Leica sold 10 times as many film cameras in 2023 than it did in 2015

[MattKing]

Dentist with a license can get a Hasselblad, but Hasselblad ownership is not necessarily bringing in a dentist license. This deeply thoughtful thought aside, any Hasselblad - dentist relations have just been nothing but jokes. Fun ends when people take it seriously.

Admittedly, back in the day, I sold more Hasselblads to professors and medical doctors than I did dentists, but then the store I sold them from was just outside the gates of the University of BC .
The "Dentists with Hasselblads" phenomena was actually more common when Hasselblads were most prevalent in the professional photography world - which is why it was somewhat remarkable.
We didn't sell Leica at that store.

 

[RomanMF]

It's risky to extrapolate from Leica's sales, but something is definitely up. The market has gone haywire and a lot of people are picking up film cameras for what appears to be a variety of reasons (tactility, authenticity, novelty). I'm into it if it means we get more film stocks

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Some people without a dog in the fight get kicks by insulting Hasselblad and Leica owners. Whatever floats their boat. I do not think that the Hasselblad and Leica owners who get insults thrown at them care enough to even response.

You expect this trolling on Dpreview. But I even see some of this on The Online Photographer, whose readers are largely an erudite and serious group. And some of them still need to squeal up about how they dropped film 25 years ago and would never go back, etc., etc. A compulsion to ram this fact down other participant's throats? Do they think film users even care?

 

[TomR55]

It's risky to extrapolate from Leica's sales, but something is definitely up. The market has gone haywire and a lot of people are picking up film cameras for what appears to be a variety of reasons (tactility, authenticity, novelty). I'm into it if it means we get more film stocks

From our words to producers’ production lines … . It’s likely that what we’re seeing here is due to a combination of factors: peoples’ economic fears translating into investment in anything that promises permanence and marketability, the historical notions about “Leica,” and social media doing what it does best.

 

[JWMster]

I've had 2 Leicas: Canadian M4-2 and M6. Had CLA's done and they worked very, very well. I used Zeiss lenses mostly, and some of my favorite shots printed large I can easily see in my mind to this day. Great, functional pieces and much enjoyed and much admired for the tiny package it presents. If you shoot wide (35mm) to normal (50mm) its great. I had a 90mm but never used it as IMHO, rangefinders and telephotos just aren't as functional as an SLR when you go tele. SLR's are just hard to beat for focal flexibility.... even when slightly larger. Years later, I find just about any tele lens is just a paperweight waiting to get parked while the shorter lenses get most of the work. There are exceptions, but today I own few beyond the portrait range.... and even then are much more inclined to move in close with a wide. So maybe Leica could still work.... if you already know that. Mine got traded out years ago. Missed only a little.

The issue for new film cameras isn't cost because quality digitals ain't cheap so much as the infrastructure a photographer needs to surround his/her camera with in terms of developing and (digital) darkroom. How many new photographers have that much dedication to the film project? A few yes. But is it enough? One of my friendly landscape LF 4X5 photographers candidly admits that a digital camera has been his best light meter and done more to improve his photographey (he's a pro rather than a ham like me), and I'd agree that using digital under challenging light can confirm that you've got "it" nailed the way you want it. And if that's the case, then if a film photographer needs digital and film, we're really at a cross roads to make the project fly.

Yes, I sure hope Pentax succeeds with a new film camera and I'd love it to be unpate of the 6445N, but I also hope it remains committed to making its monochrome digital succed, too. Leica seems to have its own sweet spot and an ability to survive and perform on its own with or without my good wishes.

 

[Sirius Glass]

You expect this trolling on Dpreview. But I even see some of this on The Online Photographer, whose readers are largely an erudite and serious group. And some of them still need to squeal up about how they dropped film 25 years ago and would never go back, etc., etc. A compulsion to ram this fact down other participant's throats? Do they think film users even care?

One learns to pretend the braggart is just a barking dog. [A trick taught to me my a Post Office clerk.]

 

[Rudeofus]

Although I don't understand why people need to put down Leica (and people that buy Leicas) every time the name gets mentioned, I do think that the new M6 was more of a marketing stunt than anything else. They successfully created a buzz and speculation about what the new camera will be like. And cashed on it even though they came up with the most boring "new" film camera you could imagine.

A photo club buddy of mine with extra cash at hand was among the first ones to get one of the new M6. There was something wrong with the pressure plate scratching his film, so he exchanged the camera, same problem with 3 cameras. Seems to have been a series error, because after a few months the issue was finally officially recognized by Leica and the pressure plate replaced with something that doesn't leave nasty scratches on the film.

I can imagine, that this episode leaves some bitter taste behind, and it does create the impression, that most initial M6 customers' new toys ended up in glass cabinets and not in camera bags. Obviously this doesn't justify trolling or general derision of Leica buyers, especially now, when the pressure plate issue appears to have been corrected.

 

[albireo]

A photo club buddy of mine with extra cash at hand was among the first ones to get one of the new M6. [...]

I can imagine, that this episode leaves some bitter taste behind, and it does create the impression, that most initial M6 customers' new toys ended up in glass cabinets and not in camera bags. Obviously this doesn't justify trolling or general derision of Leica buyers, especially now, when the pressure plate issue appears to have been corrected.

Wow. That's a lot of mental gymnastics needed to draw that conclusion.

We have a film photography forum in my country that is run like an old men photo club. It's an absolutely toxic place. Low on photography, low on facts, high on bragging and arrogance. I deleted my account long ago. Best thing I've ever done!

 

[TomR55]

A photo club buddy of mine with extra cash at hand was among the first ones to get one of the new M6. There was something wrong with the pressure plate scratching his film, so he exchanged the camera, same problem with 3 cameras. Seems to have been a series error, because after a few months the issue was finally officially recognized by Leica and the pressure plate replaced with something that doesn't leave nasty scratches on the film.

I can imagine, that this episode leaves some bitter taste behind, and it does create the impression, that most initial M6 customers' new toys ended up in glass cabinets and not in camera bags. Obviously this doesn't justify trolling or general derision of Leica buyers, especially now, when the pressure plate issue appears to have been corrected.

I think that it’s particularly irritating because of the excessively long “turnaround” time. IIRC, customers waited months for Leica to replace the pressure plates on the effected cameras. I have three Leica film bodies: two M4-Ps and one M4. I use one or two of these almost daily. I have had some minor problems with one or two of these occasionally scratching film (on the backside which is a pretty clear indication that something might be amiss with the pressure plate). I actually tried, several years ago, to have Leica send me a pressure plate (or two) so that I might replace these myself. The New Jersey company replied that they no longer made those items. Now, that doesn’t make sense to me unless the pressure plates on these newer M6’s a different from the original? Could be. But, how then does my regular technician obtain these parts?

 

[Rudeofus]

I think that it’s particularly irritating because of the excessively long “turnaround” time. IIRC, customers waited months for Leica to replace the pressure plates on the effected cameras. I have three Leica film bodies: two M4-Ps and one M4. I use one or two of these almost daily. I have had some minor problems with one or two of these occasionally scratching film (on the backside which is a pretty clear indication that something might be amiss with the pressure plate). I actually tried, several years ago, to have Leica send me a pressure plate (or two) so that I might replace these myself. The New Jersey company replied that they no longer made those items. Now, that doesn’t make sense to me unless the pressure plates on these newer M6’s a different from the original? Could be. But, how then does my regular technician obtain these parts?

The way the M6 pressure plate situation was explained to me was, that Leica stopped making these plates in Germany, had the new M6 plates made in East Asia and that the resulting product was out of spec. They may have placed an order for M6 pressure plates but not for older models. After those with Leicas in their camera bags started looking at their film strips and found scratches, too, the few remaining M4 spare parts may have quickly been sold and could not easily been remade.

That's pure conjecture, but after decades in engineering it sort of makes sense to me.

 

[TomR55]

The way the M6 pressure plate situation was explained to me was, that Leica stopped making these plates in Germany, had the new M6 plates made in East Asia and that the resulting product was out of spec. They may have placed an order for M6 pressure plates but not for older models. After those with Leicas in their camera bags started looking at their film strips and found scratches, too, the few remaining M4 spare parts may have quickly been sold and could not easily been remade.

That's pure conjecture, but after decades in engineering it sort of makes sense to me.

Thank you for your cogent explanation; it makes sense given the numerous posts about this and other topics related to Leica’s customer service, etc.

It’s an interesting point that you raise about users starting to look for scratched film … I wonder if a lot of recent discoveries about scratched film isn’t a result of more people shooting and scanning films? I know that I spend lots of time scanning, cataloging, etc., and I am more aware of scratches over these last few years than the previous 30+ years when I spent more time printing fewer images than I scan, and doing so with cold-light or diffusion heads … ?

 

[brbo]

After those with Leicas in their camera bags started looking at their film strips and found scratches, too, the few remaining M4 spare parts may have quickly been sold and could not easily been remade.

That's pure conjecture, but after decades in engineering it sort of makes sense to me.

So, M6 with defective plates were fixed by spare M4 plates and now Leica can't make M6 anymore? Yeah, I'm not buying it...

 

[Rudeofus]

So, M6 with defective plates were fixed by spare M4 plates and now Leica can't make M6 anymore? Yeah, I'm not buying it...

M6 plates were discovered defective. Leica denies problem at first, internet rabble brews up. People with older models start looking at their films, some find scratches, too. Send in their M4 for repair until all available M4 spare pressure plates are used up. Probably not a part in high demand until then. Manufacturing of new M4 pressure plates not easy to bootstrap, especially after M6 experience suggests, that "simply send drawings to maker with cheapest offer" doesn't work.

 

[brbo]

People started noticing scratches after 50 years?

 

[Rudeofus]

People started noticing scratches after 50 years?

Are you sure, that most M4 owners today are the same people as those owning these cameras 50 years ago? I never claimed "all M4 have faulty pressure plates", but there will inevitably exist a small subset which does for whatever reason, and these camera are more likely to end up in camera service than they would have been 5 years ago, especially if the uptick in film camera use is real.

 

[brbo]

Are you sure, that most M4 owners today are the same people as those owning these cameras 50 years ago?

You think that pressure plates start scratching film when the owners change? Now THAT would be very strange, indeed.

BTW, is the M4 pressure plate "problem" of today a widely know problem now or just a wild conclusion from a lone testament of @TomR55 about a problem that happened years ago before the introduction of the new M6?

 

[Rudeofus]

You think that pressure plates start scratching film when the owners change? Now THAT would be very strange, indeed.

Yes, this would be very strange. There may be a better explanation for this mystery, which also follows the theory I put up all the time: Some Leica's always had a habit of putting tiny scratches onto film, these were either accepted "if Leica does this, how much worse would a Nikon/Canon/Pentax/... be?" or the affected Leicas were sold in the used market until they found an owner who didn't care. Then the big scratches issue came up with the new M6, and suddenly everyone accepted, that these scratches are neither normal nor acceptable, and everyone inspected their film rolls, revealing older models with the same or at least similar issues.

Until now this has been conjecture, but here is a thread in a Leica forum, which illustrates this quite well. I preset some choice quotes:

I never heard of film scratching isssues with any of the previous models. Maybe I was not paying attention. At least I never had issues with multiple vintage M’s. Have used on M2,M3,M4,M5,M6 (old version).

Suddenly it does affect older models ...

Neither of my Leicas scratches film. But if it is at the edge of the tolerances then only a small number of cameras would be affected. Since 2003 there are known reports of MP and M-A and now recently new M6 cameras scratching film.

And more. Typical pattern, concerned Leica owners suddenly look more carefully and sure enough suddenly find tiny and previously ignored defects:

It appears both my Leica IIIf and M3 put tiny microscratches into the film which I had not noticed before.

I believe you might be on to something, 5/8 Leica film M bodies (all within last few year production) I own have micro scratches when i compared the negatives today.

BTW this whole situation reminds me of the "front/back focus issue of Sigma lenses on Canon dSLRs", when suddenly everyone became a lens expert and could detect focus errors in the ppm range.

BTW, is the M4 pressure plate "problem" of today a widely know problem now or just a wild conclusion from a lone testament of @TomR55 about a problem that happened years ago before the introduction of the new M6?

There is no widely known "M4 pressure plate problem" I am aware of. There are (and always have been) production tolerances, see the previous quotes, and some people suddenly pay attention and flood the support channels.

 

[Ai Print]

Largely unrelated to this thread, but the amount of hate towards Leica is something I fail to understand.

There seems to be no shortage of senior amateur photographers spending tens of thousands of $ on huge plasticy manlet toys like the Nikon Z9 or any of those pixel shifting triple sensor mega sonic AF Sony mirror less monstrosities - and nobody will bat an eyelid.

I have been a professional photographer for about 36 years and I love using my Leica film and d_gital, Hasselblad film and d_gital and Nikon film and d_gital. In fact, I have an amazing state of the art darkroom but also have some 320TB of storage that has archived about 1.5M photos, will having been using d_gital for 30 years this Fall.

I helped advise Nikon on the Z9 through NPS in its final development stages, my specific area was the implementation of the sensor shield which it has. In turn, Nikon gave people what I consider to be the very best camera they have ever made, regardless of media used and no, it is not "plasticy" as you state, it is all metal. Sure, you have the amateur set being staunch gear heads and hardly producing anything really meaningful to the history of photography in terms of images, what else is new? They all do the same damn thing with a huge variety of gear and then turn around and brag about their brand and put down others, this is not exclusive to the d_gital realm. But you also have super talented people producing stellar imagery that pushes the limits of the mind, body and gear, please don't reduce them to what was said above.

I suggest you re-think what you have asserted about a brilliant photographic tool.

 

[albireo]

The irony here is that you fail to understand the source of criticism towards what is now largely a luxury brand and then turn around and say what you just did about another camera.

I have been a professional photographer for about 36 years and I love using my Leica film and d_gital, Hasselblad film and d_gital and Nikon film and d_gital. In fact, I have an amazing state of the art darkroom but also have some 320TB of storage that has archived about 1.5M photos, will having been using d_gital for 30 years this Fall.

I helped advise Nikon on the Z9 through NPS in its final development stages, my specific area was the implementation of the sensor shield which it has. In turn, Nikon gave people what I consider to be the very best camera they have ever made, regardless of media used and no, it is not "plasticy" as you state, it is all metal. Sure, you have the amateur set being staunch gear heads and hardly producing anything really meaningful to the history of photography in terms of images, what else is new? They all do the same damn thing with a huge variety of gear and then turn around and brag about their brand and put down others, this is not exclusive to the d_gital realm. But you also have super talented people producing stellar imagery that pushes the limits of the mind, body and gear, please don't reduce them to what was said above.

Photrio with its now more diverse set of topics and users is well positioned to flourish where other forums might come to pass. But the kind of comment above will also drive people away if it were to become more commonplace.

I suggest you re-think what you have asserted about a brilliant photographic tool.

Suggestion rejected!

Sorry, I couldn't care less about what the Z9 is made of. I have nothing against it, mind you. I just picked the first that came to mind as an example of some people's double standards. Personally I would never waste my money on one, but that's just me. Aside from that, I've actually been using Nikons exclusively for 25 years. So you're barking at the wrong tree.

In general - relax. Accept that other people have other opinions.

Personally, I have no skin in the game. I don't own a Leica, but dismissing it as a 'luxury' brand while suggesting that a battery powered vaguely imaging-related portable computer should be immune from criticism seems extremely odd to me. Or probably just culturally alien. Again, I wonder if people flaunt their money in a different way that side of the pond.

 

[Ai Print]

Suggestion rejected!

Sorry, I couldn't care less about what the Z9 is made of. I have nothing against it, mind you. I just picked the first that came to mind as an example of some people's double standards. Personally I would never waste my money on one, but that's just me. Aside from that, I've actually been using Nikons exclusively for 25 years. So you're barking at the wrong tree.

In general - relax. Accept that other people have other opinions.

Personally, I have no skin in the game. I don't own a Leica, but dismissing it as a 'luxury' brand while suggesting that a battery powered vaguely imaging-related portable computer should be immune from criticism seems extremely odd to me. Or probably just culturally alien. Again, I wonder if people flaunt their money in a different way that side of the pond.

You are missing the point, did you even see what I own and use? Not just for a passion of mine but for a living? Out of those three major brands that I use, I also use Leica and not because it is considered politely to be a luxury brand and it is, but because they are a bit different a tool for the task. They are great for what they are great for and not a jack of all trades camera.

Saying Leica is a luxury brand is not a criticism, it’s a fact. Saying the Z9 is a portable computer is a criticism and is therefore an opinion, and you are entitled to it.

25 years with Nikon eh? Did you enjoy the addition of the flash exposure compensation button that first appeared on the N80? If so, good, that is my doing. Did you like that they kept the interchangeable finders on the F5 even though they wanted to go the route of the F6? Because I weighed in on that one too.

 

[Ai Print]

I think it is great Leica is selling these, they are not perfect as a company and one could say “Of course they are” given the prices of good clean used M6 bodies but anything that helps keep the messaging on film positive is a good thing.

I still get the age old “you still use film?” comment now and then but I have standard replies to that. And with AI coming onboard to further meddle with things like provenance, I love the fact I can shoot with any one of a bunch of film cameras in 35, 120 and 4x5 and go straight to a real darkroom print completely sidestepping anything to do with digital.

 

[koraks]

Locking this thread for now because it's apparently difficult to discuss the topic at hand without emotions running high. We might re-open it at a later stage.