dickgrafixstop Posted May 31, 2011 Share #1 Posted May 31, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Let me tighten the chinstrap on my picklehaube and wade into this one. Imagine that Zeiss (or Epson, Voigtlander, Cosina or someone) came to market with a "new" full frame digital camera that (1) was completely compatible with M lenses, (2) had the viewfinder (and framelines) of the current Zeiss film offering, (3) offered black and traditional silver finish options, (5) was "mechanically sound" and needed no special filters, and (6) was offered at a street price of under $5000 ......... Would you (1) look at it as a entry level full frame alternative to the M9 or it's successor? (2) consider it as a back up to an existing M9? (3) replace my M8/M8-2 to go full frame? (4) ignore it and save my pennies for a M9? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 31, 2011 Posted May 31, 2011 Hi dickgrafixstop, Take a look here Alternative to M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bill Posted May 31, 2011 Share #2 Posted May 31, 2011 (5) Carry on happily using film Ms. Regards, Bill 9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freusen Posted May 31, 2011 Share #3 Posted May 31, 2011 Imagine......... Dream on! ____________ FrankR Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 31, 2011 Share #4 Posted May 31, 2011 I would reach for my alarm clock, wake up and go to work.... If such a camera were a paying proposition for those firms they would have built it long ago. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arminw Posted May 31, 2011 Share #5 Posted May 31, 2011 Just get the real thing and get yourself an M9 .... Happy Shooting ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 31, 2011 Share #6 Posted May 31, 2011 (6) consider it with attention. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
exit Posted June 1, 2011 Share #7 Posted June 1, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) pre-order it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted June 1, 2011 Share #8 Posted June 1, 2011 I'm sure I would buy it. Shoot 1000 images with it. Spend hours and hours pixel-peeping to compare to my M9 images. Conclude the M9 pixels are sharper. Put it on eBay. End up $2,000 lighter having confirmed what I already knew. That being said, I have had no problems with my M9, so as long as that doesn't change any "alternative" has a high bar to clear. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBatemanJ Posted June 1, 2011 Share #9 Posted June 1, 2011 If it will be around $3000 with good sensor, I may replace with M8 which is now backup of M9 so answer may be yes for (2) and (3). SATOKI Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted June 2, 2011 Share #10 Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) If I was not a M9 owner already, I'd buy a used M9 for some USD 5000 and walk past the "alternative" offering in the store;) Considering the relatively low volumes Leica produces, I believe the M9 is quite competitively priced and potential followers will have a hard time offering similar performance at a significantly lower price. Camera makers have to think how there lens business is going to benefit from new bodies to support a new camera technology/line development, manufacturing and marketing investment decision. And new high end m-mount cameras will rather benefit Leica m-mount lens sales than competitors' irrespective of the camera bodies make. So all in all, Leica is a tough contenter in the narrow RF m-mount and m-lens market space, recently also benefitting from a weakening Euro relative to potential competitors' home currencies. Edited June 2, 2011 by Ecaton Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted June 2, 2011 Share #11 Posted June 2, 2011 Would you (1) look at it as a entry level full frame alternative to the M9 or it's successor? (2) consider it as a back up to an existing M9? (3) replace my M8/M8-2 to go full frame? (4) ignore it and save my pennies for a M9? 1) Yes, I would. 2) Maybe, but it may be too expensive for me as a back-up. 3) No doubt...if you can afford to do so. 4) Depends on one's income. I gave up on waiting for an alternative and figured out a way to buy a M9. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted June 3, 2011 Share #12 Posted June 3, 2011 As one Zeiss rep said to me - "Zeiss isn't sure there is a sustainable market for ONE digital rangefinder camera, let alone two!" "(1) was completely compatible with M lenses..." Since even Leica themselves haven't achieved this yet (red-edge, no support for 21 Super-Angulons and 35/28 Summarons, minimal menu-only support for 135s and some other lenses (35 f/1.4 pre-ASPH)) - this seems the biggest hypothetical. Who is going to source the sensor for this bit of magic? Zeiss and Cosina/Voigtlander don't make sensors - Epson may, but seems to be totally out of the camera business except for the remaining R-D1x's, and those only in Japan (Epson Digital Cameras: Digital Photography Review). Kodak likely has exclusivity agreements with Leica on the M9 sensor, and patents with Leica on the special sensor technologies that allow the M9 to do as well as it does with <50mm lenses. You might as well add Ford or Boeing to the list of possible builders - they seem to have just as much applicable expertise (and interest) as the other companies mentioned. But I'll play along - if it used the .dng file format, performed at the M9 standard, and fulfilled (2), (3) and (5) of the specs (what happened to (4)?) - and cost under $4500 US, I'd give it consideration as (2). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shard Posted June 3, 2011 Share #13 Posted June 3, 2011 I can't remember the source but I think in an interview, Zeiss mentioned that they cannot make a full frame digital M and still be price competitive with the M9. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted June 3, 2011 Share #14 Posted June 3, 2011 1. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted June 3, 2011 Share #15 Posted June 3, 2011 I would have to take a pass on it. I owned a Konica Hexar RF at one time, and at another time an Epson RD-1. Both unmistakably good cameras. Both filled specifications which (at the time each came on the market) Leica staunchly maintained were as yet impossible, and some might say provided the needed impetus for Leica to "get with the program" so to speak. But ultimately I ended up with Leica's offerings, the M7 and M8. In the case of both the Hexar RF and Epson RD-1, there were no successors, and both companies have "left the building" at least where high-end cameras are concerned. I'm not sure what the situation is regarding service/repairs on those cameras, but I'm guessing it isn't great. Maybe I'm just a snob, but as rangefinders go I'll stick with Leica. Used is fine, since the cost of new equipment is more than I consider spending on this hobby. But I hope others don't all think like I do, because those competitive products serve to inspire Leica. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jase Posted June 3, 2011 Share #16 Posted June 3, 2011 Let me tighten the chinstrap on my picklehaube and wade into this one. Imagine that Zeiss (or Epson, Voigtlander, Cosina or someone) came to market with a "new" full frame digital camera that (1) was completely compatible with M lenses, (2) had the viewfinder (and framelines) of the current Zeiss film offering, (3) offered black and traditional silver finish options, (5) was "mechanically sound" and needed no special filters, and (6) was offered at a street price of under $5000 ......... Would you (1) look at it as a entry level full frame alternative to the M9 or it's successor? (2) consider it as a back up to an existing M9? (3) replace my M8/M8-2 to go full frame? (4) ignore it and save my pennies for a M9? If it had no AA filter.... I would sell my M8, buy it immediately and not worry about an M9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jase Posted June 3, 2011 Share #17 Posted June 3, 2011 Who is going to source the sensor for this bit of magic? Errr.......... Canon. Canon could make one for errr Canon, who could produce a rangefinder like.... errrr.... Canon used to. And as far as what the Zeiss rep said, I'll bet he said that before the Fuji X100 came out. Who'd have thought it would be possible to make a camera that looks like a rangefinder, without an interchangeable lens and sell it for as much as the X100 until Fuji did? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted June 3, 2011 Share #18 Posted June 3, 2011 I think that we've been here before. Didn't Zeiss make a cheaper-than-Leica film rangefinder which was such a run away success that it provided serious competition to Leica? No? Well why would a full-frame digital? You could perhaps ask the same question about that film camera? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 3, 2011 Share #19 Posted June 3, 2011 We can imagine any scenario we like to dream of... ... personally I give 0,01% chance that someone announces a RF / FF Digital / M glass compatible : in this case I'd simply do what I did when the Zeiss film RF arrived : "wow, interesting !!! (1) Let's wait sometime to see if it proves to be succesful, THEN (2), let's start to think IF I'd like to have it..." : I even never reached (2)... Given this is a thread on "imagination"... a camera that instantly could make me to think of should be something like a NEX in FF, EVF, M mount (or ring for) at 1,5-2 x the NEX price... but a) far from sure I'd buy it am still with M8 only, with the most logical next step in my mind... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted June 3, 2011 Share #20 Posted June 3, 2011 I think that we've been here before. Didn't Zeiss make a cheaper-than-Leica film rangefinder which was such a run away success that it provided serious competition to Leica? No? Well why would a full-frame digital? You could perhaps ask the same question about that film camera? Well, there are tons of film rangefinders to choose from... 70-80 years worth. There are only three digital rangefinders one of which is full frame and current. Also, how do you guys know that the Zeiss RF hasn't been successful? Zeiss may not have needed to sell huge numbers in order to be profitable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.