So why Cosina won't make a RD2?

agentlossing said:
We need the low-financial-risk product to sell well to get the moderate and high risk models.
Click to expand...
I hope they know what they are doing and price it properly. If you start using film, with £60 you can get a Spotmatic, £90 will get you an MX, £150 an EOS1n and £250 an F5. How much people will be willing to give for a new p&s? We'll wait and see.

My view is that they should have tried to test the market with a good quality SLR in the £300 -£600 region.

Regarding the RD2, nowadays all the money are in mobile phones - it is the latest hotcake. Back in 2005, digital cameras was the buzzword and people were willing to throw money in the pot.
 
p.giannakis said:
…

Regarding the RD2, nowadays all the money are in mobile phones - it is the latest hotcake. Back in 2005, digital cameras was the buzzword and people were willing to throw money in the pot.
Click to expand...
I think this is probably true. For me, I chose to buy a Ricoh GR iii rather than an iPho…15 - my current phone works perfectly well.

I’m not much for social media sharing anyway, but it can do it well enough. For those who are younger and more with the current zeitgeist, I suspect the A.I. assisted phone is more to their liking.
 
When I went in to get my new phone on Friday (I ordered a Motorola Razr & got it last evening), I made sure to take my Leica in with me so there wouldn't be any pestering about phone camera nonsense. I have other things I use my phone/hand-held computer for.

A new toy with an old toy ;) L1009334.jpg
 
sojournerphoto said:
I think this is probably true. For me, I chose to buy a Ricoh GR iii rather than an iPho…15 - my current phone works perfectly well.
Click to expand...
I usually get my wife's old phone whenever they upgrade it at her work. Now I have a Samsung S7 and I am extremely happy with it.

Going back to the RD2, is there a market for a camera like that nowadays? Fuji seems to have the whole cake and eating it. Leica products are in a different price bracket.
 
There are so many variables that it must be all but impossible to make an educated guess as to how many camera units need to be sold to achieve break even on a given production run.

For example we are told that Leica made a loss on every M5 and Leicaflex. One imagines this is due to low sales due to high retail price plus huge development costs and also high manufacturing costs. I suspect that if you took the development costs out of the equation it would still be loss making.

Does anyone have any insight into this side of things?
 
p.giannakis said:
I hope they know what they are doing and price it properly. If you start using film, with £60 you can get a Spotmatic, £90 will get you an MX, £150 an EOS1n and £250 an F5. How much people will be willing to give for a new p&s? We'll wait and see.

My view is that they should have tried to test the market with a good quality SLR in the £300 -£600 region.

Regarding the RD2, nowadays all the money are in mobile phones - it is the latest hotcake. Back in 2005, digital cameras was the buzzword and people were willing to throw money in the pot.
Click to expand...
I think people who are enough of enthusiasts to go on eBay looking for cameras will try not just one, but several. If they have the Pentax as an option, especially if it's there at a brick and mortar film photography store (no idea whether it will be), I think people will buy it.
 
I owned an R-D1 briefly and it didn't work for me. I've been lucky enough to afford the digital Leica M models since. I tried a Pixii briefly in 2022, and returned it as it also, at that time, just was too raw and unfinished for me.

An R-D2? No interest from me. I'm pretty set with the M10-M and M10-R that I have now, alongside my Hasselblad stuff.

G
 
I‘d love to hold a RD-2 in my hands. It would have to have the advance lever though (I know, it doesn’t advance but cock the shutter).
 
I imagine that the market for digital rangefinder cameras is actually a lot smaller than people might imagine. And that Leica's high prices for digital M cameras are less a barrier to more mainstream popularity than they are a reflection of how limited the market really is. And that people who want a Leica, want a Leica. It does not matter if they are/are not the finest photographic instruments, it's all about the brand's vibe.

I like soulful/iconic products aka "cult objects" too, but there's a limit to how far I will go to pursue them! I've become increasingly aware of how fickle my moods can be, and how quickly I can become bored and restless with even iconic "forever" purchases.
 
I don't know if the current market is large enough for another digital rangefinder brand, in addition to Leica and those French upstarts over at Pixii.

On the bright side, though, I'm sure that Cosina's rangefinder lens business has gotten a nice boost from the many compatible digital mirrorless systems.

Mirrorless EVFs aren't the same, of course, but they work well with manual focus lenses of all sorts. Fuji's X-Pro line, in particular, is clearly working hard to approximate the rangefinder experience, and that seems to be good enough for a lot of buyers.
 
It's been a while since the notion of an Epson RD1/RD2/R2D2 reissue has come up; again. I participated in the first of these fantasy threads maybe 15 years ago.
I guess it had to happen.
I want to see Nikon begin regular production of an F2AS alongside the complete line of AiS lenses. Let's also revisit the whole Kodachrome fantasy. It's not deja vu, but the parched skeleton of a deceased mammal of the Equus genus.
One can dream though.

Phil Forrest
 
I have a hunch that this Leica boom will gradually wane as people get tired of the equipment talk and want to get back to taking pictures.
For most photographic needs, an iPhone is enough+. There are excellent digital pocketable cameras with powerful zooms and video.
Go and do that with an RF camera! We are a particular bunch. I have a remarkable set of Sony bodies and lenses. Still, I wanted to learn the Leica Way, so I got myself the M9 and a 35mm f/1.4 Nokton II. There is a certain satisfaction when I get the focus and the exposure right. I was more focused in composition, lights, and poses with Sony.
I do not think the Leica Renaissance will be strong enough to bring us M-mount RF bodies from China,
The Chinese are good at math. (if not for politics!)
 
santino said:
I think Kyocera.
Click to expand...
The Contax brand returned to Carl Zeiss AG when the agreement with Kyocera to make cameras ended in 2005.

The Zeiss ZX1 seemed like a good idea, including in-camera editing, but appears to have been stillborn. I have never seen one. Zeiss have their sights set very firmly in much more profitable sectors of the optical market than cameras.
 
As a business model, film cameras are not enough profitable unless they become a collection item too.
With digital you can come out with a new model every year, with some (more or less) useless upgrade, justifying the purchase of another camera.
With film you can't. Only Leica can sell new models that are almost the same of the old ones.

Furthermore, film camera customers are usually very informed and have no issues buying 2nd hand gear.
I don't know many "casual" film photographers that would ve interested in spending 2000 euros for a brand new non collectible analog camera...

About a non leica digital rangefinder... due to the small numbers, do you really think it would cost a lot less than a digital leica? who would buy a 5000€ cosina camera?
 
Freakscene said:
The Contax brand returned to Carl Zeiss AG when the agreement with Kyocera to make cameras ended in 2005.

The Zeiss ZX1 seemed like a good idea, including in-camera editing, but appears to have been stillborn. I have never seen one. Zeiss have their sights set very firmly in much more profitable sectors of the optical market than cameras.
Click to expand...
I have Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2.0 and 40mm f/2.0 lenses for my Sony. They give excellent results, especially the 40mm, with its near-macro capability, which is a pearl. This is why I have my eyes fixed on the Nokton 40mm f/1.2, and eventually, I will buy it.
From Roger Cicala (Lensrentals), I understand that Zeiss and Tamron share components (surprise, every industry does). They supposedly share designs also. Sony owns 14.8% of Tamron, so why not?
Cosina makes Voigtländer and Zeiss lenses. I have never seen problems related to one specific manufacturer in the lens business.
Most lenses from big brands and third parties are better than we deserve.
 
luuca said:
As a business model, film cameras are not enough profitable unless they become a collection item too.
Click to expand...
As a business model, cameras are not profitable enough. The sector is doing terribly.
AndyCapp said:
I have Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2.0 and 40mm f/2.0 lenses for my Sony. They give excellent results, especially the 40mm, with its near-macro capability, which is a pearl. This is why I have my eyes fixed on the Nokton 40mm f/1.2, and eventually, I will buy it.
From Roger Cicala (Lensrentals), I understand that Zeiss and Tamron share components (surprise, every industry does). They supposedly share designs also. Sony owns 14.8% of Tamron, so why not?
Cosina makes Voigtländer and Zeiss lenses. I have never seen problems related to one specific manufacturer in the lens business.
Most lenses from big brands and third parties are better than we deserve.
Click to expand...
I have plenty of current Zeiss lenses too, including Batis (I even tolerate often awful Sony menus to use them), Milvus (if you really want film to look good put the 50mm f1.4 Milvus on a Nikon or Canon SLR - they are like a more modern version of where the Leica R lenses might have ended up if they had survived) and an Otus, but it’s clear that Zeiss is not putting much effort in. There is no reason to. And it is a clear sign that they talked a lot about a camera that essentially never materialised.

Marty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top