kshapero
South Florida Man
We are quite happy with our full frame film rangefinder(s).
We would consider a full frame digital rangefinder if there was one for a lot less then $6995.
Voigtlander, Zeiss are you listening?
We would consider a full frame digital rangefinder if there was one for a lot less then $6995.
Voigtlander, Zeiss are you listening?
Even though I recently bought the M9, I cannot see myself doing it ever again. $7000 is too much. As long as something comes along that isn't a DSLR, has a VF, is small (M9 or smaller) and has a large sensor, I'll be fine. I don't necessarily require a m mount or a mechanical rangefinder. I do prefer to have interchangable lenses though.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
We are quite happy with our full frame film rangefinder(s).
We would consider a full frame digital rangefinder if there was one for a lot less then $6995.
Voigtlander, Zeiss are you listening?
If Voigtländer and Zeiss COULD make one for much less than $6995 (say, $3995 or less) they probably would.
But I don't think they can. Nor do they, and they have more information than I.
Cheers,
R.
back alley
IMAGES
really, another question to stir things up akiva?
first off...there is no full frame film camera...there are/were many DIFFERENT film formats, sized differently, dependent on need and want....therefore we have 35mm, medium format, large format etc.
35mm was a freak of nature, born from the fallen film scraps of cine film.
digital sensors really are not cropped, they are DIFFERENTLY SIZED from the popular 35mm format...but then they are differently sized from medium format also.
they seemed cropped because we insist on using lenses DESIGNED for 35mm...just as they would be differently sized if used on a medium format camera.
if you are truly concerned for our happiness maybe just ask who here is happy...and not connect it to a contentious issue like full frame vs. cropped...
just sayin'...
first off...there is no full frame film camera...there are/were many DIFFERENT film formats, sized differently, dependent on need and want....therefore we have 35mm, medium format, large format etc.
35mm was a freak of nature, born from the fallen film scraps of cine film.
digital sensors really are not cropped, they are DIFFERENTLY SIZED from the popular 35mm format...but then they are differently sized from medium format also.
they seemed cropped because we insist on using lenses DESIGNED for 35mm...just as they would be differently sized if used on a medium format camera.
if you are truly concerned for our happiness maybe just ask who here is happy...and not connect it to a contentious issue like full frame vs. cropped...
just sayin'...
kshapero
South Florida Man
gee, nothing contentious in my post just sitting at the desk on a very rainy day in Florida. "a contentious issue like full frame vs. cropped..."? Hey it is just cameras not war in Iraq. All cameras make me happy.
EthanFrank
Well-known
Put it this way - I would love to see another digital rangefinder on the market, as long as the sensor is of a decent size.
segedi
RFicianado
A bit ironic, but I paid over $5000 for my new M7 a la carte, but the M9 seems to be a bit much! But, I won't have "digital envy" you know when the M10 comes out and it has all the features that I really wanted in the M9?
That said, if the M9 had been $4000, I think I would have bit. But I llike shooting film, scanning can be tedious, but at least I have a full frame, color or B&W 23MP output that serves my needs well. Digital? That's where the Nikon SCS 9000 ED comes in. And it gives my medium format kits digital output as well.
That said, if the M9 had been $4000, I think I would have bit. But I llike shooting film, scanning can be tedious, but at least I have a full frame, color or B&W 23MP output that serves my needs well. Digital? That's where the Nikon SCS 9000 ED comes in. And it gives my medium format kits digital output as well.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Unfortunately, we will probably not see another digital rangefinder from another manufacturer. Can't help from dreaming though.
Look at the new Pentax Q, the NEX, M 4/3. This is the future. This is where manufacturers are and will be making their money.
Look at the new Pentax Q, the NEX, M 4/3. This is the future. This is where manufacturers are and will be making their money.
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Quite. These are the Fords and Toyotas of the camera business. How often does a successful contender come along to take on Aston Martin or Rolls Royce? And in the last 70 years or so, Aston Martin has been in a lot more financial trouble, a lot more often, than Leica.
On the other hand, not all of the future is with Fords and Toyotas.
Cheers,
R.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Good luck with that M7, what a fine rig.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Well you know folks, we might be surprised. Case in point: Didn't Leica make an announcement that at Photokina 2012 they would present a new platform probably closer to the mirrorless cameras we are seeing these days. But I can still dream.
AFenvy
Established
I love my NEX-5, it is my "M9". I just wish it had a viewfinder. I'm sure a tiny camera with a viewfinder is soon to come, so that will be my next purchase. As great as the M9 is, I would rather buy a new Red Scarlet cine camera for less money!
ferider
Veteran
Dear Roger,
if I remember right, you also didn't think Leica could make a FF DRF, a couple of years back
That being said, I might start using digital when Fuji comes out with an X200 (whatever the name, hybrid viewfinder, interchangeable lenses optimized for sensor, whatever format they pick, less than US 1500).
And then I'll buy two. Never will I get a camera for serious application in single copy. That's what really holds me back on the M9: buying two feels excessive.
Roland.
Last edited:
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
We are quite happy with our full frame film rangefinder(s).
We would consider a full frame digital rangefinder if there was one for a lot less then $6995.
Voigtlander, Zeiss are you listening?
Yes, Voigtlander and Zeiss, a LOT less--as in, less than $2.5k USD.
I've been trying to shake my fixation on FF sensors for a while now, and as the IQ of standard digital sensor sizes (e.g., APS-C, MFT) has gotten better and better, shaking it has gotten easier and easier. I'm getting to the point where I'm willing to trade off my want of a FF sensor for the things that really make (RF-type) shooting pleasurable for me: IQ, VF, ergos, manual controls, quick handling, etc. After all, I want to shoot, not sit around wringing my hands over a camera that might never come. Besides, I think we're now in the era where digital cameras have IQ that is 'good enough'. All that remains now is buying into the system that gets you what you want. For me, I want RF-like features and a (frickin'!) viewfinder (hello, X100!).
/
gavinlg
Veteran
I would buy it. Call it a digital ikon for now...
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Dear Roger,
if I remember right, you also didn't think Leica could make a FF DRF, a couple of years back
That being said, I might start using digital when Fuji comes out with an X200 (whatever the name, hybrid viewfinder, interchangeable lenses optimized for sensor, whatever format they pick, less than US 1500).
And then I'll buy two. Never will I get a camera for serious application in single copy. That's what really holds me back on the M9: buying two feels excessive.
Roland.
I think that would be my deam camera. I'm so impressed with the direction Fuji have gone with the X100 and what you describe would really be the ideal solution for a rangefinder devotee who want's the option of digital.
segedi
RFicianado
It is great. The MP is a bit lonely these days...
I don't think Leica even thought is was possible!
For some reason this makes me think of radishes...
If Zeiss made an RD-2 (not to be confused with R2-D2) or Fuji made an X-M, M9 sales would really drop!
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I think this is where the future might be and that you will have to settle for a non rangefinder digital if you want a digital that has similar traits to an M. That is interesting for me also.
Bob
Pablito
coco frío
Just get the Clearviewer. It's like having a viewfinder.
I mocked the NEX when it came out. Changed my tune once I bought one, got used to it, and started using it with M lenses & the Clearviewer. Very useful under certain circumstances and makes beautiful raw files.
Beyond that I gotta say I agree with Joe. This thread is a little like pulling out some old Playboy magazine and going at it again.
As for happiness, in my case at least cameras play no role whatsoever.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
As for the Zeiss factor ... if they're not going to give us a digital Ikon why bother to keep making the current film body? I can't see that they'd be selling many cameras with the current onslaught of better and better digital options!