Leica explains how all of this unnecessary 'mumbo jumbo' of a DSLR adds to the cost of the camera, and that the simplicity of the mirrorless camera(which they've been making since the dawn of time) are much cheaper and less complex to produce.
Then they explain how the shorter register distance(flange to sensor) of the mirrorless cameras allows much more simple wide angle lens designs, with flow on effects of lower production costs of these too.
So the average mug would be pleased to know that this mirrorless camera design is going to be much cheaper to produce, with cheaper lenses to boot
... and yet! .... the reality doesn't reflect this 'supposed theory'!!
Look at the prices of Leica products, watch the video and the only conclusion that can be drawn from theses two sources of info is that Leica are ripping their loyal customers to shreds!
a quick spot check of the average price and a 35mm f/1.4 lens(a wideish angle, but not a focal length that pushes optical boundaries!) and the Leica version will set you back at least 2-3x what the Nikon/Canon/Sony 35mm equivalents will!
So, with the consideration that the DSLR versions of this 35mm f/1.4 lens design must surely cost the DSLR manufacturers a lot more to produce(Leica's admission), and yet the retail pricing of these lenses are 2-3x lower than the Leica what other conclusion could be made here?
And then we have the consideration that the shorter register distance inherent with mirrorless cameras makes it easier to produce wider angle lenses, which means that for mirrorless camera systems, you'd expect the lens market to be awash with super duper ultra wide angle lenses.... and yet it isn't!
It's the DSLR segment that leads the way with the 'wideness' of the wide angle lens(wide FOV) market!
As far as I'm aware, there is only the 12mm Voightlander lens available for the Leica system that comes anywhere near the focal length of the current 12-14mm UWA lenses from Sigma/Nikon/Canon(full frame).
Leica themselves don't have anything close to this, and the 12mm Voight is a very old design. Leica only has an 18mm prime as one of their widest lenses and they also have the 16-18-21 tri-elmar .. which seems a bit strange from them to have their widest lens as a 'zoom' lens type!
Don't get me wrong here I have(or use to have) a lot of respect for Leica and their products. After seeing this video, I've lost a lot of that respect, but maybe this short video of guff marketing was the work of a desperate person looking to justify their position with Leica or something. Either way, I think if you're going to produce some thing like this, at least have the hardware on the ground to prove the points being made about the design philosophies!!
I doubt very much that I'm not alone in the opinion that for wide angle lens design and product, nothing comes close to Nikon's 14-24mm lens.
Sigma's 12-24mm is definitely wider(but slower), although for image quality, the Nikon is regarded as having set the performance bar(and I'm sure Canon is working on an equivalent lens as I write).
Yet with Leica's admission of how much easier and simpler it is to make wide angle lenses for mirrorless cameras, we only get a three step zoom lens, which falls way short of the current mark, and costs 3x as much to buy .. and is a slower lens design too!
So, one of two possible conclusions could be drawn from the video:
1. Leica is producing the same expensive little box of tricks it has been for longer than any other manufacturer and reaming it's customers for the privilege, or
2. the chap that produced this video is a few sense short of a full dollar, and should have waited until there was product available to support his assertions!
Finally, I think he should have researched his 'camera equivalency' tables before making this video too. At about the 7min mark, he compares the cost and complexity of the Canon 14mm on a full frame DSLR to an equivalent lens for smaller Sony NEX camera. But he continues to use the 14mm focal length as the example lens for the NEX lens, and how much more simple it'd be and smaller and lighter and so on. But doesn't mention the fact that you'd lose something like 20° of FOV in going from a 14mm lens on full frame to 14mm on an APS-C sensor camera!!
For the same FOV you would need a 9mm lens on the APS-C camera, and producing a 9mm lens is more difficult than a 14mm lens irrespective of whether it's for a mirrorless or DSLR camera.
Apologies for the rant!
I just thought that this video doesn't appear to have been well thought out prior to release, and also what type of photographer was the intended market?