Whateverist
Well-known
An Epson RD-2 would be aimed at a very narrow market.
You need to find a customer base who want to shoot a digital rangefinder enough to skip the multitude of great mirrorless cameras but not quite enough to shell out Leica money. That seems to be a pretty narrow wedge to aim for.
You need to find a customer base who want to shoot a digital rangefinder enough to skip the multitude of great mirrorless cameras but not quite enough to shell out Leica money. That seems to be a pretty narrow wedge to aim for.
tbhv55
Well-known
It's a pity. I'm sure that if this were the case, I would own one right now... and would probably have had several of the intermediate releases between 1 and 10.
I have seen the comment before on here, but it still seems to me that the R-D1 was slightly ahead of its time - but not in the way that this phrase is often used (regarding the technology), more that it was a little too early for its own appointment with the 'Zeitgeist'.
I'd venture to suggest that it would have been more successful if it had been released around 3 to 5 years later than it actually was. Of course, I might be completely wrong... we'll never know.
tbhv55
Well-known
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Definitely!
No lever, no deal...
It's funny, but that was one of the things I really disliked about the R-D1. I'd already had enough experience with winders on 35mm and digital cameras by then that I found the need to manually wind the shutter just an annoyance.
G
user237428934
User deletion pending
I missed countless situations in my life with film cameras because after one shot I just forgot to wind and at the next photo situation I realized quickly why the camera refused to take a photo. Still happens regularly with my MF camera, my only camera with a lever.
tuanvinh2000
Well-known
i love the winder. i always wind after taking a shot so i rarely missed a photo because forgetting to wind.
the epson is a camera i enjoyed a lot using. iso 200 is lovely. i hate the dust on the sensor though so hard to clean. the rf base is a bit short to focus a 50mm f1.4 but other than that its as good as it gets for a digital camera form factor. love the iso dial and the top Seiko watch dial.
Of course a M240 would be nice but i'm ok with a sony for digital. it produces great results for 35mm and up focal length which i use often.
the epson is a camera i enjoyed a lot using. iso 200 is lovely. i hate the dust on the sensor though so hard to clean. the rf base is a bit short to focus a 50mm f1.4 but other than that its as good as it gets for a digital camera form factor. love the iso dial and the top Seiko watch dial.
Of course a M240 would be nice but i'm ok with a sony for digital. it produces great results for 35mm and up focal length which i use often.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
At least with the Hasselblad 500CM, I'm notified if the camera isn't wound because the mirror is still up ...
G
user237428934
User deletion pending
At least with the Hasselblad 500CM, I'm notified if the camera isn't wound because the mirror is still up ...
G
Too bad my MF camera is a rangefinder....
BluYote
Newbie
Definitely!
No lever, no deal...
Agreed. I just gifted myself an M8 and I kind of spaz out with my thumb after each shot. Dang muscle memory!
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
Nor Nikons or Canons or any other real camera.
Bille
Well-known
Thats the wedge Cosina is living off.
Oh agreed. But those already exist. I was supporting that a new Epson could sell enough. Obviously, I wasn't so eloquent in my wording.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I agree, a Zeiss digital RF would be very interesting, and perhaps tempting.
I don't miss the winding lever when shooting my M9 (or my X100).
unixrevolution
Well-known
I always thought that Sony and Zeiss could team up on a digital version of the ZM with great performance, relatively low cost, and a selection of damn fine M lenses. With that combo they could absolutely eat Leica's lunch, then wash it down with their milkshake, AND take their lunch money for tomorrow.
But then Zeiss killed the ZM.
But then Zeiss killed the ZM.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Have you ever thought about WHY Zeiss/Cosina killed the Zeiss Ikon (not ZM, which is a lens line)? Like, because it wasn't profitable? Why do you think manufacturers discontinue things? Spite?
And what are the bases for your fantasies about "relatively low cost" and "eat Leica's lunch"? Do you know anything at all about the camera market?
Cheers,
R.
Archlich
Well-known
Most Bessa and Zeiss Ikon cameras are discontinued by now. Quite surprising Cosina is still alive...
Or, is it living off something else? Like it's lens lineups?
Whateverist
Well-known
As far as I can tell they only sell lenses and accessories these days.
dmr
Registered Abuser
And I'm still holding my breath for Digital Film.
RichC
Well-known
Some may recall that I used to run the unofficial Epson RD-1 website - now donated to Stephen and part of his Cameraquest website: https://cameraquest.com/Epson-R-D1/_r-d1/r-d1_01.htm. So, I know a little of the background to this camera. (Or, rather, can make educated surmises: to this day, Epson has said very little about the camera – at least not much has made its way outside of Japan.)
There will never be an RD-2! And the poor marketing and support was on purpose! You want to know why...?
Epson is a subsidiary of the Seiko Group, and the RD-1 was a concept product – designed to showcase the company's technical prowess. The camera is nothing more than an advert! To that end, the camera was never a "normal" product intended to be profitable.
It was no accident that Seiko Epson, to give the company its full name,
(1) chose to make a product associated with a company that was iconic in Epson's home country (Japan), namely the Leica rangefinder camera (that Leica had described a digital rangefinder as technically unfeasible was doubtless a factor)
(2) was publicly listed on the Japanese stock exchange shortly before the RD-1's release.
Some seem to think that the RD-1 was a joint project between Epson and Cosina or that Cosina was the lead: neither is true. The camera was wholly Epson's design and concept, with Cosina simply commissioned as a supplier. Apart from aspects that are Cosina's property, essentially the Bessa chassis, everything else was designed and supplied by Epson, including its heart – the Nikon sensor. The electronics were designed by Epson. The eye-catching analogue dials were created by its Seiko watchmaking sister company, and their inclusion was of course very deliberate – making the company's DNA and history obvious.
So, for these reasons (and perhaps also legal ones, arising out of Cosina's contract with Epson), Cosina can't make an RD-2 by itself. (Also, don't forget that Cosina has always maintained absolute disinterest in making a digital camera.)
In short, the RD-1 was a PR exercise, and Epson never intended to sell it as a mainstream product. Hence the lack of advertising and its low profile. In fact, I suspect its success was a bit of a curate's egg for the company: as a concept product it was wildly successful, becoming iconic itself, but this popularity strained its meagre support network, and frustrated users (Epson doubtless expected executives to buy the camera, rather than photographers wanting to actually use it!).
I wish an RD-2 would appear - I'd buy it! But it's not happening. Ever. Another digital rangefinder, perhaps, but it won't be like the RD-1 with its analogue handling and indicator dials.
There will never be an RD-2! And the poor marketing and support was on purpose! You want to know why...?
Epson is a subsidiary of the Seiko Group, and the RD-1 was a concept product – designed to showcase the company's technical prowess. The camera is nothing more than an advert! To that end, the camera was never a "normal" product intended to be profitable.
It was no accident that Seiko Epson, to give the company its full name,
(1) chose to make a product associated with a company that was iconic in Epson's home country (Japan), namely the Leica rangefinder camera (that Leica had described a digital rangefinder as technically unfeasible was doubtless a factor)
(2) was publicly listed on the Japanese stock exchange shortly before the RD-1's release.
Some seem to think that the RD-1 was a joint project between Epson and Cosina or that Cosina was the lead: neither is true. The camera was wholly Epson's design and concept, with Cosina simply commissioned as a supplier. Apart from aspects that are Cosina's property, essentially the Bessa chassis, everything else was designed and supplied by Epson, including its heart – the Nikon sensor. The electronics were designed by Epson. The eye-catching analogue dials were created by its Seiko watchmaking sister company, and their inclusion was of course very deliberate – making the company's DNA and history obvious.
So, for these reasons (and perhaps also legal ones, arising out of Cosina's contract with Epson), Cosina can't make an RD-2 by itself. (Also, don't forget that Cosina has always maintained absolute disinterest in making a digital camera.)
In short, the RD-1 was a PR exercise, and Epson never intended to sell it as a mainstream product. Hence the lack of advertising and its low profile. In fact, I suspect its success was a bit of a curate's egg for the company: as a concept product it was wildly successful, becoming iconic itself, but this popularity strained its meagre support network, and frustrated users (Epson doubtless expected executives to buy the camera, rather than photographers wanting to actually use it!).
I wish an RD-2 would appear - I'd buy it! But it's not happening. Ever. Another digital rangefinder, perhaps, but it won't be like the RD-1 with its analogue handling and indicator dials.
nasmformyzombie
Registered
RichC, thank you so much for your post. When I first saw this thread I thought the real question is not why we haven't seen an R-D2, but how the R-D1 ever got made in the first place.