why isn't there an affordable digital rangefinder?

[chiif]

Since someone mentioned C mount lenses, we OT a little bit...

C mount lenses have been around for many years. Traditionally used on 8mm, 16mm movie cameras, now they have been adapted to machine vision. Schneider & Pentax/Hoya and a few other manufacturers still make them new. They are mainly used in manufacturing processes for pattern recognition, where high contrast, centre sharpness is required. That is why to many people they find the image quality so much different from modern lenses. Sharpness is not required for entire image circle, but centre sharpness is important, corner edges sharpness is not important, hence, the "Bokeh" is so different from modern lenses.

Traditional C mount lenses, used in movie cameras have very different qualities. Most of these lenses are used for Cine quality pictures, that is why many M4/3 users who have started using them discovered that their resolution far surpass even the "best" modern 35mm lenses today. Imagine having a lens that is used for cinema screen, that wide, the resolving power must be superb!

Anyway, the M4/3 20mm flange distance open up a whole new world for people who play with old lenses. The new NEX system with their 18mm flange distance and LARGE mount make it possible to mount almost ALL C mount lenses including those 8mm and f1.2 and even those f0.95 ones. If you are into speculation and investment, start stocking them up now...

Of cos, there will be light fall off at the corners due to the larger sensor size.

Having said that, the EVIL (electronic viewfinder interchangable lens) cameras is different from RF and DRF, simply the focusing mechanism is different and provide a different experience. No point saying which is better, they just serve different purpose.

All I can say, the next half year is going to be exciting... with introduction of the NEX and soften prices of the M9... Prepare to spend spend spend....

 

[Neo]

Do not forget that whatever Cosina (or someone else) is making, they have to compete with the M8 (yes, not the M9). There is a large market of M8 floating around, and the prices are bound to fall with succeeding generations of Digital Leica-M cameras being launched. If Cosina were to launch a new APS-C digital rangefinder today at 3k, there will be a lot of people who'd rather buy a M8 at $4k instead.

I'm using a M8.2, and I do wish I could pay less for a digital range finder (say $3k instead?). But the engineering of Leica is indeed exceptional (I've used a lot of cameras before making this statement), and while I can take the same photo with a more affordable camera, the experience of using a Leica is just that wonderful.

But I get the point - it will be great if someone can come up with an affordable digital rangefinder so that photographers who want an affordable digital rangefinder can have a choice, just like what Voightlander did for film rangefinder.

 

[snits]

Do not forget that whatever Cosina (or someone else) is making, they have to compete with the M8 (yes, not the M9). There is a large market of M8 floating around, and the prices are bound to fall with succeeding generations of Digital Leica-M cameras being launched. If Cosina were to launch a new APS-C digital rangefinder today at 3k, there will be a lot of people who'd rather buy a M8 at $4k instead.

I'm using a M8.2, and I do wish I could pay less for a digital range finder (say $3k instead?). But the engineering of Leica is indeed exceptional (I've used a lot of cameras before making this statement), and while I can take the same photo with a more affordable camera, the experience of using a Leica is just that wonderful.

But I get the point - it will be great if someone can come up with an affordable digital rangefinder so that photographers who want an affordable digital rangefinder can have a choice, just like what Voightlander did for film rangefinder.

u nailed alot of points there! well done..

 

[Royale With Cheese]

Yup! iPhone, to me is the BEST DIGITAL CAMERA IN THE WORLD!

Those who says it's crappy simply do not know how to exploit it's fullest potential.

Excellent white balance, good dynamic range, easy to use, portable, decent VGA video recording... and it's almost free with any top end phone plan!

haha!

This is something I took in UK.

Shoot, tweek, upload on flickr all with one phone.

You see, its the person behind the camera, not the camera

 

[funksoulava]

haha!

This is something I took in UK.

Shoot, tweek, upload on flickr all with one phone.

You see, its the person behind the camera, not the camera

Pro sia :thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Royale With Cheese]

Pro sia :thumbsup::thumbsup:

No pro la, I just shoot only, dont think just shoot :bsmilie:

Back onto the topic. I think the only affordable D-RF that I could go for on the market would be the Epson RD1s.

I might get it soon, I am not too sure myself. The lure of convenience is hard to resist.

But for brand new spanking RF, I would say, I give it 5 years before I head out & buy myself a brand new set.

Correct me if I am wrong but I just feel that D-RF right now is still in its infant stage. This is due to only Leica & previously Epson/Cosina pumping into the R&D of the product.

Maybe in another years or more, we could see a D-RF from Cosina? Prob the only reason why they had to do it because film manufacturers are stopping the productions of film?

We never know....

For now, I would stick to shooting with a analogue RF which is already at the highest peak of R&D.

 

[chiif]

chiif

Did Rd1 make money for Epson and for how much?

That would probably contribute part of the reasons why they have stopped producing/enhancing a fine camera.

I have no real statistics. But from some facts here and there... it's not difficult to guess that it's a economical flop.

1. Cosina made 10,000 bodies for Epson. That was in 2004/2005 or something... and now it's still selling the R-D1xs.

2. From some sources in the internet... it cost USD500 just to make the dial on the top of the camera. And any sane people would know that the camera can never be sold for less that USD2500 if just the dial cost 1/5 of the price of the camera.

So... do you think any smart manager in Epson would dare to suggest a R-D2 after this project?

 

[night86mare]

You see, its the person behind the camera, not the camera

:bigeyes:

:sweat::sweat:

:bsmilie:

 

[efftee]

anyone seen this?

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/04/april-fools.html

"People say they want Canon or Nikon to make a digital rangefinder. I heard an insider rumor a year or two ago that a big manufacturer was fairly far along with plans for just such a camera, but that Leica went to them and begged them not to do it, saying it would be the death of Leica. Leica is revered in Japan, and, according to my source, this Japanese company acquiesced, and shelved its plans. What that means—if there's any truth to that story—is that if you really want a cheaper M-mount digital rangefinder, your best bet is to be rooting for Leica to go out of business, because that's what it would take to clear the way for the camera you say you want. Is that what you want?"

Yeah, I heard Ernst Fuhrmann was on the same trip and he also begged the Japanese car makers not to make a roadster as it would be the death of Porsche. :flush:

 

[efftee]

Leica products are unarguably premium quality but since LVMH acquired ownership of the company they have become eye-wateringly expensive; resulting in them becoming yet more sought after by the poseurs.

Um, since when did LVMH acquire Leica eh? :dunno:

 

[snits]

U nailded it Chiif, exactly! No rocket science here!

If Epson can't make an inexpensive DRF to sustain the biz, what's there to hope in the near future if Epson would roll out and enhanced RD1/2/x, let alone a Full Frame RF to compete head on with M9?

Nikon and Canon made the nicest RF decades ago, so does ZI today, I'm pretty sure they did their sum based on Epson's flop! Else technically, what's so difficult for them to roll out one to the competition? Unless they want to do charity!

so if you need a full frame DRF, I'm afraid you need to pay the premium. As to what price is regarded as 'inexpensive'? well that's another study area based on percieved value. Be it $10k or $5k, years down the road,if there's still no competition to Leica's, they will be people saying it's overpriced. For a monopoly, that's the price to pay. Sad but it's this the real world I'm afraid.

I have no real statistics. But from some facts here and there... it's not difficult to guess that it's a economical flop.

1. Cosina made 10,000 bodies for Epson. That was in 2004/2005 or something... and now it's still selling the R-D1xs.

2. From some sources in the internet... it cost USD500 just to make the dial on the top of the camera. And any sane people would know that the camera can never be sold for less that USD2500 if just the dial cost 1/5 of the price of the camera.

So... do you think any smart manager in Epson would dare to suggest a R-D2 after this project?

 

[Royale With Cheese]

U nailded it Chiif, exactly! No rocket science here!

If Epson can't make an inexpensive DRF to sustain the biz, what's there to hope in the near future if Epson would roll out and enhanced RD1/2/x, let alone a Full Frame RF to compete head on with M9?

Nikon and Canon made the nicest RF decades ago, so does ZI today, I'm pretty sure they did their sum based on Epson's flop! Else technically, what's so difficult for them to roll out one to the competition? Unless they want to do charity!

so if you need a full frame DRF, I'm afraid you need to pay the premium. As to what price is regarded as 'inexpensive'? well that's another study area based on percieved value. Be it $10k or $5k, years down the road,if there's still no competition to Leica's, they will be people saying it's overpriced. For a monopoly, that's the price to pay. Sad but it's this the real world I'm afraid.

I agree, that is why I stick to shooting analogue RF.

Besides, shooting B&W/Negs/Slides at about 2-3rolls a week take that cost times 5 years, it wouldnt even come close to the price of the M9

 

[Shawn]

I agree, that is why I stick to shooting analogue RF.

Besides, shooting B&W/Negs/Slides at about 2-3rolls a week take that cost times 5 years, it wouldnt even come close to the price of the M9

Amen to that. haha. lets burn more film.

 

[snits]

I agree, that is why I stick to shooting analogue RF.

Besides, shooting B&W/Negs/Slides at about 2-3rolls a week take that cost times 5 years, it wouldnt even come close to the price of the M9

I'm happy for u for doing what's u perceived as doing the right thing for urself ie shoot film that perfectly fit your value system. That's all to it so long shooting film and the costs/time/convenience what not fit your value system, you're doing the right thing for yourself. Once you affix a monetary elements to the value (system) you complicate things, worse if you equate the value with absolute monetary terms and ur original intent got smudged. So while u r at it, do what's best and enjoy ur hobby bro.

 

[scandezz]

I agree, that is why I stick to shooting analogue RF.

Besides, shooting B&W/Negs/Slides at about 2-3rolls a week take that cost times 5 years, it wouldnt even come close to the price of the M9

Actually gary, i like non digital cos its unexpected. Anyway to answer

Re: why isn't there an affordable digital rangefinder?

DSLR = MASS = CHEAP

DRF = NICHE = EXPENSIVE

Simple economics

 

[artspraken]

An alternative view based on price. My view is that the population of 2nd hand M8 and M8.2s that are circulating in the market are preventing other makers from entering the market with a cheap RF. The longevity of Leica products enables it to cover a wider price spectrum than is commonly perceived. To compete effectively, the new entrant has to be priced far below a 2nd hand M8 - that seems difficult.

 

[Recoil3d]

Just a question about the M9 .

Since other analogue RF scuh as m7 have "full frame" ,35mm film ,thus image circle can cover the full frame of the film, why does the m9 need the bespoked microprism's at the the sides of the kodak's FF sensor ?:dunno:

Unless analuge RF also have micro prism at the corners of the frame which i doubt so :sweat:

 

[schmuak]

Just a question about the M9 .

Since other analogue RF scuh as m7 have "full frame" ,35mm film ,thus image circle can cover the full frame of the film, why does the m9 need the bespoked microprism's at the the sides of the kodak's FF sensor ?:dunno:

Unless analuge RF also have micro prism at the corners of the frame which i doubt so :sweat:

Supposedly to solve the corner vignetting issue with wide angle lenses. My guess is that film is flat and the light hitting the film plane doesn't need to be 90 degrees unlike sensors.

 

[zoossh]

bene123, the options you listed are not RFs at all because they use TTL focusing, not RF focusing. An RF must be an RF.

OP is correct, there is no option currently in the market for a cheap digital RF. From what I understand, the most expensive part of an RF body is the RF window mechanic. Is this true?

M8 is not an RF?

 

[zoossh]

I guess its actually depends on the individual. Some personally do not care about the process, all they are seeking for is the end results, the perfect moment. But others, like me in particular, do take into account the process of capturing what I see. Its largely intangible, I also cant describe the feeling lol :dunno: But all I know is, its :heart::thumbsup:

how to not care about the process?? good photos cannot be just by luck with the same setting throughout one's life, just waiting and hitting at the right moment, but no thoughts about the tools, the working distance, the vantage and the settings rite? even post processing is a process.