>>3774586>Cameras are increasingly niche by their very nature.Yeah, and Leica's profits have been going down along with everyone else's. Leica's been struggling for a while now. It's not clear whether or not their current business model is sustainable. You'll notice that they *are* trying their damndest to branch out away from their core M line with things like the L and Q lines and the medium format S line. Stuff where they're still expensive as hell but might be able to produce a little more intrinsic value.
>the Leica name is all over the Panasonic lenses on Micro Four Thirds, which kind of gives a level of... confusion?Yeah, and it has eroded their cachet a little bit, but I think the fact that Leica-branded lenses on those platforms are still more expensive than others has maintained it. I'd wager Leica snobs look down on those as "not REAL Leica" anyway.
>So then what's the point of Leica making decent cameras in current year when their customer base won't actually care?Because it's not *pure* fashion. Lamborghini and Porsche still need to make high-quality luxury cars, even if the prices are vastly out of line with the increased utility you get over a midrange Toyota.
It's a complicated psychological balance. Luxury brands have to have some advantages that the rich snobs can point to so they can lie to themselves and others that they're not just buying them as fashion accessories.
>What about someone who isn't too keen on the Panasonic bodies?Then they're gonna be looking at a Nikon, Canon, or Sony. Or Sigma, I guess, if they start releasing more L-mount bodies besides the FP.
Leica's lenses are certainly nice, but they're not so much better than similar offerings from any of the other brands that they can justify the cost from a utilitarian standpoint. You're paying for the Leica name, not a tiny uptick in that MTF line that's going to be entirely eaten by Facebook image compression in practice anyway.
