GaryLH
Mentor
In terms of re-issues from Nikon, there are other Japanese cameras that were RF designed that were in the not to distant past.*
Before Konica went under, there was the Konica RF and if I remember correct for fixed lens, the contax T was actually made by a Japanese company that right now I cannot remember how to spell the name. The Epson rd1 also comes to mind. The Fuji medium format RF cameras and the xpan.
Btw Minolta also made the CL for Leica.
I really doubt we will c an RF based digital camera from a Japanese camera maker in the near future. I personally think that Fuji would have done it given their past history when they released the xp1.
Gary
Last edited:
judsonzhao
Well-known
Definitely will happen but it takes time. Once Canon Nikon Fuji go into this realm, it's gonna be interesting. Look back the history, once entered the digital era, not a single company still alive other than Leica in 135mm
With that being said, Leica will be still alive but threatned..
With that being said, Leica will be still alive but threatned..
Nikon F6, Lomography, etc. but not much else.
jschrader
Well-known
I think the google translation is somehow weak. The title is
Sony system cameras threaten the Leica niche.
I think what he wants to say is that Leica is not alone in the niche any more; i.e. that a digital non-SLR of a quality comparable to Leica is available now - and much cheaper.
That may be true (the author did not use the camera, it seems). I think however Leicas are bought for their handling, for their finder and manual focusing.
Therefore, whatever the share of collectors and other who buy because they are expensive and not despite it, there ARE good reasons for a Leica that nobody even tries to beat.
I changed to an M6 from analog Nikon SLRs (via D700). I love it for the handling. I could probably do as well with a Sony as with an M9 but I would not think of it for 1/125 of a second.
Sony system cameras threaten the Leica niche.
I think what he wants to say is that Leica is not alone in the niche any more; i.e. that a digital non-SLR of a quality comparable to Leica is available now - and much cheaper.
That may be true (the author did not use the camera, it seems). I think however Leicas are bought for their handling, for their finder and manual focusing.
Therefore, whatever the share of collectors and other who buy because they are expensive and not despite it, there ARE good reasons for a Leica that nobody even tries to beat.
I changed to an M6 from analog Nikon SLRs (via D700). I love it for the handling. I could probably do as well with a Sony as with an M9 but I would not think of it for 1/125 of a second.
Markus
Established
You are right. I distinguish between Sony and Minolta. Minolta was a great manufacturer. And it is obvious, that Sony pushed into the market because of Minolta's KnowHow. I woulndt be surprised, if somithing like the a7 was one of Minoltas idea. My first digital camera was a Sony (F828) and I hated it. The viewfinder was ugly and camera was slow. A friend of mine had the EOS 20D at the same time. I sold the Sony and got a EOS 20D with a nice optical viewfinder.
Japaneee manufacturers don't use rangefinders, because they are too difficult to build. The only japanese manufacturer which builds rangefinders is Mamiya (Mamiya 7 II) and Cosina (Voigtländer Bessa III). Sony, Canon and somehow Nikon are mainly electronics corporations. Building a ramgefinder is
annoying for them, because every single camera needs to be checked and adjusted. A camera like the a7 is much easier to produce. Nobody cares, if the viewfinder LCD is 1/10 of a millimeter misaligned.
It would have been more accurate to have captioned it
"New Type of Camera threatens the Leica Niche"
As I have posted elsewhere in other RFF theads these new Sonys are just the first of their type.
Nikon and Canon will be forced to market similar cameras to remain competitive. Likewise Fuji will have to move up to full frame in the FujiX system.
Its all just a matter of time,
and more competition and more choices!
Stephen
cosmonaut
Well-known
Well I always thought Leica was about simplicity and shooting at a slower pace. The a7 doesn't fit the bill with that. It is what it is. But nothing will ever be a Leica killer. Who knows how the old Leica lenses will work on a Sony? I know I wasn't impressed with the NEX7 with Leica glass. I wouldn't buy the a7 specifically to use Leica lenses on it.
hausen
Well-known
And with Leica you can also add concern about the quality of the electronics, whether they get on with certain SD cards, massive dust issues and huge depreciation
swoop
Well-known
They're out there. My wait time was about two weeks.
Markus
Established
Yes, I had the same experience with my Mamiya 7 II. But thanks to their service the problem was solved within one week. I think Leica will offer the same service. Of course, this is not the ideal case.
Markus
Established
Because from a technical point, the rangefinder isn't anylonger important for digital photography. Film has to protected from exposure. A sensor can be exposed at any time to record an image for the electronically viewfinder.
So a modern camera doesn't need a rangefinder - but I need it because I'm neither modern nor digitally
leicapixie
Well-known
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137308
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137308
The main topic was "threat to Leica..".
I in no way predicted the future.
Sony doesn't support older* equipment.
From personal experience, something that was a bit over,
a year old, was marked as obsolete and not repairable.
Reason it was 5 years older in Japan.
Sony will no doubt be successful.
No matter how successful, it is NOT a Leica.
Sorry.
Horse races, like the Stock Exchange, Beauty Pageants and
Sport competitions are all rigged/fixed.
I don't watch sports or gamble..
TY for the invite.
Are you a Leica user? I am. They are not perfect.
They are special.
That specialty is not a list of specifications, but a feel.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137308
The main topic was "threat to Leica..".
I in no way predicted the future.
Sony doesn't support older* equipment.
From personal experience, something that was a bit over,
a year old, was marked as obsolete and not repairable.
Reason it was 5 years older in Japan.
Sony will no doubt be successful.
No matter how successful, it is NOT a Leica.
Sorry.
Horse races, like the Stock Exchange, Beauty Pageants and
Sport competitions are all rigged/fixed.
I don't watch sports or gamble..
TY for the invite.
Are you a Leica user? I am. They are not perfect.
They are special.
That specialty is not a list of specifications, but a feel.
GaryLH
Mentor
I get the simplicity point but I disagree w/ slower pace. To me slower pace is more of a mind set not really a function of the camera itself. Granted some cameras force a slower pace like a 4x5... But I have seen people snapping pictures left and right w/ a Leica at a fairly good clip...
Gary
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear David,
Well, you can, anyway. I just take pictures with mine. Which is what I bought 'em for.
Cheers,
R.
Lss
Well-known
Well, I am a fairly new rangefinder user, and for me rangefinder cameras are very much about speed.
uhoh7
Mentor
Another very interesting post at FM
CK Dexter Haven
Well-known
There is/was a market for Leica, that makes/made pricing irrelevant. But, that scheme is based on Leica's legacy and its history. A great many people buy Leicas because they're buying into legitimacy — those people are aware of the heritage of the film cameras. But, those people are getting older every day, and two things accompany that age: eyesight fails, and AF becomes more and more attractive; and younger and younger buyers dominate the marketplace. Fewer 20 year olds in the next generation will revere the Leica marque than did 10 years ago. The kids don't care about HC-B, and at some point, it'll be only the kids — and their kids — who are buying cameras. Heck, the kids today don't even remember what cell phones were like before the iPhone.
Leica is no longer competing in the same arena as when they offered the M6-MP, where they could claim "mechanical perfection" and "hand-built" and all that. It's now all about the sensor, and Leica isn't likely to ever be at the leading edge of sensor design/implementation.
At some point, the sensor is more important than the lens. Further, at some point, consumers will figure out that their images don't benefit from the theoretical 2% advantage of a Leica lens, and will balk at paying the additional $4,000 to walk around with the theory.
Leica is no longer competing in the same arena as when they offered the M6-MP, where they could claim "mechanical perfection" and "hand-built" and all that. It's now all about the sensor, and Leica isn't likely to ever be at the leading edge of sensor design/implementation.
At some point, the sensor is more important than the lens. Further, at some point, consumers will figure out that their images don't benefit from the theoretical 2% advantage of a Leica lens, and will balk at paying the additional $4,000 to walk around with the theory.
GaryLH
Mentor
When you quit trying to focus them, and set them at 10 feet and f8, they speed up a lot.
+1. Been waiting for someone to say that.
Gary
Lss
Well-known
It's not just that. It has a lot to do with the intuitiveness of the focusing aid. And many lenses are very quick to focus. Some others really require prefocus for fast shooting. You pick the lens for the job.When you quit trying to focus them, and set them at 10 feet and f8, they speed up a lot.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
Get ahead of the curve. Sell that old outdated M9-MM-M240 body now on ebay at a bargain price before it plummets in value below the price of a new Sony A7... Then buy an A8r next year, and pocket a few grand for more Leica glass. Win/win.
Sardonic humor?
Sardonic humor?