[Leica] OT-Zeiss Lenses Now Listed at B&H

[billgem at hotmail.com (Bill Marshall)]

>grduprey wote: "It is not a problem (that Zeiss hoods are priced separately 
>from lenses), and I'm sure that Leica adds the cost into the lens. But why 
>can't Zeiss do the same thing, since they are obviously trying to get 
>Leica's business. As far as I'm concerned, it is good marketing on Leica's 
>part to include the hoods as then you do not have to go out and find a 
>dealer who has them in stock in order to purchase one. Most do not stock 
>them and do not want to be bothered to order one."

Gene, I can't second guess either Leic'as or Zeiss's marketing strategies. I 
certainly don't think that it'is incumbent on Zeiss to follow the same 
marketing plan as Leica & include hoods with their lenses. If I need to 
order a hood, I simply pick up the phone, call B&H, & they have it to me 
within a day or two. It's simply not a problem.

My point is that it's nitpicking to complain about whether hoods are 
packaged with lenses or not. It's certainly not standard within the industry 
& professional photographers & enthusiasts both seem to find a way to get 
their equipment needs met whether they're packaged together or separately. I 
imagine that Zeiss thinks that it's better for them to get the cost of the 
lens down as low as possible. And that means selling the hood separately. 
Regardless, it's not something I'm going to lose any sleep over. And it's 
certainly not going to be the basis for my decision regarding a lens 
purchase.

I know that it's popular on Leica forums to claim that Zeiss is "obviously 
trying to get Leica's business." I don't think that such a claim is obvious 
at all - unless one assumes that all business in rangefinder equipment is 
somehow "Leica's." For its own reasons, Zeiss has decided to offer what they 
think is an attractive new product line. As Cosina did before them. And 
Konica did as well in recent years. It's just as likely that attractive new 
product lines, with offerings at varying price points, will grow interest in 
the whole rangefinder sector of the market place & that there will be as a 
result more business for everyone. Markets are not static; they constantly 
expand & contract. Zeiss would only be taking Leica's business if the pie 
were a fixed size & it now had to be divided more ways. But this is not the 
case. If Leica can't survive with competition from Zeiss, it will likely be 
because there isn't enough interest in this technology for anyone to survive 
in a digital world or because the Leica business plan & price point are 
unsatisfactory. Even in a world of a limited, fixed rangefinder market, 
Zeiss would simply be filling the niche abandoned by Konica a year ago - not 
taking business from Leica. Not that there is much business there to take. 
Despite the absence of Konica from the market for the first time in five 
years & with Zeiss Ikon not yet a player in the market, Leica experienced a 
experienced a drastic decline in sales of film products within the past 
year. At the same time, Kyocera abandoned the whole Contas line as well. The 
writing is on the wall.

Postings on this forum & others have analyzed Zeiss marketing claims to 
death, asserting, as you have, that Zeiss is trying to say that their 
product is better than Leica's in order to steal their business. It's just 
as likely - & more likely, in my opinion - that they are trying to convince 
potential customers that it's worth it for them to spend the extra money 
over & above the cost of Cosina's Voigtlander line. That's where the 
competition is much more likely to be fierce - between CV & ZI. Leica has an 
RF niche that is almost unassailable. Their demise, if it comes, will be as 
a result of digital, not due to another RF product line IMO.

Cheers . . .