I'm dreaming of an affordable digital rangefinder

[italocam]

Being a Leica M user it's not that I don't like digital photography it's that I refuse to spend over $4000.00 for something that will be obsolete the minute I buy it, just look at all the M8 problems. Don't you think it would be great if Voigtlander would manufacter an affordable digital rangefinder with a Leica mount? Since they already produce digitals it would be right up their alley.I wrote to them asking if they had plans to do so and they politley answerd no.Italo C.

 

[Finder]

I did not know the M8 was obsolete? Doesn't still take pictures? Aren't the pictures just as good as when it was released?

 

[charjohncarter]

I wish I could get one, too. Maybe one that used, by some reasonable technology, Leica thread mount and M mount. Don't get too fancy, strip it down to the essentials. 'In other words', as Macaber (sp?) would say, not for the masses, but for the photographers. Who needs a LCD, who needs Photoshop on board, just give me RAW. I'll do the rest. Just the features that are on an M7.

 

[Keith]

I think defining the word affordable here is important ... I would never buy one of those 'poverty pack' small cars that come out of Asia. I have nothing against them but it would not be my choice to be sitting in one when I get T-boned at an intersection by some deranged SUV driver.

The M8 is a quality piece of gear and is priced accordingly ... as for it being obsolete ... that's years away! 🙂

 

[Ken Ford]

I still think Huw Finney was on to something with his digital M2. My ultimate digital RF: a full-frame digital MP3 body with a manual wind cloth shutter. Nice, simple, quiet.

 

[grduprey]

The only problem my M8 has is I don't have more time to shoot with it. Zero problems after 8 months. Takes a lickin, keeps on tickin. Its only obsolete if you can't get images out of it of the same quality as when new.
Gene

 

[emraphoto]

i certainly don't want to come off as confrontational however i don't really get these "for want of" digital rangefinder threads? rangefinder camera's are inherently expensive. the zeiss ikon was a $1000 plus FILM? camera in a digital age!!! i mean really... i think we might be doing ourselves as rf fans with all this internet talk of "cheap" rangefinders... "stripped down and affordable" rangefinders... i wouldn't spend $5000 on a leica m8! if i was a manufacturer i'd be scared. i cannot field a decent camera for under $3000??? these guy's aren't gonna buy??? no jpeg? raw only???? are these guys for real??? no lcd???
the camera we all want here would be corporate suicide for the manufacturer. it's gonna come. it's gonna have an lcd. it's gonna shoot raw and jpeg. it's going to have on board filters, sharpening etc. AND it's gonna cost a few bucks.
as for me... the m8 is MOST certainly worth the $, i scoff at the "obsolete after two months" buisiness and fully intend to buy one.

 

[Avotius]

seems like we have someone every week starting one of these threads, and every week someone replies "the owner of cosina is not interested in a digital rangefinder right now"

 

[nrb]

Both RD1 and the digital M are much too expensive, several times the cost of a digital Rebel but not several times better.

 

[bessasebastian]

The M8 is no alternative to a classic 35mm film camera anyway.

Since digital cameras are much like computers its true - what is hot today will be forgotten tomorrow. Might be that in about five years time used M8s will sell for less than used M6 bodies. (In fact, five year old digital SLR flagship cameras can be had cheaper than new amateur level digital cameras today!)

 

[NickTrop]

I just don't get the lust over digital rangefinders. Half the advantage of using film cameras is freedom from batteries, PC's, software, media storage, etc... and the fun of developing your own negatives and the traditional film/print "look". I think rangefinder users are "rebels" in a sense, who forgo the "wonders"(?) of digital technology for the experience of shooting film and the tactile feel of a mechanical camera, who like small compact cameras with prime lenses and the look and feel of traditional prints, and "old school" photography, and candid photography. Rangefinder and digital are two things to me that seem incommensurable, diametrically opposed, opposite ends of the spectrum, even incompatible.

Given the cost of all digital rangefinders - I just don't get it. I simply don't see what they have to offer - for the cost differential that's literally thousands of dollars over a friggin' $30 Fed 2 with a Jupiter 8!

Don't misconscrue - I'm not trying to diss anyone with this post. But I genuinely just don't get it. But to my way of thinking it's like saying, "I really like the experience of horseback riding, can't wait to get me one of those two-wheeled automated Harley horses.." ???

 

[JNewell]

Both RD1 and the digital M are much too expensive, several times the cost of a digital Rebel but not several times better.

Consider the sales volume of the Rebel versus an M8 or an R-D1. There are other factors at work, but that alone guarantees you're never, ever going to see a digital RF selling for D40 prices.

 

[BrianPhotog]

aren't there a dozen threads like this already here?

next time do a search

lead paint? brain damage? who cares. it's cheaper.

 

[loslosbaby]

What's really funny is when you adjust for cost-of-living, 4000$ isn't that much money. I have 3100$ for a Canon FD lens in 1983 when I was 17, after completing (if memory serves) three car-deal-flips, selling some guns and working for four months for that purpose...a 2nd job.

Its all relative.

I would get an M8 in a heartbeat (or two) if I was "in production" with my photography, which at this point I'm not. My R3 has awakened my senses, the 21 is the 1st decent wide I've ever had and the 2nd wide of any quality I've ever had!

My old film skills have clicked into play, and I am doing the happy dance.

G.

 

[nrb]

Consider the sales volume of the Rebel versus an M8 or an R-D1. There are other factors at work, but that alone guarantees you're never, ever going to see a digital RF selling for D40 prices.

What a pity that logic is not linear, sometimes...
:bang:

 

[RichC]

... digital rangefinders ... I genuinely just don't get it.

Take me: took up photography 4 years ago, and bought a Canon 10D.

I've never used film, and don't want to (not dissing film - I'm just not interested in it, personally). Hence, a digital rangefinder is perfect for me as I wanted a simple, straightforward tool without bells and whistles.

 

[alternatve]

Rangefinders have always been film to me.

If I had the money to get a Digital Rangefinder, I would get a Canon or Nikon DSLR AND get a film Rangefinder.

 

[danwilly]

I just don't get the lust over digital rangefinders. Half the advantage of using film cameras is freedom from batteries, PC's, software, media storage, etc... and the fun of developing your own negatives and the traditional film/print "look". I think rangefinder users are "rebels" in a sense, who forgo the "wonders"(?) of digital technology for the experience of shooting film and the tactile feel of a mechanical camera, who like small compact cameras with prime lenses and the look and feel of traditional prints, and "old school" photography, and candid photography. Rangefinder and digital are two things to me that seem incommensurable, diametrically opposed, opposite ends of the spectrum, even incompatible.

Given the cost of all digital rangefinders - I just don't get it. I simply don't see what they have to offer - for the cost differential that's literally thousands of dollars over a friggin' $30 Fed 2 with a Jupiter 8!

Don't misconscrue - I'm not trying to diss anyone with this post. But I genuinely just don't get it. But to my way of thinking it's like saying, "I really like the experience of horseback riding, can't wait to get me one of those two-wheeled automated Harley horses.." ???

I wish I had said that. You speak for me as well.
dan

 

[jky]

I have a digital RF.... it's just that the CCD is stuck in the Coolscan V 😉

 

[kb244]

I have a digital RF.... it's just that the CCD is stuck in the Coolscan V 😉

Don't you mean coolpix *grins*