Leica Dying

Alan Browne wrote:
You and I agree (on this issue) to a point that is spooky.

You an I agree on a great many things, it is just in the fine details
where we disagree.

Scott

"Roger" wrote in message
...
Jeremy,

The news has caused me to think a great deal about accelerating my
next purchase of Leica equipment. However it is for me a uncertain
choice on whether to buy Leica gear or not. Certainly my Leica
shooting so far has been because gear manufactured 35 years ago is
still useable today. For me, the film/digital debate also weighs some
measure on buying more Leica equipment. The weight comes not from
whether to still continue with film but from the cost of continuing
with Leica. Heaven knows I've put together a Nikon F3 film kit with
eight lenses or so after the film decline started. But my total
expenditure for the F3 system is far less than the cost of a single
Leica lens.

My M6 is currently having a MP rangefinder patch modification. I look
forward to many more years of good use from it and my 35mm ASPH cron
and 50mm lux. My dilemma is whether to spend the additional $2500 for
a 28mm ASPH cron and possibly another $3000 for a 0.58x MP body.

That expenditure could finance a F6 plus grip and strobes and another
AFS zoom to complement all those good Nikkors that I just bought for
$125 a pop, or a D2X and 17-55mm f2.8 lens. Leica has made it very
difficult to choose Leica.

The only reason I'm still struggling with trying to stay in the system
are the side-by-side end results in the photographs. There is nothing
else in an extensive Nikkor collection that can deliver equivalent
results. However, the obvious best results may be too good based on
the current perception of photographic excellence and the very short
camera to publication cycle available with digital.

Regards,
Roger


The quality of their optics is beyond reproach, but they are priced so high
that they have more chance to be sold as collectibles, rather than being
used.

It seems that nearly everyone is looking for value, and paying $2000 for a n
ormal f/1.4 lens is just plain crazy. If one is looking for image quality,
a used $100 Yashica Model D TLR can produce better results at a normal focal
length.

And who wants to pay a premium for a Panasonic digital camera, rebadged as a
Leica?

But now, with the likely prospect that the company will not remain in
business to provide their legendary parts and service for decades, who will
want to make a purchase? I would think that people buy high-priced gear
because they expect to amortize the price over time. What assurance is
there that parts and repairs will be available in the near term, much less
the long term?

And, if we are quite honest about it, just consider all the other camera
lines that produce perfectly acceptable images. Even long-time Leica
aficionados could switch without a whole lot of stress, if they had to.

I believe that Leica missed the boat on digital. They can try to slap their
name on someone else's gear, but people aren't fools, and that tactic can go
only so far. Much as I dislike the prospect of Leica disappearing, I never
could justify supporting them with my dollars.

Scott W wrote:
3) I don't believe the Panasonic lenses are manufactured by Leica

(designed yes,

but outsourced ... I may be wrong).
Wasn't that Kyocera which also makes most of the Contax lenses?



I think Alan's point 2 is very likely, if they go under then the assets
will be sold, someone could buy all the assets including the IP and
continue with out the accumulated debt burden. Hopefully the buyers
would have sense enough not to try selling 35mm cameras but just do
optics.

The 'someone' might be one the other Leica branches, outsourcing lens
production.

-- hans

Bill Tuthill wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:

wrote:
Wow looks like Leica is going to bite the dust.
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,342973,00.html

I have a hard time believing they can make a 'digital turnaround'.
They will not return to profit on M7's and the R8/9 by any stretch.

The important question now is, who will make lenses for Panasonic digicams?


Whoever buys out that part of them?

Note that as the Leica name and other trademarks will be sold, there
might soon be on sale the "Special Edition Canon(tm) Leica(tm) 350D with
Summicron(tm) Kit Lens"

--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++

wrote:

Wow looks like Leica is going to bite the dust.
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,342973,00.html

It was only a matter of time I figured before this happens.

A sad day for photography, engineering and the pursuit of excellence for
it's own sake.

(Not a Leica owner)

Chris

"Jeremy" wrote in message
ink.net...

"HvdV" wrote in message news:15ef2

Photography is going digital, this can be seen in the sales numbers of
both cameras and film.

How many potential buyers of Leica gear will put off their next purchases,
in light of the possibility that the company may not survive?

This news may really be one of the last nails in Leica's coffin.

Looks like the Leitz family sold out to Hermes while they could still get
some money from the company.

If Alpa can hang in, so can Leica. Bob
Hickey

"Roger" wrote in message
...

I fully expect that the independent side of things will continue. Of
course that is speculation, but the folks who independently repair
Leicas also repair other cameras so it's not like their whole base is
tied to the fortunes of Leica.


There is one little obstacle: availability of new parts.

As an example, Pentax stopped repairing Spotmatics 15 years ago, independent
shops could always get parts by cannibalizing old bodies, because a lot of
them were out there.

I continue to shoot with my Spotmatics. I bought a couple of extra bodies,
just in case I ever required parts for my user bodies.

I can't imagine very many Leica bodies being sold "for parts." I can't
imagine many people buying a couple of spare bodies, to be cannibalized as
future parts needs dictate.

Finally, Zeiss Ikon is about to return to the scene, with a line of Leica M
mount lenses and a new body. So the existing Leica M user (probably only
the amateur ones) could conceivably migrate over to Zeiss and continue to
get some use from whatever Leica gear they've already accumulated, as
opposed to completely getting out of the M-mount system.

I don't know what the Leica reflex users will do. Those cameras and lenses
use a proprietary mount, don't they? Maybe Cosina could come out with a
camera that takes those lenses, like they did with the Voightlander that
uses Pentax screw mount lenses. What an insult to Leica that would be!

"Bob Hickey" wrote in message
...


If Alpa can hang in, so can Leica.

But when is the last time anyone ever saw an Alpa?

And if Leica does not introduce a line of digital SLRs, but instead remains
in the film-based end, who will take them seriously? Won't they become just
a maker of expensive, collectible (but not really usable in the Real World)
cameras? Made, not for using, but for displaying? Kind of like a camera
version of the Franklin Mint?

Jeremy wrote:
"Roger" wrote in message
...
Jeremy,

The news has caused me to think a great deal about accelerating my
next purchase of Leica equipment. However it is for me a uncertain
choice on whether to buy Leica gear or not. Certainly my Leica
shooting so far has been because gear manufactured 35 years ago is
still useable today. For me, the film/digital debate also weighs
some
measure on buying more Leica equipment. The weight comes not from
whether to still continue with film but from the cost of continuing
with Leica. Heaven knows I've put together a Nikon F3 film kit with
eight lenses or so after the film decline started. But my total
expenditure for the F3 system is far less than the cost of a single
Leica lens.

My M6 is currently having a MP rangefinder patch modification. I
look
forward to many more years of good use from it and my 35mm ASPH
cron
and 50mm lux. My dilemma is whether to spend the additional $2500
for
a 28mm ASPH cron and possibly another $3000 for a 0.58x MP body.

That expenditure could finance a F6 plus grip and strobes and
another
AFS zoom to complement all those good Nikkors that I just bought
for
$125 a pop, or a D2X and 17-55mm f2.8 lens. Leica has made it very
difficult to choose Leica.

The only reason I'm still struggling with trying to stay in the
system
are the side-by-side end results in the photographs. There is
nothing
else in an extensive Nikkor collection that can deliver equivalent
results. However, the obvious best results may be too good based on
the current perception of photographic excellence and the very
short
camera to publication cycle available with digital.

Regards,
Roger


The quality of their optics is beyond reproach, but they are priced
so high
that they have more chance to be sold as collectibles, rather than
being
used.

Nonsense. People drive Mercedes Benza nd other fancy cars. The matter
is one of perception.

It seems that nearly everyone is looking for value, and paying $2000
for a n
ormal f/1.4 lens is just plain crazy.

No, it's not. They obviously sell, and the lens is superb.

If one is looking for image quality,
a used $100 Yashica Model D TLR can produce better results at a
normal focal
length.

Bull****.

And who wants to pay a premium for a Panasonic digital camera,
rebadged as a
Leica?

But now, with the likely prospect that the company will not remain in
business to provide their legendary parts and service for decades,
who will
want to make a purchase?

Why do you say that?



Moron.

Jeremy wrote:
"Bob Hickey" wrote in message
...


If Alpa can hang in, so can Leica.

But when is the last time anyone ever saw an Alpa?

And if Leica does not introduce a line of digital SLRs, but instead
remains
in the film-based end, who will take them seriously? Won't they
become just
a maker of expensive, collectible (but not really usable in the Real
World)
cameras? Made, not for using, but for displaying? Kind of like a
camera
version of the Franklin Mint?

Who says so? Not everyone wants or cares about digital. I sure don't!