Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Leica needs to make money. Selling a few to many $3K digital backs is not going to save them. They need to move a lot of $2500 50mm lenses to stay viable. They make money on their glass. Leica makes a $2500 50mm F1.4 lens. The next most expensive lens of 50mm F1.4 is 1/10 the price. You think the build costs THAT much more? Be serious. There is profit in the glass. Ditto for the R lens lineup. It is expensive. Stephen and I have been devotees of taking that superb glass, and instantly creating demand by offering it in other SLR lens mounts. The competition can not compare and will not try to compete on the image quality, although marketing hype might increase. They would make money on this approach, without a lot of costs nor time spent in "developing" new technologies. My own prediction on the digital M is that the market place will hate the quality loss compared to film. The digital M will be marketing suicide. Maybe if they offered it under the Minox name, with some cheap Japanese or Chinese's lenses can this strategy be a reasonable venture. But on its own, it is not viable. Digital back for the R is a viable strategy, but it will not save Leica from extinction because they will not sell enough of them, and because they make their money on the glass, not the bodies. You are talking about survival here. Major changes in thinking are required. Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net