[LRflex] Re: Interview with Steven K. Lee
- From: "a aa" <classwp@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 21:51:31 -0400
A few comments.
Firstly, I agree with you that 4/3rds will ever be the premier digital
system so I agree Leica need a full (or nearly full frame) system.
In fact, I stated so in my post.
Secondly, the analogy of 4/3 to APS is not a good one; even if 4/3rds
goes the way of APS that is irrelevant to the user because a digital
system is not dependent on the production of film or other
consumables. Yes a shortage of parts will kill it, but that is true
for all electronic cameras.
Thirdly, I strongly disagree about the need for Leica to make and sell
premium lenses. All indications are that digital is, if anything, less
forgiving of optical flaws than film. Notice, as an example, how
certain Canon L lenses were regarded as being adequate for film but
are now acknowledged to need improvement for use with digital sensors.
What I am unable to understand from Mr Lee's statement is this: if the
lenses are just 'good enough' why would I or anyone else on this list
buy them in preference to N or C or CZ?
Like everyone else I wish L the best and shall endeavor to support
them - I just hope they do not cheapen the R line too much.
On 12/05/07, Douglas Sharp <douglas.sharp@xxxxxx> wrote:
> And what if 4/3 goes the way of APS-film cartridges?
> That was supposedly a revolution too - Leica must, IMO, address the
> people who want a 28mm lens to create images that their users are used
> to seeing from a 28mm lens - they won't even get past first base without
> a full frame sensor - Canon did it with the 5D at a lower-than-Leica
> price - that's what Lee means with competitive.
>
> The bloke also wants Leica to manufacture lenses that are appropriate
> for the sensors and what photographers need, not ones that astound the
> readers of MTF charts.
>
> How he's going to work out the AF side of things is something completely
> different - Zeiss/Kyocera had the idea with a moving film plane,
> perhaps Leica may be thinking along the same lines, maybe a reduced
> sensor to lens distance and the equivalent of an electronically
> controlled AF "bellows" (or helical) just behind the lens mount (Leica
> used to be famous for mechanical versions of this kind of thing) . which
> would probably be the simplest technical solution.
>
> But then again , do customers really want an AF Leica?
> Isn't it a definitive characteristic of Leica SLR users that they prefer
> to have complete control of the process of photography - focusing, DOF
> etc? Maybe just give us reliable focus confirmation. Dyed in the wool
> Leica R owners don't "trust" AF anyway , as a rule.
>
> He mentions re-hiring - that means precision engineers, designers and
> constructors - the ones over the age of 40 - 50 who were the first to go
> (salaries were too high, but re-employ them for less - that's the way
> the German labour market works at present). Gathering expertise and
> competenceis the name of the game, the Leica we know today will probably
> become a simple "centre of excellence", and one of the components in a
> group comprising the other branches (and their particular areas of
> competence) swallowed by Kaufmann and co and planned to be the core
> concerns in the Leitz Park project .
>
> Expensive is what is currently 100% made by Leica or to Leica tolerances
> - so reduce Leica's own contributions to the R10, but keep it Made in
> Germany (Leitz Park? Leitz Brand) and if it's marketed right, it retains
> its Leica charisma while increasing margins. Even when sold at a
> premium (but competitive) price.
>
> What does Lee consider to be "The Competition" as such: I expect,
> primarily Canon and Nikon - so what do they have that Leica doesn't?
> And what can Leica offer as a Unique Selling Proposition to gain a
> competitive edge and a profitable market share?
>
> Plus for Leica: two respected brand names Leitz and Leica, a reputation
> for absolute quality, an accepted justification of premium market prices
> for excellent products (sadly waning), historical tradition, Made in
> Germany, brand loyalty, brand personality, build, reliability, backward
> system compatibility.
>
> Prestige is a two-edged sword that can be either beneficial or
> detrimental to Leica's business, depending on how it is handled.
> Hopefully, the new -found willingness to invest on the part of the new
> owners is a long-term, or at least mid-term, strategy.
>
> Plus for Canon and Nikon: Professional acceptance, fast model
> turnarounds, lower prices (not much lower, in fact) in the premium/pro
> segment, AF, two different ranges of lenses, premium and consumer, a
> dynamic approach to manufacturing and marketing, close customer
> relations, willingness to invest.
>
> Minus for Leica: Old fashioned production and marketing methods, abysmal
> advertising, gradual loss of reputation, pride, arrogance, ignorance of
> customer needs, AF?, price?. over specified tolerances in bodies and lenses.
>
> Minus for C+N: Corporate size, range too large, consistently changing
> models, lens quality (in absolute terms), Made in Japan (still a
> disadvantage for some), build, "don't repair - replace" or built in
> obsolescence, lack of consistency in lens quality from one focal length
> to another.
>
> IMO, Leica must MEET expectations and no longer EXCEED them by producing
> immensely expensive, over-specified equipment with properties which by
> far exceed the requirements of digital media and potential or existing
> users.
> Leica must regenerate overall market awareness of Leica as a viable
> alternative to C & N in price and quality.
> Leica must address premium/pro target groups with a product designed and
> constructed to fulfil their needs, and must cease to pander to the
> desires of people demanding "potential results" which can hardly be seen
> in practice, just for the sake of being able to say we did it because
> we can.
> Leica must also stop working according to the motto that has killed off
> a great part of German precision engineering prowess - "But we always
> did it that way".
>
> I personally see the renaissance of the Leitz brand as a means for
> retaining the aura, and simultaneously reducing production costs.
> Standardisation can build a basis for an R10, the core elements of which
> allow faster model changes/versions and are basis of the R11, R12 etc.
> to follow. I'm still astounded that the R9 came so soon after the R8,
> this was only possible because about 99% of the R9 was R8 from the start.
>
> With the Leitz Group as an umbrella brand and Leica as a premium
> sub-brand we have a win-win situation - both names are equally well
> respected. I can already envisage the marketing angle, a return to the
> innovative traditions of Leitz Wetzlar, all it needs is some very clever
> brand management minds to convince us that we are still getting 100%
> Leica for our money.
>
> Just a couple of ideas
> Cheers
> Douglas
>
>
>
>
> >
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
