In his crystal ball gazing opinion piece on Macfilos last week, Wayne Gerlach wondered whether Leica might be tempted to enter the micro four-thirds world following the success of the D Lux. There’s a lot of logic in the suggestion. Leica has a strong and long-standing cooperative agreement with Panasonic and the shared cameras have been an important component in broadening Leica’s offering.
Two mainstream Lumix models, the FZ1000 and LX100 are sold under the Leica brand — the V-Lux and the D-Lux — with different cosmetic packaging and modified software. Leica claims that they are improved over their Panasonic brethren.
Leica also lends its name to the very impressive range of DG micro four-thirds lenses, including the superb 12-60mm zoom which is one of my all-time favourites.
So there is some basis for Wayne ’s crystal ball suggestions. A Leica-branded version of, say, the Lumix GX8 would be very popular among Leica fans. I agree with him. I also think a red dot would look good on the Lumix G9 would I believe it wuldsell in large numbers to the Leica faithful.
These variants are invariably more expensive than their complementary Panasonics and it is very easy to write them off as overpriced: “Why not just buy the Panasonic and save yourself a hundred or two?”, is a common refrain from people who have little understanding of marketing.
The fact is that it isn’t a clear-cut matter. The more expensive camera with the Leica badge will retain more value than the Panasonic when it comes time to sell. The model will also be in demand for many more years, as evidenced by robust sales of earlier D-Luxes and V-Luxes, not to mention classics such as the 14-year-old Leica Digilux which still commands some 40% of its original price. Indeed, that “Leica tax” is turned into a tax credit when you come to sell. The overall cost of owning the Leica version, even taking into account the premium purchase price, is often lower than if you’d taken the upfront saving and bought the Panasonic.
It seems to be a no-brainer for Leica to jump on the successful micro four-thirds bandwagon. All the ducks are in a row, it just needs an agreement, a boxful of red dots and a pot of glue. The word LEICA would fit perfectly in place of LUMIX on the front of the camera (if only I had had the right font, see the mock-up at the top of the page).
So why has this not happened? Leica has made it clear in the past that it is not interested in fielding another interchangeable-lens system. Stefan Daniel told me three years ago at Photokina that there would never be a micro four-thirds Leica. It was at the launch of the new D Lux and he made it very clear that it should not be referred to as a m4/3 camera, merely a 4/3. Micro four-thirds is reserved for the system, not simply a description of the sensor size, that much is clear. But is there more to it than that?
It seems to me there are two possible reasons for the absence of m4/3 cameras in Leica’s lineup. One is that Leica may be prevented from joining the m4/3 crowd for legal reasons, perhaps something to do with the co-operative agreement with Panasonic. However, this doesn’t stop Leica donating its name to Panasonic’s premium lens range. But perhaps Olympus, the only other manufacture of m4/3 cameras, doesn’t like the idea of widening the playing field.
The second reason could be that Leica simply doesn’t want to get involved in another system, despite its involvement in the design of m4/3 lenses.
Nevertheless, it’s a fascinating prospect. I firmly believe that Leica would be banging on an open door if it rebadged the GX8 or G9. As it is, many Leica users have bought such bodies as the basis of a lightweight travel system — an autofocus alternative to the traditional M camera. Many of them, me included, have also bought into the Leica DG lens system. And the little D-Lux (aka Panasonic LX100) has been an undoubted success for Leica.
Wayne makes a very good point and he reflects the views of many Leica users.
Read also our reviews of the Leica V-Lux and D-Lux
_______________
- Subscribe to Macfilos for free updates on articles as they are published
- Want to make a comment on this article but having problems?
If I could be allowed another comment, it is just to say that Leica did have a flirt with rebadging a Four Thirds (not MFT) Panasonic – the Leica Digilux 3 (Panasonic DMC-L1) back in 2006, and that would perhaps have been a good way to go, given that MFT junked the original FT concept where the lens circle covered the whole sensor for the sake of smallness and then took years to catch up on image quality. FT started out with the advantage of telecentricity – all light rays hitting the sensor at right angles and therefore avoiding peripheral distortion. Size could have been reduced by going mirrorless with FT and its lenses rather than downsizing the lenses as with MFT. In the meantime APS-C has caught up – or down! – on size, as with the brilliant Sony Nex and a6000 etc. bodies.
Leica often criticized by spreading itself thin because they have a huge product range, from film camera, interchangeable lenses (two system M and L), compact camera line (C,D,X,Q) and even an instant camera (Sofort). So I think this re-branding m43 camera idea will not happen in the near future. I think it is better to concentrate effort on L-mount camera system.
Nothing wrong with re-branding advanced compacts from Panasonic tho, but Leica has to wait for Panasonic to release LX200 which may come at the end of next year with G9 sensor and processor. But usually Leica is very careful, if the new LX200 is no significantly better than LX100, Leica may not rebrand it. For example, Panasonic FZ2500 is an updated FZ1000. It has been in the market for 1 year, but there is no new Leica V-Lux.
Thanks, you are made a good assessment of the situation and there’s a lot of sense in what you say. Mike
I end up wanting to say: why not just be happy that there is a good m4/3 company (Panasonic) making Leica-licensed lenses? I still think it would be good if Leica seriously delivered on their "mini-M" promise and gve us an APS-C ILC – the X-ILM? (X-vario body with M bayonet). Made in Germany.
HI John
It seems that Leica have been listening to you, The CL seems to be exactly what you wanted (okay, you need and adapter, but it’s a cheap price to pay for AF lenses, and it does recognise coded M lenses properly
Simply put, a Leica interchangeable lens system where both body and lens are made in Japan/China would seriously damage the brand.
This is why you don’t see this happening any time soon.
Another useful angle, Kwesi. There is definitely a degree of sensitivity at Wetzlar whenever micro four-thirds is mentioned….
John is right. Leica probably makes money when M4/3 lenses with its name are sold, but is likely to pay money when it sells rebadged Lumix M4/3 cameras. The D-Lux is not really a Leica, but rather a Lumix wearing a different suit. It would be interesting to see what conditions, restrictions and payment terms the various licensing agreements contain. It would not seem to make sense for Leica to pay license money for M4/3 cameras, unless it wants to pick up some of the ageing Canon and Nikon photographers who are drifting over to the lighter products made by Fuji, Sony, Olympus and Lumix. This is certainly a growing trend where I live.
You recently highlighted a 200m f 2.8 lens from Lumix with the name Leica on the front. What would make sense would be a Leica adaptor of some kind which would allow this lens, and others of its kind, to be used on the upcoming Leica CL/XY, or whatever name, with full autofocus function. This would allow Leica to make money through a number of channels. In a declining market you have to make money where you can. It is difficult for Leica as it is a much smaller company than the companies mentioned above. For most of those companies, cameras are a very small part of their business. That includes Fujifilm, whose camera business is in the order of 10 to 15% of its overall turnover.
William
Mike, I have a vague recollection that Olympus and Panasonic have a legal hold on rights to the M4/3 system. If true that may well explain why Leica – or indeed Nikon,Canon and Pentax-have not developed a M4/3 system.
Mike,my apologies you make this point in the story. I missed it .
I believe you are right on this, John. I suspect Panasonic would be a willing partner with Leica but Olympus would not welcome more competition. If they allowed Panasonic there would be nothing to stop Sony and others jumping on the bandwagon. As it is, from public perception, Olympus is the senior partner and gets most of the press plaudits, with Panasonic playing second fiddle. It’s a great pity. It is interesting to look at the list of members of the micro four-thirds “council”. It includes endless lens and accessory manufacturers but only two camera companies, as mentioned. Even Leica is missing as a member despite its involvement in the Leica DG lenses.