M9 $7,000, Pentax 645D $9,400 and future affordable digital rangefinders.

[noimmunity]

I believe the lone awaited digital offerings from Zeiss and Cosina are in the pipeline and will be seen in late 2011-early 2012.

I've been saying this, too, and I think this is the point. Between Cosina, Fuji, and Zeiss, we can expect an alternative M mount digital platform to appear soon. When the M9 came out I expected these manufacturers would give it a three year grace period, then enter the fray. 2012 sounds about right to me.

And having said that, I'm in the same boat as Cam. I have too much in M glass, and I love rangefinder bodies, so there isn't any choice for me.

I may purchase an X100 as a way to make it easier to sustain the waiting for the next dRF to replace the M8.

 

[Frankie]

For the money I want this...turns this classic camera into a digital workhorse.

Exactly...but the new CFV-50. Buying an older Hasselblad 503 is cheap.

I have a current Bronica ETRS system that would, via an adapter plate take Hasselblad backs. The new CFV-50 is only 12,000 euro.

The Fuji X100 would serve as a fun, take anywhere camera. The 645 system for anything more serious. [The excess Nikon and M-mount stuff would be enough to finance all that.

Sorry Leica, no M and no S2. Photokina 2010 terminated your future in my life.

 

[Frankie]

I bought an M8 to use with my Leica Mount lenses, and bought An Olympus EP2 to use with my collection of lenses. Most of the time, an EP2 has a Nikkor-S 5cm F1.4 in LTM on it. So I picked up another EP2 in a trade.

I will get an M9 to use Leica mount lenses with a full-frame sensor. But for now, the M8 serves quite well. I was never big on Wide-Angle lenses.

By the time you are ready for the one true god [M9], Canikon might just start the FF O'EVIL cult. 😀

 

[sprokitt]

Going back to the original post...
I think the good news in all this is the potential for more, better performing, and more affordable 35 mm full-frame sensors in the mid market.
We can only hope.

 

[bwcolor]

Since we are all over the place...

I would prefer a large sensor camera more like my RF645 vs. my ETRSi. That said, progress with regards to low noise/highISO with smaller sensors may eliminate my interest in medium format digital.

 

[Alnitak]

I know that it's hard for some of you to wrap your minds around, but anyone who's shot with one of the original Hexars can confirm that there's more than one way to design an incredibly effective street camera.

Funny, I never thought of getting an M as getting a "street" camera, whatever that is supposed to mean. To me it was all about getting the smallest camera with the biggest sensor and excellent quality lenses. I personally use it for all kinds of shooting, and "street" is probably the last thing I use it for. But I digress. 😀

 

[Alnitak]

Now on to the original post...I think the OP is way off in speculation-land. While I would love the X100 to herald something in the RF world, the fact is that it simply doesn't. It's not even an RF camera. It's a compact camera with some analogue controls, a fast lens, a relatively large sensor and a nifty viewfinder. It happens to have "retro" styling.

But stop for a second. The Olympus EP-1, EP-2 and EP-L all have "retro" styling, and relatively large sensors. They have a somewhat innovative EVF system. You can get compact fast lenses. The sensor is large, although not as large as the X100.

To me, this is just a continuation of a trend. People--and the camera manufacturers--are coming to realize that pure megapixel wars are no longer the way to win. We are now seeing more and more focus on image quality, and that is leading a turn towards larger-sensor cameras. Not only do we have the whole micro-4/3 ecosystem, we also have the Leica X1, the Sigma DP series, the Sony NEX series, etc. I do think its a matter of time until we see entries in this space from Canon and Nikon, and I believe that Canon is on record as indicating that they will be moving into this space.

I'm not really sure that this will have any real effect on the RF shooters of the world. The average person buying a camera like this will want AF. What this will likely mean to the RF users here is that we will have more options in the small camera with high image quality perspective--but I seriously doubt that we will see many other digital rangefinders.

What this could mean for Leica is that fewer people will turn to them in the future--maybe. I do know that a number of people came to Leica in the M8 and M9 days for the same reason I did--they wanted superb image quality in a small package. As more options for that turn up in other systems/formats, people will have other places to spend their money. There will always be a die-hard core of Leica fans that will buy almost anything Leica makes, but I think we all agree that Leica needs to expand beyond that base, which is likely only going to shrink over time.

What I would love Leica to do is imagine beyond the pure M model, and innovate in the small camera space. They showed a flicker of that with the X1, but I view that as a shot and a miss when compared to a lot of the competition. I think they can still carve out a niche in this space, which is their original DNA (remember, the original Leica was conceived as a compact camera for use while Oskar Barnack was out hiking).

Jeff

 

[bwcolor]

I'm not familiar with many of the modern small digital cameras, but which of these cameras have a large, bright optical viewfinder? Perhaps some do, but I think most are electronic finders. The sensor in the Fuji is more than a little bit larger. I think that many of us are excited about a much larger sensor, with potentially great low light capability, with a hybrid electronic finder in a 'M' sized camera. A different beast than what has gone before and a challenge to other manufacturers.

I think that it will be a game changer, but it may not and you could be right. After all, as you point out, it may not result in a true digital rangefinder in that the demand is rather limited. So true...

 

[Frankie]

The thread is about what future digital is all about...a better M, medium format or what? Bottom line: digital cameras will get better...and more affordable. The road map is unclear...and Leica or even Canikon does not have a leading position.

 

[Alnitak]

I'm not familiar with many of the modern small digital cameras, but which of these cameras have a large, bright optical viewfinder? Perhaps some do, but I think most are electronic finders. The sensor in the Fuji is more than a little bit larger. I think that many of us are excited about a much larger sensor, with potentially great low light capability, with a hybrid electronic finder in a 'M' sized camera. A different beast than what has gone before and a challenge to other manufacturers.

I think that it will be a game changer, but it may not and you could be right. After all, as you point out, it may not result in a true digital rangefinder in that the demand is rather limited. So true...

The VF is innovative on the X100--combo digital and optical--but there are beautiful optical VF's for the m4/3 cameras, the X1, etc. As for sensor size, the X1 and NEX are both APS-C sensors, so nothing new there. That was last year's news.

What will excite me is another compact with a FF (as in, standard 35mm) sensor.

Jeff

 

[semilog]

The VF is innovative on the X100--combo digital and optical--but there are beautiful optical VF's for the m4/3 cameras, the X1, etc.

None of those finders tell you whether you've hit focus. None of them provide even rudimentary exposure information. None of them correct for parallax. All of them are clip-on kludges.

The X-100 and the M8/9 are the only digital cameras that provide this information in an OVF.

That is the difference.

 

[Spyro]

Personally I wouldnt mind an RF with a smaller-than-24X36 sensor, as long as they made a few lenses that are dedicated for this sensor. I never liked using legacy lenses with image circles that are bigger than the sensor they are used on, this is a waste of image circle and therefore a waste of money, size, weight and aperture at wide ranges. The problem is that when they do make new small primes for these mirrorless systems out there, they are always the AF kind with the focusing ring that turns forever and has no distance markings or aperture ring, and all that just to retain AF (as if anyone needs AF on a 14mm lens, but thats another story anyway). Let alone the fact that these cameras dont have a viewfinder. Sorry but I dont call an external EVF a viewfinder, I call it an expensive small television at the end of small tunnel that you have to buy separately, attach to the top of your camera, perpetually worry it doesnt get caught on things and deal with the fact that it half destroyed the nice form factor of your camera - which was the whole point of replacing your DLSR with it in the first place.

So I was basically losing hope that it was ever gonna happen until Fuji came out of nowhere and fixed it all. Hence the excitement.

Now my next hope is that this little Fuji will be a commercial success and other designers will get the message that there are people out there who need and appreciate this combo: VF + dedicated usable MF lenses on a mirrorless camera that doesnt cost the earth. Hopefully.

 

[Spyro]

Come to think of it, if the Fuji's shutter sounds a bit like the X1&DP1 (tick-tick-tick) rather than the m4:3 and NEX cameras (both sound like little sewing machines), I actually couldnt care less what the rest of the camera makers do.

It so happens that 35mm (or thereabouts) is all I ever use 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

The Party Line is that Zeiss has no intention of making a DRF (source: Zeiss photokina). Of course they could be lying with the intention of surprising us all but personally I doubt it. Incidentally, Kobayashi-san wasn't even at photokina and the new WA version of the 667 was only on the Fuji stand, under glass, inaccessible.

The X100 is NOT yet fully functional and the weight of the prototype is NOT the same as the final camera will be (source: Fuji photokina and handling the camera). And of course it's not an RF. It is however far more than a point-and-shoot.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Paul T.]

Zeiss are in danger of missing the boat. They will lose the credibility they've built up with the Ikon, and it will represent a pointless, evolutionary cul-de-sac.

But if Kobayashi-San had a word with his good friends Fuji, with whom he collaborated recently, and licensed their software and electronics, we could surely have a Zeiss-badged, Cosina-made cropped rangefinder, with a range of Zeiss crop lenses, by next Photokina!

 

[Mister E]

For me to get an m-mount RF it has to be a 24X36 sensor. Anything less and I have no interest. I however will be buying the Fuji X100.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Zeiss are in danger of missing the boat. They will lose the credibility they've built up with the Ikon, and it will represent a pointless, evolutionary cul-de-sac.

But if Kobayashi-San had a word with his good friends Fuji, with whom he collaborated recently, and licensed their software and electronics, we could surely have a Zeiss-badged, Cosina-made cropped rangefinder, with a range of Zeiss crop lenses, by next Photokina!

Dear Paul,

They aren't actually interested in catching the boat, so they can't miss it. And I think that they've enough 'credibility' not to worry. Remember: the ZI was not entirely a Zeiss initiative. Nor were (Kyoto Ceramics) Contaxes.

The market for Zeiss interchangeable crop-format lenses would be so tiny that they'd not even consider it, given that everyone would expect them to be cheap. Spend $10,000,000 of your own money and they'll make 'em for you.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jsrockit]

But stop for a second. The Olympus EP-1, EP-2 and EP-L all have "retro" styling, and relatively large sensors. They have a somewhat innovative EVF system. You can get compact fast lenses. The sensor is large, although not as large as the X100.

BUT, the u4/3 stuff all have convoluted menus, no dedicated knobs, no internal viewfinders, etc ... which is why the X100 is so promising.

 

[jsrockit]

The VF is innovative on the X100--combo digital and optical--but there are beautiful optical VF's for the m4/3 cameras, the X1, etc.

Are you seriously comparing the optical viewfinder on the X1 or the E-P1 to that of the Fuji? Come on now...

 

[Sonnar Brian]

BUT, the u4/3 stuff all have convoluted menus, no dedicated knobs, no internal viewfinders, etc ... which is why the X100 is so promising.

The M8 Menu system is far easier to navigate then is the EP2. The EVF of the EP2 is amazing. Menues can be fixed in firmware, or screwed up by firmware. We have not seen the X100 firmware in a released camera. If the Menu system proves popular, expect future firmware to follow its lead.

As far as comparing viewfinders- the X100 "concept viewfinder" is great, but you can't compare it with anything yet as it is not in release.