BobYIL
Well-known
Very interesting... Derive your own conclusions:
Interview with Leica Director Product Manager:
http://the.me/interview-with-stefan...oduct-management-next-target-non-leica-users/
Interview with Fujifilm's president:
http://the.me/interview-with-fujifi...omori-redefining-the-business-of-photography/
Interview with Leica Director Product Manager:
http://the.me/interview-with-stefan...oduct-management-next-target-non-leica-users/
Interview with Fujifilm's president:
http://the.me/interview-with-fujifi...omori-redefining-the-business-of-photography/
loquax ludens
Well-known
My simplistic unnuanced interpretation, just a gross impression, is that Leica is committed to digital and the luxury market, but they do plan to offer some products slightly lower down the rung from their premier products. They won't attempt to compete with Fujifilm, Sony, Canon, etc. They also clearly see no future for film or film cameras. The M7 and MP will be dropped, I would guess, the moment they are no longer profitable.
Fujifilm is highly diversified, much of their expertise in other areas being connected to or derived somehow from their expertise in film. They value their film roots and plan to take advantage of their now premier position in the market, especially for movie film. Even though film is 1% of their revenue, they'll probably remain a player as long as there is demand.
Fujifilm is highly diversified, much of their expertise in other areas being connected to or derived somehow from their expertise in film. They value their film roots and plan to take advantage of their now premier position in the market, especially for movie film. Even though film is 1% of their revenue, they'll probably remain a player as long as there is demand.
denizg7
Well-known
Well ever since the x100 release fuji changed directions.
However the x 1 pro is not what most people make out for it to be. All though it is not a rangefinder and there is a possibility for it to support m lenses, it is a half frame and only beats the m8.
Right now Leica has a lot of money for investments. Until they start to learn from fuji and kodak to make their own digital sensors in a copper main board, they should stick to film.
However the x 1 pro is not what most people make out for it to be. All though it is not a rangefinder and there is a possibility for it to support m lenses, it is a half frame and only beats the m8.
Right now Leica has a lot of money for investments. Until they start to learn from fuji and kodak to make their own digital sensors in a copper main board, they should stick to film.
denizg7; said:
Honestly, calling a modern APS-C a half frame isn't quite fair. It's not the same difference in quality between 35mm film and half frame 35mm. The Fuji X-pro1 is a lot closer to the M9 than you may want to admit. Honestly, the m8 is very close to the m9.
JHutchins
Well-known
It's also not really a half frame -- that might be a reasonable way to describe a micro 4/3 camera (and Olympus with the PEN designation is really encouraging it), but doesn't really fit here unless coupled with a large dose of imprecision.
JHutchins
Well-known
Not wanting to be overly snarky but....
....
...
Kodak?
I think it's at least 20 years since I've heard Kodak held out as a model.
My own guess is that Leica will continue to develop, digitally, as it has -- by looking for adaptations (e.g. offset microlenses) that fit reasonably closely with its areas of actual expertise. And it seems silly to say they should stick to film as it seems they have a lot (at least something) to add along those lines.
paulfish4570
Veteran
fuji interview was very, very interesting. fuji is looking for new niches, new markets, broader markets.
denizg7
Well-known
kodak still devolops sensors. In fact the sensors in the m9s are kodak manufactured.
I just think if leica is going to start a more agressive digital future it should plan on buying a company that makes digital sensors and not use the sensor in the sony nex5 for the x compacts
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
This is a llittle strange IMO:
That's quite a generalisation to make about a new product! ... "everybody says"
It makes me think that the M9M is more about marketing than actual fact!
That's quite a generalisation to make about a new product! ... "everybody says"
It makes me think that the M9M is more about marketing than actual fact!
seakayaker1
Well-known
Kodak sold it Sensor Division: http://www.techradar.com/news/photo...ras/kodak-sells-image-sensor-division-1039458
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Kodak is bankrupt. They no longer make sensors. They sold their sensor division to an investment firm whose main expertise is leveraged buyouts. What was formerly Kodak's sensor division is now called Truesense, a wholly owned subsidiary of Platinum Equity LLC. It's dead, Jim.
That said, Leica will never buy a sensor manufacturer. That's just not realistic. They barely have the money to keep their own R&D going. It would be easier for a sensor manufacturer to buy Leica than vice versa.
Teuthida
Well-known
You managed to pack a lot of misstatements in such brief post.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
The interview leaves no mystery about the Leica business model: it relies primarily (though not exclusively) on the value-added "made in Germany/Europe" appellation in order to sell photographic equipment at a premium. (This is also the obvious reason why Leica would not allow itself to be bought out by Fuji). The primary targets are affluent consumers in expanding markets, as well as aficionados and those for whom sensor size/body size ratio trumps all other considerations.
BobYIL
Well-known
My own conclusions for the future of the mirrorless cameras no matter if we call them RF or OVF or EVIL.. no matter if it would come from Leica, Fuji or Canikon:
- The only way for the sensors: CMOS
(Better Dynamic range, much higher ISO capability, Liveview, Video..)
- Future most popular sensor size: APS-C
(Very high MP, this year 24MP next year who knows; very high ISO, 6400 became standard, enabling more compact body design than FF, reasonable size for AF lenses compared to huge FF-AF lenses of DSLRs, and the most important: IQ became very close to that of the FF.)
- Autofocus is the way to go.
( Lightning fast focusing compared to manual, use any focal length lens, no need for costly rangefinder calibration.)
- Extra features are no-nonsense:
(Either in-lens or in-body image stabilization enabling hand-held shooting down to 1/2 sec., HD video is not a must for PJs only,
microadjustment capability of lens focus calibration, if possible higher frames/sec. OM-D can go up to 9 fps!.)
- The only way for the sensors: CMOS
(Better Dynamic range, much higher ISO capability, Liveview, Video..)
- Future most popular sensor size: APS-C
(Very high MP, this year 24MP next year who knows; very high ISO, 6400 became standard, enabling more compact body design than FF, reasonable size for AF lenses compared to huge FF-AF lenses of DSLRs, and the most important: IQ became very close to that of the FF.)
- Autofocus is the way to go.
( Lightning fast focusing compared to manual, use any focal length lens, no need for costly rangefinder calibration.)
- Extra features are no-nonsense:
(Either in-lens or in-body image stabilization enabling hand-held shooting down to 1/2 sec., HD video is not a must for PJs only,
microadjustment capability of lens focus calibration, if possible higher frames/sec. OM-D can go up to 9 fps!.)
Manuphoto
Member
I totally agree with those conclusions. I have a NEX-7 and I see the need for FF less and less. I use to wait for Nikon to release a small FF DSLR for less than $1500. They might do it at some point, but it won't be a digital FM2 or the like. The Sony actually feels closer to this experience... Even the OM-D with its smaller sensor is incredibly good. My only complaint for M4/3 is that you have less control over DOF. I can live with 1.5x ratio, 2x is a bit too much for me.
IMHO, APS-C will take the place 35mm use to have. Totally. I mean it'll be the documentary/journalistic/hobbyist tool, just like 35mm film used to be, it's already started. Even if some might prefer 35mm film rendering for XY reason, nobody can say that APS-C latest sensors can't match and even surpass film's quality in the best possible conditions. APS-C used to be far behind on some point, especially dynamic range, but it's no longer the case. And, as BobYIL pointed out, it makes a lot of sense financially.
FF will be the new medium format. Used by pros, advanced amateurs, studios and the like. They might go down in prices, but not in size (body and lenses), nowhere near the size of old film SLRs, limiting applications.
Leica is the odd player in this FF game, for sure. But its prices already makes it a niche product, not accessible to the vast majority of amateurs. Hell, even working pros have a hard time justifying the cost in lots of cases! I do think it will survive with its very faithful clientèle, even if it's an odd one: 80% nouveaux riches, 10% young guys with dad's money, and about 10% of real users (pros or not). Those are non-scientific statistics from me selling Leica cameras
Medium format digital cameras and back will remain where they are now: pros only, very pricey, the best quality. Totally useless in other conditions and not even heard of by the vast majority of people.
Teuthida
Well-known
APS-C is much superior to the best 35mm can offer. I'm a film guy, but the obvious is obvious.
20+ mpx FF is the new MF. For that matter, files from my 10 mpx M8 are better than what I get from 6x4.5 MF.
20+ mpx FF is the new MF. For that matter, files from my 10 mpx M8 are better than what I get from 6x4.5 MF.
emayoh
Established
For a moment I was confused and thought that article was an interview with jsrockit. Even though he changed his pic now.
Even though he changed his pic now.Aristophanes
Well-known
The sad common theme in both articles in how irrelevant film as a medium of photography has become, both technically and from a business perspective. They don't even position it as an alternative with cultural or nostalgic interest. It's just costly chemicals and processes or another assembly line adding cost for no growth and negative returns.
Aristophanes
Well-known
You forgot the killer reason why CMOS now dominates: much lower power consumption.
BobYIL
Well-known
Thanks.. Another one is the processing speed and power. All the new generation Fujitsu processor engines are based on CMOS.. I really did not hear if any new processor technology being developed for CCD.