Carterofmars
Well-known
I'd sell my film ZI and buy a digital in a heart beat.
Last edited:
I'd love to see a Digital ZM...
- Thread starter Carterofmars
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 21
- Views 3K
jslash6
jeffrey lash
I'd keep my film ZM and buy a digital in a heart beat.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Actually I'd suspect there'd be a bit of a glut of film ZM's on the market if Zeiss released a digital version.
Especially if it came in at around $2500.00!
We never give up hope in case you're listening Zeiss! 😀
Especially if it came in at around $2500.00!
We never give up hope in case you're listening Zeiss! 😀
ZeissFan
Veteran
I'd keep my film Zeiss Ikon (not a ZM -- that's the name of the entire system) and buy a digital version. No need or desire to give up on film.
arseniii
Well-known
At a 2500 tag there're a bunch of M8s available 🙂 If Zeiss can deliver FF digital at this price - wow good for them. Personally as long as film last I am happy with my analog RFs and 250 green Benjamin's will buy me film to last longer then any digi-sensor can handle 🙂
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I think if I had an Ikon that was full frame and 18 megapixel ... I'd be taking the time to learn more about digital post processing.
Currently ... via my M8 it barely interests me!
Currently ... via my M8 it barely interests me!
scottwallick
ambition ≥ skill
I would too. I love my M9, but nothing compares to the Zeiss Ikon's big bright VF.
croweater
Member
In principle I'd like to have one, but only if it's full-frame. And it wouldn't replace my film cameras, it'd just be another option.
Carterofmars
Well-known
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Quercus
Quercus
- Local time
- 12:13 PM
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2005
- Messages
- 72
what about a micro four thirds cosina/zeiss with a legacy vf fron the g series ad the option of an evf for a new range of zeiss lenses.
Even better would be cosina purchasing the rights to use the rollei tm (it will be available at some time) - and building a M4/3 equiv of the rollei 35s with the above features and a new range of rollei hft m4/3 lenses and to add icing building the flex in limited numbers for the collector/user market (aka Leica with now almost anything they produce)
an interchangeable lensed rollei 35{ish} with zeiss designed sonnar 20 2.8 - the ikon rf even has a rollei sl2000 film chamber release so cosina at least know what rollei idiosyncrasies look and feel like
Even better would be cosina purchasing the rights to use the rollei tm (it will be available at some time) - and building a M4/3 equiv of the rollei 35s with the above features and a new range of rollei hft m4/3 lenses and to add icing building the flex in limited numbers for the collector/user market (aka Leica with now almost anything they produce)
an interchangeable lensed rollei 35{ish} with zeiss designed sonnar 20 2.8 - the ikon rf even has a rollei sl2000 film chamber release so cosina at least know what rollei idiosyncrasies look and feel like
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I think Roger has the idea, here. A FF Zeiss Ikon would cost about what an M9 does. No magic there.
Fujitsu
Well-known
No, it would cost about 50% of the Leica. Same with lenses and analog bodies.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
bene
Established
If you save the manufaturing process of M9 you realise it is very labor intensive and a lot of checking by people not machines....
SHouldby 30% but I don't be able to get it cheaper think its worthwhile for Zeiss to go there. I feel ziess is just making royalties off their name since cosina is the one making the stuff.
I think it is more hopeful to see a Cosina DRF...
ZeissFan
Veteran
I think the price of such a camera is going to be closer to $4,000. I would expect it to be less costly than the M9, but only by a little.
I don't think the $2,500 price tag is realistic. But we'll have to wait and see what shakes out.
I don't think the $2,500 price tag is realistic. But we'll have to wait and see what shakes out.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The Leica is also made in tiny quantities, and I really doubt that there is a gigantic market for anyone else's DRF, despite the fantasies of some on RFF. In other words: high R+D costs spread across a small number of cameras = high prices.
The Voigtländers were basically cheap fun in an affluent society, and were based on an existing SLR chassis. ZIs cost quite a lot more, but don't require any sensor R&D. ZI digi would (I think, and I might be wrong) appeal to so few people at the prices they had to charge that it is not worth considering.
Note the words 'I might be wrong'. I've been wrong before, and no doubt will be again. But I've also been around the business a long time, and know some of the people involved, so I suspect that my chances of beng wrong are slightly less than some people's.
Cheers,
R.
Pavel+
Established
I'd like them to enter the market eventually but I think that Roger is correct that the price could be more than people are dreaming of. The mechanical aspect as the difference between Zeiss and Leica film bodies would be minimal and if the sensor in such low volumes (compare to Nikon and such) is a great part of the cost then the Zeiss could be priced - the same (gasp!)
But that would be ok by me (if I could come up with the bucks - I'd buy either one, but likely the Zeiss for the viewfinder) I'd love to have a second Rangefinder in Digital because it may show the public that rangefinders are doing fine in this SLR world and perhaps float the boats of all.
A more realistic likelihood would be that sales of Leica might go down, and then nobody wins. Zeiss, I am sure is doing just fine selling lenses to those who buy film or digital and so the more Leica sells the M9 the more Zeiss makes safe money.
I think the best of all worlds would be that Zeiss puts itself into the same role as they have with their film offerings. How can they do that? The only way that I can see is to wait 2 to 3 years until there is an M10 and then take a generation old technology so that it makes sense and is possible to price it at 60 to 70 percent of the cost of a new Leica. I think this would serve both companies as well as us best. Will they? Perhaps that is predicated on how well the M9's do? I don't know ... but I hope with patience we may yet have a version of what we all want - a healthy, diverse RF market.
But that would be ok by me (if I could come up with the bucks - I'd buy either one, but likely the Zeiss for the viewfinder) I'd love to have a second Rangefinder in Digital because it may show the public that rangefinders are doing fine in this SLR world and perhaps float the boats of all.
A more realistic likelihood would be that sales of Leica might go down, and then nobody wins. Zeiss, I am sure is doing just fine selling lenses to those who buy film or digital and so the more Leica sells the M9 the more Zeiss makes safe money.
I think the best of all worlds would be that Zeiss puts itself into the same role as they have with their film offerings. How can they do that? The only way that I can see is to wait 2 to 3 years until there is an M10 and then take a generation old technology so that it makes sense and is possible to price it at 60 to 70 percent of the cost of a new Leica. I think this would serve both companies as well as us best. Will they? Perhaps that is predicated on how well the M9's do? I don't know ... but I hope with patience we may yet have a version of what we all want - a healthy, diverse RF market.
Quercus
Quercus
- Local time
- 12:13 PM
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2005
- Messages
- 72
Whilst I would love to see a zeiss badged M-Drf that I could afford - I am doubtful one will be available at any time soon if ever. Roger is right when he talks about the R+D costs involved that is how zeiss has kept within the foto industry for the last 40 years almost, by concentrating R+D money on glass and leaving body R+D to license holders with CZ input obviously.
Cosina possibly are not placed to develop a Drf at present - in the future who knows - but the entire Voigt line up are realistically tinkerings with a Cosina CS -1/CT-1 chassis (a camera that first hit the production line in the late 70s) so re tooling to build all the Voigtlanders from the L till today has been minimal. That also sort of includes the ZM which is essentially built on the same tool set.
CZ does obviously have a partner that now have experience building Dslr's in the shape of Sony and a total R+D budget that makes canons look like pocket money. But would Sony sub contract a zeiss body - this would not follow sony's usual business models. Sony don't make minolta or konica badged camera so why would it make zeiss badged ones?
So where would that leave zeiss - basically where it is now which is a lenses contractor for sony and a rights holder in a sub-contract arrangement with cosina.
why would zeiss even want to invest in R+D for a very limited return - leica at least had body manufacturing capability - zeiss would be starting from scratch
Does that mean a zeiss compatible Drf-ish camera will never appear: well no if Sony start to see panasonic in particular doing well with the G1 then a Sony built and badged but zeiss glazed equiv makes more sense
I know the scenario is slightly different but following the demise of F&H and the R+D costs that the Hy6 must have eaten up and CZ close relationship with both - then CZ probably need no more reason not to go down dead end (commercially) R+D. They seem to be doing very well making lenses and glass for others and that way keeping a presence in the high end foto world which for CZ is now more a shop window than a profit and loss statement
Cosina possibly are not placed to develop a Drf at present - in the future who knows - but the entire Voigt line up are realistically tinkerings with a Cosina CS -1/CT-1 chassis (a camera that first hit the production line in the late 70s) so re tooling to build all the Voigtlanders from the L till today has been minimal. That also sort of includes the ZM which is essentially built on the same tool set.
CZ does obviously have a partner that now have experience building Dslr's in the shape of Sony and a total R+D budget that makes canons look like pocket money. But would Sony sub contract a zeiss body - this would not follow sony's usual business models. Sony don't make minolta or konica badged camera so why would it make zeiss badged ones?
So where would that leave zeiss - basically where it is now which is a lenses contractor for sony and a rights holder in a sub-contract arrangement with cosina.
why would zeiss even want to invest in R+D for a very limited return - leica at least had body manufacturing capability - zeiss would be starting from scratch
Does that mean a zeiss compatible Drf-ish camera will never appear: well no if Sony start to see panasonic in particular doing well with the G1 then a Sony built and badged but zeiss glazed equiv makes more sense
I know the scenario is slightly different but following the demise of F&H and the R+D costs that the Hy6 must have eaten up and CZ close relationship with both - then CZ probably need no more reason not to go down dead end (commercially) R+D. They seem to be doing very well making lenses and glass for others and that way keeping a presence in the high end foto world which for CZ is now more a shop window than a profit and loss statement
Last edited:
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I love to see a ZMd, but I am not sure it will need to take the M9 form.
I can afford a D3X anytime. I won't buy because of its bulk and weight.
The Zeiss ZM's range finder is the best in the business. I am sure robustness can be improved. I can even imagine transforming the optical parts into solid-state with frame lines projected electronically...much like Zeiss photogrammetric stereo plotters 20 years ago, with no adjustment necessary.
However, the future might be preempted by EVIL. I have high confidence that the next generation EVF will have texture finer than ground glass. I have already accepted the EVF in the GH-1...purportedly also matched by an Epson chip used in the EP-2. Having an eye-level and waist-level finder built-in is an joyous idea. An EVF can find the range, manually or automatic...and present the exact view as the camera senor sees, before the fact, even for zoom's.
The M-mount is useful only because of lenses already available...so long as the illumination issue in FF can be tamed. My bet is on extra bit-depths soon become common place...affording wastage of a couple of bits to equalize vignetting, leaving the long accepted 12-bit imagery budget undisturbed. [This is already standard practice within large format digital aerial cameras, where the Zeiss DMC is a major player]
Copal shutters has been tried-and-true for decades. I am not hung up on the Leica silence, we live in a world of much ambient noise. Next-generation all electronic totally silent shutter is just around the corner...Rollei already uses one on their AIC models.
Imagine using 32Gb memory cards, matched by lithium-polymer battery with capacity already exceeding 4000+ exposures...
What remains is the form factor of approximately 3" x 5.5" x 1.5" camera body, housing the components still remain.
I can afford a D3X anytime. I won't buy because of its bulk and weight.
The Zeiss ZM's range finder is the best in the business. I am sure robustness can be improved. I can even imagine transforming the optical parts into solid-state with frame lines projected electronically...much like Zeiss photogrammetric stereo plotters 20 years ago, with no adjustment necessary.
However, the future might be preempted by EVIL. I have high confidence that the next generation EVF will have texture finer than ground glass. I have already accepted the EVF in the GH-1...purportedly also matched by an Epson chip used in the EP-2. Having an eye-level and waist-level finder built-in is an joyous idea. An EVF can find the range, manually or automatic...and present the exact view as the camera senor sees, before the fact, even for zoom's.
The M-mount is useful only because of lenses already available...so long as the illumination issue in FF can be tamed. My bet is on extra bit-depths soon become common place...affording wastage of a couple of bits to equalize vignetting, leaving the long accepted 12-bit imagery budget undisturbed. [This is already standard practice within large format digital aerial cameras, where the Zeiss DMC is a major player]
Copal shutters has been tried-and-true for decades. I am not hung up on the Leica silence, we live in a world of much ambient noise. Next-generation all electronic totally silent shutter is just around the corner...Rollei already uses one on their AIC models.
Imagine using 32Gb memory cards, matched by lithium-polymer battery with capacity already exceeding 4000+ exposures...
What remains is the form factor of approximately 3" x 5.5" x 1.5" camera body, housing the components still remain.
Similar threads
