So why Cosina won't make a RD2?

[AndyCapp]

As a business model, cameras are not profitable enough. The sector is doing terribly.

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

Zeiss cannot compete with the modern Sony lineup. When I got my first A7III, the situation was different.
Who can compete with Sony technology? Nikon and Canon were years behind with their first mirrorless cameras.
"They say" that they are about equal now. It is possible, but none of my concerns.

 

[Freakscene]

Zeiss cannot compete with the modern Sony lineup. When I got my first A7III, the situation was different.
Who can compete with Sony technology? Nikon and Canon were years behind with their first mirrorless cameras.
"They say" that they are about equal now. It is possible, but none of my concerns.

Of course: Zeiss is worth/has a market cap of ~$11 billion and Sony is worth/has a market cap of ~$110 billion. The point is that Zeiss tried to do something different and new, which was not trying to compete but to make its own market segment, but Zeiss could not, did not or decided not to pull it off. They are big enough and serious enough that they could have done it had they put enough resources in. The most likely driver is that the probable return was not ultimately worth it. The camera market seriously tanked between when the ZX1 was announced and when it finally failed to appear.

 

[wlewisiii]

Perhaps. I have never cared what Sony does though. Do they make cameras? I've never bothered to even pick one up. On the other hand I have Nikon lenses that date back to the mid 50's and Zeiss lenses over a 100 years old that I can use on Nikon & Leica cameras that I already own. I can't get too excited about modern stuff I can't afford anyway

I was out yesterday using a 1937 Zeiss lens on my Leica M 240. I had a lovely time and got a couple of images I liked out of it.

 

[splitimageview]

The problem with a new RD has more to do with committing to the semiconductor (sensor) supplier. It’s not just one camera release, once one gets onto the digital treadmill, it’s a continuous turnover as semiconductors are not simply manufactured and put on the shelf like potato chips waiting for customers to grab some. The purchase volume must be significant or it just doesn’t make sense.

It’s also a firmware/software commitment, whether in-house or subcontracted it’s a major expense.

These factors would be easily surmounted for someone like Sony.

There certainly is room in the price equation as the current Leica offerings are ridiculous even for them - $9k for a body?? How about an M-mount Sony with an optical viewfinder for $3k or less? Would that sell? They offer a full-frame A7CII for $2200 currently.

More likely tho they might offer an X100-style hybrid with E-mount.

 

[Michael Markey]

As a business model, cameras are not profitable enough. The sector is doing terribly.

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

Yep ... I loved my Batis lenses.
It does seem that the whole sector is struggling .

 

[Michael Markey]

Perhaps. I have never cared what Sony does though. Do they make cameras? I've never bothered to even pick one up. On the other hand I have Nikon lenses that date back to the mid 50's and Zeiss lenses over a 100 years old that I can use on Nikon & Leica cameras that I already own. I can't get too excited about modern stuff I can't afford anyway

I was out yesterday using a 1937 Zeiss lens on my Leica M 240. I had a lovely time and got a couple of images I liked out of it.

Sony make superb cameras.
I`ve had a few .
I concluded that they aren`t for me for various reasons but when I need AF and I`m struggling with the sub par AF on the latest Leica bodies I do sometimes miss them.

I think we are very fortunate with the choice on offer today from all the manufacturers.