SlowDriver wrote:
My local camera store still carries the SL but it no longer carries the CL (or the TL2) because they feel Leica is not committed to the format...
I think that ^ sounds like fluff talk.
Rather than saying it isn't selling well in our store, so we have decided to not carry inventory that doesn't move well for us.
My local camera store doesn't carry ANY Leica (but, can order it) ... so, I wouldn't equate a business decision to NOT carry inventory in stock as somehow inferring Leica's lack of commitment to the format. By that logic, my store's decision to NOT carry FF Leica would infer that Leica isn't committed to FF either ... kinda non-sequitur, imo.
I mean, Leica has retained commitment to everything they've produced thus far ... why would Leica suddenly be inclined to not retain their commitment to their products?
Unless you are defining commitment as developing more lenses for the APS-C format ... no, I don't expect they would put a large amount of effort into future development of APS-C glass. Imo, the APS-C format is "fit to a purpose", and one that should NOT be expected to be developed anywhere near to what the FF format is. Where other companies have sought to make APS-C "emulate" full frame with it's APS-C glass lineup (similar for 4/3), I don't see Leica going down that path to try and create an APS-C lineup that is expected to "emulate" FF. Just take a look at the aperture rings on Leica's APS-C dedicated lenses ... imo, they are clearly designed to fit to a different purpose than the legacy of "commitment" that has been given to the FF format. If you think that Leica's ever gonna make a bunch of Lux lenses for APS-C ... dream on, imo.
Simply put, if you want FF, get FF ... not APS-C trying to be FF.
But, I still don't equate that to Leica as having a lack of commitment to their APS-C (albeit limited) lineup. They've continued to advance the APS-C ... T, TL, TL2, CL. It wouldn't surprise me to see a CL2 come out with IS (thinking for the 55-135).
Some camera store salesman (or business owner) saying that Leica isn't committed ... I'm not buying into that one. I think there may be other reasons for him suggesting such, but I don't think it is really a lack of commitment from Leica regarding the APS-C lineup, even if it pales in comparison to their expansive FF format. Rather, it might be more fitting to say that the majority of Leica consumers aren't committed to the APS-C format ... or conversely, the majority of Leica consumers ARE committed to the FF format. This, rather than call Leica's commitment into question.
My .02 ... even as a pre-neophyte into Leica.
Short answer: I ain't scared of Leica's "lack of commitment" to the APS-C format. Consumer demand or resale value of APS-C gear might be different, but I don't buy camera's to sell them. I buy 'em for shoot 'em value, not sell 'em value.
RustyBug wrote:
I think that ^ sounds like fluff talk.
Rather than saying it isn't selling well in our store, so we have decided to not carry inventory that doesn't move well for us.
My local camera store doesn't carry ANY Leica (but, can order it) ... so, I wouldn't equate a business decision to NOT carry inventory in stock as somehow inferring Leica's lack of commitment to the format. By that logic, my store's decision to NOT carry FF Leica would infer that Leica isn't committed to FF either ... kinda non-sequitur, imo.
I mean, Leica has retained commitment to everything they've produced thus far ... why would Leica suddenly be inclined to not retain their commitment to their products?
Unless you are defining commitment as developing more lenses for the APS-C format ... no, I don't expect they would put a large amount of effort into future development of APS-C glass. Imo, the APS-C format is "fit to a purpose", and one that should NOT be expected to be developed anywhere near to what the FF format is. Where other companies have sought to make APS-C "emulate" full frame with it's APS-C glass lineup (similar for 4/3), I don't see Leica going down that path to try and create an APS-C lineup that is expected to "emulate" FF. Just take a look at the aperture rings on Leica's APS-C dedicated lenses ... imo, they are clearly designed to fit to a different purpose than the legacy of "commitment" that has been given to the FF format.
Simply put, if you want FF, get FF ... not APS-C trying to be FF.
But, I still don't equate that to Leica as having a lack of commitment to their APS-C (albeit limited) lineup. They've continued to advance the APS-C ... T, TL, TL2, CL. It wouldn't surprise me to see a CL2 come out with IS (thinking for the 55-135).
Some camera store salesman (or business owner) saying that Leica isn't committed ... I'm not buying into that one. I think there may be other reasons for him suggesting such, but I don't think it is really a lack of commitment from Leica regarding the APS-C lineup, even if it pales in comparison to their expansive FF format.
My .02 ... even as a pre-neophyte into Leica.
Short answer: I ain't scared of Leica's "lack of commitment" to the APS-C format. Resale value of APS-C gear might be different, but I don't buy camera's to sell them. I buy 'em to shoot 'em. ...Show more →
I don't take issue with anything you said about APS-C, but I think some Leica R users might take issue with your statement that, "Leica has retained commitment to everything they produced thus far . . ."
Steve Spencer wrote:
I don't take issue with anything you said about APS-C, but I think some Leica R users might take issue with your statement that, "Leica has retained commitment to everything they produced thus far . . ."
Understood ... I guess what I meant is that the continued support remains, even if future development does not expand any further. Kinda back to what one's definition of "commitment" is.
Imo, the difference between the R vs. APS-C is that the R was rooted in mirror & film, and they decided to not (dabbled) carry it forward into digital. Whereas the APS-C is clearly mirrorless, digital designed, so I see no end in sight for it (until there is the next paradigm change in technology) to be worried about anytime soon. Imo, the L mount is the replacement for the R, and it happens to have it's main FF format, and a smaller format as an option (fit to a different purpose).
SlowDriver wrote:
I am sure there will be something... but there is a difference between keeping things going and being committed...
My local camera store still carries the SL but it no longer carries the CL (or the TL2) because they feel Leica is not committed to the format...
Given that there has been no sign of life from Leica for 3 years now it is hard to disagree with that...
+1. Leica's current focus is certainly currently on M-mount and SL-cameras, followed further down the priority with the S-series. Pretty high up is also the Q-series and the Q2.
CL and TL2 seem pretty dormant on the shelves currently, low demand. I wouldn't personally vest in any of those at this point.
RustyBug wrote:
Personally, I wouldn't let what others do / don't do (sales volume / demand) determine what I do.
If the shoe fits, wear it. If it don't, don't.
I tend to think they made it for the option, not the mainstream. Of course, that makes it the "not mainstream" of the "not mainstream".
My statement wasn't related to you - I simply agreed from my POV with the poster I cited. I am sure there are still people buying into the cropped sensor Leica system - it has also some pros like reduced size and weight. Each on their own if this fits the bill.
One point made in the article was the 3rd party options in Siggy & Panny ... presented as a positive. Not saying that it isn't a positive (in certain regard), but I think this is a dual edged sword, that presents commitment to the APS-C format via the Alliance, etc. I think it also makes it such that Leica themselves won't be putting a ton of development (current basics) into future TL APS-C lens development ... at least not at any rapid pace.
That's not to suggest a lack of commitment from Leica ... just a realistic expectation of how many TL APS-C dedicated eggs they're gonna put in the basket. Since, you can also use FF Leica L & M mount lenses (understanding the pro / con of such) ... I have little expectation that dedicated TL APS-C lense lineup will ever be in line with their FF counterparts ... i.e. electronic controls only, not physical aperture controls, limited max aperture offerings, etc.
Again, fit for a purpose, and one that is not likely to be a strong attractant to those who aspire for Leica's best mechanical and best optical FF offerings. But, I still don't construe that as a lack of a commitment, just accepting that it will remain as a "minor" role in their lineup.
Reminds me a bit on the Sony DSLR story with A-mount: Sony remained "committed" to its DSLR mount but nothing much was happening there for a while until the lights finally went out for the A-mount last year.
So Leica remains also committed to its APS-C cameras but likely focuses more on the SL- and M- full frame mounts. Similar to Sony with their DSLRs, Leica might not be able to compete well enough against other competitors in the cropped APS-C sensor market. And also, the alliance with Panasonic ensures some market cap in the micro-four-thirds area.
Hey, if I would be looking for an APS-C based MLC, I wouldn't hesitate and go with Fuji.....
SlowDriver wrote:
I am sure there will be something... but there is a difference between keeping things going and being committed...
My local camera store still carries the SL but it no longer carries the CL (or the TL2) because they feel Leica is not committed to the format...
Given that there has been no sign of life from Leica for 3 years now it is hard to disagree with that...
I have heard from a well placed source that a CL2 with higher MP count was scheduled for release in the Fall. However, given the production difficulties created by the pandemic, I expect that the release will be delayed, if not cancelled. Let's face it, we're all just speculating here.
robgo2 wrote:
I have heard from a well placed source that a CL2 with higher MP count was scheduled for release in the Fall. However, given the production difficulties created by the pandemic, I expect that the release will be delayed, if not cancelled. Let's face it, we're all just speculating here.
For me the bar is IBIS and 1-2 new lenses. Anything less I feel would be a disappointment after a furlough of 3 years.
More MP is not essential but it would be a bonus. Canon also moved to 32MP with the M6 Mk II.
We should know before the end of the year. Companies are eager to make up for having to shut down production in the March-May period.
SlowDriver wrote:
For me the bar is IBIS and 1-2 new lenses. Anything less I feel would be a disappointment after a furlough of 3 years.
More MP is not essential but it would be a bonus. Canon also moved to 32MP with the M6 Mk II.
We should know before the end of the year. Companies are eager to make up for having to shut down production in the March-May period.
I agree with your sentiment, but I have learned that Leica is not following quickly what others do and what is successful in the market and already seen as standard. Leica managed to sell negligence with good marketing as "Das Wesentliche / The Essential" for a triple price tag. And somehow this strategy actually worked - Leica is now directly associated with a strong collector base which drives prices up (I am personally very curious about the ratio of actual Leica digital cameras users vs. collectors but this remains secret).
Good example is the M10-R - finally a higher 40 MP FF camera which Sony already had with 36 MP in 2013 sensor-wise. Just that Leica sells ist now for a price tag of > $8K, and Leica enthusiasts probably proclaim that the "Das Wesentliche" (less for more) and the rangefinder excuses the price tag (which I do not agree with).
I applaud Leica for brainwashing their customer-base extremely well (and I am not at all a Leica hater, I am using Leica film gear and have a good amount of money invested in it over the course of years). Leica twisted a disadvantage of falling behind in electronics as a positive by not having more MP in the past , no IBIS, slower image processors as other brands. Also smart move of Leica to form an alliance with Panasonic and Sigma - Panasonic's advantage in electronics might become a savior for Leica in the long-term. We don't know yet if some of Leica's MLCs will merge into a new consolidated camera line together with Panasonic in the future. I suspect they will do - at this point we will likely see IBIS and other electronics added into new MLCs from Leica (and Panasonic). The current crisis and increased cost-cutting might even move this plan to an earlier date especially if Leica can't maintain by itself their multiple camera lines.
retrofocus wrote:
I agree with your sentiment, but I have learned that Leica is not following quickly what others do and what is successful in the market and already seen as standard. Leica managed to sell negligence with good marketing as "Das Wesentliche / The Essential" for a triple price tag. And somehow this strategy actually worked - Leica is now directly associated with a strong collector base which drives prices up (I am personally very curious about the ratio of actual Leica digital cameras users vs. collectors but this remains secret).
Good example is the M10-R - finally a higher 40 MP FF camera which Sony already had with 36 MP in 2013 sensor-wise. Just that Leica sells ist now for a price tag of > $8K, and Leica enthusiasts probably proclaim that the "Das Wesentliche" (less for more) and the rangefinder excuses the price tag (which I do not agree with).
I applaud Leica for brainwashing their customer-base extremely well (and I am not at all a Leica hater, I am using Leica film gear and have a good amount of money invested in it over the course of years). Leica twisted a disadvantage of falling behind in electronics as a positive by not having more MP in the past , no IBIS, slower image processors as other brands. Also smart move of Leica to form an alliance with Panasonic and Sigma - Panasonic's advantage in electronics might become a savior for Leica in the long-term. We don't know yet if some of Leica's MLCs will merge into a new consolidated camera line together with Panasonic in the future. I suspect they will do - at this point we will likely see IBIS and other electronics added into new MLCs from Leica (and Panasonic). The current crisis and increased cost-cutting might even move this plan to an earlier date especially if Leica can't maintain by itself their multiple camera lines. ...Show more →
So you're not a Leica hater but you think it's fine to call us that uses digital Leica cameras brainwashed. What a nice guy you are...
retrofocus wrote:
I agree with your sentiment, but I have learned that Leica is not following quickly what others do and what is successful in the market and already seen as standard.
Leica did integrate IBIS in the SL2. They have the know-how.
The only reason for not integrating it in the CL2 would be to keep size/weight down and/or to not cannibalize SL2 sales.
Both would be wrong reasons IMO, 2-3 years down the road I feel you won't be able to market or sell an APS-C body without IBIS, certainly not one with a price tag of $3K.
SlowDriver wrote:
Leica did integrate IBIS in the SL2. They have the know-how.
The only reason for not integrating it in the CL2 would be to keep size/weight down and/or to not cannibalize SL2 sales.
Both would be wrong reasons IMO, 2-3 years down the road I feel you won't be able to market or sell an APS-C body without IBIS, certainly not one with a price tag of $3K.
I state corrected with the SL2 and IBIS. But I agree that it was purposely left out in other camera systems - other manufacturers play similar games. As I said earlier, Leica price tag and the kind of features offered don't run proportionally for reasons I mentioned.
robgo2 wrote:
It should be noted that 3 years is the typical camera cycle for Leica. The CL was announced in November 2017, so we're not yet at 3 years.
Agreed, I was mostly referring to the lenses, although a new body would have been nice as well.
That being said, and even though the 3-4 year cycle rule is probably still valid, Leica pretty much releases a new variant of the M every year now, you have the regular M, the P, the D, the Monochrom, now the R, and that is not even counting the special editions...
And obviously a 3-4 cycle does not prevent any firmware updates, the last firmware upgrade for the TL2 dates from September 2018.
When product director Stefan Daniel recently said that APS-C "needed some stimulation" that was a fairly big understatement...
SlowDriver wrote:
Agreed, I was mostly referring to the lenses, although a new body would have been nice as well.
That being said, and even though the 3-4 year cycle rule is probably still valid, Leica pretty much releases a new variant of the M every year now, you have the regular M, the P, the D, the Monochrom, now the R, and that is not even counting the special editions...
And obviously a 3-4 cycle does not prevent any firmware updates, the last firmware upgrade for the TL2 dates from September 2018.
When product director Stefan Daniel recently said that APS-C "needed some stimulation" that was a fairly big understatement......Show more →
I would take that statement about needing stimulation as a hint that there will be action on the APS-C front. Time will tell.
Meanwhile, I remain very pleased with my CL camera. There isn't much that needs improving, though I won't complain if there is a CL2 with IBIS. More pixels? I don't really need them, but, again, I won't complain if there are more in the next iteration. As for lenses, I'm happy with the four that I have been using--two native AF and two adapted M lenses--but I do appreciate why some users would like more native options.
retrofocus wrote:
I state corrected with the SL2 and IBIS. But I agree that it was purposely left out in other camera systems - other manufacturers play similar games. As I said earlier, Leica price tag and the kind of features offered don't run proportionally for reasons I mentioned.
I don't perceive that the issue was one of "playing games". The engineering challenges of adding components, adding in more power, dissipating more heat (imo, least understood by the average consumer) as generated by more power (processing increases and IBIS physical movement) ... AND still retain packing it into the same format objective from previous generation ... might take a bit to get it all figured out.
Moving slow on "getting it right" from an engineering perspective isn't what I would construe as playing games. Building to a different price point and refraining from implementing certain features is a different matter, as well.
I perceive neither of these as concerns for the future of the APS-C with Leica. I figure, they've taken it this far, they laid the ground work and the future will continue to advance. I look forward to the CL2 having IBIS as they get it figured out how they wish to incorporate the engineering of it.
