Re: [Leica] ODDS and ends

["Dante A. Stella" <dante@umich.edu>]

leica@davidmorton.org wrote:

> Paul Chefurka wrote:
>
> "I can't understand why the RF isn't selling - it must be the lousy
> engraving on the top plate.  As a camera design, I think it represents
> a humiliating defeat for Leica."
>
> Let me get this clear. We're told - from a number of sources - that Konica
> RF sales since its launch are a huge disappointment. In contrast, during the
> first three quarters of FY 2000/2001 M6 sales are *up* by 11.7%.
>
> This represents a "humiliating defeat for Leica"?
>

Technically, yes.  This is a product Leica could probably never afford to make.

>
> In addition to the technical niceties, for a camera design to be considered
> a success it has to sell in sufficient numbers - and price - to make back
> the R&D budget, or at least show signs that it might do this eventually.
> Those signs don't seem very clear for the RF as yet.

This is not a moneymaker, and it is questionable how it could ever have been.
K has not made money from cameras in quite a while, and this is a sideline
pursuit.  K doesn't care.  Look at how they made just 800 of the 60/1.2L
rangefinder lenses or about an equal number of the 50/2.4L, and the 35/2L.
They are currently doing a run of the 50/1.2 M-Hexanon which apparently won't
top 2000 units.  Those just aren't numbers that could justify the tooling or
R&D costs.

The M tooling was largely designed a long time ago.  The KRF was designed two
years ago on all of its own tooling (including titanium plates), with
hand-assembly, tons of parts, much more in the way of electronics.  The
production is 300/month.  Based on current production, I would guess that there
wouldn't be a profit on the Hexar for quite some time.  I think that I heard
the total output was originally projected to be 6,000 units only, over 18
months.  M6 production is already past 150,000, and they still cost $2,000
new.  I suspect that every RF represents a small loss to the manufacturer.