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

Athos6 said:
I thougt of this while posting on a different thread, they should make a run of Nikon and a run of Contax to M-mount adapters that work well 🙂
Click to expand...

I think this idea, and KBG's viewfinders are both good ones

Personally I'm happy with the lenses. There is a good selection and they are good performers.

I'd like to see:
a re issue of some of their 'discontinued' accessories like the level's, hot shoe adapters, right angle viewfinders etc

a fix for the R3 + R4 film rewind crank so it doesn't jam on film advances

I'd love a longer base on these RF's

a MF equivalent of the the Mamiya 6 without external viewfinders and with lenses to the 25, 35, 47 mm equivalent lenses. Just look at the resale market for those cameras
 
How about a compact, F/2 or faster 18mm or 20mm for the 4/3 system?
I think Olympus's little 420 is pretty neat, but 50mm lenses don't work well for me and speed is especially important for DOF reasons. The lens could cost as much as the body and nobody'd complain.
A fast, compact 24mm for Pentax could also work.
Of course a digital M body would be better yet...
 
Seele said:
The Hakuba ones seem to be devices whose function is to lock the hand to the camera which produces some interference. Apologies if I sound like I am blowing my own trumpet...

http://www.periandtang.com/wriststrap.html
Click to expand...


this one would do it for me ... if it only did not attach to the (notoriously weak) standard strap lugs. so, combine this with a really reliable lug, and i'm happy.

unfortunately, the grips (attaching to the tripod mount) i have seen so far do not offer that solid steel lug.

sebastian
 
sebastel said:
this one would do it for me ... if it only did not attach to the (notoriously weak) standard strap lugs. so, combine this with a really reliable lug, and i'm happy.

unfortunately, the grips (attaching to the tripod mount) i have seen so far do not offer that solid steel lug.

sebastian
Click to expand...

Well, it was designed using a different methodology to facilitate the use of the CRF camera the way it is meant to be used: being held all the time rather than being a mean to suspend it pendulum-fashion.

Out of interest: alll my SLR cameras are fitted with neck straps.
 
Seele said:
Well, it was designed using a different methodology to facilitate the use of the CRF camera the way it is meant to be used: being held all the time rather than being a mean to suspend it pendulum-fashion.
Click to expand...

for that carrying style, a neck strap is sufficient. (wrapped around wrist)
 
Some more ideas far fetched ideas

Some more ideas far fetched ideas

How about a stereo R camera or a panoramic R camera, like the Xpan but cheaper!

On a side note, are we doing some of the R&D process for free here?? If so I want a stock option 🙂
 
I would like a compact metal 21mm finder preferably a dual frameline one like 18/21 and then bring out the 18mm f4 that they had planned to make but in M mount.

An orion type adapter and a compact Bessa would be nice too.

Someone mentioned before a 50mm f3.5 macro like the S Macro Nikkor based on the Heliar 50mm f3.5 would be interesting, I always wish I had one of those Nikkors for my Nikon rangerfinders but an M mount one would be good too!
 
Sorry, but I think a macro lens (i.e. 1:1 or close to that) just does not make sense in RF world. You will have no idea what gets on the frame and what will be in focus.
Click to expand...

Its not so much about getting full macro with your rangefinder just something closer to get you out of trouble when the only camera you have is your rangefinder. We wouldn't expect 1:1 but something capable of closer focus than usual and something you could also use for your standard lens that you have with you most of the time. It would be interesting to see how Cosina addresses the framing issue, they come up with some great innovative things, who would have thought built in 21mm framelines were possible!
 
Recontinue the T. Call it a "TM" (for manual), use the metal design of the 100th anniversary sets (or keep it plastic if the metal parts push the cost too far up; this should be an accessible entry-level or 2nd body camera), make a special external VF (28-200?) for it, put the self-timer back in, ISO up to 3200, film lock...price below US$250 (w/o VF).
 
What I would really like to see is a digital Bessa (or DSLR) which has the option to use film.

Yes, I know that if I think it will happen, I'm on drugs!

Yes, I do know about the Leica DMR, and other than the obvious coincidence, it doesn't appeal to me -- I don't really want to carry a huge boat anchor around with me. 🙂
 
Very interesting thread. I second noimmunity's suggestions:

*) classic tessar-style 45mm lens
*) a fast lens in an unusual FL, like a 55 or 60/1.2 (with the unusual FL, it wouldn't conflict with the existing product lines of other makers)
*) a "generic" styled RF body (all black, with no lettering whatsoever and perhaps a fixed lens...)
*) a retake on the Leica Thambar: a portrait lens that is romantic and dreamy rather than sharp
 
Being somewhat less active than I used to be... I tend to use the smaller, slower, and lighter versions of CV lenses when I can get away with it - saving the faster, heavier, lenses for winter or when I know I will be dealing with a low-light situation.

Having said that I'd be seriously tempted by an f1.4 or f2 25mm lens - provided it didn't exhibit the same focus-shift problems as the f1.4 35mm.

I'd also be tempted by a digital Bessa R - especially if there were versions with 1:1 and wide angle viewfinder magnifications. However, I'd have to add the proviso that the rangefinder was a little sturdier that that in my R3A - which tends to go out of register vertically at the slightest provocation.
 
jlancasterd said:
I'd also be tempted by a digital Bessa R - especially if there were versions with 1:1 and wide angle viewfinder magnifications. However, I'd have to add the proviso that the rangefinder was a little sturdier that that in my R3A - which tends to go out of register vertically at the slightest provocation.
Click to expand...

I do not think the digital camera is in line with Voigtlander's plan, the Epson R-D1 is something of an aberration anyway.

By the way, if the R-D1 is Epson's first foray into digital CRF cameras based on the Bessa R2 body, it should really be known as R2-D1; so if Epson wants to make a Mark II version, should that be the R2-D2?
 
1. Compact wide lens, rangefinder coupled :
- 18 mm
- 15 mm

2. 50 1.4 smaller than the 50 1.5 and without the back focusing problems of the zeiss 50 1.5

3. Smaller, more compact camera, maybe a smaller R4


4. Very small fixed lens camera
 
functionality

functionality

It seems that the wishes fall into two classes.

1. Things which won't affect the final image and have a minimal impact on shooting. This include bringing out existing lenses in M mount and/or with different maximum apertures.

2. Things which might effect the final image. This includes improving the accuracy (baseline) of the rangefinder, making the finder zoom and adding auto exposure to models without it. Poor focusing and exposure are avoidable by careful use, but in situations where time is short (street photography, for example), one risks misfocusing or poor exposure vs missing the picture.

I find it almost impossible to use a 90mm lens well. The frame is too small and the need for careful focusing is important. Changes to the viewfinder and metering system could make a difference. On the other hand a lens of a slightly different focal length from an existing one seems more about equipment lust than real world shooting.

I do find the rewind on the R a bit fiddly, I don't know if this is better on later models.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom