rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Now how hard would that be to make by Cosina, Zeiss, Fuji, Canon or Nikon? Not hard at all I suspect
If it was all that easy & worthwhile to make digital RFs we would have seen them by now.
Now how hard would that be to make by Cosina, Zeiss, Fuji, Canon or Nikon? Not hard at all I suspect
The reality is that Leica have a whole range of cameras and that they can and will ask premium prices for their best products. The M10 will be better than the M9 and why would you even think that Leica won't charge more for it than for the M9? There will always be a fanatic or rich clientele willing to buy these.. Remember, just like high-end audio, we're not talking about the most rational group of buyers here 😉
I made the choice to use rangefinders based on how they shoot and lens quality. The rangefinder way of shooting is a creative choice to many, and should not be reserved for the "rich" only but to those who use it in the way artists only use certain oil paints and brushes.
Clearly, it is absurd and too bad to exclude many who have talent the option of using a digital rangefinder camera for their creativity. At times, I get mad at Leica when I see special editions (Titanium M9). It gives the impression they only cater to the rich. Many of the great photographers in history were not rich and used rangefinders.
I must say the new Fuji will change alot. For $800-$1000 USD, the rangefinder experience will be accessable to many who cannot afford an M9 or a used M8. This is great for those who really love rangefinder photography and want people of all economic levels to have the choice to experience using a high quality direct viewfinder camera. Let us say I am for rangefinders for the masses, digital and film!!!!!!! If the rich want their diamond studded editions, fine, but lets see the photos they will take! I have seen M9 photos that are terrible from people who are bad photographers and superior M8 (M9 too) photos in the hands of great photographers. Great photographers come in all colors, races, religions and economic levels. That is what Leica, Canon, and everyone else must realize!!!
Clearly, it is absurd and too bad to exclude many who have talent the option of using a digital rangefinder camera for their creativity. At times, I get mad at Leica when I see special editions (Titanium M9). It gives the impression they only cater to the rich. Many of the great photographers in history were not rich and used rangefinders.
I must say the new Fuji will change alot. For $800-$1000 USD, the rangefinder experience will be accessable to many who cannot afford an M9 or a used M8. This is great for those who really love rangefinder photography and want people of all economic levels to have the choice to experience using a high quality direct viewfinder camera.
I can only think of ISO performance, other than that I don't see anything that needs improving and worth upgrading from M9.
Let me add: EVF and TTL focusing. I know we love the RF, but there are so many little issues solved by this approach. I often think that my little EP-2 is an M 9/2 (nine divided by two) -- it's just such a slick little lozenge of a camera. Flame away if you must, but I think EVF would significantly improve the M's handling. No more RF adjustments, no more back- focusing lenses, the ability to use extension tubes and lenses as long as you'd like. Hell, you could even get image stabilization in there . . . Olympus did.- Greater dynamic range. 10-12 stops would be good.
- Less high iso noise
- Weathersealing!
Let me add: EVF and TTL focusing. I know we love the RF, but there are so many little issues solved by this approach. I often think that my little EP-2 is an M 9/2 (nine divided by two) -- it's just such a slick little lozenge of a camera. Flame away if you must, but I think EVF would significantly improve the M's handling. No more RF adjustments, no more back- focusing lenses, the ability to use extension tubes and lenses as long as you'd like. Hell, you could even get image stabilization in there . . . Olympus did.
OK. Done hallucinating.
Ben
Dear Ben,
Well, you invited it, so, flame, flame, flame. R.
[Donning fully articulated asbestos head-gear and matching undies]. Roger, I thought I would feel the same way as you do about the Olympus's EVF, and I have gotten along with it tolerably well. Key to this is being able to toggle into "magnification mode" for critical focusing in certain situations. But for me, that EVF is adequate. As for the "where is it?" well, in the vapor/ether along with a lot of other gear hypothesized here on RFF. I am carrying around an M8 and the EP-2 these days and for my picture making they complement each other nicely. I just catch myself wishing that the one camera had certain features of the other and vice versa with some frequency.
Ben
Dear Ben,
Well, I tried it at photokina. It's certainly the least worst yet. The guy behind the counter agreed with me that in 2-3 years, or maybe 5-10 if things didn't work out, EVFs would equal optical. But not yet. And although you can do a EVF 'rangefinder', it's an absurd work-around, like a steam-driven machine-gun.
Cheers,
R.