Well there are now posts after posts about the direction of Leica after PMA. We are all waiting impatiently for any signs of Leica's direction. Some of the questions we are asking are: 1. Will it be called a M6AE, M6.2 or M7? My answer is M7, as i believe that they will keep the M6. Why? Because in all their advertising, they push the fact that a Leica is special because it has no technological features. So what would they be sayin if they discontinued this model? "Leica leading the way in technical advances in 1914 and now, slightly behind Canon?!

Are Leica going to adopt canon's yesterday technology and call this "keeping tradtition" or are they going to surprise us all?

My point is that Leica is is risking a lot by not giving out any information. Who knows, maybe they're starting false rumours themselves. This PMA will definately show the world what direction Leica is headed.

Where do we all think they're going?

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002

Answers

Auto focus. Think about it. It's probably not that far-fetched.

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), February 07, 2002.

......and we'd all like them to release a few suggestive lenses: 1. S-Cron 75mm f/2 2. Elmar zoom 24-50mm f/4 or Elmar zoom 35-70mm f/4 or f/2.8 3. Noct 35mm f/1.2 (but do we really need it? who cares it would be cool).

Are we dreaming or do we believe that these expectations/hopes are somewhat realistic?

-- kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

Kristian,

Leica's lack of information on prospective new gear is not a unique posture to adopt. It's a classic marketing problem. If a company announces a new product to be available in say, three months, they fear that consumers will not buy existing product(s) thereby creating a three month revenue gap while they wait for the new product. This may have the effect of creating a surplus inventory that is not easily disposed of when the new product is available.

There are risks to being forthcoming with information as well as saying nothing. It's up to the consumer to vote with their dollars (or pounds or marks or whatever).

Regardless of what does or doesn't get announced, my concern centers on compatibility. I would be most upset if I could not use my M lenses or accessories with a new member of the M family.

-Nick

-- Nicholas Wybolt (nwybolt@earthlink.net), February 07, 2002.

Regarding future lenses there are a couple of gaps - I would really like an 18mm focal length, or perhaps a 20-35 Tri-Elmar. Finally I believe they need a slower short telephoto - ie a 75 mm F4.

This could be made really compact and would be a logical incarnation of the old 'Mountain' Elmar

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 08, 2002.

I think Leica needs to listen to their consumers. No matter where the electronic path takes them, they should to continue to market the M6. People seem to want window variety. Many want the M2 35/50/90 style. These are the most popular lens, why not make such a viewfinder. People want the black paint and script on the top plate on all models. Why not put it into standard production. I think the flash meter should be left to the new marvel and the M6 just have film exposure metering as the "Classic"

Will this happen, probably not. A post on the Leica Customer Forum on 2/5/01 by EC stated "....she also mentioned that, as far as she knows, the M6 will be carried for some time as the "all mechanical" alternative as Leica evaluates M7 acceptance/sales."

The mechanical M6 is probably history if the M7 catches on. Not overnight but sooner or later.

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), February 08, 2002.

It is obvious indeed that if the M7 catches on then the M6 will be history - but the point is will it? It sounds to me to be less interesting than a Hexar RF. The way you lot go on anyone would think that this is THE year that will make or break Leica - why this one and not last year or next year? Why all this portentous stuff about "This PMA will definately show the world what direction Leica is headed." Anyone would think that the whole future of the world is at stake!

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

A more interesting question might be: If Leica continues down its current path and everyone else continues down theirs, what film options will be available to Leica users in the next few years and where will we buy it?

-- Robert Schneider (rolopix@yahoo.com), February 08, 2002.

It sounds to me to be less interesting than a Hexar RF.

Maybe in terms of the tale of the tape. But the M7, if the rumors are true, scores one knockout punch in that it will be specifically designed to work properly with your Leica M lenses. I'll take that any day over the "maybe, maybe not" situation with the RF. I actually asked an eBay seller, gr8fuldoug1 (who has been selling the bulk of the new RFs available there) two months ago about the situation. He told me that to this day he still gets returns from people who say their bodies aren't focusing their Leica lenses properly.

-- Anon Terry (anonht@yahoo.com), February 08, 2002.

Quit worrying everyone and take pictures! The only people who might want to wait are those who are about to buy their first M camera.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

Well I'm glad you said it, Robert. I was beginning to bore at least one person by making a similar observance. I suppose for Leica, announcing an M6 with an automatic shutter is earth-shattering, but in the larger scheme of things it's downright silly. In point of fact the bulk of the photo industry is now focused (no pun intended) on digital. Will the M6TTL soldier on once an M7 has arrived? Of course not. If the M7 is a reality then Leica has most likely ceased production of M6TTL's some time ago and converted the manufacturing to the new model. They can't afford to equip and run 2 parallel assembly lines for a low-volume niche-market product. What Leica means by the M6 continuing "for some time" is: until the inventory is depleted. They did exactly the same thing with the R6.2, which it is said has not been produced in several years, but only recently "officially discontinued", and without a successor in sight.

The real issue as I see it, is how much of an inventory Leica has of parts that are specific to the M6 Classic and TTL models. Though I would suspect that if even the meter circuit boards dried up, some Leica afficionado in the semiconductor field would set out to build replacements.

To my personal feelings: I can't say how I'll feel about the M7 until I see it, and test the shutter for accuracy. I am very satisfied with my Hexar RF but I like an 0.72 finder, so I still use an M6. Mine are Classics, as I can still not see any point to upgrading to the TTL. If the M7 has a more accurate shutter than the M6, that would be the only reason I'd consider it. But I am admitting that I am very reluctant to invest large sums in film bodies at this point, for the reason Robert elucidated.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 08, 2002.

Maybe I've finally become Leica "latest and greatest" jaded, but I do not seem to have any of the excitment and anticipation some here are expressing for whatever ground breaking (maybe) stuff Leica is about to put on the market. All the talk here recently about digital, however, has got me doing some research again into what is currently available and likely to be seen on the next 12 months to see if it is time to jump in. After some thorough research, the cameras currently available still do not seem to offer a viable alternative to film for my type of shooting. Have you seen the color fringing present on the test of the new Nikon 5000 camera? My god, if my Summicron performed like that, I'd send it back to Leica and ask them to check if an element was installed backwards. Ergonomics are still crap on the current cameras,(tiny buttons, quirky controls, fuzzy finders, etc.) and storage is a real problem right now for those who choose to take advantage of the high pixel ranges-the chips have outpaced the storage devices. Time delays, dust problems on the SLR's, dead pixels, color balance problems and color fringing--these keep coming up in my research as being more than minor probelms for even the better cameras. Every camera out there has some major drawback that the testers aren't happy about. I'm going to take a look at the Leica/Panasonic offering when it becomes available, but am not expecting to be bowled over. For those worried about film cameras going bye bye soon, go and actually play with some of the "pro-sumer" cameras folks ares pending over $1000 on, and you'll ease your mind.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), February 08, 2002.

Jay: >...They can't afford to equip and run 2 parallel assembly lines for a low-volume niche-market product...< UNLESS they subcontract the M7's manufacture...

Andrew: And let's not forget power consumption! All of the high-end digital cameras I've seen are big-time power pigs!

BUT, I agree with Robert and Jay that the next 12 months will be very interesting. I just saw a bank of Super Bowl shots done with the Canon 1D and printed on the Fujix 11x14 printer -- WOW! I was blown away at the quality delivered by this combo. Don't get me wrong, it was still not film, but folks, I'm here to tell you, they're getting close to 35 in it. Very close.

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 08, 2002.

I've seen some racing shots done with the $5000 Nikon digital SLR bodies that were very high quality as well--nothing like the images I've seen from the $1000 point and shoot models. I quess a $5000 body isn't a factor for someone writing their equipment off against lots of income, but it's a hard purchase to justify for the amateur shooter. Especially when it will be obsolete in a few years. I can't imagine that a digital M or R body would cost less than $5000 either. Would anyone here still be waiting in line waving money for a $5000 or more R body?

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), February 08, 2002.

Since we are all speculating I might as well add my 2 cents.

The main problems w/ Leica is not the products per se, but with the company itself and its culture. They use outdated manufacturing, distribution, pricing and marketing processes. Don't get me wrong, the end result, the Leica M/R series w/ lenses are outstanding quality wise, but I'm having some trouble understanding the mission of the company. Normally it is to make money for the owners by producing a product/service that fulfills a special need. A lot of Leica's issues appears to be able to be solved if they wanted it, but the company/culuture have to change. E.g., if capital is a problem, introduce partnerships, make leica lenses for a hig-end japanese digital camera, and so on, to infuse cash into the company that can be used for R&D, expansion of manfacturing capacity, more effective marketing and pricing.

It all comes down to what Leica wants to do. If they want to continue to produce a superior nische product for a small group of old-schoolers, pros and enthusiasts, but profits will continue to me marginal.

No one outside Leica knows exactly what the M7/M6x will be, however, from what I've heard it will not change much. No one outside the enthusiast community will care more/less about Leica. If Leica wants to remain relevant they will need to address the digital marketplace seriously, directly or indirectly.

Leica M-series will last for a very, very long time, but it is still a marginal/nische market.

So where is Leica going - I have no idea. I do think they need to change as a company.

cheers,

pat

-- pat (svenburg@yahoo.com), February 08, 2002.

Pat

"outdated manufacturing, distribution, pricing and marketing processes"

This is a bold statement! Can you explain how Leica, given that it is a minnow amongst giants, is different to other camera and lens manufacturers?

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

sure, it is a "bold" statement ment to drive a healthy discussion around the company, it's especially bold since I haven't been there and my comments are based on discussions with leica dealers and users.

What I mean is - I bet you there is room for considerable improvement. Manufacuturng - have the tied their production and inventory to a internet-based application system where they have two- transparency into supplier & partners? I doubt it. Distribution - do certified dealers have 24/7 real time access to Leica inventory and do they make their orders through self-service? Not that I know of. Marketing - what are they doing to take input from the user community? Are they encouraging pepple interested in their products to register their contact info? Do they have a viable customer database to mine for information? Maybe, doesn't seem so. Pricing - how are they working with small/medium/large dealers in order to maximize market penetration and grow profits for their distributors?

OK, I don't mean this to be an exercise in business operation 1-on-1, but it is my IMPRESSION that Leica could be doing a lot of things to improve their company, brand, profitiability, relevance etc. But hey, that's just my opinion. I'm sure that many people like the status quo and want to keep things the way there are.

Regardless, the quality of the end result is maybe what is the most important and needless to say, Leica knows better than most how to deliver a superior product.

cheers, and happy shooting

ps

-- pat (svenburg@yahoo.com), February 08, 2002.

I keep telling you guys. In three years Leica will introduce the M6-2. If five years, the M6-P and in seven or eight years, the M8.

-- Pete (greenthing@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

This question seems to come up perennially: what direction Leica? I think there is plenty of room for a company that makes top-quality products for a niche market. IMO, the emphasis should continue to be 100 per cent on craftsmanship and rock-solid reliability rather than technical innovation. There is a big demand for traditional cameras: Why else would the Voigtlaender be produced?

The real danger is Leica being gobbled up by a large company and subsumed into that company's philosophy. Would it still be a Leica if it simply just wore the badge? An automotive parallel is Jaguar, now owned by Ford. A fine car but is it the same? Does this matter? Is there still room for old-fashioned, small companies? I wonder.

At present Leicas are made by highly skilled technicians in Germany, a country where wages are high, as is the quality of life, with workers getting six weeks of public holidays a year. What if Leicas were made in China by workers geting $1 a day? They could load them up with more automation and electronics and sell them far more cheaply. Well, they could, but they wouldn't be Leicas anymore. A more likely scenario is for Leica to be purchased by another big company (say, Cosina), which continues to support a specialist Leica division. Another automotive example: Audi/VW bought Lamborghini but wants it to retain the spirit of an Italian car. The bottom line is this: whatever happens, quality is worth paying for, and this is how Leica users will judge their purchases!

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), February 09, 2002.

"I can't imagine that a digital M or R body would cost less than $5000 either. Would anyone here still be waiting in line waving money for a $5000 or more R body?"

If it's output is as good or better than an EOS1D then I'm there. I shoot professionally and I have an R6.2 and a small range of R lenses. If Leica doesn't come out with a competitive digital body M or R) soon, then the R gear goes and I go Canon. Simple as that.

-- Robert Schneider (rolopix@yahoo.com), February 11, 2002.