Avotius
Some guy
I hope I am not repeating what someone else here has said but...
All these rumors we keep having about digital rangefinders and such....
Olympus and Panasonic giving us a "classic" rangefinder like shape on the EP1 and GF1 and the amazing sales of those cameras.....
The desire for viewfinders on more compact cameras that go away from the current DSLR Hunchback theme.....
The thread every other week asking when Zeiss is making their DRF.....
Are rangefinders, or rangefinder like cameras with some sort of viewfinder in them really so undesirable as so many people would have us believe? More than one person here will say that we are a small small niche in a wild digital world. Rangefinders, optical viewfinders, etc etc etc, all things of the past.
So why the hell does it come up all the time? Why the hell is there so much excitement by non RF users that a rumor that something might come gets the communities blood running? And not just the English communities, here in China the demand for some sort of digital RF solution that is down to earth is incredible! The Leica RF market here is massive, I never would have guessed until I really got into the forums here, the following of RF cameras is still more than some tiny blip on the map.
Sure RF's dont sell to the entry level DSLR crowd. No soccer mom would get one and a vast majority of camera sales are in that sort of bracket....but lets compare RF andthe market for medium format digital, another tiny niche, and yet look at all the names producing products. PENTAX for goodness sakes finally came through with that 645 digital, and yet there is a smaller and smaller crowd interested in this type of equipment.
Would you say there are more potential medium format digital users out there or RF type users?
When cameras that touch back on the qualities of RF come around people jump all over them, the Panasonic LX3 comes immediately to mind. The original advertisements had them decked out RF style in leather and optical viewfinders.
I think that we may have even underestimated ourselves here. Is there room for AF in rangefinders? Yes, and its already been done for more than a decade in many different forms. Is there room for more people to move into a RF type camera segment? I truthfully think there is an untapped market out there of users who dont know what they want is NOT an DSLR. Even if it an EVIL type with RF styling and a built in EVF, people will want that......as proven with the Leica Digilux 3 which is still selling today even after so so so long on the market not to mention the EP2 and GF1's EVF popularity.
Is there still room for the little RF user guy (or lady) in this big bad market?
Remember how much excitement Yashica made with that little digital that had what looked like a RF viewfinder?
:angel:
All these rumors we keep having about digital rangefinders and such....
Olympus and Panasonic giving us a "classic" rangefinder like shape on the EP1 and GF1 and the amazing sales of those cameras.....
The desire for viewfinders on more compact cameras that go away from the current DSLR Hunchback theme.....
The thread every other week asking when Zeiss is making their DRF.....
Are rangefinders, or rangefinder like cameras with some sort of viewfinder in them really so undesirable as so many people would have us believe? More than one person here will say that we are a small small niche in a wild digital world. Rangefinders, optical viewfinders, etc etc etc, all things of the past.
So why the hell does it come up all the time? Why the hell is there so much excitement by non RF users that a rumor that something might come gets the communities blood running? And not just the English communities, here in China the demand for some sort of digital RF solution that is down to earth is incredible! The Leica RF market here is massive, I never would have guessed until I really got into the forums here, the following of RF cameras is still more than some tiny blip on the map.
Sure RF's dont sell to the entry level DSLR crowd. No soccer mom would get one and a vast majority of camera sales are in that sort of bracket....but lets compare RF andthe market for medium format digital, another tiny niche, and yet look at all the names producing products. PENTAX for goodness sakes finally came through with that 645 digital, and yet there is a smaller and smaller crowd interested in this type of equipment.
Would you say there are more potential medium format digital users out there or RF type users?
When cameras that touch back on the qualities of RF come around people jump all over them, the Panasonic LX3 comes immediately to mind. The original advertisements had them decked out RF style in leather and optical viewfinders.
I think that we may have even underestimated ourselves here. Is there room for AF in rangefinders? Yes, and its already been done for more than a decade in many different forms. Is there room for more people to move into a RF type camera segment? I truthfully think there is an untapped market out there of users who dont know what they want is NOT an DSLR. Even if it an EVIL type with RF styling and a built in EVF, people will want that......as proven with the Leica Digilux 3 which is still selling today even after so so so long on the market not to mention the EP2 and GF1's EVF popularity.
Is there still room for the little RF user guy (or lady) in this big bad market?
Remember how much excitement Yashica made with that little digital that had what looked like a RF viewfinder?
:angel:
Last edited:
Tim Gray
Well-known
Interesting question. I know one of the things that eventually landed me here in RF land was being annoyed at the size of modern SLR cameras and lenses. I think a lot of people feel the same way. RFs offer a solution to that problem, though they introduce other ones. I think if camera companies could offer Canon 5D/Nikon D700 quality in a smaller compact camera (lenses included), people would be really excited. The interest in the micro 4/3rds cameras is probably partially driven by that. The cameras look great, but aren't quite in 5D land.
Avotius
Some guy
I agree 100%, the are not quite 5D quality yet, but then again this is a area that has not had a lot of attention from developers. Imagine how much thought went into making the 5D that good.
And yes, the D700....that tempted me away from Canon, especially with using F mount Zeiss lenses....then I held that D700 body in my hands and have not thought back to buying one. Titanic....
And yes, the D700....that tempted me away from Canon, especially with using F mount Zeiss lenses....then I held that D700 body in my hands and have not thought back to buying one. Titanic....
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I think a lot of folks have a nostalgia for the past that is a part of this. But many find that the "idea" of a rangefinder camera is better than the reality of using one. So they are hot on the idea of an AF digital camera that "looks like" a rangefinder. Then they can pretend they are walking in the shoes of HCB without the squinty finder and messy film.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Where do you hear these rumours except among self-confessed rangefinder addicts?
I think Pickett Wilson is right too.
Cheers,
R.
I think Pickett Wilson is right too.
Cheers,
R.
aizan
Veteran
i agree that the market is driven by nostalgia and mystique, and that it is also driven by a discomfort with optical viewfinders and film, but only on the low end. the high end is occupied by the m9 and gf670, after all. the low end prefers lcds and evfs, unfortunately.
Avotius
Some guy
dpreview forums (not the brightest bunch I admit, but a different sample none the less)
Various "user" sites and forums
Luminous Landscape
The Online Photographer
Xitek forums
Douban BBS
NCS forums
Sina portal forums
etc etc etc......
And yes Picket Wilson has a point, but nostalgia is a very important marketing point, and I hope we have only seen the beginning of products that touch on those points that had been got right so long ago but people seem to have forgot about.
Not to mention that guy who wants to play HCB has to buy a camera to do it....
user237428934
User deletion pending
I visit this forum and a DSLR related forum regularly. The number of people there who have a battery grip because the DSLR alone is too small exceeds the number of people here who choose a rangefinder because of the size. So do people really always want a small camera?
mFT-cameras: do they steal customers from DSLRs (similar quality but smaller) or do they steal customers from compact cameras (same size but better quality)?
If you don't consider mFT then rangefinders are really a small niche market with expensive cameras and lenses. Many people are commenting rangefinders because they just don't unterstand why other people buy such an expensive camera that is "obviously" inferior (because every magazine or internet test say so). I don't think that most people are excited in a positive way.
mFT-cameras: do they steal customers from DSLRs (similar quality but smaller) or do they steal customers from compact cameras (same size but better quality)?
If you don't consider mFT then rangefinders are really a small niche market with expensive cameras and lenses. Many people are commenting rangefinders because they just don't unterstand why other people buy such an expensive camera that is "obviously" inferior (because every magazine or internet test say so). I don't think that most people are excited in a positive way.
parsec1
parsec1
Sorry Roger on this one we must disagree.
Mass marketing hype
The type that drove all the other photographers to use Pentaxes and Nikons at one of the first news agencies I worked for and that thankfully left me as the newbie with an original MP2 discarded in the back of the camera cupboard and which I still have ( Stored in the bank ) is responsible.
SLR makers contine to make ever increasingly complicated 'machinery' without ever considering until very recently the huge weight and bulk they are imposing on the advertising subjugated masses. I know so many amateurs and quite a few pro's that seriously consider what equipment they should leave behind before shooting.
Money in the pockets of the SLR makers from investments made by the public on equipment too bulky or heavy to use and left at home ..
IMHO opinion a marketing driven con.
A classic example after many years being the new 'lightweight' 300/400 mm 2.8 lenses from both Nikon and Canon and the introduction of 'VR'.
Once again I repeat my true experience:- Shooting an assignment at Southend with a couple of my much loved Contax G2s I was approached by two gentlemen with huge SLRsand 28-300mmzooms sticking from their midrifts." Thats a couple of oldies' you got there" one said to me.Barely managing to reply to their brainwashed Ideas they were both taken aback when I explained that they had autofocus,autoexposure,motordrive etc and were by far not as 'old' as they had been brainwashed to think.
I watched one of them heave his camera to his eye zoom in and out a few times and 'parade on'
Laughable.
Best Regards,
Peter
Last edited:
imokruok
Well-known
Rangefinders are so "out" that Engadget posted a Leica M9 review today.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/31/leica-m9-hands-on-or-the-tao-of-leica/
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/31/leica-m9-hands-on-or-the-tao-of-leica/
goamules
Well-known
"Are rangefinders, or rangefinder like cameras with some sort of viewfinder in them really so undesirable as so many people would have us believe? More than one person here will say that we are a small small niche in a wild digital world."
They aren't undesirable to me. But I consider a lot when I get into something. One big factor is if everyone else is doing it, I do something else. It's just a personality thing. But 90% of the world listens to marketers, repeats untested hype, tries to keep up with the Joneses, shops at Best buy....etc.
What attracted me to rangefinders:
They aren't undesirable to me. But I consider a lot when I get into something. One big factor is if everyone else is doing it, I do something else. It's just a personality thing. But 90% of the world listens to marketers, repeats untested hype, tries to keep up with the Joneses, shops at Best buy....etc.
What attracted me to rangefinders:
- Small size
- Mechanical function, no batteries
- Quality workmanship, metal bodies
- Super quality lenses
- Cheap cost (because the masses have moved to DSLR)
- Unique hobby
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Peter,
I don't think we're disagreeing: I suspect that a lot of people really are more in love with the RF idea than with RFs, though as Aizan says, only at the bottom of the market (and even then, some of the lovers fall out of love when it comes to paying for a decent RF camera). As for Avotius's claims, again, I don't think we're disagreeing much: there are almost certainly plenty of self-confessed RF addicts on other forums. I'm delighted to hear, though, that the appeal is greater than I thought.
Cheers,
R.
I don't think we're disagreeing: I suspect that a lot of people really are more in love with the RF idea than with RFs, though as Aizan says, only at the bottom of the market (and even then, some of the lovers fall out of love when it comes to paying for a decent RF camera). As for Avotius's claims, again, I don't think we're disagreeing much: there are almost certainly plenty of self-confessed RF addicts on other forums. I'm delighted to hear, though, that the appeal is greater than I thought.
Cheers,
R.
imokruok
Well-known
Agreed, even with your MF comment.
If I'm out of town, I will take my G2 and my Panasonic point-and-shoot (ZS3). The G2 covers the film and high-quality image side of things, while the Panasonic gives me image stabilization, a huge optical zoom for shots that the G2 can't get near, and 720p video. Only issue is that the G2 is still kind of heavy, and not all that different in overall handling from my film Nikon AF SLR and 50mm lens.
And honestly, if I'm taking pics locally, I like the larger negs of my Mamiya 645, and that's all I might take with me. Plus, the lenses are much cheaper for that than they are for the rangefinder.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
This is true, I use my battery grip for this reason. Its not that my camera is too small so much as it isn't tall enough. My pinky is always slipping off the bottom.
binky
Established
right on.
The P&Ss are easy to use, but don't let you break out of the box. Or they let you, but you would have to memorize the 15 different buttons to get it to turn off the flash and give you a wide aperture. The DSLRs are better with the user inputs but it seems that each iteration becomes a reflection of "more is more" marketing brainwash.
But a nice RF is really an elegant tool that lets you do things simply. Of course there are some with a lot of bells and whistles, but many are elegant in not polluting with convenient features. There's nostalgia and a real need for that.
parsec1
parsec1
Ever used a 'True' wide angle on a rangefinder. Compared with SlR w/a pariculaly DSLRs with a 1.5 or more crop factor they blow them away.
Its a simple matter of basic physics.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Did I say something against RF? Just asking some questions.
And who uses a crop DSLR anyway
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Never had anyone tell me I should have used a 21mm on an RF rather than a 20mm on my FF DSLR when they looked at a photo.
oftheherd
Veteran
Pickett Wilson, I have seen some of your photos. You should use a 21mm on an RF instead of a 20mm on your FF DSLR. (Now you can't say that any more.
)Hey, I like film for what I can get out of it. But digital is eventually going to replace film. In a sense it already has. Consider how many digital camera models come out versus film models of cameras. That is as inevitable as MF replacing LF, and 35mm replacing MF (for the majority of people, especially snapshooters).
But just as LF, MF are hanging on, so will 35mm film users. Many of them will prefer RF. So there will always be a niche market for RF digital as well. But the price will have to come down some for it to hang on as in new models.
Time marches on, and despite how much I dislike that when my ox is gored, I like in for the fact I don't have to have a chamber pot beside my bed on cold nights, nor plan long wagon train or smoke belching locomotive rides to visit relatives or just vacation.
But I hear you Avotius and others. Sometimes progress is painful, expensive, or both.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I've got lots of Leica gear I've acquired over the years, and would love to have a FF dRF to use the lenses on, rather than mess with film (which I'm less and less willing to do). But I'm not going to pay more for one than my 5DII's, and I suspect many other folks who like RF's would say the same.