a gnarly comment on the useless 'Leica-should' debate but then I remembered:


I don't care.

[MikeL]

Originally Posted by buzzardkid

I was going to post a gnarly comment on the useless 'Leica-should' debate but then I remembered:

I don't care.

Amen Brother!

[pieter]

Hmmm have to say this article by Thorsten Overgaard managed to bring out the worst of what Leica is and stands for. It almost makes me wish they didn't make such amazing camera's.
Thankfully I also know of that other side of Leica, that of pure joy of photography unhindered by silly in camera gadgets. That side that speaks to my adventurous and rebel heart. But I have to admit that there is also that luxury brand side of the Leica story. That side that seems to love its own pompous glory and seems proud of the fact that it would never release a "cheap" camera that everybody could afford. As if that's something I would be afraid of.

Sadly that might well be the fear of many Leica owners: a world where everybody would have a Leica. Oh the horror. Thankfully that will never happen, or so Leica seems to reassure us. Thankfully Leica is mostly unknown to the world. Only a select few of illuminati will know what that camera is, that is hanging around your neck.

Ah well, I guess if Leica needs to be a luxury fashion company in order to be able to keep making the most amazing and daring cameras in the world, then so be it, and more power to them.

[davidtan]

I've always been under the impression that Leica’s original intent, when it first came out with the Barnacks, was to be a democratizing force in photography. The arrival of Leica gave an alternative to large, costly negatives and cumbersome cameras. They gave an economic use to small cine-film, and introduced a lightweight and highly portable camera to shoot it with. Does anyone else think that the current goals of Leica—to foster an image of prestige and present their inventory as luxuries—to be quite different from their earlier ideas and innovations?

Of course, Leica is a business first and a religion second. They understand the sort of appeal that their products carry, especially with a century's worth of fame and artistic association to prove it. If they can sell their cameras at a premium and make a profit, they will. That's just how a company operates and I won't criticize them for that.

I'd love to have a Leica, but I can't reason why I'd spend that much to have one. I suspect that this state of mind is shared among some naysayers of the brand. It's a normal reaction though; an item being expensive can be counted as a fault. But a high price can also be a plus; Leica can probably be considered a Veblen good in that it's pricetag signals it's perceived quality. What helps Leica in fostering this consumer mindset is that it's one-of-a-kind; there are no other M-mount full-frame digital rangefinders. It's flagship camera benefits from that mystique of the rangefinder style, the professional standard of the full-frame sensor and it's compatibility with a legacy of lenses.

Suppose Cosina Voigtlander makes an M-mount full-frame digital rangefinder. How would Leica, and the rangefinder community, react?

[hausen]

Dave I can understand your lust for Omega, my Seamaster Planet Ocean Chrono leaves home most days with me and my M9. Am a sucker for the luxury brands

[Araakii]

Originally Posted by davidtan

Suppose Cosina Voigtlander makes an M-mount full-frame digital rangefinder. How would Leica, and the rangefinder community, react?

That would be great news! But can they? If you can't convince yourself to buy a digital Leica, then don't. There is no need to come up with all kinds of reasons to justify your decision.

[icebear]

As for a little diversity from the dry discussion, a shot taken on my first nigth out with the new toy and it's only from the jpg file, obviously far below the limits and downsized for posting to ...you know.
But anyway :