Bnack
Established
I find it funny when I hear people talk about the lack of technological prowess of someone like Zeiss. As a molecular biologist... I've had the opportunity to use the new Zeiss 710 confocal laser scanning microscope (which by the way is currently knocking the socks off the current Leica model due its extremely high signal to noise ratio sensor). Now... I realize that their specialty in this piece of equipment is still the lenses, and that most of the other stuff is manufactured by other companies and supplied to them. But if you saw what into making one of these quarter-of-a-million dollar scopes, I think you laugh at the statement that Zeiss doesn't have the know-how or resources. It may also be true that Zeiss microscopy and Zeiss cameras are quite different divisions and such... but trust me, the folks at Zeiss know what their doing. They could make one if they wanted.... they just have to decide if they want to.
amateriat
We're all light!
Speaking for myself, my workflow allows me to print up to 13 x 19" with stunning results, and I can discern lens/film characteristics without much effort. It's not just what you do, but how you do it. (A good scanner and disciplined workflow certainly help, though.)
A good inkjet print is different from a wet print, but can stand on its own merits just fine.
Bnack: Agreed. And, let's not forget their cine-lens department...
- Barrett
sojournerphoto
Veteran
Noe Danaher are an interesting bunch...
wgerrard
Veteran
Thanks, Barrett. I'm waiting for an enlarger delivery, so I'll give that side of things a try and see if I enjoy it. Or, indeed, if I find printing to be rewarding. If the answer is yes to the latter and no to the former, I'll save my pennies for a good printer and bumping up my Coolscan V ED.
victoriapio
Well-known
Back to Keith's OP, Zeiss's entry in the RF business was fairly recent given the history of Leica and other RF manufactuers. So as has been stated eloquently earlier, if they want to get into the digital world, they will, if they do not, then I guess they won't :^)
Frankly, I would like to see what they could do in the digital realm.
Frankly, I would like to see what they could do in the digital realm.
ashrafazlan
Established
M9? Doubt it...X1? For sure. We're seeing more and more "compact" apsc/u43 cameras this year (E-P1, GF1, DP series). Sony definately wants a piece of this market, and Zeiss will probably ride along.
kuzano
Veteran
I commented on this on Nikon/Canon: Listen Up...
I commented on this on Nikon/Canon: Listen Up...
no sense taking more bandwidth here.
I commented on this on Nikon/Canon: Listen Up...
no sense taking more bandwidth here.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
What? !932?
They gave up making interchangeable-lens rangefinders 30+ years before Kobayashi-san started making them.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Eric T
Well-known
No other company has such an important stake in the rangefinder camera business as does Leica. No other company has a need to invest the R&D necessary to produce a high quality, full frame digital rangefinder. I don't see anyone else doing it. It just doesn't make financial sense. Zeiss has many other business lines and just doesn't need it.
And C/V? They just produced a 6x7 folder that costs $2,250 in the USA. I don't see how they could make an M9 competitor that would sell for less than $10k. I can't imagine that company would or could make the investment needed to produce a rangefinder to compete with the M9.
The only competition will come from the micro four thirds movement. Even there, Panasonic and Olympus will be making the cheaper compact, high image quality digital cameras many desire that won't be a direct threat to the M9.
And C/V? They just produced a 6x7 folder that costs $2,250 in the USA. I don't see how they could make an M9 competitor that would sell for less than $10k. I can't imagine that company would or could make the investment needed to produce a rangefinder to compete with the M9.
The only competition will come from the micro four thirds movement. Even there, Panasonic and Olympus will be making the cheaper compact, high image quality digital cameras many desire that won't be a direct threat to the M9.
kuzano
Veteran
Where Olympus went wrong???
Where Olympus went wrong???
That's an interesting question. There is one tale floating around about Olympus fulfilling a contract for one of the big press services, and suffering serious reliability problems during the duration of that contract. It's been difficult for me to find further information on this myth/rumor/story, but may be an indicator as to why Olympus has not made strides in professional markets and/or entry into SLR Autofocus.
On the other hand, perhaps they just followed their own path and never wanted to participate at a professional level, although more than a few photographers pressed their OM's into service professionally.
Where Olympus went wrong???
When I look at my OM-1 I have to wonder where they went wrong ... imagine a simple full frame digital SLR based around Maitani's design.
I'd have one like a shot!
That's an interesting question. There is one tale floating around about Olympus fulfilling a contract for one of the big press services, and suffering serious reliability problems during the duration of that contract. It's been difficult for me to find further information on this myth/rumor/story, but may be an indicator as to why Olympus has not made strides in professional markets and/or entry into SLR Autofocus.
On the other hand, perhaps they just followed their own path and never wanted to participate at a professional level, although more than a few photographers pressed their OM's into service professionally.
victoriapio
Well-known
Yes, I should have said "reentry" into RF referring to the Ikon of course. Thanks for the correction.
Mackinaw
Think Different
Easy answer, how about making their wide angles one or two stops faster? And at a price substantially less than the Leica offerings.
Jim B.
kxl
Social Documentary
The link below displays the Leica Camera financial results for fiscal year ending March 31, 2009. It is a company that is in trouble, has been in trouble, and will likely continue to be in trouble.
The M9, even if it fulfills every DRF shooter's dream, is one niche product from a company that is in dire straits.
It's certainly possible for Zeiss to have a DRF product somewhere in its internal product development lifecycle, but it would have been due to its own independently-conceived product roadmap and strategy, NOT as a reaction to a single niche product from a financially-troubled company.
http://www.corporate.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=cp_file_4371.pdf
The M9, even if it fulfills every DRF shooter's dream, is one niche product from a company that is in dire straits.
It's certainly possible for Zeiss to have a DRF product somewhere in its internal product development lifecycle, but it would have been due to its own independently-conceived product roadmap and strategy, NOT as a reaction to a single niche product from a financially-troubled company.
http://www.corporate.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=cp_file_4371.pdf
Last edited:
mark-b
Well-known
I hope Zeiss does come out with their own FF, because a $9K M9 is way out of my price range.
thomasw_
Well-known
So this is the 'leaked' price, then? I have not been following this closely as I prefer the film process and, especially, the look of film prints to the ink-jet printing of digital files. So I will not be buying a M9 for myself anytime soon. My wife, on the other hand...
But based on the 'leaked' info, what would bother me -- if I were keen on picking up a M9 -- is the VF maginification of 0,68x. I can see a lot of Leica 1,4x finder accessories being sold to M9 owners who like to shoot 50/1,4 or 90/2 or 75/1,4 type lenses. I wonder why the VF magnification is rather low.
wgerrard
Veteran
We do not know what kind of profit margin Leica expects on the sale of its cameras. They implicitly have a choice between marketing many lower cost cameras with lower profit margins, or a relative few very high cost cameras with very high individual profit margins. Given the link between Leica's prices and its reputation for quality, it's easy for me to imagine that Leica feels constrained to avoid more affordable cameras, even if that would involve no loss of quality.
namelast
Member
My guess is that Zeiss will make a digital Ikon. First Sony will (as already planned and said at the Berlin fair) develop a mirrorless camera concept, hopefully full 35mm frame. Once this will be in place, then this model will be adjusted to a rangefinder model by Zeiss/Cosina. Just my guess, but no so unfeasible, no?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
My guess is that it's technically barely feasible at best; economically very unfeasible; and given the personalities involved, even more unfeasible.
But I've been wrong before.
Cheers,
R.
namelast
Member
Possibly you are right Roger, however also the Big Guns are starting to understand that the future is mirrorless. SLR module will be there for some applications where direct through-the-viewfinder/lens is a must, but mirrorless is the future and will replace SLRs in many applications (in a measure like SLRs did with rangefinders...).
So, more investments will make something that now IS possible (let's leave out "barely"... it is possible, full stop) also possible & cheap (or more affordable) at the same time. At this point a digital Ikon (or another affordable digital rangefinder) will pop up and compete with Leica. I foresee this happening in 3-4 years time. Since I do not have the money for an M9 (not even for an M8) I will gladly wait (& keep using beloved film in the meantime). Have fun!
So, more investments will make something that now IS possible (let's leave out "barely"... it is possible, full stop) also possible & cheap (or more affordable) at the same time. At this point a digital Ikon (or another affordable digital rangefinder) will pop up and compete with Leica. I foresee this happening in 3-4 years time. Since I do not have the money for an M9 (not even for an M8) I will gladly wait (& keep using beloved film in the meantime). Have fun!
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
Building a digital camera is not a matter of immediate profitability, but a matter of survival. A company CEO should know that while the COO might be more concerned about operational profits.
Those who failed to do do convincingly, from Minolta, to Konica, to Yashica, to Contax were all eventually side-lined or died.
In the RF world:
Denial will never work.
Those who failed to do do convincingly, from Minolta, to Konica, to Yashica, to Contax were all eventually side-lined or died.
In the RF world:
- Leica had to do something. Relying on a 50 year old M concept is a delusion and waiting to die. M7 with AE was a 25 year old idea already before introduction. What took them so long?
- Zeiss Ikon ZM itself at 2004 was no better than a Minolta CLE knock-off...including even the camera shape and functions. The ZM would buy Zeiss some time and stake a claim at the expense of Leica...then.
- Voigtlander's future cannot be building and rebuilding lens for the legacy M market. Kobayashi San's well-publicized "dislike" of digital not withstanding. Voigtlander already had a test of concept at the expense of Epson, nothing could hold them back really. At the very least, they could have upgraded to a 12Mp APS-size chip now abandoned by Nikon.
- Contax could have adapted the G2 into digital...the motorized auto-focus lenses and camera firmware are already there. The zoom viewfinder can be improved. I was very surprised that Zeiss didn't look at it more.
Denial will never work.