Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Kit McChesney said the following on 12/3/2003 9:39 AM: > Well, maybe not the digital, but the overall manufacturing process is > primarily as I described, even if a small portion of their business is > outsourced. That type of manufacturing/business strategy determines the > overall pricing and profitability of the business. At least I think it does! > What your business does as a majority of its activity, where most of your > sales are, would seem to have the most influence over how much it costs to > run the biz. No? > ... No, not really. The Panaleicas share the marketing costs but not the manufacturing costs of the M-series. Cross subsidizing the manufacturing costs of old product lines with excess margins on marginally competitive new product lines is really bad business. In partial justification of the cost, the direct mechanical control of zoom, focus, and aperture is probably way more costly to manufacture than electronic controls such as are found on a P&S -- and likely more satisfying to use. The EVF will be no better than other EVFs -- same technology. Not even close to the M-series. The small sensor size will be the killer flaw in this camera. In no way will its quality be able to match any of the DSLRs (not even the cheapest) with their larger sensors. Yes -- I will be flamed because the tests are not yet in. However -- small sensors are noisier than large sensors at a given ISO equivalent rating -- given current technology. Yes, I know this was the argument against 35mm from the beginning -- but the Digilux 2 does not offer the same advantage that the original Leicas offered over the alternatives. - -- Clive http://clive.moss.net - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html