What new Voigtlander RF or SLR product would you like to see?

Roger Hicks said:
Trouble is, you can't go a lot faster -- my 90/2 Summicron definitely stretches the Bessa's base-length too far -- and anything less than f/2 (e.g. f/2.5) doesn't really look that much faster from a marketing viewpoint. Actully, even an f/2.5 might be pushing their luck. There's no much sense in selling a Voigtländer lens that won't work well on Voigtländers.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

f1:2.5 would be fine, I’d risk an f1:2 in a crisis, as I suspect most people would.

Anyway although I understand how triangulation works and how base-length effects accuracy, I can’t actually see that difference through the VF, you see the same thing regardless of base length
 
Slr

Slr

I agree with most of the above on RFs.

The question also referred to SLRs:

The recent Bessaflex was great and I believe Cosina probably still make (or at least designed - to be made in China or?) the same basic body (eg Nikon FM10) as the Bessa RF chassis - now selling at least in Japan under the Kenko name in Nikon, Pentax K and Contax/Yashica mounts.

It would seem to be the time to make a "multi-mount" digital body to take all those great lenses in "patent expired" mounts - Canon FD, Konica, Minolta MD, Olympus, Contax, 42mm - - not all mounts in one body but --

One production line for basic body with the standard Cosina shutter/mirror box/externals with a good quality but "no frills" digital sensor - no autofocus or live view or high speed or huge memory or big rear screen. Different mounts available and just the basic exposure automation appropriate to mount -- I believe there would be enough of a demand if you added together all the different groups of users/enthusiasts. It could even be a limited time production - as with some other Cosina ventures - an economical way to manufacture a special. I think there are enough baby boomers and others with lens collections and the money to afford a reasonable price.

Of course it would also tie in with the Cosina and Zeiss SL lens lines - increasing their sales.

Cosina did the equivalent for film cameras for many years.

I'd love full frame but I'm realistic - a Sony or Samsung 10-14MP 1.5x factor would be fine (especialy if they brought out a couple of Cosina wides in all mounts to suit). I believe much of the development cost is in good firmware - but I would hope that the sensor maker would sell a package, even if not their very latest version.

Just to show how nice some of the Kenko (Cosina?) films types can look - have any of you Nikon enthusiasts seen the Mapcamera (Japanese shop) limited edition Ai version with speeds to 1/4000, metal top plate, no name markings, price under 30,000 yen. Much more classy than the FM10.


Ah well - here's hoping - Photokina 2008 (at least under the counter).

I still use film mostly but I'd like the digital option with "manual" flavour.


Danny
 
.... you see the same thing regardless of base length.

If I understand things correctly, the problem is that when the camera tells you things are in focus, based on the alignment of images in the viewfinder, it may actually be off. And that relates to the base length. When the images line up in an M2, it may be off by say X millimeters, but with an R2A it may be off by Y centimeters, where Y > X.
 
funkaoshi said:
.... you see the same thing regardless of base length.

If I understand things correctly, the problem is that when the camera tells you things are in focus, based on the alignment of images in the viewfinder, it may actually be off. And that relates to the base length. .
Click to expand...

That's exactly it. From experience, trying the 90/2 on the R-series, the focus is off as often as not -- at wide apertures, and under about 4-5 m. Personally I can't see the point of an f/2 lens where you have to hope it's in focus, possibly being tempted to risk (and lose) a shot because you're using a lens that is faster than your camera can reliably focus.

Of course it's a philosophical qiestion as well as technical, but Sparrow and I have different views on the former.

Cheers,

R.
 
Wishing for three things:

1. For 35mm RF, a collapsible Ultron 35/1.7 or 35/2

2. For 35mm SLR, a set of modern lens for M42 mount (Zeiss have them, why not Cosina? :) )

3. For MF, definitely a modern Bessa RF 6x9 with Heliar. This can become a new trendsetter. Just have two models, one with the standard 105mm, the other, wider at 75mm maybe?
 
funkaoshi said:
.... you see the same thing regardless of base length.

If I understand things correctly, the problem is that when the camera tells you things are in focus, based on the alignment of images in the viewfinder, it may actually be off. And that relates to the base length. When the images line up in an M2, it may be off by say X millimeters, but with an R2A it may be off by Y centimeters, where Y > X.
Click to expand...

If the base length is A B and the point of focus is C a triangle ABC is formed, in an M2 the angle at B formed by the lines AB and BC is greater than the same angle on an R2 so mathematically it would need to be calculated to a lesser degree to achieve the same accuracy, but I can’t see that angle through the VF they both look the same to me; it only has an impact on the tolerance the manufacturer has to achieve.
:)
 
Ok one more

Ok one more

I also think a think MF folder or MF Rangefinder with a 3 lens kit would be cool. The folder should have a coupled rangefinder, but no meter so it wouln't need batteries. The MF rangefinder could have all the goodies, a meter and AE. I would go for a 6x9 with format masks and a 35mm panorama adapter, all of the format brightlines would be visible in the viewfinder via a selector.
 
1/ A Bessa CLE with metered manual and still maintaining the 28/40/90 frameline format.

2/ An M mount version of the 40mm f2 Ultron ASPH

3/ An M Mount 18mm f4 rather than the LTM mount prototype once considered but still compact taking 39mm filters

4/ New metal 21mm finder. Or a another mini finder with 21/25 framelines.

5/ A LTM or M Mount 50mm f3.5 Macro lens like the first Micro Nikkor in S mount using the optical formula from the legendary Heliar 50mm f3.5 (And yes before someone jumps on me that macro lenses aren't suitable with rangefinders, this may be true but its my Rangefinder I usually have with me and something closer focusing like the Leica Macro Elmar would be handy especially if you could use it as your standard lens as well. Cosina has come out with many ingenious solutions like the 21mm finder in the R4, I think if they put their minds too it they could find a great rangefinder macro or close focus solution as well.)
 
Hopefully they don't bring anything I want ;)
My wallet and visacard would be happy so, that said I would like a singlecoated Tessar or a Biotar lens in M mount. That would hopefully stop me from buying a Contax I in the future. A bit more seriously, a 50mm 1,2 would be really nice.

vha
 
Sparrow said:
... it only has an impact on the tolerance the manufacturer has to achieve.
:)
Click to expand...

Dear Stewart,

Exactly.

I was doing a little consultancy work for another manufacturer a while back -- medium format, not 35mm -- and as he pointed out, significantly tightening the tolerances can put prices up so far that no-one would buy the camera. Anyone can do it; the question is what it costs.

Much easier to start out with a much longer base length that allows lower tolerances at an affordable price. Even Leica had to use a rangefinder magnifier to make a 135/2.8 tolerable.

Cheers,

R.
 
CameraQuest said:
OK, everyone seems to want a digital Bessa, but that is probably not close.

Stephen
Click to expand...

What a good news... :D this means we have hope..
"Probably not close" sounds like a plan! :p
Stephen pre-order one for me..
Rob.
 
Why a DSLR for old MF lenses? You can mount almost anything on a Canon 5D (except for Canon FD and Minolta I think). There's no way Cosina will be able to compete with Canon in this field. Cosina's strengths are finding gaps in the market.

Speaking of evil SLRs, I'd love to see some more Voigtlander lenses in EF mount with electronically controlled aperture (but metal barrels and manual focusing). There are a lot of people who don't mind focusing themselves, but who hate dealing with stop-down metering.

Avotius said:
... all lenses produced should focus to .7 meter regardless as .9 is often a real barrier and the reason I didnt get the 50 nokton, 35 ultron, 50 sonnar, etc etc etc
Click to expand...

Seconding this. I hate bumping into this sort of limitation.
 
Sam N said:
Why a DSLR for old MF lenses? You can mount almost anything on a Canon 5D (except for Canon FD and Minolta I think).
Click to expand...

Now if they made a digital that could mount and use FL/FD - then I'd be very happy.

I'm still grumpy at Canon for abandoning even the hope of future support for the mount.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom