What the new Digital Rangefinder rumors really mean to me!

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
1:57 AM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
View My Gallery
With all of this talk about a new digital rangefinder buzzing online, my mind has been going on this subject. If true, wether Zeiss, Canon, etc,, this is potentially good news. My hope is it will be able to use M mount lenses, even if an adaptor is needed. I selected the M8 when it came out because it was the only game in town. If others came into existance, I would seriously consider the cameras. I am not bound to any brand at all. They are tools to me. I have M lenses due to their "look" more than brand. What more choice will mean to me is freedom to choose what I want based on market competition. Some say this is bad news for Leica. I do not agree! Did Lexus put Mercedes out of business when they first came out? No! For Leica, this will pressure them to go back to being a camera company less interested in special edition cameras and more interested in producing professional tools. I like the idea of having cameras with different designs in that each is not perfect, but will have certain strengths one can use to be more productive and creative. One thing here. What if the new camera is a Nikon or Canon with conventional shutter dials on top like the M9? If they sell, they may also start putting dials back on DSLR's. I feel the new designs are too complex for pure photography. So what are everyones thoughts on this?
 
I think it's pretty much accepted that the story is a lame April Fools' joke.

It does however illustrate that there is still an appetite for a compact rangefinder-style digital. A huge proportion of pro photographers still miss having a digital Leice/Hexar/Mamiya rangefinder/ Contax G2 or other, high quality compact with a decent VF. It's bizarre, a decade into the digital era, that except for the M9 we don't have one as yet.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
The digital RF market is too small for many players. Any new camera splits the potential sales and makes it harder to make a profit.
Click to expand...

The lack isn't ust in the RF field - it's more to do with compactness. The Olympus Mju was one of the company's best sellers. It was compact, had a decent VF and autofocus and took great photos.

ALl these years on, we don't have an equivalent. The G10 has far inferior picture quality, the EP1 doesn't have as good a VF, and both cost far more than the Mju.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
The digital RF market is too small for many players. Any new camera splits the potential sales and makes it harder to make a profit.
Click to expand...


But if a mystery camera was to make an entry into the RF market it would need to be light years ahead of it's competition with auto focus, illuminated framelines, accurate parallax compensation etc etc.

It would need all this to to create a new market of buyers ... not just divide and share the existing one!
 
Pickett Wilson said:
An AF camera has nothing to do with the RF market.
Click to expand...



But by who's definition Pickett ... Konica Hexar AF Rangefinder, Contax G series Rangefinder ... both with auto focus and marketed as 'rangefinders!'

Why can't a rangefinder system operate on infra red as in the Hexar's ... who says it all has to be done with mirrors? (and smoke!) 😛
 
Keith, it wouldn't bother me personally. I use focus confirmation when shooting MF lenses on the 5D. But from all the posts I read, it's that optical rangefinder that people want to retain.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
Keith, it wouldn't bother me personally. I use focus confirmation when shooting MF lenses on the 5D. But from all the posts I read, it's that optical rangefinder that people want to retain.
Click to expand...


Funny you should mention that ... I'm just starting to really appreciate that focus confirmation dot in my D700! (well, my aging eyes certainly are!) 😀
 
Pickett Wilson said:
Keith, it wouldn't bother me personally. I use focus confirmation when shooting MF lenses on the 5D. But from all the posts I read, it's that optical rangefinder that people want to retain.
Click to expand...

Plenty of people here love the Hexar AF, as do I, and the G2 despite its flaws. SOmething close to those two, with fast infra red AF, could capture a significant market.

IF Leica had got closer to the Hexar AF with the X1, it might even be worth $2k. As it is, there's nothing close to the functionality of those cameras, or even more basic ones like the Mju/Stylus.
 
A digital rangefinder camera is of little interest to me as I shoot B&W. When I've used my Leica glass on digital cameras it has lost a lot of it's signature, so even if I shot color I would pass. A friend that also shoots Leica mentioned that most people don't even know what a rangefinder camera is, and if they do they don't like using them. So it's a niche product that consumers will not care about.

What I WOULD be interested in is someone coming out w/ a new rangefinder film camera that I could put my LTM or M lenses on. Nothing wrong w/ the Bessas/Ikons, but I'd like something of a higher build quality, but not so expensive as a Leica. Just a well built and reasonably priced rangefinder film camera. It is such a hassle shooting 50 year old M3's and other variants because you invariably have to get them sent out for an expensive service, and afterward what you end up with is a serviced 50 year old camera that is nowhere as good as it was when it was new. A nice shiny new rangefinder camera would really work for me, but I don't see it happening. Too bad, because even though the market for it would be small, Cosina has shown that there is certainly a demand for such a thing.
 
Keith said:
But if a mystery camera was to make an entry into the RF market it would need to be light years ahead of it's competition with auto focus, illuminated framelines, accurate parallax compensation etc etc.
Click to expand...

What competition? The M9? I think an optical VF full-frame m-mount digital camera at a decent price would whet the appetite of most RFers. 🙂


/
 
Paul T. said:
IF Leica had got closer to the Hexar AF with the X1, it might even be worth $2k. As it is, there's nothing close to the functionality of those cameras, or even more basic ones like the Mju/Stylus.
Click to expand...

A Hexar af-D, I would buy it without a second thought, the X1 was tempting but did not survive the second thought. The x1 would be a very tempting camera for me if it had a decent viewfinder.
 
Keith said:
But by who's definition Pickett ... Konica Hexar AF Rangefinder, Contax G series Rangefinder ... both with auto focus and marketed as 'rangefinders!'

Why can't a rangefinder system operate on infra red as in the Hexar's ... who says it all has to be done with mirrors? (and smoke!) 😛
Click to expand...
Well, I guess sometimes in history the framelines system + prime interchangeable lenses were deemed as core components deserving the rangefinder name.
This being said, a rangefinder is in strict terms, a distance measuring device (be it by mirrors or laser).
So any camera could actually be called a rangefinder as they all calculate the distance where focus must be done. 🙄

I know it does not help.
 
Optical viewfinders are not going to survive on smaller cameras. For most people it is just a thing that makes the camera bigger. The Leica X-1 is created for future leica customers and they do not care about the viewfinder.

No auto focus? Again camera companies have to create cameras that can be sold to other people than the ones who already have bought a camera 20 years ago and are estimating a service on it sometime around 2020.
 
Steve M. said:
A digital rangefinder camera is of little interest to me as I shoot B&W. When I've used my Leica glass on digital cameras it has lost a lot of it's signature, so even if I shot color I would pass. A friend that also shoots Leica mentioned that most people don't even know what a rangefinder camera is, and if they do they don't like using them. So it's a niche product that consumers will not care about.

What I WOULD be interested in is someone coming out w/ a new rangefinder film camera that I could put my LTM or M lenses on. Nothing wrong w/ the Bessas/Ikons, but I'd like something of a higher build quality, but not so expensive as a Leica. Just a well built and reasonably priced rangefinder film camera. It is such a hassle shooting 50 year old M3's and other variants because you invariably have to get them sent out for an expensive service, and afterward what you end up with is a serviced 50 year old camera that is nowhere as good as it was when it was new. A nice shiny new rangefinder camera would really work for me, but I don't see it happening. Too bad, because even though the market for it would be small, Cosina has shown that there is certainly a demand for such a thing.
Click to expand...



I don't quite understand why the Ikon doesn't seem to fit this desription for you ... aside from the fact the camera feels fairly light the build quality seems quite high to me. I can only speak from my own experience here but I owned an M7 and sold it to buy the Zeiss and have no regrets!
 
I welcome the rumors and hype that comes with these types of rumors. it points toward the future with as much variety in digital camera designs as we have no in film camera designs. I just don't like handling the digital cameras that are out now within my budget. I just haven't slept in more than 24hrs and the same old black dslr is really bothering my mind right now. If you placed one in my hand I think I would just drop it. I am going to go cuddle with my F3 and XA now (I like a little variety in my partners I guess).

I bet I didn't have to tell you I haven't gotten much sleep
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom