If someone else made a FF digital RF?

If someone else made a FF digital RF?

  • Yes, as well as an M9

    Votes: 16 2.8%

  • Yes, instead of an M9

    Votes: 201 35.3%

  • Maybe, depends on the body

    Votes: 248 43.5%

  • Probably not, but possibly

    Votes: 44 7.7%

  • No

    Votes: 45 7.9%

  • Other

    Votes: 16 2.8%
  • Total voters
    570
Adanac, you made some brilliant points in your last two posts, and others have too. The fact is the last time anyone tried to compete and actually outdo Leica was Epson and the RD1. And they lost so much money that they dumped it and ran for the hills.
A FF rangefinder at half the cost of the m9? When pigs fly 🙂
 
Victoriapio, does launching swine from a catapult[1] count as "pigs flying"? 😀

Somehow I doubt anyone will take up the challenge to produce a digital rangefinder unless Zeiss was willing to get into the game - with a willing partner - to produce a digital Ikon.

Hopefully in this day and age a digital Ikon RF would also have a very functional live-view implementation. Carry that thought on for a moment, a digital Zeiss Ikon RF camera with live view processing power could also easily be made to accommodate an optional EVF -- now that would be a fantastic innovation for rangefinder cameras, making the RF camera for the first time usable across all focal lengths, and for macro and long telephoto use too. With one relatively low cost component. Optional EVFs from the likes of Sony or Ricoh cost about the same as some outboard optical finders for wide angle lenses.

Such a camera would interest me very much. I bet it would be a huge success.

Where can I pre-order it?

[1] No animals were injured in the production of this posting.
 
I see full-frame as being the opposite of the current direction things are going. Manufacturers are building smaller cameras and smaller lenses (read, cheaper due to less materials) to fit the very nice APS-C sized chips... and smaller.

Manual autos have been replaced (in North America anyway) with automatics. Just as AF has supplanted manual focus. And complex and finnicky RF systems, heck even mirrors have been replaced by EVFs.

Leica has even jumped into the small digital market. We should feel very lucky there is ANY digital full-frame RF system around. And Leica entered that to not go the way of Kodak.

Do I wish for a fullframe digital RF system that was around $2000 for the body and took M mount? Yes! But I don't see it happening.

Production costs for a full frame sensor can exceed twenty times the costs of an APS-C sensor. Only about thirty full-frame sensors can be produced on an 8 inches (20 cm) silicon wafer that would fit 112 APS-C sensors, and there is a significant reduction in yield due to the large area for contaminants per component. Additionally, the full frame sensor requires three separate exposures during the photolithography stage, which requires separate masks and quality control steps. The APS-H size was selected since it is the largest that can be imaged with a single mask to help control production costs and manage yields.
Click to expand...
SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format

The info is a bit old, but I still think it is relevant. Smaller is still cheaper and that's what is needed to get more cameras built at an econoimically viable rate, not only for the maker, but the buyer.
 
segedi said:
I see full-frame as being the opposite of the current direction things are going. Manufacturers are building smaller cameras and smaller lenses (read, cheaper due to less materials) to fit the very nice APS-C sized chips... and smaller.
Click to expand...

Actually the price ratio between the state-of-art APS-C sensor and the one of FF size has reduced considerably, almost down to the area ratio. Assuming the D7000 having the same technology (which is not in most regards) like the D800, the price ratio of $1300/$3000 is more realistic indication of the mentioned "area ratio".

AF has become the standard for the new "rangefinder like" cameras, consequently dictating the employment of smaller lenses, smaller circle of illumination, as small as possible outer lens diameters to involve USM or micromotors but to not intrude into the optical viewfinder area. Moving a 50/1.4 glass block to illuminate 43mm diameter requires much larger and powerful motors than what a glass block of 35/1.4 lens to illuminate only 30mm diameter does; so would be the current requirements too. (I am not sure but this could be a reason why Fujifilm chose a not-so-fast AF with their new cameras, to keep the lens design and the battery size as compact as possible. Batteries are not developing with the same pace as the sensors.)

With the crop sensors already into the territory of the full frame with ISO 6400, over 13 Ev DR , I frankly wonder which camera maker would plan to introduce a new "rangefinder like" with no AF but FF other than Leica.
 
Bob,

For a while I thought Ricoh was a likely prospect, given its experience with the GXR and M Mount module. Who knows what the impact will be of the Pentax acquisition and realignment of the digital camera unit from Ricoh as part of the larger Pentax organization.
 
Pretty soon Sony will release a full-frame version of the NEX-7, probably within a year of the release of their next generation of FF SLRs. This will be wonderful, because it will be able to use all 35mm glass available at the intended FOV. Focus on MF will be by focus peaking and magnification. A tiny subset of people will complain that it is "not a real rangefinder," yeah, whatever, pony up for an M9 and stop whining already.
 
jsrockit said:
How do you know they lost money?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know this for a fact. But the first batch had problems and many "refurbished" RDs were suddenly available. (sounds like the first batch of M8s huh.) By the time they relabeled it RD1 it was a very good camera (i had one) but no way to easily get repairs or support. I dont know if Epson thought the entire process through. Other manufactureres will not make that mistake. I would love for Ikon to make a digital FFRF but when you consider the support, repairs, contracts with sensor companies, software companies, and all other "infrastructure" you need to Introduce your first digital FFRF, any company better have a ton of cash in the bank. And even with a ton of cash, as you have already pointed out, it may cost more than the M9p.
 
Adanac said:
Victoriapio, does launching swine from a catapult[1] count as "pigs flying"? 😀

Somehow I doubt anyone will take up the challenge to produce a digital le success.

Where can I pre-order it?

[1] No animals were injured in the production of this posting.
Click to expand...


Yes, catapulted swine DO count but only if they have a FF sensor 😉
 
Seeing as how E-mount lenses won't cover full frame, I'm adding this to the NWIH list. The do have A-mount lenses, but SLR != RF even with an RF-like EVF.
 
It appears nobody but Leica will ever make a mechanical digital rangefinder... 🙂 We'll have to make do with EVFs (or if lucky OVF) AF cameras or pay the crazy prices for Leica.
 
Only if it had an M-mount. The ZM seems like a likely candidate for "digitalization"--especially if Zeiss Ikon wants to keep the line going, as film slowly dies out. Wonder why it hasn't happened already....
 
Leica and its hilarious prices are inviting, if not begging for, some competition. Epson/Cosina are, as we speak, discussing revamping the R-D1. $8000 for a b&w camera- if it sells- could open the door to a very expensive Epson!:angel:
 
benlees said:
Leica and its hilarious prices are inviting, if not begging for, some competition. Epson/Cosina are, as we speak, discussing revamping the R-D1. $8000 for a b&w camera- if it sells- could open the door to a very expensive Epson!:angel:
Click to expand...

Any hint of source?
 
benlees said:
Sorry! I was being facetious!😉 Should have made it more obvious. Just meant that with the skyrocketing prices that people may be willing to pay for Leica stuff that more companies would/should be investigating putting something on the market.
Click to expand...

Skyrocketing prices for Leica doesn't mean a super-healthy rangefinder market. It means a luxury brand is doing well.
 
Flattery by imitation like X100 and XPro cameras do indicate a healthy market. These cameras have opened up a new segment of customer base to
Peaking sales on the introduction of these cameras indicate as much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom