dougi
Established
You're lucky in the US. ONLY $7000. $11995 here in Oz. 'New' M8s up to $5800 and M8.2s around $9000 still. We always get ripped off for camera gear here! Going by that, the X1 would end up $3400 here, which I don't think they could justify. I'll be interested in the eventual X1 sale price here.
dng88
Dennis
Programming Dbase on cp/m running under z80 card adapter in an apple ][. Like these m9 GAS now, at that time always think about trying s100 bus computer due to one column in Byte.
efkbl
Established
Arvay
Obscurant
The world definitely goes mad...
7 k for an ordinary (non exclusive) digital camera without lens...
And that's we who establish the price.
Ourselves for ourselves
7 k for an ordinary (non exclusive) digital camera without lens...
And that's we who establish the price.
Ourselves for ourselves
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
RFF is an interesting forum. Populated by lots of folks that can drop $7,000 at the drop of a hat. And consider it quite a deal! 
Roger Hicks
Veteran
RFF is an interesting forum. Populated by lots of folks that can drop $7,000 at the drop of a hat. And consider it quite a deal!
And even more for whom it's a hell of a stretch, not lightly embarked upon, but still considered worth it.
Cheers,
R.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
RFF is an interesting forum. Populated by lots of folks that can drop $7,000 at the drop of a hat. And consider it quite a deal!
hehe... but they'll complain about Paypal fees
Dave
raid
Dad Photographer
A statement to think about:
"We should stick together as a RF group, and we need to insist on new and better non-digital RF cameras. It is dangerous to just sit back and allow digital gizmos take over the RF arena. I know, some people here [a small minority out of the 20,000 membership] wants a digital RF camera, but it is not what the majority of RF users want."
I forgot who said it.
Do you feel otherwise or do you feel similalarly to what the statement says?
"We should stick together as a RF group, and we need to insist on new and better non-digital RF cameras. It is dangerous to just sit back and allow digital gizmos take over the RF arena. I know, some people here [a small minority out of the 20,000 membership] wants a digital RF camera, but it is not what the majority of RF users want."
I forgot who said it.
Do you feel otherwise or do you feel similalarly to what the statement says?
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Raid, I love my film M's. But the reality is that it is only going to get harder to buy and get film processed. It really makes no sense that a camera company would at this point in history produce a new mechanical, film based rangefinder. We can insist until we are blue in the face, but it just doesn't seem reasonable to me to expect it.
raid
Dad Photographer
Pickett,
It is not reasonable to expect a peaceful and prosperous Iraq, but I still do.
Without the will to get what you really want, it will never happen. Do not allow the major companies to lead us into an enforced digital arena.
It is not reasonable to expect a peaceful and prosperous Iraq, but I still do.
Without the will to get what you really want, it will never happen. Do not allow the major companies to lead us into an enforced digital arena.
Manufacturers will build what the market demands. Unfortunately the market isn't demanding mechanical film cameras. Besides, the ones that have already been manufactured work quite well.
It's really not hard to get film processed though. It may not be as convenient as it once was but it's not going to get harder.
It's really not hard to get film processed though. It may not be as convenient as it once was but it's not going to get harder.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
So you think the situation with film with continue for the long term as it is now? I dunno.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Raid, what company are you going to demand mechanical RF's from? Leica makes a couple and I doubt they are going to come out with a new model. Cosina makes several models, but they have about exhausted the possibilities for new models. Nikon and Canon have zero interest or motivation to do R&D in that area.
ethics_gradient
Well-known
No, not all. I'm not particularly attached to the concept of an all-mechanical camera (the idea of buying an R3M over an R3A, sacrificing AE for the possibility that your batteries die and you were too imprudent to lug around a pair of thimble-sized SR-44's just seems ridiculous to me), although I certainly can appreciate the craftsmenship that goes in to one.
Innovation in the digital field likely a far more viable growth strategy for a company today. I don't really see the need to re-invent the wheel with another mechanical RF, there are plenty of old bodies to choose from already, whereas we have what, 3 different models of DRF's now, none of which can be had for less than a thousand dollars? It seems unlikely that mainstream consumers would want to take a step "backwards" to manually focusing again, although perhaps something like a digital Contax-G (with manual-focusable lenses) might have a market.
Last edited:
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Agreed.
I would think, though, Raid (and everyone else who wants to have yet another film camera created) that the same group of people you mentioned in that quote could potentially influence a competitor to create another full frame digital RF camera. One that, while not carrying the Leica dot, would still be able to support the M-mount (much like Cosina/Zeiss/Voigtlander).
I don't expect Canon or Nikon to do this though - if they had seen a big enough need/desire/market for such a camera they would have, one would think, have had it by now. They develop (Canon at least) their own sensor technology - so an aps-c or even full frame digital RF could have been produced by them.
Sony has potential but only as a sensor maker - they have no RF experience.
Ideally - "Mr K" will convince Sony to "borrow" one of their chips and drop it back into some version of the Voigtlander/Zeiss cameras - not just another R-D1 version either - but they need the impetus to do so and that has to come from those 20,000 RF fans out there.
Cheers,
Dave
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Those Lomography people.
They are treading the waters with TLR's (plastic, of course), so in due time, they will come up with a plastic RF dubbed: "The Lecia" in gold, pink, and maroon colors, of course.
raid
Dad Photographer
I meant to say "non-digital" and not "mechanical". As long as people want to use film cameras, there is room for another camera.
functus
Failed Poet
I can't see another entrant into what is a very, very shallow pool. While I don't see film ever disappearing entirely, I suspect that it has been relegated to the same small proportion of the photographic community that vinyl has among audiophiles. We can produce new film cameras all we want (rangefinder or otherwise), but I don't see new product substantially increasing market share for film -- just more companies chasing the same amount of dollars (and competing against 50 years of decent used product already out there).
I would argue that given the limited market for film photography, that we have an embarassment of riches right now. Who would have thought that in an era when film is in retreat, that there would not only be one, but THREE companies producing 35mm film rangefinder bodies and lenses -- at price points that allow just about anybody to try a rangefinder out, and with universal compatibility of lenses? Do we need more?
