Speaking of niche products, Nikon and Leica are actually like...
Heck, Slobodan just showed up! So I'll have to refrain from comparisons with automotive industry.
Oh and BTW, Leica's Andreas Kaufmann already thinks Nikon has one foot in the grave:
Emphasis' mine (an indirect reference specifically to Nikon; or, if I may, as direct as we can expect from Leica's boss).
At the same time they made the X-U...
Leica was, not that long ago, in a far worse business, technology and product line up situation that Nikon currently is. The only think they had left was pretty much a brand. Nikon does have that as well.
Btw, is Leica in such a great position today?
- The S is caught in a very competitive market with much cheaper, lighter, compact MF mirrorless cameras, high end DSLRs with similar image quality (much better AF, more lenses options,...) and real MF cameras with larger sensors that end up not being much more expensive after a few lenses are added to the mix. The S income has been critical for Leica and its future is IMHO clearly at risk. It is really incoherent to call the Canon and Nikon DSLR dead but the Leica S alive with its bulkier looks and outdated sensor. Is someone going to follow if Leica releases a new set of lenses for an hypothetical mirrorless S? I don't think so, the system is just too new,
- few people still believe a new M body would bring anything since the current one already can't be focused reliably anywhere near its resolution potential,
- the SL is pretty much the only Leica with a future, but they manage to make the body huge and native lenses larger than DSLR one costing twice less and just as good optically,
- the Q is great but doesn't generate system revenue
So is Leica really in such a great position?
Cheers,
Bernard