Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/12/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted Grant wrote: > > Sorry folks a long rant, but I hate it when a company I've supported > buying multi thousands and thousands of dollars, using and promoting > their equipment for 50 years and they cant get their act together, tell > the truth or are flailing around lost in a world of yesterday while the > space age speed of other companies pasted them by completely. > > And quite frankly it's highly unlikely they'll ever catch the pack. Maybe? > ted Ted, Leica's fundamental problem is its lack of a serious long range technology research group. It seems from all that I hear that they can design lenses ;-) but what they don't seem to be able to do is to look at technology in the longer term and make accurate predictions as to where things are going. They did it ONCE with OB and the original Leica concept, but they appear not to have been able to follow on. OK the M3 is an exception. A lot of what I see on this list is people bemoaning how far Leica are behind the curve. Leica itself is caught in a dichotomy. The current pace of technological change is so rapid that it is fundamentally incompatible with Leica's way of doing things. Yet Leica needs new product. My guess is that the present shareholder structure wouldn't or won't invest in long-term research. The only way out is not to play the game in the same way. Leica *must* take a long hard look at current and future technology, assess where it needs to be and come up with a new approach which puts them back in their hard-won and rightful place. In the meantime? Licence technology from the likes of Epson (for example) mate it to M lenses and produce a product which will sell well, in reasonable volume and at a reasonable price. Just my .02 Peter Dzwig