Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I just want to correct some of the mis-information floating around about Cosina manufacturing in japan.
It is not a small operation, about 1000 employees, manufacturing cutting edge optics for surveillance cameras, digital projection systems for both theatre's and home projection units. They also manufacture specialized optical components like mirror prisms, beam splitters - as well as having their own glass manufacturing facility. Make no mistake - they know optics.
The photographic department is small, basically a group of designers, engineers and optical "guru's" who are bright, enthusiastic and willing to push the envelope in design. They are to put it mildly - bloody amazing! Think 12mm f5.6, 35f12, 50 Heliar 3.5, Heliar 75f1.8 - and lets not forget the 50mm f1.1 - a Noctilux for around $1000 - the list is long and all of this in less than 16 years.
I am fortunate to have become friends with Kobayashi san and the design group and my favourite day of the year is spent in the board room at Cosina "brain storming" new products or modifying existing designs.
Of course, digital cameras are discussed and tried, but Kobayashi san's philosophy is that lenses will last a long time - but digital cameras have a lifespan counted in month. The development cost is high - and the limitation is still in the sensors, only a handful manufacturers for those - which means that you are constrained to what the sensor can do - not what you want it to do.
Yes, Zeiss moved their production to Japan and Cosina, which also means that they trust the quality of the end-product. They mostly provide the design parameters and Cosina refines them - often improves upon them. In my book, if Zeiss thinks that Cosina can do a better job than they can do - that is good enough for me.
yes. Leica makes some spectacular cameras - still! The Monochrome is one and yes the M240 is a good digital rangefinder too. Pricing is nuts of course. Their optics are still among the better ones available - but the competition is getter stiff and will get stiffer as Zeiss and Cosina takes up the gauntlet.
Personally, I have used Leica glass for close to 50 years - but in the last 6 years I have only bought one new Leica lens, the 21f3.4 Elmarit - good lens, but not great compared to what Zeiss and Cosina offers at 1/3 to1/2 of the price. I use my lenses and I am interested in the end result - the price tag does nothing for the performance!
OK, I would love to see a RD1 with a full frame sensor, the optical finder from the Zeiss ZM and 18-20 MP - and a price tag of less than $3000. I am using a Sony A7 now because of it's flexibility of its mount - any thing I have in lenses can be stuck on it. So it is not an autofocus, but I have manually focussing cameras my whole life so no big deal. I think the Sony 7 (and its almost 5 different variations in less than 2 years!) and the Fuji X100 are probably the true "game changer" in the digital camera morass that is out there.
Look from the bright side - 16 years ago us Leica shooters were mostly stuck with recycled designs from Leica, some better than others of course - but really no great innovative lenses. In comes Cosina and Zeiss and the pressure is on - maybe tough on Leica, but good for us users.
It is not a small operation, about 1000 employees, manufacturing cutting edge optics for surveillance cameras, digital projection systems for both theatre's and home projection units. They also manufacture specialized optical components like mirror prisms, beam splitters - as well as having their own glass manufacturing facility. Make no mistake - they know optics.
The photographic department is small, basically a group of designers, engineers and optical "guru's" who are bright, enthusiastic and willing to push the envelope in design. They are to put it mildly - bloody amazing! Think 12mm f5.6, 35f12, 50 Heliar 3.5, Heliar 75f1.8 - and lets not forget the 50mm f1.1 - a Noctilux for around $1000 - the list is long and all of this in less than 16 years.
I am fortunate to have become friends with Kobayashi san and the design group and my favourite day of the year is spent in the board room at Cosina "brain storming" new products or modifying existing designs.
Of course, digital cameras are discussed and tried, but Kobayashi san's philosophy is that lenses will last a long time - but digital cameras have a lifespan counted in month. The development cost is high - and the limitation is still in the sensors, only a handful manufacturers for those - which means that you are constrained to what the sensor can do - not what you want it to do.
Yes, Zeiss moved their production to Japan and Cosina, which also means that they trust the quality of the end-product. They mostly provide the design parameters and Cosina refines them - often improves upon them. In my book, if Zeiss thinks that Cosina can do a better job than they can do - that is good enough for me.
yes. Leica makes some spectacular cameras - still! The Monochrome is one and yes the M240 is a good digital rangefinder too. Pricing is nuts of course. Their optics are still among the better ones available - but the competition is getter stiff and will get stiffer as Zeiss and Cosina takes up the gauntlet.
Personally, I have used Leica glass for close to 50 years - but in the last 6 years I have only bought one new Leica lens, the 21f3.4 Elmarit - good lens, but not great compared to what Zeiss and Cosina offers at 1/3 to1/2 of the price. I use my lenses and I am interested in the end result - the price tag does nothing for the performance!
OK, I would love to see a RD1 with a full frame sensor, the optical finder from the Zeiss ZM and 18-20 MP - and a price tag of less than $3000. I am using a Sony A7 now because of it's flexibility of its mount - any thing I have in lenses can be stuck on it. So it is not an autofocus, but I have manually focussing cameras my whole life so no big deal. I think the Sony 7 (and its almost 5 different variations in less than 2 years!) and the Fuji X100 are probably the true "game changer" in the digital camera morass that is out there.
Look from the bright side - 16 years ago us Leica shooters were mostly stuck with recycled designs from Leica, some better than others of course - but really no great innovative lenses. In comes Cosina and Zeiss and the pressure is on - maybe tough on Leica, but good for us users.
GaryLH
Veteran
Thanks Tom
Nice bit of info there. I don't blame Cosina one bit. The product life cycle of digital camera bodies is just tooo fast. I don't understand how Sony can keep this up.
Gary
Nice bit of info there. I don't blame Cosina one bit. The product life cycle of digital camera bodies is just tooo fast. I don't understand how Sony can keep this up.
Gary
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Thanks so much, Tom!
Aristophanes
Well-known
Because Sony can throw 14,000 people into their Sony Semi operations and make cameras almost as an experimental offshoot.
The economy of scale required not to make a digital camera production line dwarfs any small, boutique manufacturer. Hence the relentless consolidation in the industry. The capital to set up a design and manufacturing facility to customize a large sensor camera dwarfs any 1,000 person entity. You watch the capital flow in this industry and you see it evolve into a few big fish or large corporate umbrella spin-offs (like Fuji or Olympus now).
The entire camera industry is no longer being driven by the optical side; not enough capital.
rbelyell
Well-known
while its true that the digicam lifespan does seem to be months, its also true that there are classics that remain popukar many years after their production run is over. tom named two of them, the rd1 and the original x100. the m8 and 9 fit this category. people still use the fuji s pro. so i think the point for cosina is to make another of these, just an updated rd1. all it needs is a new sensor and the ability to burst shoot just a little. keep the vf, its 1:1 and fabulous. the body feels great. we just need like 16mp and the abikity to take more than 1 picture at a time. no need to throw in the towel, just dont make a disposable product. and an updated rd1 certainly would not be a disposable product.
as an aside, i just sold the expensive, modern, FF and high rez sony rx1 because i prefer the results i get from the lowly 6mp rd1. and i also prefer the results from the original x100, that i sold to buy the rx1 and just repurchased now that i sold the rx1. bottom line, make a great product and it will have devotees.
as an aside, i just sold the expensive, modern, FF and high rez sony rx1 because i prefer the results i get from the lowly 6mp rd1. and i also prefer the results from the original x100, that i sold to buy the rx1 and just repurchased now that i sold the rx1. bottom line, make a great product and it will have devotees.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Very common topic from P.O.T.N. (used to be Canon forum)
Some of us do believe what you should see entire lens to get the full flavor of it. This is why we like to use lens with the format it was originally designated. You know, soft corners and vignetting
Also FoV is just one thing. DoF and perspective is another two, which only few of us dare to consider.
Cheers, Ko.
I wonder why Zeiss outsourced manufacturing to Cosina.
Kwesi
Well-known
Tom and Stephen, the real crux of this thread is , if Kobayashi San had a change of heart would his team be able to achieve the design directive stated in bold letters above?
Last edited:
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Very common topic from P.O.T.N. (used to be Canon forum)
Some of us do believe what you should see entire lens to get the full flavor of it. This is why we like to use lens with the format it was originally designated. You know, soft corners and vignetting
Also FoV is just one thing. DoF and perspective is another two, which only few of us dare to consider.
Cheers, Ko.
perspective is unaffected by cropping the image.
Aristophanes
Well-known
Not full frame. The sensor alone runs just under $400 from Sony and supporting circuitry adds another 50% to that. This is before margin.
And to get that they'd need to source in volume.
For an equivalent sales volume to be viable and profitable they'd need to hit sales figures probably close to what Fuji hits with each of their models (X-Pro is a good example). Problem is, if you scales the price up 100% over say the X-Pro you probably halve your market. That is why FF is so fiendishly expensive and still accounts for ~7% of all large sensor sales worldwide.
Blue sky estimate, to get a project like that off the ground they'd need to capture 1-2% of the existing FF market to leverage the capital and the supply chain credit. Then on a 3-year model viability they'd need to sell ~20,000 units and be working on the next model during that period anticipating another 3-year demand cycle. I doubt there is anywhere near enough demand for that many units at that price factoring in kit costs with the glass. Not for an OVF RF requiring multiple lenses.
Unlike boutique audio equipment or customized gaming PCs built from a supply chain of mostly off-the-shelf parts, camera manufacture has become a capital intensive business requiring volume. This is because of the sensor and its heavy R&D and QC. As an example, look at RED on the video side. They had to go big on volume and product array or not at all.
In the past optical companies were the capital intensive side (well...film was the dominant capital nexus). Glass foundries were highly specialized and lens development an arcane science. Now the optical side is a wing of the electronics arm in a near complete reversal of investment priority. Recycled or tweaked optical formulas are used while the main focus is paying off the fabs and photolith side.
Kwesi
Well-known
Thanks for the explanation/analysis Aristophanes, It goes a long way in understanding Leica's M Premium price/Luxury market positioning and also their need for product diversification.