[LRflex] Re: Breaking rumor - Sigma
- From: Steve Barbour <steve.barbour@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 14:47:43 -0700
so it would take some faith even if the price was right (ie low) which it
isn't...
s
On May 28, 2011, at 2:17 PM, Douglas Sharp wrote:
> For me, Sigma's breaking rumour announcement has about
> as much value as breaking wind.
> Brand charisma is an essential marketing factor, and
> that is something that Sigma simply does not have.
>
> The announcement of the new camera generates at most a
> "so what" or "oh yeah", and nowhere near anything like
> a "wow!" and their pricing is as if Daihatsu were
> bringing out a model in the Mercedes price bracket
> (even the corrected price).
>
> People will perhaps say "great new sensor, really
> innovative - but WTF is SIGMA? Is that the same company
> that manages to make a decent lens every now and
> again?" SIGMA is simply not a brand with a reputation
> for superior quality, and that sticks in peoples minds.
>
> George is right, lenses are the money spinners.
>
> If Leica could see their way to producing lenses for
> other brands, I think they would be on to a good thing
> - Zeiss are doing it (Non-AF) and Voigtländer /Cosina
> proved that it works when they started selling the
> "no-features" Bessa-L as a film back for their first
> series of excellent (almost-but-not-quite
> Leica-quality) wide-angle lenses in LTM mount. A "lens
> with a camera on it" kind of affair.
> CV very soon built a reputation for outstanding quality
> that SIGMA still doesn't have. Hands up everyone who
> has used a CV lens on a Leica-M or screw mount body.:-)
>
>
> Ricoh may be pointing the way ahead with their modular
> camera, but I very much doubt whether they are thinking
> of the very limited number of Leica R users (a group
> with gradually falling numbers due to natural
> attrition) and comparatively limited number of R lenses
> owned or on the market.
>
> I'm certain that Leica ran a profitability study and
> decided that it was dead on its feet from the start -
> although, the now infamous "nicht darstellbar" argument
> in a Leica statement - engineer-speak for "we took a
> look at the idea and shelved it 'cos we couldn't afford
> it in a month of Sundays, and it wouldn't be profitable
> even if we could" which everyone hopefully
> misunderstand as meaning "not yet ready to be
> presented", kept hopes high for a while.
>
> We must accept (Sorry Frank) that Leica R is dead and
> buried, and that the M9 (P and 10), Leica S2 (and the
> S3 to follow it) are Leica policy from now on (and, as
> I assume that my information is correct, are actually
> doing rather well on all fronts, though they are not
> quite out of the forest yet).
>
> If someone does come up with an idea for an R
> alternative, which I doubt, I'm pretty sure it would be
> a cumbersome solution with none of the elegance and
> finesse that a Leica could potentially have been under
> different circumstances - and it won't be all that much
> better than using adapters.
>
> And Leica would not put a red dot on the front of it
> either, so half the charisma would be gone in a flash.
>
> BTW: we don't hear many people complaining that there
> are no digital bodies for wonderful Zeiss lenses and
> other excellent, but long gone, brands- I could think
> of a few mounts I would love to have a digital camera
> for, but not necessarily from SIGMA.
>
> Cheers
> Douglas
>
> On 28.05.2011 21:46, George Lottermoser wrote:
>> On May 28, 2011, at 10:10 AM, Frank Filippone wrote:
>>
>>> Sigma, on the other hand would sell bodies, which is good business for
>>> them.....I think....
>> I suspect that S, C, O and N all want to sell lenses.
>> Interchangeable lenses means you'll sell at least 2 to (pick a number) more
>> lenses than bodies.
>>
>> Though I like your thinking.
>> It'd be nice if someone could see how to make a profit selling bodies
>> which could easily adapt to using various mfg lenses at full functionality.
>> Welcome to our fantasy island.
>> While we're here;
>> how cool it would have been if the S2 were shallow enough to use R glass;
>> even with vignetting.
>>
>> ;~)
>>
>> Regards,
>> George Lottermoser
>> george@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.imagist.com
>> http://www.imagist.com/blog
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------
>> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
>> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
>> Archives are at:
>> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>>
>
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
