hankg Posted November 11, 2007 Share #21 Posted November 11, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) The idea being to take away the market and then move them to my lenses. What market? Any Nikon or Canon employee who suggested diverting resources to make an M rangefinder in order to get a piece of the tiny RF market would be shown the door. After all the engineering is more difficult for the M mount then any SLR so costs are higher yet the potential sales are much, much lower. Why bother? They are marshaling all the resources they have to stay competitive in the DSLR and P&S market which is fiercely competitive, a million times larger and where you can expect much larger returns on investment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 11, 2007 Posted November 11, 2007 Hi hankg, Take a look here Firmware Upgrade. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
woodda Posted November 11, 2007 Share #22 Posted November 11, 2007 Wheel still not fixed and for some reason my SD extreme 3 does snot work now. Card will not show or format Any suggestions Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradreiman Posted November 11, 2007 Share #23 Posted November 11, 2007 Wheel still not fixed and for some reason my SD extreme 3 does snot work now. Card will not show or format Any suggestions Regards i have also a sandisk ultra2 that does not work. it is the one i used for the firmware update. I am unable to format it in camera and i am unable to delete anything from it on my mac. the photos from my last shoot are still there and i can import to mac but cannot delete. when i try to format in camera i hit the "yes" button and it goes back to previous menu. i've just tried everything i can with no success. weird. all my other cards work-its just the one i did the firmware upgrade to. i formatted in camera after the firmware upgrade and shot 58 shot with the card with no problems. when i try to delete files in camera one at a time it goes into negative numbers in the display-weird that they even have a minus sign in the readout for negative numbered files. is your experience the same?...brad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodda Posted November 11, 2007 Share #24 Posted November 11, 2007 NO just it cannot be seen or uised. I think I will have to send it back to the manufacturer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradreiman Posted November 11, 2007 Share #25 Posted November 11, 2007 weird-i wonder if we'll start hearing more of this. pretty ambitious to send it to manufacturer. i have used this card for probably 5000 shots at least and it only cost fifty bucks-the price of 10 or so rolls of apx-doubt i'll bother to try to get a refund...b Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodda Posted November 11, 2007 Share #26 Posted November 11, 2007 It is covered for 5 years waste not want not:). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradreiman Posted November 11, 2007 Share #27 Posted November 11, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) i hear ya im just lazy and content i guess...B Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted November 11, 2007 Share #28 Posted November 11, 2007 Brad, Have you tried to erase the card with Disk Utility? I'm sure you've checked, but is the card unlocked? Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradreiman Posted November 11, 2007 Share #29 Posted November 11, 2007 yeah disk utilty wont repair erase or anything. i tried it locked and unlocked. tried everything i can think of and it just wont give. still has the photies on it adn won't erase em or format or anything-weird. of course i did the firmware upgrade and the leopard upgrade the same day so now don't know which to blame...b Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted November 11, 2007 Share #30 Posted November 11, 2007 What market? Any Nikon or Canon employee who suggested diverting resources to make an M rangefinder in order to get a piece of the tiny RF market would be shown the door. After all the engineering is more difficult for the M mount then any SLR so costs are higher yet the potential sales are much, much lower. Why bother? They are marshaling all the resources they have to stay competitive in the DSLR and P&S market which is fiercely competitive, a million times larger and where you can expect much larger returns on investment. Hank, How many Nikon D3's do you think Nikon will sell? How many of the high end Canon's do you think are sold? Ten thousand, 50K, 100K? When you are talking $10K to start for a camera with a few lenses you are not talking a mass consumer market. I would be surprised if the entire market world wide for all brands combined exceeded 100K units. Yet, the large research expenditures are put into these high end units (same as the car industry did/does with racing cars) because they establish the company and its brands as being the best and the marketing affect carries down to their consumer units where the real money is to be made. It also could open up a whole new lens market if they did their own lens line. It also gives them a way to further distribute their R&D investment by spreading it over more high end models. The incremental cost to take a technology you already have and repackage it is far less than starting from scratch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted November 11, 2007 Share #31 Posted November 11, 2007 Hank, How many Nikon D3's do you think Nikon will sell? How many of the high end Canon's do you think are sold? Ten thousand, 50K, 100K? When you are talking $10K to start for a camera with a few lenses you are not talking a mass consumer market. I would be surprised if the entire market world wide for all brands combined exceeded 100K units. Yet, the large research expenditures are put into these high end units (same as the car industry did/does with racing cars) because they establish the company and its brands as being the best and the marketing affect carries down to their consumer units where the real money is to be made. It also could open up a whole new lens market if they did their own lens line. It also gives them a way to further distribute their R&D investment by spreading it over more high end models. The incremental cost to take a technology you already have and repackage it is far less than starting from scratch. Canon shipped 19.7 million digital cameras in 2006 of which about 2 million were DSLR's. You are going to compare that base of resources that Canon has to draw from with Leica? They are not even on the same planet and the market for high end DSLR's dwarfs the M market. Combine the total of event, news, sports, wedding, studio, fashion, portrait, etc, etc, photogs using high-end 35mm DSLR's and compare the number to M8 sales -the M8 is a tiny drop in the bucket of either the pro or amateur market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted November 11, 2007 Share #32 Posted November 11, 2007 I'd add one note to the above. Even if the high end Canon DSLR's only represent 10% of the total 2 million or so annual Canon DSLR sales. The 1Ds does not have to bear the cost of development all on its' own. Unlike the M8 much of hardware and software development is shared among all the Canon DSLR's from the digital rebel on up to the 22MP 1Ds MKIII. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted November 11, 2007 Share #33 Posted November 11, 2007 Sure but out of that 2M DSLR's how many were 1Ds? Most were low end consumer DSLRs or prosumer models. I am only talking about the $6K market and above. Here the world wide market is small. At least one source claims Canon produces between 2K and 4K 1D MK III per month or 24000 to 48000 units per year. I doubt anyone else comes close so we are still talking about a worldwide market of under 100K units for $6K+ cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 11, 2007 Share #34 Posted November 11, 2007 John, for Canon and Nikon to design cameras like the 1Ds3 and the D3 works because of the trickle-down effect. The high-end models gets the pros excited, and the lower end models get the old technology from previous high-end models, and Joe end-user buys one to use the same brand as his favorite pro, or as his consumer magazine advises. When the tech starts at and stays at the high end, and there is no trickle-down effect, then only Leica plays the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted November 11, 2007 Share #35 Posted November 11, 2007 Sure but out of that 2M DSLR's how many were 1Ds? Most were low end consumer DSLRs or prosumer models. I am only talking about the $6K market and above. Here the world wide market is small. At least one source claims Canon produces between 2K and 4K 1D MK III per month or 24000 to 48000 units per year. I doubt anyone else comes close so we are still talking about a worldwide market of under 100K units for $6K+ cameras. Yes but development cost, chip fabs, software components, engineering staff lots of costs are shared across the range of DSLR's. It doesn't matter how many 1Ds's they sell a lot of what is spent to develop that model goes into a lot of the 2 million other camera's plus with 2 million DSLR units moving a year they can sustain pretty slim margins if they choose on the flagship models. The M8 is on it's own it must make money and must recover 100% of it's development costs. If Leica develops more models and broadens it's user base that picture might improve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted November 12, 2007 Share #36 Posted November 12, 2007 Yes but development cost, chip fabs, software components, engineering staff lots of costs are shared across the range of DSLR's. It doesn't matter how many 1Ds's they sell a lot of what is spent to develop that model goes into a lot of the 2 million other camera's plus with 2 million DSLR units moving a year they can sustain pretty slim margins if they choose on the flagship models. The M8 is on it's own it must make money and must recover 100% of it's development costs. If Leica develops more models and broadens it's user base that picture might improve. Exactly my point! The incremental cost to Nikon to add a RF is rather small and allows it to recoup more of its R&D on its high end models. Especially since Leica has set the price point on the high side. They only need to sell 2K units per month which they would easily be able to do with their marketing reach and by pricing it below Leica. Leica, lacking the larger distribution would not be able to compete on price or the digital expertise that a Nikon or Canon would have. In fact, the only way Leica will ever be able to compete in the digital world would be to take a daring move and open up their firmware as an open source project where they would gain the benefit of the technical talent that is available on the web. This kind of radical thinking would be hard for a traditional German company to engage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted November 12, 2007 Share #37 Posted November 12, 2007 Exactly my point! The incremental cost to Nikon to add a RF is rather small and allows it to recoup more of its R&D on its high end models. Especially since Leica has set the price point on the high side. They only need to sell 2K units per month which they would easily be able to do with their marketing reach and by pricing it below Leica. Leica, lacking the larger distribution would not be able to compete on price or the digital expertise that a Nikon or Canon would have. In fact, the only way Leica will ever be able to compete in the digital world would be to take a daring move and open up their firmware as an open source project where they would gain the benefit of the technical talent that is available on the web. This kind of radical thinking would be hard for a traditional German company to engage. You can't slap the guts of a DSLR into an M mount camera. If you could we probably would have seen Canon and Nikon RF's. You could make an RF with a Nikon SLR mount with minimal investment but I can't see that happening and if it did it wouldn't be compatible with M lenses. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Canon or Nikon to jump into the M market they are focused on a very competitive and unforgiving DSLR market with a brutal product cycle. They can't afford any distractions or drain on resources away from DSLR development. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
newyorkone Posted November 12, 2007 Share #38 Posted November 12, 2007 i have also a sandisk ultra2 that does not work. it is the one i used for the firmware update. I am unable to format it in camera and i am unable to delete anything from it on my mac. the photos from my last shoot are still there and i can import to mac but cannot delete. Am I correct in understanding that you updated your firmware with a card that still had photos on it? The instructions clearly state that the card should be freshly formatted in the camera and should only have the firmware update loaded on it. If this isn't what you did, then that is probably why the card doesn't work now... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlancasterd Posted November 12, 2007 Share #39 Posted November 12, 2007 You can't slap the guts of a DSLR into an M mount camera. If you could we probably would have seen Canon and Nikon RF's. You could make an RF with a Nikon SLR mount with minimal investment but I can't see that happening and if it did it wouldn't be compatible with M lenses. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Canon or Nikon to jump into the M market they are focused on a very competitive and unforgiving DSLR market with a brutal product cycle. They can't afford any distractions or drain on resources away from DSLR development. If anyone other than Leica (or Cosina/Voigtlander) is going to produce a '35mm' digital rangefinder camera, surely it would be most likely to be Fuji - building on their experience with the Fuji/Hasselblad X-Pan? Now a digital version of the X-Pan would really be something...! (And, yes - I DO know about image stitching) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradreiman Posted November 13, 2007 Share #40 Posted November 13, 2007 Am I correct in understanding that you updated your firmware with a card that still had photos on it? The instructions clearly state that the card should be freshly formatted in the camera and should only have the firmware update loaded on it. If this isn't what you did, then that is probably why the card doesn't work now... no steve you are incorrect in understanding that I updated my firmware with a card that still had photos on it. i don't read instructions but i am smart enough to use a "clean" formatted card to do a firmware update. i formatted after the update then took the pictures that are still on the card-come on mate... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.