[Leica] Leica's position at the end of the millenium

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@knoware.nl>]

First I would like to apologize to anyone who feels offended by my 
remark about the historical background. One of my rare attempts at 
humor just does not work. I should leave that to my brother.

Mike wrote in part:
"I think, for one thing, that the G2 has taken more users
"away from Leica than it has contributed to Leica; from what I hear in my
"position, I would guess the ratio of people abandoning Leica for the G2
"vs. the other way around is perhaps 2 or 3 to 1.

If Mike says so, I would not doubt the accuracy of this statement. 
Still, looking at the production figures for the last 5 or so years, 
you will note that 1993: 9930 and  1994:11200 and 1995:10200 and now 
around 11000 to 12000. It is true that these production figures go 
slightly upward and if there is a G effect it might be seen around 
1995. (The G1 arrived late in 1994).  There is no discrepancy here. 
People leaving Leica for the G might be persons who bought their 
Leica long ago or second hand. What may be happening is that some 
people from Leicas userbase leave and that new buyers  add to the 
base. Unless we know the figure of the current user base, and can see 
if it grows or declines, we can ascertain if the use of Leicas grows 
or declines, or stays stable because of influx of new buyers and 
abandonment of people who stop using Leica. When the Konica Hexar 
arrived in 1992, some people predicted that Leica would take a blow, 
and again this had been predicted in 1994 when the G1 arrived and now 
we see it happening with the Hexar and we will see it being repeated 
when the Bessa-RF arrives.
Leica cannot stay complacent and new models or variants of models are 
needed, but not because of this competition but because the Leica way 
of photography needs some  fresh rethinking. That is Leica should 
develop their own philosophy of taking photograps by looking back 
into their roots.  The future for Leica is not the Hexar RF. As soon 
as a company strays away from its roots and just copies the 
competition (however excellent that may be), then we may pray and 
hope. The strength of Leica has always been their independent and 
unique view  on photographic instruments and their ability to design 
very effective tools for taking pictures. Just adding features in a 
well designed body will not convince the market. Look at the new 
Minolta flagship: loaded with most features of the competition. But 
are the Nikon people run  in droves  to the Minolta?
Leica follows several strategies: branding as with the Fuji digital 
camera, upgrading as with the compact line and developing their own 
products. A new strategy is embodied in the new compact C1, lens 
designed by Leica, body designed in Frankfurt by a German industrial 
design company and built in Japan.
Leica should build on its own strengths and not copy others. Since a 
few years from the moment there was a rumor of a new Leica, 
conventional wisdom had it that the new Leica should be a Leica M 
with G2 features.
The Hexar is just that, excluding the AF facility. Now is the Hexar a 
worthy successor to the M6?  I have not seen it and to remember 
Mike's warning comment should be sparingly. But I may ask why the 
Hexar has a 135mm frame line in a .6 viewfinder. That is really 
useless. Not noted by anyone is the remark in the Konica specs that 
the automatic parallax correction works from 0,7 to 8 meters and so 
not beyond that? All this points to a clear direction for the Hexar. 
And Leica would be badly advised if they would go that route.


Erwin