[LRflex] Re: Leica R rumours?
- From: Douglas Sharp <douglas.sharp@xxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 14:11:22 +0200
Thanks for the reminder, Alex
I forgot my R3Mot :-)
But I don't need another one.
What I DO need is a battery holder for the Leicaflex motor on my SL2Mot
Cheers
Douglas
Alex Hurst wrote:
> Douglas wrote in part:
>
>
>> I use almost everything :-)
>> M2, M6, M4-2, CL, CLE (not quite Leica) IIIG, SL(several), SL2
>> (several), SL2Mot, R5 and R7, when I have time (usually about 3 to 4
>> weeks a year).
>>
>
>
> Jaysus, Douglas, you're as bad as me! Last count was:
>
> LTM: 1926/27 I converted to III, 1932 Standard, IIIa, IIIf.
> M: M2 (2), M3, M4-P, M6, CL.
> R: SL, SL2 (2), R3 MOT.
>
> All of these get used in regular rotation, apart from the R3, which I
> don't get on with. Anyone want a nice R3 MOT plus slightly
> temperamental winder? Email me off-list - sorry, it's not Friday.
>
>
>
>> The basic problem for Leica is their existing customer base - this
>> limits the scope of what they can sell at present, and as I have
>> mentioned before, is gradually diminishing through age. The demographic
>> factor is the death sentence for Leica in its present form. Leica needs
>> a new brand image and identity for a market that has not yet been
>> confronted with the qualities and charisma of the Leica we all (most of
>> us over 50 - and with perhaps. at the most, 20 to 30 years of potential
>> Leica purchasing power ahead of us) know and "love".
>>
>
> This is a problem for the LHSA too - there weren't that many
> youngsters at the Wetzlar meet last year.....
>
>
>> Whether Leica sinks or swims is a matter of brand management and feeding
>> the market where it's hungry, not where it's more or less saturated.
>> Leica relies on us for a "professional" view of what Leica tradition
>> demands and what "conservative" photographers want, what this means when
>> you get down to the hard facts is, we are a bunch of relatively
>> "ancient" advisors whose opinions are treasured but only as a guideline
>> about what NOT to do. Leica's lack of success is based on the fact that
>> the market has been limited to people like us.
>>
>
> Not sure that the sage advice of us ancients is not heeded by Solms.
> After all, most of us seem to have also embraced digital in some
> shape or form, so we look forward as well as back. I went the Nikon
> D200 route, and am very happy I did.
>
> Our problem is that we have a significant investment in the past as
> well as the future of Leica. If they fudge the issue of backward lens
> compatibility for a new DSLR, then there's little incentive for us to
> buy a new body. Nikon have addressed this successfully - I can use
> nearly all my MF Nikon glass on the D200 with focus confirmation and
> matrix metering, and do so frequently. I hope Leica can emulate them.
>
>
>> It would be interesting to see statistics showing the percentage of
>> first-time buyers who purchased an M8 - I expect that it tends towards
>> zero. This is NOT a sound basis for sustainable success.
>>
>
> It would indeed. I suspect Leica don't know themselves. OTOH,
> received wisdom is that the M8 is still flying off the shelves
> despite its high price, and I can't believe that this is entirely due
> to the old guard upgrading. If it is, then the future for Leica is
> indeed as bleak as Douglas implies.
>
>
>> It may be hard for some of us, but for Leica it's a matter of survival
>> in a predators market.
>>
>
> That's why I hope that a new digital R will not be too little too
> late, as was the case with the 'flexes. R&D is moving at such a pace
> in the DSLR field that it's going to be very difficult to offer a
> product from scratch that is even competitive, let alone a
> market-leader designwise.
>
> Best
>
> Alex
>
------
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:
