eleskin
Well-known
Now I own an M8, but I also have a few Voigtlander lenses. My favorite is the 15mm Super Wide Heliar which I bought for my M8 and use a 21mm finder with it. I would love to see a good value digital M mount for this lens and others.
If my memory serves me correctly, Carl Zeiss said they would build a Digital M Mount camera when the technology was available to do so. Well, the M9 has proven the future is here right now, today!
Now one of the advantages to the Voigtlander and Zeiss line is they offer real value considering the savings one would have when buying their products over the Leica brand. The M9 has to be giving some at Zeiss and Voigtlander the need to drinking more coffee late at night in that they are less relevant now than ever in the market place. Some there must be asking the question that they must try to come up with something to compete, or they will just be making lenses and cameras for the Japanese that still have a film fetish, while the rest of the world moves on (I still use film too, but I had to go digital or I too would have become irrelevant in the market place).
Both Zeiss and Cosina have much to gain in a affordable ($2500) digital M Mount. They could market the camera as a much better true value (M9 is $7000, and in 3 years $2000, where a Zeiss or Voigtlander would cost $2500 or so, and after 3 years would still be worth $1,500 or so. They could also make Leica products more affordable due to competition (good ol CAPITALISM), and Leica in the end would be better off in that they would become more a serious camera company rather than one that makes these ridiculous special edition cameras that only the Queen of England can afford.
So here, everybody wins if they at least offer one digital camera.
The question is , just like the Wendys commercial "Where's the Beef?"
If my memory serves me correctly, Carl Zeiss said they would build a Digital M Mount camera when the technology was available to do so. Well, the M9 has proven the future is here right now, today!
Now one of the advantages to the Voigtlander and Zeiss line is they offer real value considering the savings one would have when buying their products over the Leica brand. The M9 has to be giving some at Zeiss and Voigtlander the need to drinking more coffee late at night in that they are less relevant now than ever in the market place. Some there must be asking the question that they must try to come up with something to compete, or they will just be making lenses and cameras for the Japanese that still have a film fetish, while the rest of the world moves on (I still use film too, but I had to go digital or I too would have become irrelevant in the market place).
Both Zeiss and Cosina have much to gain in a affordable ($2500) digital M Mount. They could market the camera as a much better true value (M9 is $7000, and in 3 years $2000, where a Zeiss or Voigtlander would cost $2500 or so, and after 3 years would still be worth $1,500 or so. They could also make Leica products more affordable due to competition (good ol CAPITALISM), and Leica in the end would be better off in that they would become more a serious camera company rather than one that makes these ridiculous special edition cameras that only the Queen of England can afford.
So here, everybody wins if they at least offer one digital camera.
The question is , just like the Wendys commercial "Where's the Beef?"
Paul T.
Veteran
There are three or more long-running threads on this subject, the most recent here:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=78999&page=6
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=78999&page=6
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It's a little hard to say whether the two manufacturers you mentioned will be too miffed if Leica sell a motza of M9's and subsequently take the atitude that they're missing out on revenue. The rangefinder market over all is still very small compared to DSLR's and that's unlikely to change much IMO so even if they can produce a decent M mount digital body for two and a half grand ... it still won't compete with a D700 for price or performance in most people's minds!
It might force Leica to re-think their pricing though ... and that would be a good thing!
It might force Leica to re-think their pricing though ... and that would be a good thing!
eleskin
Well-known
Pros with tired muscles
Pros with tired muscles
I think alot of pros in the field with tired DSLR muscles will relish a choice of Digital M mount cameras.
In the world there are many more amateurs than pros. I am a pro, and I can tell you the M8 has made my body ache alot less in the field.
So my assumption is less muscle pain for the pro is an excellent marketing strategy, although the sales numbers are not as huge as the amateur market!
Pros with tired muscles
I think alot of pros in the field with tired DSLR muscles will relish a choice of Digital M mount cameras.
In the world there are many more amateurs than pros. I am a pro, and I can tell you the M8 has made my body ache alot less in the field.
So my assumption is less muscle pain for the pro is an excellent marketing strategy, although the sales numbers are not as huge as the amateur market!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I agree with that statement ... I think the non pros control the market and I don't think that syndrome is confined to just cameras.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
Maybe Nikon will make a M-mount digital RF with a D700 sensor & microlenses as a prestige product. They DID makes the S3 and SP special editions. I have no idea how expensive that was for them as compared to developing something like a digital RF... but hey, a man can dream. I'm all for competition and lower prices. On the other hand, it could kill Leica.
jedrek
Member
The obvious question is how pervasive is your shooting style among pros? That's one thing that gets passed over time and time again on photography forums: there is no single definition of a "pro". Child, wedding, event, posed wedding, product, nude, fetish, reporters, photoillustrators, landscape, portrait, sport and on and on. For some of these things, a rangefinder is basically useless - that doesn't mean those people aren't pros, it just means their shooting style is different.
At the end of the day, the pro, non-Leica rangefinder shooting pool is extremely small, the $7000 price tag of the M9 takes that into account.
At the end of the day, the pro, non-Leica rangefinder shooting pool is extremely small, the $7000 price tag of the M9 takes that into account.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I shoot with pro digital when a costumer needs it for giving me money.
I shoot with rangefinders because they're the funniest toys to play with best capture: film.
Maybe I am too blind: I understand a digital rangefinder as a monster thing....
Apart, if CV comes into that bad taste field, they'd be condemned to be a third class product, for years or decades, because that very competitive and developed bussiness has lots of cheap dslrs options CV or any other newbie won't beat.
Please don't do it, Mr. K!
Keep with us, remaining the best actual line in the world!
(With respect to all great shooters with the M8 and others)
I shoot with rangefinders because they're the funniest toys to play with best capture: film.
Maybe I am too blind: I understand a digital rangefinder as a monster thing....
Apart, if CV comes into that bad taste field, they'd be condemned to be a third class product, for years or decades, because that very competitive and developed bussiness has lots of cheap dslrs options CV or any other newbie won't beat.
Please don't do it, Mr. K!
Keep with us, remaining the best actual line in the world!
(With respect to all great shooters with the M8 and others)
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I don't think your memory does serve you correctly.
Who said this, and when?
Even if they were to make one, for a small share of a very small market, where are they going to get the sensor?
And $2500 is pure fantasy.
Tashi delek,
R.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Sorry Roger but Zeiss did state that but I believe their exact words were, "They wouldnt make a digital Ikon until technology permitted "full frame" sensors to be used in the confines of a rangefinder." What Eleskin was saying is that full frame technology for rangefinders is now available ie the M9.
tritiated
Well-known
Hate it to the point of cringing when people misuse the word fetish.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Who said it, and when? I'm not calling you a liar: it's just that my memory is different, and there is no person called 'Zeiss', so it has to be someone in the organization.
Also, there is a big difference between "Will not make until" and "will make when" .
Cheers,
R.