darinb
Newbie
Ahhh, your math is slightly off. What you should have said was "divide it by two and add one" since at that point I will enter the market.
I wonder if I'll be the only one?
--Darin
Rumor: Full frame Zeiss Ikon digital rangefinder in development
- Thread starter kshapero
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 75
- Views 10K
Ahhh, your math is slightly off. What you should have said was "divide it by two and add one" since at that point I will enter the market.
I wonder if I'll be the only one?
--Darin
ZeissFan
Veteran
Not even close to the truth. Which of course you would know if you were in the publishing business.
Photoshopping what you want it to look like and then saying it's in the works isn't even close to being ethical.
ZeissFan
Veteran
As others have stated, photography isn't necessary for the survival of Carl Zeiss AG. However, the foundation has remained committed to providing consumers with premium lenses since the early 1900s, right on up through today.
It's always interesting to read the annual report, because you can see how much they commit each year to R&D (not limited to photography).
By the way, I still believe that at some point, we'll see a digital version of the Zeiss Ikon.
It's always interesting to read the annual report, because you can see how much they commit each year to R&D (not limited to photography).
By the way, I still believe that at some point, we'll see a digital version of the Zeiss Ikon.
climbing_vine
Well-known
Sorry. Been there, done that. Don't you read the news? The list of "reputable" "fact-checked" traditional media that have been caught photoshopping front-page pictures, making up quotes, paying sources.... is growing by the day.
Olsen
Well-known
The key to Zeiss's success is in the ownership, I think. All the profit is reinvested in the company. Instead of being 'wasted' on shareholders. It is worth noting that Zeiss is one of the most profitable companies in the photo business. It is obvious that it is far more profitable to make smart and competitive lenses for the M8/9 than making the cameras....
Sonnar Brian
Established
If they implemented deepview technology and put the digital sensor on a moving plate, they could solve the field-curvature and focus-shift issues for Sonnar lenses.
sector99
Member
As a newbie here I see SONY as the driver and not Carl Zeiss. Zeiss wins by doing even more damage in 35mm SLR land. The ZF lenses (MAKROs in particular) are wreaking havoc.
SONY has the EXMOR FF sensor, a vast ocean of money, is already challenging CANON's digital FF throne with the ALPHA Series, is already using Zeiss lenses and probably sees a good chance to undermine Leica's M9 high-end ambitions too.
The entry SONY ALPHA sells at $2000.
A $3000 IKON will be easy but will it be as thin? Have the compact RF look and feel?
Well...there's no Wattage needs for AF or flapping mirror so like the M9 a digital FF IKON will be ALMOST as thin. CMOS consumes up fewer electrons than CCDs so Leica would be at a disadvantage.
Designwise to balance the FF complexities of SLRs, SONY/COSINA/ZEISS could swing far to the basic side...even more so than the M9.
Who are SONY's targets? CANON (Currently FF wounded) to start, to a lesser extent NIKON, then Leica. The EXMOR does look nice in video comparisons. Real low noise. Opens up Live View for critical focusing, thus eliminating "Focus shift" issues.
SONY wants as many vendors using EXMOR as they can get...Tuna boats if the SONY boys could integrate EXMOR into Fish Finders. Remember the EXMOR factory line is equivalent in every respect to a film line at Kodak. It runs 24/7. Somebody will push Zeiss into this and probably already has. Kobayashi San will smile over his Sushi.
The Germans patiently waited for everybody else to play their FF cards.
Ciao
SONY has the EXMOR FF sensor, a vast ocean of money, is already challenging CANON's digital FF throne with the ALPHA Series, is already using Zeiss lenses and probably sees a good chance to undermine Leica's M9 high-end ambitions too.
The entry SONY ALPHA sells at $2000.
A $3000 IKON will be easy but will it be as thin? Have the compact RF look and feel?
Well...there's no Wattage needs for AF or flapping mirror so like the M9 a digital FF IKON will be ALMOST as thin. CMOS consumes up fewer electrons than CCDs so Leica would be at a disadvantage.
Designwise to balance the FF complexities of SLRs, SONY/COSINA/ZEISS could swing far to the basic side...even more so than the M9.
Who are SONY's targets? CANON (Currently FF wounded) to start, to a lesser extent NIKON, then Leica. The EXMOR does look nice in video comparisons. Real low noise. Opens up Live View for critical focusing, thus eliminating "Focus shift" issues.
SONY wants as many vendors using EXMOR as they can get...Tuna boats if the SONY boys could integrate EXMOR into Fish Finders. Remember the EXMOR factory line is equivalent in every respect to a film line at Kodak. It runs 24/7. Somebody will push Zeiss into this and probably already has. Kobayashi San will smile over his Sushi.
The Germans patiently waited for everybody else to play their FF cards.
Ciao
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Brian: Talk to me about the moving plate.
garygraphy
Established
well i'm a newbie around here and i can tell you the dRF market is certainly growing.
photographers who grew up in the digital age and all they know are DSLRs are slowly gravitating towards dRF. perhaps not as their 1st and main body but definitely as a creative choice.
a main stopping point for them in picking up a RF is that it is film in nature and they have grown accustomed to both using digital and the efficient workflow process around digital.
perhaps zeiss/sony recognizes this growing market and feel it is time to produce a new entrant. after all, if cosina/epson has done it before, it is not exactly rocket science to come up with one. again, for this market for 1st time rangefinder users, full frame is not a major consideration.
one thing people tend to overlook is that sony has proven in the past and is still willing to push products at a loss or almost at a loss for market share.
2nd hand M8s can be viewed as both a problem and opportunity. lower prices means lower entry barriers for people wanting to pick up a dRF. but that also means the market for dRF increases quite quickly. if sony/zeiss can have an offering priced perhaps 10-20% premium on top of current 2nd hand M8s, maintain 1.3x FOVCF, and yet able to achieve better noise control, you would see a real market for them.
i agree that sony has to be the main driver for such an effort. zeiss seems to be content as an optics company.
photographers who grew up in the digital age and all they know are DSLRs are slowly gravitating towards dRF. perhaps not as their 1st and main body but definitely as a creative choice.
a main stopping point for them in picking up a RF is that it is film in nature and they have grown accustomed to both using digital and the efficient workflow process around digital.
perhaps zeiss/sony recognizes this growing market and feel it is time to produce a new entrant. after all, if cosina/epson has done it before, it is not exactly rocket science to come up with one. again, for this market for 1st time rangefinder users, full frame is not a major consideration.
one thing people tend to overlook is that sony has proven in the past and is still willing to push products at a loss or almost at a loss for market share.
2nd hand M8s can be viewed as both a problem and opportunity. lower prices means lower entry barriers for people wanting to pick up a dRF. but that also means the market for dRF increases quite quickly. if sony/zeiss can have an offering priced perhaps 10-20% premium on top of current 2nd hand M8s, maintain 1.3x FOVCF, and yet able to achieve better noise control, you would see a real market for them.
i agree that sony has to be the main driver for such an effort. zeiss seems to be content as an optics company.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Moi aussi...
I waited for years for a FF Nikon dSLR. I can wait again for an affordable (in Leica-dollars terms) dRF camera. 🙂
Who's bringing the beer? It's the only missing thing in this thread. 😉
wgerrard
Veteran
What damage is that? Why do you think Zeiss, or anyone else, is in a contest with SLR makers? Profits counts, not imaginary games.
Consider Apple. Apple is making lots of money, thank you, and doesn't seem at all concerned about "doing even more damage" to Microsoft.
Olsen
Well-known
This sounds like a good old daydream.
It is far more difficult to make a digital RF camera than a DSLR since you have to cope with far steeper light angles that hit the sensor. That's why the RD-1 had 1,5 crop factor, the Leica M8 had 1,33 crop factor, - and we have yet to see comparative tests of M9 how that copes with extreme wide angle lenses. Since this is the critical part of the construction. Leica uses a CCD sensor from Kodak that is the most suited sensor for just any DRF camera. Vignetting and colour fringes in the corners are still low compared to any CMOS sensor. My Canon 1Ds III, with one of the best digital camera sensors on the market, vignettes some 3 - 4 aperture stops from senter to corner when used with extreme wide angles. It would be impossible to use it in a DRF. Corners would be all dark. The Sony (& Nikon) sensor is not even that good, and would be up for a lot of expensive modifying to fit into a DRF, - if it is at all possible. i doubt it.
Further: Sony 'have no money'. Despite a wide range of products and services, they are loosing money. To my knowledge, Canon is the only camera producer that will make profit on their camera operation this year. - Even Nikon has warned of a loss.
Zeiss/Cosina/(Epson?) do have an advantage over Leica, though. They are all Japanese companies (Zeiss has a Japanese operation) and can harvest from domestic Japanese government supported product development. This means that the Sony sensor, - or any other Japanese sensor, is available to them to a reasonable price. Leica has no possibility to buy any of these Japanese developed sensors. - That said, I don't think it matters much since all the Japanese sensors of any interest are specially made for DSLR cameras and will not be suited for DRF cameras. - At least not without expensive and risky modification work.
bwcolor
Veteran
Also, mirrorless, compact, large sensor cameras seem to be the new design. If this is true, the role of the small film rangefinder will not be filled by a digital replica, but rather by new designs that leverage new technologies to fill the role of the rangefinder and DSLR. The Ricoh GXR may just be the beginning of such a camera. Competition and market forces will refine the initial concept. How can Zeiss make a profit in such a market? My guess is that they will continue to license their name/lens designs.
MichaelW
Established
When Sony took over the Minolta camera business did they also get the rights to the Hexar RF? I've no idea, but if they did they would have access to some good M mount camera designs that might be useful in making a digital version. Consider this my contribution to the rumour.
Olsen
Well-known
Most likely, Sony has also 'taken over' the Hexar design included in the Minolta deal. (Why did they not continue to use the Minolta brand name is beond me). But they will be faced with the same technical challenges as just anybody trying to make a DRF camera: The steep light angles hitting the sensors which prohibits light hitting the sensor well-bottoms. Thus creating dark corners and color fringes along the edges.
sector99
Member
The damage Zeiss is doing to SLRs is to replace the major's prime lens sales with Zeiss products (ZE, ZF, ZS, etc.). Worse for the majors Zeiss is firmly reestablishing their optical quality dominance and Zeiss is doing it with reasonably-priced products.
Indeed, it's the current Zeiss marketing philosophy that's harming the majors. Buyers want to believe their camera company has the best optical performance and Zeiss is clearly eroding that status.
To be sure, Zeiss isn't playing in the long lens arena and probably never will. Zeiss is taking what the majors has given them: The Digital SLR Prime Lens Market.
Ciao
Indeed, it's the current Zeiss marketing philosophy that's harming the majors. Buyers want to believe their camera company has the best optical performance and Zeiss is clearly eroding that status.
To be sure, Zeiss isn't playing in the long lens arena and probably never will. Zeiss is taking what the majors has given them: The Digital SLR Prime Lens Market.
Ciao
Tim Gray
Well-known
Is Zeiss really doing that much damage to Canon and Nikon lens sales? I can't say that I've ever seen a ZE or ZF lens in person.
For that matter, while the ZM lenses are very nice, I wonder how they are actually doing in terms of sales/profits.
For that matter, while the ZM lenses are very nice, I wonder how they are actually doing in terms of sales/profits.
Olsen
Well-known
Zeiss is 'very' profitable, while I don't know much about Cosina, but, most ,likely, they are profitable too. How many ZM lenses have been sold per the sales of M8 and M9? I would guess between two and four. At least. That means that Zeiss/Cosina have had a nice profit out of the M8/9 sales. Why should they bother making a DRF camera..?
sector99
Member
Not only are the ZF, ZE, ZS and ZK SLR series doing fine, Thomas Polzer, Carl Zeiss CEO came from ASML Optics, Netherlands.
They specialized in Aspherical optics. Thus, we can expect future lens offerings to include Aspheres and perhaps very fast lenses. I can see a 35mm format opening for a very fast (Read very expensive) normal lens.
Ciao
They specialized in Aspherical optics. Thus, we can expect future lens offerings to include Aspheres and perhaps very fast lenses. I can see a 35mm format opening for a very fast (Read very expensive) normal lens.
Ciao
Tim Gray
Well-known
So nobody really knows? I've heard that the ZM lenses are doing fantastic, but I've also read the opposite.
People talk about the Z SLR lenses, but I've never really read much on whether or not they are making a bundle or slow movers. Presumably both lines are doing alright, because they are still making them, and releasing the SLR lenses in different mounts.
I'm not so sure we can expect ASPH designs from Zeiss right now. They clearly have the experience, but it seems to me they have been sticking with more conventional (and excellent) designs, keeping the costs down. Zeiss certainly knows how to make ridiculously good and expensive lenses (cine).
People talk about the Z SLR lenses, but I've never really read much on whether or not they are making a bundle or slow movers. Presumably both lines are doing alright, because they are still making them, and releasing the SLR lenses in different mounts.
I'm not so sure we can expect ASPH designs from Zeiss right now. They clearly have the experience, but it seems to me they have been sticking with more conventional (and excellent) designs, keeping the costs down. Zeiss certainly knows how to make ridiculously good and expensive lenses (cine).
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
