uhoh7
Veteran
Yeah, who wants utterly obsessed customers who will pay 4k for a prime? Or people are will study a lens for a year and spend another to find one? Who are bored with 5Ds?
You have shot that 24 elmar?
If somebody brought out a Ferrari at 20.000 Euro I would buy it in a flash...
Haven't you heard? There's no "market" for fast cars
Adanac
Well-known
Apparently the GXR does very well in Japan, all modules. Japan also seems to be a hot bed of interest for non-reflex interchangeable lens cameras.
Maybe the Japanese demand in part explains why the M Mount module often is in short supply elsewhere in the world.
Oh and I'd also be interested in a digital Ikon even if it had a crop sensor, but not if a full frame version was known to be coming.
hteasley
Pupil
I post what I believe to be the case. The RF market is a tiny market, and I don't see it getting big enough for a big player like Nikon to seriously care about. Folks like Zeiss and CV care, maybe Sigma could have a go, but really, there's not a lot of upside for Canon or Nikon to pursue this market anymore.
The RF market, to my mind, will be niche forevermore, simply because it is rooted in a mostly manual mode of shooting. At the very least, it is replete with all-manual cameras and lenses, with the only significant automation capability being shutter speed on a handful of cameras.
The mass market that Canon and Nikon pursue demands AF. The RF market is pretty immune to the siren song of AF. Canon and Nikon need to pursue opportunities that make sense at their scale, and RF cameras, I believe, do not offer such an opportunity.
Adanac
Well-known
It's back to the future. Registrations only got longer because viewfinder / focusing schemes for compact cameras decades ago were not up to the task of focusing macro and tele lenses, thus the SLR was born.
Half a dozen decades later new viewfinder/focusing capabilities thanks to electronics are enabling a return to shorter registration cameras.
Sure, it's a happy accident that short back focal lengths mean lenses from longer BFL cameras can be easily adapted, but the decision to design slim cameras isn't accidental and surely the designers were at some level aware that their cameras would be targets for enthusiasts and non native lenses - a good thing.
This all feels like a trend to me, one made possible by advances in EVF technology and in part due to acceptance of rear LCD only "finder" cameras.
Not even that, $649 USD retail at authorized dealers. This pricing makes me hopeful that a full frame module from Ricoh could come in under $2,000. Bet they'd sell out quickly.
I'd be willing to buy such a module or a FX rangefinder-lens friendly compact from anyone, even if it were, M9-like, strictly focused on the needs of photographers and not videographers, especially if removing such features makes it possible to keep costs down. Might be nice to have in body stabilization though.
ajuk
Established
Well Leica did.Question is how big that market is. The huge upfront R&D to produce this "dream" camera will need a much more expansive market than the RFF community. Not to mention most of us just want to put our "M" glass on there anyway
hteasley
Pupil
Leica's the only company that can charge the high prices needed to make a company of its size successful on such a small number of lenses and cameras. No one is going to pay nearly as much for another marque.
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
AFAIC, the combined price of an M9 and its imminent replacement at the end of the year are what is keeping me from getting one. I am looking forward to getting the M10 and hoping in the meanwhile someone other than Leica would come out with a FF DRF or even mirrorless like the GXR in order to spare my bank account that big dent
Zeiss unfortunately seem to have completely ditched the digital ZI project. The most likely alternative will come from Cosina (RF) or Ricoh (FF GXR) or maybe Sony (Nex 9).
Zeiss unfortunately seem to have completely ditched the digital ZI project. The most likely alternative will come from Cosina (RF) or Ricoh (FF GXR) or maybe Sony (Nex 9).
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
If you're into making camera bodies, it doesn't really matter how much your users are willing to spend on lenses by other manufacturers. What does matter is that they tend to have ideosyncratic, divergent ideas what they expect from a camera body, and it's difficult to please them all at once. Together with the comparatively small numbers this makes them a bit of an unrewarding demographic.
Played around with it. It's clearly a very good lens, but it doesn't really fit into how I shoot. On RF I'm mostly shooting film and 21/50 lenses, and the SLR lens is so much more flexible to use that it's really a non-comparison. It's also a LOT bigger and heavier due to the tilt/shift mechanics, however. If one wanted to start pixel peeping and comparing "pure" image paramters, however, I think the Canon is in the same ballpark if not better.
NLewis
Established
What we really need is an NEX-9 with the new 36mp fullframe sensor, for about $2800. It would be compatible with about everything under the sun. Sony will release new FF SLRs this year, and maybe they'll announce something similar at the same time, just as they announced the NEX-7 along with the A-77 and A-65, all of which use the same sensor.
f6andBthere
Well-known
If somebody brought out a Ferrari at 20.000 Euro I would buy it in a flash...
And if that Ferrari had drum rear brakes and points and coil ignition you'd buy it in a flash no doubt ... because then you'd a have a car to match your M9's level of sophistication!
jarski
Veteran
Toyota would do, but there's just the Ferrari available
Godfrey
somewhat colored
And if that Ferrari had drum rear brakes and points and coil ignition you'd buy it in a flash no doubt ... because then you'd a have a car to match your M9's level of sophistication!
The only Ferrari I would like is a 1959 Ferrari 250GT SWB like this one:
Technologically, it makes my Leica M9 appear like a starship. But as a car ... feh, nothing else fit for the street has ever had that kind of soul. ];-)
user237428934
User deletion pending
I'd like to have a Tesla Roadster. Any ideas which corresponding camera fits to this car?
ferider
Veteran
The M9, Tom, obvious to me. Short battery life, too expensive, and by far doesn't handle as well as the classic it is based on (Lotus Elise = M6TTL ?).
user237428934
User deletion pending
ferider said:
LOL. short battery life. Good comparison
Tessar.
Established
I'd buy a full frame NEX7 with high quality evf in the blink of an eye.
ajuk
Established
If somebody brought out a Ferrari at 20.000 Euro I would buy it in a flash...
While I think you're analogy utterly fails, there are sports cars as fast as Ferraris that cost a lot less, and while being well made do not match up to their exceptionally high standards. There is this though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Thema
I don't see the point in spending so much money on a body when its got computerized internals, for the same reason I wouldn't buy a gold plated diamond encrusted swatch, I could still put the latest Leica lens and Ektar into an M3 and get exactly the same result as an M7. Still A Bessa R4A still too expensive for me anyway, but I wouldn't mind forking out for a digital version of that if I had the money.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Not exactly, but point taken. But if one likes a meter, likes extreme precision in exposure and likes an RF body that is as quiet as can be then there isn't much "better" than an M7. It can certainly be more precise than an M3, or an MP.
uhoh7
Veteran
I'd like to have a Tesla Roadster. Any ideas which corresponding camera fits to this car?
CV 75/2.5 + nex-5
I think the sony FF compact EVIL is coming fast, but how much time will they spend tuning the sensor for M wides?