If someone else made a FF digital RF?

If someone else made a FF digital RF?

  • Yes, as well as an M9

    Votes: 16 2.8%

  • Yes, instead of an M9

    Votes: 201 35.3%

  • Maybe, depends on the body

    Votes: 248 43.5%

  • Probably not, but possibly

    Votes: 44 7.7%

  • No

    Votes: 45 7.9%

  • Other

    Votes: 16 2.8%
  • Total voters
    570
jaapv said:
Flattery by imitation like X100 and XPro cameras do indicate a healthy market. These cameras have opened up a new segment of customer base to
Peaking sales on the introduction of these cameras indicate as much.
Click to expand...

They're not rangefinders. They look retro, which indicates that the market appreciates a little retro design. But they're not rangefinders.
 
hteasley said:
They're not rangefinders. They look retro, which indicates that the market appreciates a little retro design. But they're not rangefinders.
Click to expand...

True, but a rangefinder is just one type of direct view camera. I think many people like the DV experience more than the RF part - I know I do.
 
Sunti said:
Xpro2 will pro'bly be FF. Not a mechanical RF, but a Virtual RF with EVF/OVF with AF.

Give them a year. If there's any comp. that would take the chance and execute it well, it'll be Fuji.
Click to expand...

Fuji has a two year road map for xpro lenses... don't think full frame is coming next year.
 
jsrockit said:
Fuji has a two year road map for xpro lenses... don't think full frame is coming next year.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'd have to agree with this, they're selling far too many X-Pro1s at the moment to worry about releasing a FF version. They're more likely to wait until the cycle comes around before introducing a new product.
 
Ken Ford said:
True, but a rangefinder is just one type of direct view camera. I think many people like the DV experience more than the RF part - I know I do.
Click to expand...

Sure, no problem. But when someone observes, "Leica's apples are selling like gangbusters, clearly there's a market for apples, someone else should try to sell cheaper apples," it's not germane to say, "Yeah, people buying these apple-shaped oranges proves that that market exists." No, it doesn't. It proves there's a market for oranges.
 
Why Leica charges such exorbitant price? Sure the luxury pricing is pretty much a Leica practice, but it's more due to (like people had been repeating for a thousand times) although the market exists, it is so small that it's pretty much limited to the people posting in this thread that are "looking for an (uncompromising yet cheap) alternative".

It's also because since the demand is so small, there's no competition, and there won't be any - why should anyone bother when they can simply make a very junky P&S swivelable and sell it for $800? (google Casio TR100/ Tryx if you don't know what I'm referring to)

The Fujis are the closest we could get..well...

Actually, it simply tires me each time seeing this thread (and its "uncompromising alternatives") shows up on the front page. The head bartender really could create a new forum just for this..
 
Totally agreed. With the whopping 31 million euros profit in the year 2011 after having lost money at least since 2006, no wonder no other company is interested in this sector.

Archlich said:
Why Leica charges such exorbitant price? Sure the luxury pricing is pretty much a Leica practice, but it's more due to (like people had been repeating for a thousand times) although the market exists, it is so small that it's pretty much limited to the people posting in this thread that are "looking for an (uncompromising yet cheap) alternative".

It's also because since the demand is so small, there's no competition, and there won't be any - why should anyone bother when they can simply make a very junky P&S swivelable and sell it for $800? (google Casio TR100/ Tryx if you don't know what I'm referring to)

The Fujis are the closest we could get..well...

Actually, it simply tires me each time seeing this thread (and its "uncompromising alternatives") shows up on the front page. The head bartender really could create a new forum just for this..
Click to expand...
 
hteasley said:
Sure, no problem. But when someone observes, "Leica's apples are selling like gangbusters, clearly there's a market for apples, someone else should try to sell cheaper apples," it's not germane to say, "Yeah, people buying these apple-shaped oranges proves that that market exists." No, it doesn't. It proves there's a market for oranges.
Click to expand...

Only if you're method-centric instead of experience-centric. To me the actual method used to focus is far lower in importance than the direct view aspect.
 
Ken Ford said:
Only if you're method-centric instead of experience-centric. To me the actual method used to focus is far lower in importance than the direct view aspect.
Click to expand...

That's cool, too, but really, I think the type of camera is important for this discussion. Leica is selling a very particular kind of camera with the M system, and the amount of competition in the space (manual-focus, manual-aperture rangefinder cameras) is ridiculously low, and absent when it comes to digital. The Fuji cameras have much more in common with the NEX and MFT cameras out there, and only share a body style with Leica.

For all the comments about how Leicas are now purely fashion items for the wealthy, it seems to me that it's actually Fuji that is trading on style. Their cameras are thoroughly modern mirrorless designs, made to look retro-cool. There's nothing the least bit necessary about their retro design, given the camera functions.
 
hteasley said:
That's cool, too, but really, I think the type of camera is important for this discussion. Leica is selling a very particular kind of camera with the M system, and the amount of competition in the space (manual-focus, manual-aperture rangefinder cameras) is ridiculously low, and absent when it comes to digital.
Click to expand...

To be honest I think the number of people who actually want rangefinders as in "cameras with rangefinder focusing" is very small, and is dwarfed by the number of people who want rangefinders as in "compact cameras with retro styling, direct view, and classic exposure controls".

Rangefinder focusing is probably pretty irrelevant except to a tiny minority of buyers.
 
rxmd said:
To be honest I think the number of people who actually want rangefinders as in "cameras with rangefinder focusing" is very small, and is dwarfed by the number of people who want rangefinders as in "compact cameras with retro styling, direct view, and classic exposure controls".

Rangefinder focusing is probably pretty irrelevant except to a tiny minority of buyers.
Click to expand...

I agree with you *mostly.* If the Xpro1 had some better manual focus controls -- IE actual MF lenses and not fly-by-wire-- I would be all ears. I like a little bit of a tactile feedback.

I use a Leica camera for the OVF and the ergonomics. Focus tabs are awesome. I could care less that there's an RF inside. In fact, I love the Fuji hybrid ovf/evf way better. I can snap a picture and tell right away if something went awry. It helps a lot!
 
jsrockit said:
Fuji has a two year road map for xpro lenses... don't think full frame is coming next year.
Click to expand...

And I was talking to a camera shop guy today and he was saying that Fuji would have to make a separate lens set/size in order to work with a full frame sensor, and the current fuji lenses for the Xpro1 wouldn't be able to be used on a full frame sensor.
 
rxmd said:
Rangefinder focusing is probably pretty irrelevant except to a tiny minority of buyers.
Click to expand...

Don't think I don't know that, too. Just don't call them rangefinders, is what I say. They are totally legit cameras, can take great pictures, and they're awesome. I love my NEX-7, which I use with a Hawk adapter and my M lenses.

But it's not a rangefinder. It solves picture-taking problems in a different way. When the title of the thread is "If someone else made a FF digital RF?" then that means a particular thing. If anyone should not be so sloppy about camera terminology as to call something a "rangefinder" when it is "not a rangefinder", it's a bunch of camera enthusiasts on rangefinderforum.com.
 
hteasley said:
:
:
For all the comments about how Leicas are now purely fashion items for the wealthy, it seems to me that it's actually Fuji that is trading on style. Their cameras are thoroughly modern mirrorless designs, made to look retro-cool. There's nothing the least bit necessary about their retro design, given the camera functions.
Click to expand...

I agree Fuji is also playing with style, helping the X line to sell also (not only) for retro attracted buyers. But still, most of the forms follow only function, as they did many years ago. And were forgotten by a playstation interface approach of many manufacturers:
- Starting from the OVF, which looks like a - well - any optical tunnel VF (is this fact already yelling retro?).
- Then the right-eye-optimized corner positioning of the VF. It looks like a ... you know, the expensive one. But: Is this retro because it is in exactly this corner of the camera which is simply the best for a compact VF based camera?
- And the shutter speed and exposition control dials: This is also not retro but one of the best ergonomic positions agreed since decades on various 35mm film cameras of any kind.
- I could add the flash socket (also exactly in this position for most cameras)
- The threaded shutter release: It is not retro only because many camera manufacturers forgot this feature in the last 15 years.

What remains on retro styling only for the fancy look? I would rather say: Form follows function. Every VF centered mid sized camera (RF or not) will look similar to the classic ones. Like all the (D)SLR: They look very similar because they share the same optical approach.
 
Lss said:
To want is to feel a need.
Click to expand...

I'd say to want is to feel a desire. But of course everybody is free to decide whether they need or want or just would like to have or can't live without something. Doesn't make the minority who need (want, desire, can't live without, ...) rangefinder focusing any bigger though.
 
dct said:
I agree Fuji is also playing with style, helping the X line to sell also (not only) for retro attracted buyers. But still, most of the forms follow only function, as they did many years ago.
Click to expand...

Some of it. But they could have made the X100 look like a G690 instead of an M.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom