Who... Digital BESSA R5

[Frankie]

CV, Epson and ZM roll into one.

CV, Epson and ZM roll into one.

Many people have discussed the possibility of a digital Zeiss-Ikon, or a new Epson, but sincerely, I consider that is the time of the king… COSINA with a Digital Bessa R5, with their experience in the rangefinder world, with all the years working hard in revive the rangefinder world, with all the relations that they have in the photography, digital electronics and optics world (Nikon, Epson-Seiko, Sony, Carl Zeiss…), now is the Cosina time, they have a big chance to bring to the market a good, successful and unique digital rangefinder camera that everybody are waiting.​

***************
I came from a background of obscenely capital intensive aerial imaging…an aerial camera will set you back ½ million dollars. Such a camera uses a 23cm x 23cm (9” x 9”) format and the films is 9 ½” wide 250’ un-perforated rolls…a B/W roll costs ~$850.

In the year 2000, the inevitable digital cameras emerged. One model was essentially a line scanner with 12,000 pixels across the flight path. Another is a 112 mega pixel unit (8000 x 14000 pixels). The latest (2006) is a 132 mega pixel units (9420 x 14430 pixels). And, if you have to ask the prices, you couldn’t afford it.

Of course, raging debates goes on whether digital is better than film. Bear in mind that aerial films are processed rather flat (to preserve all shadow and highlight details), with a density range of about 1.5, or merely 5 of Ansel’s zones. If that is construed to be only a 5-bits equivalent, then the 12-bit digital output is clearly better, no?

Of course there is no such thing as a 112 mega pixel chip then. The image frame output was based on ultra-complex computer magic, stitching and re-sampling from biggest available chip composites, or post-processed (reassembled) pixel-line by pixel-line into the big picture.

In 2007, a 111 mega pixel chip (10,500 x 10,600 pixels) was announced. The second-generation one-chip/one-lens no post-processing (cost) camera is in the horizon…imagining the poor sods (most) that have not come close to paying off the first-generation camera investments!

I put in my two bits worth a few days ago in the Zeiss ZM section. Much of what I had said also apply to a CV digital or an Epson RD-2:

I had a chance to play with a ZM recently. This camera is begging to be converted into digital.

Indeed, the view finder is every bit as good as a Leica M. Leave it alone and let me focus the lens. Add a screw-on magnifying eye piece for life-size 1:1 view…let the 50mm and 85mm lenses also shine.

The sharper-sounding automatic shutter is just as quiet as an M. I would adapt the dial for ISO control, and operate AE or manual as I please.

I would leave the manual film advance alone…let me do some things Epson RD1 style. A nice option would be an add-on motor to cock the shutter. 4~5 FPS with a double-size buffer is good enough to support manual exposure bracketing.

The cavity for the unneeded film cartridge is the perfect place for batteries…hopefully 3 or 4 AAA rechargeable cells interchangeable with store-bought disposables. The film rewind is the perfect place for a screw-on sealed battery hatch.

The unneeded film take-up spool is the ideal space for dual SD memory chip Nikon D3 style…one for RAW and one for JPEG, or double up for higher storage capacity. Imagine dual 8 Gb SD for bracketing at will. No film/processing cost is the perfect reason for such operations.

I would urge Zeiss to use a full-frame CCD…allowing usage of all available M-mount lenses without crop factor. 4500 x 3000 (3:2) 13.5 MPixel would be sufficient…allowing also 4000 x 3000 (4:3) and 4496 x 2539 (16:9).

Don’t bother with LCD screen, a million buttons and all possible features, real photographers don’t need them gismos. An external wire-linked LCD with a large screen for review also doubles as a waist-level low-level view-finder would be useful, just plug it in when needed.

This way, the camera would not be larger, heavier or more complex. I will do the lens focus, set the exposure and bracket, or select AE and/or auto-ISO if deem appropriate. Free me to be the photographer I want to be; and not Imaging Device Input Operator/Technician (IDIOT) relying on automatic everything.

Regarding a CV R5 Digital:

Mr. Kobayashi might have been quoted to say that he does not like digital. But I am sure he is mindful that the day will come when someone makes a full-frame chip that is good enough…perhaps the Nikon D3 FX chip? So, how about encasing the CCD chip in a standard-size housing that can be, ideally, user replaceable (or at least factory upgrade-able)?

CV can sell more new lens with more new camera buyer, which is also serious business. Entice the millions of digicam owners into rangefinder users would be a good way.

CV has a reliable shutter unit, perhaps modifiable to be like the Nikon FM3a shutter—AE with all manual shutter speed usable without battery.

CV has a good range finder, perhaps up-gradable to be ZM like (CV already knows how building the ZM).

So, how about it, Mr. Kobayashi? Hell, Nikon might even award you the production contract for the rumored (or course) digital remake of the SP or S3, or Zeiss might buy CV out (back?).

 

[cmogi10]

All this reflects - first of all, the deteriorating purchasing power of, first of all, americans. Pitty, because it was the 'american market' that always has been the salvation for Leica with it's rich and prosperous customers. Not any more. Now the same americans are daydreaming about a digital rangefinder costing 2,000 $

Now come on...!

For that kind of money you are not even within the good part of the D-SLR-market, - God forbid. With your 2,000 $ you are a digital P & S customer. Buy two.

I think that's a bit absurd, second hand 5D's, the D300...are these camera's not on the good part of the DSLR market?

 

[CodeMonkey13]

I'm with the very simple school of digital RFs. I don't need any of the fancy processing for the images. Capture and store is all you need. I do very little "Chimping" with the view except at the the end of the day or over lunch. I could live without that or slip my card into my Epson P2000 and get a rally nice view. With raw you have a wide enough latitude with the exposure that you really don't need to see the image. I have gotten pretty good with my Pentax Spot V doing manual matrix metering, so no big deal there. RFers seem tobe a a pretty photographically sophisticated lot that seems to thrive on the LACK of automation. I print winning images to 13x19 with the D100 6MP. Give me a 8mp sensor and I will be happy for years. Think about any manufacturer coming out with two models a Fixed lens 40-50mm 1.x (think QL17 or GSN) for about $500 and an M mount for $1k. Same sensor, no LCD, very basic.

Ahh... Just Dreaming...

 

[Olsen]

I think that's a bit absurd, second hand 5D's, the D300...are these camera's not on the good part of the DSLR market?

Here we talk of new cameras, or..? The D300 is a good camera, alright, but the 'better part' of the D-SLR starts right above that one.

Absurd...? 2,000 $ for a high performing/high quality digital camera, that's absurd.

 

[mdspace]

The Japanese remained stock of Epson R-D1s...

The Japanese remained stock of Epson R-D1s...

In Japan the remained stock of Epson R-D1s began to die. I was checking many stores that they used to have this camera, but now, only just a few of the big stores still have one. The most interesting thing for me is that six months ago the price increased in every store that used to have it, but now, the last week the price fell down around 10%... A NEW DIGITAL RANGEFINDER IS COMMING???
This game of the price or strategy always happens in Japan when a new model or substitute appears.
Somebody know something about it?

 

[cmogi10]

Maybe they got tired of watching them gather dust and decided the shelf space served better purposes?

 

[DrLeoB]

Not voting.... there needs to be at least 2 other options:

Digital Module <$1000 with a crop factor sensor
Digital Module >$1000 with full frame sensor

 

[etrigan63]

One can only hope, mdspace.

 

[Ronald M]

No Zeiss is not ready for a digi RF just like Chicago is not ready for reform.

They will run into the same problems as Leica. They are smart enough to stay away until technology evolves.

 

[phatnev]

A digital module is a wonderful idea, if we consider that the backdoor of all Bessas are the same, nevertheless, I think this option will be very expensive, to buy a camera that already has the digital back integrated is cheaper, easy to develop and produce.
The thing that happened to Nikon is interesting, after they made the Nikon’s king successor “F-3”, the AF fashion began to invade the hearts of many photographers, because the people considering the AF and advantage, but if I ask to every rangefinder camera user about it, we know the answer, “the connection between the photographer and the rangefinder is essential”. Sadly, the AF fact introduce the people to the automatic world (I am not complaining), and that makes extremely electronic, automatic and plastified F-4, F-5 (very poor) and the last one F6 (a joke). The truth is that the F series concept has been to put all the technology available in a camera. In my opinion, the FM series was the last and the most respectful, because never leaved their essence (just compare the FM of 1976 and FM3 of 2006).
The reality is that one more time the people began to be illuminated with a new thing, the digital cameras and since then, Nikon has been concentrated in the battle of the digital SLR cameras, because their market is just that, the mass consumers, nevertheless, Nikon still has a heart for the classic and the essence, 2003 the S3 and 2005 the SP.
The case of Cosina is completely different. They arrived in the rangefinder photography with an all rangefinder mechanical camera when in the stores the market was full of electronics AF SLR cameras, they have been continue producing these miracles even when all the SLR world turn in to digital. Until today, they have given to us many good things, they revived in such way the rangefinder photography for people like many of us, good and affordable M and L-mount lenses and cameras, Nikon S and Zeiss Contax generic cameras and lenses, an many many things to promote the rangefinder world.
The rangefinder photography itself, has a lot of things that avoid such parts of the pass of the time for sure, the rangefinder users prefer the manual focus, the mechanical feeling, the metallic surface, the taste of our creativity catch in the viewfinder, to touch with our eye the colors and the moment that we want. If the digital photography will kill the film photography, I think that this is impossible. Do you think that the canvas, the acrylic paint will disappear just because we have computers, softwares and good prints?
The digital photography is just an option that we can also enjoy, is not the satanic fact of the rangefinder photography.

Do you think that Leica will stop producing film cameras after the M8?
If you have a digital Bessa, you will stop using your film Bessa L, T, R, R2, R3 or R4?

I always will use my film rangefinder camera and I wish Cosina continue producing film cameras until I die, but I also wonder a digital Cosina… a digital Bessa R5 can sound nice.

“The rangefinder is not a fashion is a life…”

Im not going to do too much analyzing with this, but as a former Nikon dSLR user, and as a current Nikon film SLR user, you must be effing retarded to say that the F6 is a joke, EFFING MAD, you realize the F6 is still considered the pinnacle of the SLR. What gives?

 

[mdspace]

Im not going to do too much analyzing with this, but as a former Nikon dSLR user, and as a current Nikon film SLR user, you must be effing retarded to say that the F6 is a joke, EFFING MAD, you realize the F6 is still considered the pinnacle of the SLR. What gives?

Sorry, but it was not my intention to make you feel bad about my Nikon F6 comment.

You don’t need to insult and became offensive.

“I remember me as a teenager with a big F4 poster hanging in the wall of my room, reading every thing about it, hoping everyday to have it some day after have the FM2, because for me the F4 was just for a real professional photographers…, I became a dentist and just an occasional photographer that never forget his passion and likes more the F3, F2 and F talking about film SLR cameras”.

In my personal opinion, I call ironically “A JOKE” the F6 because many aspects and the essence that I love of the legendary F series were completely eliminated in my perspective, just the time and the advances of the technology know it. Simply, the F6 is too much robotics for me. I miss the optional viewfinders, the advance film lever, the aperture in the old F tradition, through a small window within the viewfinder, directly viewing the lens, just the small, heavy and squared metallic handing that you feel when you have a good old friend camera in your hands.

You are right if we have to call the F6 the pinnacle of the F series, because maybe this was the dream of a SLR Nikon in the beginning of the F without the technology that we have now and without the digital photography eating the film market.

I can say openly that I like the old style and the mechanics, the necessity to use your mind to control the light aspects, the color, moment and instant in a very basic and fundamental ways. The only thing that I want from a digital RF camera is the fact about developing and scanning films by myself, obviously committing a sacrifice talking about the quality that I expect, no doubt about it.

I consider myself a new RF user, and many RF users don’t like the AF systems (including myself). The SLR and the RF cameras are for some different purposes and mine it’s covered by the RF cameras. The photography give me the opportunity to create an image with the synergy of what am I looking through a viewfinder and the creativity of my mind. Do you think that a real RF photographer needs a computer inside the camera to do everything that suppose is his challenge? Do you think that a RF photographer hopes a RF camera with all the F6’s stuffs?

 

[Trius]

No Zeiss is not ready for a digi RF just like Chicago is not ready for reform.

They will run into the same problems as Leica. They are smart enough to stay away until technology evolves.

In their brochure on the ZM system, Zeiss states:

When digital sensor technology takes another
leap or two, accepting the high incident angles of
a wide-angle M-mount lens to the corners of a
full format sensor, you can count on us to come
up with high performance digital systems that
will satisfy even the truly passionate. And your
Carl Zeiss T* ZM-mount lenses will be ready.​

Clearly they are looking to sensor technology to mature and produce a "full-frame" sensor worthy of the lenses they have produced. Not that they couldn't change their mind, but this seems a pretty strong statement that they aren't about to produce a dRF with a smaller sensor.

 

[Paul_U]

A Digital BEESA R5 would be interesting but, I would not buy one.
On the other hand if a Medium Format 6x7 BESSA R7 came out from Cosina I'd be first in line.
Unfortunatly I think I'll be the only one in line.

 

[Trius]

I might be in line with you.

 

[kb244]

The digital Bessa R5 still being the winner, some ideas about WHY???

Perhaps because the poll was placed in the Cosina Voigtlander forum, which would be a bit bias towards a Bessa... no ?

 

[iandg]

Bessa R7

Bessa R7

I would be in the line too

 

[swoop]

I would not buy another digital rangefinder until Leica released an "M9." And for me to ditch the M8 and spend the cash to upgrade, it would have to offer a full frame sensor and higher ISO performance. And preferably a return to the quiet shutter. Otherwise there would be no reason to upgrade. I think it's at least 2 years away.

Another nice addition would be to reduce the dimensions to the same as the M7, and also to include a physical knob to switch ISO.

 

[trev2401]

nah... enuff with the M8s & other 2 - 5$k digital RFs.

A simple M3, Coolscan 9000 & Epson 3800 would be enough. Oh yes, I'd still have $ left over from the M8 fund to spend on ink and paper to last me another 2 years.

just my 2 cents.

 

[jbf]

If a digital RF came out that wasn't insanely expensive (more around a thousand or so) i would definately buy it and get rid of my DSLR. The only reason I even have a DSLR is for shooting texture work and references for visual effects work.

However I think with a digital rf imight actually use it more often than my SLR. My SLR is just so freaking huge.

 

[bradfordco]

I agree we need an M9 with higher ISO - Nikon D3 test shots are awesome.