[LRflex] Re: Next "R" Camera Survey - 20 Questions.
- From: "Chris Birchenhall" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:12:00 +0100
Javier
You suggest "In order to turn itself into a
profit making company of respectable size. They will
have to start producing the kind of cameras many here
will not like." They are already doing that with various re-badged Lumix and
Lux cameras. I have to suggest the business plan involves pursuing the
"mass" market with such re-badged cameras and maintaining, possibly as a
loss leader, the "quality" minority products. Note they need both; the mass
cameras to raise good consistent revenues with a good margin, but that
margin can only be sustained if they can maintain a premium to the Leica
badge and that requires niche products that sustain the historic association
of the badge with goods of the highest quality. Loosing some money on such
quality goods will be viable as long as it means it can continue to charge
good premiums on the mass market money earners.
Chris Birchenhall
-----Original Message-----
From: leicareflex-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:leicareflex-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Javier Perez
Sent: 19 October 2006 22:27
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [LRflex] Re: Next "R" Camera Survey - 20 Questions.
Hi David
My apologies. I thought they were passing surveys
around.
But here's the problem. In order to turn itself into a
profit making company of resopectable size. They will
have to start producing the kind of cameras many here
will not like. Of course that won't matter since we
are customers and like any company they will trade one
or two of us in for 10 others who might not be as
picky. That's more than just making a few changes in
the marketing approach. They will have to start
practicing price point strategies and this in turn
require the design of new bodies that are compatible
with looser tolerances. It means making extensive use
of plastics in areas where theyt don't belong and
designing optical sets that can produce results almost
as good as Zeiss or Leitx while being far more
forgiving in terms of axial spacing or centering of
elements. That's the Canon design svchool btw: They
might have to introduce a new product line if they are
not willing to call those less than spectacular lenses
Leicas! They may also have to farm out lens
manufacturing for these to Cosina or God forbid,
Samyang! They may have to introce lenses on other
companies' mounts. You'll notice that even though the
lenses are what counts on a camera, it's the camera
that holds the badge! Then they will have to
concentrate on getting the Leica label on as many high
end point and shoots as they can. They may have to
kill off good products in order to maximize the sale
of inferior but more profitable. Did you know that
until now Leitz is the only company that produces
lower speed lenses to the same optical and mechanical
quality standards as their higher focal equivalents.
(Maybe Zeiss for SLR lenses)Imagine the 90 Elmarit was
a dog compared to the 90 Summicron! As for digital,
they will have to play catchup and anyone who has a
Rebel or a 1Ds can tell you that Canon imaging
technology is the best in the world.
Now of course all this begs the question, why didn't
they strart doing this years ago. The answer is not
that they had stodgy old mangers and designers who
refusred to look foward, nor was it because they
disregarded the wishes of Leitz users. The truth is
that it was out of loyalty to that customer base that
they didn't emoploy all the modern business practices
which include farming out to the east and relabeling.
Do you remember the ruckus caused by the customer base
when the XE based R3 came out - Not a real Leica. How
about the CL - one of my favourite cameras - not a
real Leica. But that's nothing. I recall more than a
little griping about the plastic tab on the advance
lever of the M4. There are still some yahoos who swear
that it's not as good a camrera as the M3 and that's
what they form their opinion on, Of course they'll
never admit it! So then, they have been paying
attention to their customers and that's why progress
has been slow. The new Leitz, may become a better
company from an business standpoint and eventually a
more significant one from an industry standpoint. But
I can assure that it won't be the company that most
Leica users identify with today.
As for me, I do have some loyalty towards the brand
but if they become just another company, why should I
treat them as anything other than that! IE: If the R14
is the performance and specification equivalent of
the 1Ds Mk5 but costs 250 more, why should I go with
the Leica if the lenses are by that time about the
same. This is how modern companies work. There is
little product differentiation, no brand loyalty no or
loyalty to employees or to customers. Pure
comnpetition I think they call it! Now of course, if
the only option is to go broke then I guess I would do
the same thing!
Javier
--- David Young <telyt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> At 19/10/2006, you wrote:
>
> >Well David
> >Those are all nice thoughts, but the company you
> are
> >describing already exists. It's called Canon. As
> for
> >this Lees fellow not haveing the time to answer
> >questions on this list, if that's the case why
> should
> >we have the time to buy his cameras! BAD ANSWER!
>
> Curious, Javier, that I don't see Canon's boss
> answering questions on
> the Canon list.... Or Nikon's boss on the Nikon
> lists. If that is
> your criteria for buying a camera, then I guess
> you'd better take up
> painting! Of course, only if the paint maker's
> president will answer
> questions on your local painting list!
>
>
> >As for the young managers, thing. It looks like
> they want
> >to start marketing themselves as a young and
> vibrant
> >company! I have never liked companies that worship
> >the youth culture and I avoid them like the plague!
> If
> >that's what Leitz turns into then I will not have
> >anything to do with them.
>
> That is your choice.
>
>
> >As for the survey. I found one question very
> unusual.
> >That was the use of polycarbonate lens barrels. I
> >believe unreinforced polycarbonate has a higher
> >expansion coefficient than most metals including I
> >think, aluminum. That makes it useless as a carrier
> >for optical elements in a critical design either
> >directly in the lens packs or in the focusing
> barrels.
> >Polycarbonate is also more flexible than metals and
> >can distort more easily under load. Again, it's not
> >suitable for critical apps. I believe a few R
> lenses
> >were made with plastic barrels but I think they
> were
> >limited to the normal Summicrons. Also, when
> designing
> >a premium lens the cost savings of polycarbonate
> over
> >spun aluminum is minimal. All this sez to me that
> >someone at Leitz is trying to squeeze the last
> >possible cent out a lens by taking shortcuts that
> >shouldn't be taken.
>
> Actually, Javier, that tells you nothing.
>
> This survey was not provided by Leica. It was
> designed entirely by
> myself, in the hopes of helping Leica understand our
> wants &
> desires. I asked the question because those plastic
> lens barrels,
> which you despise, are prevalent in nearly all
> autofocus lenses,
> including those made by your "does the job" Canon. I
> simply wanted to
> know if our members would accept such materials.
>
> Polycarbonates (or similar materials - I am not an
> engineer) are used
> because they are lighter, and thus can spin (read
> focus) faster, with
> less inertia and can be driven by smaller motors,
> which, in turn,
> consume less battery power. They have a lot of
> advantages, of which
> cost is one of the least important. However, as you
> point out, they
> are not suitable lens carriers for high quality
> lenses. Still,
> Nikon, Canon and just about everybody else, use
> them.
>
> When I asked Leica about the possibility of plastic
> lens barrels,
> they told me that they will have nothing to do with
> such materials.
> Simply not good enough, as you point out. And no,
> there are not any
> Leica lenses using plastic lens barrels in any
> current or older models.
>
> My friend, you seem much to ready to jump to
> conclusions based on
> erroneous assumptions. Why not simply complete the
> survey and email
> it to me? That will do much more to ensure you get
> the products you
> want from Leica, in the future, than all manner of
> arguing and complaining.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> David.
> ---
>
> David Young,
> Logan Lake, CANADA
>
> Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/
> Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt
>
>
>
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------
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:
