$6999 for the M9, what about M8 and M8.2 prices?

[dougi]

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]

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]

heck, the m8 is still the second best digital RF in the world.

It is also the second worst 😉

(some even say the worst...)

 

[Arvay]

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

 

[Pickett Wilson]

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]

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]

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]

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?

 

[Pickett Wilson]

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]

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.

 

[splitimageview]

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.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

So you think the situation with film with continue for the long term as it is now? I dunno.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

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]

do you feel similalarly to what the statement says?

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.

 

[dcsang]

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.

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]

Raid, what company are you going to demand mechanical RF's from?

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]

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.

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]

I meant to say "non-digital" and not "mechanical". As long as people want to use film cameras, there is room for another camera.

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?

 

[raid]

We decide what is in retreat and what is not.

 

[elmer3.5]

Back

Back

Isn`t it time for an M digital back ? I guess it should be a great business! It`s not an original nor new idea, is it?

Bye