View Full Version : R2a and R3a Info...
Mainline has it's site updated - details in English at http://www.mainlinephoto.com.au
tp
Hmmm...not many details tho :(
Stephen Gandy has stated that he will be posting a full description on www.cameraquest.com tomorrow...
Gene
Thanks for the link, Tim! The prices sound horrendous, but the gear looks great. That little 40/1.4 is especially mouth-watering.
Somebody took note of the lack of the word "Aspheric" in the lens engraving or description, and speculated that "Classic" could well indicate that this lens is directed toward those who prefer the "pre-asph" look.
I am very fond of 40mm lenses. I already have a 40mm f/1.4 (but it's for the Olympus Pen F so has a different angle of view). And a 40mm f/2 Rokkor for my CLE. And a 43mm f/1.9 Pentax-L for Leica thread. And a Voigtlander-SL 40mm f/2 for Pentax bayonet. I really don't know that this can stop me from wanting this tidy new Nokton!
Doug, the "Classic look" I guess is also acheived through a new coating too. I hope Gandy offers more detail than Mainline.
That lens has what looks like a "double tab" - a ridged slightly convex part and a smooth concave part.
I'm very interested in this lens too but I find using tabs to be very awkward. Maybe this design would help...
Peter, that's not double tab. The focusing tab is the smooth concave one. The ridged tabs are for turning the aperture ring. That design is exactly the same as Pancake II.
I find the concave focusing tab on PII very easy to use because its location is just right. I use the tip of my index finger to adjust it. On the other hand, tab positioned on the left hand side ala Oly SP really frustrated me.
I don't know if it is a tab that I think is awkward as much as it is short lenses. There has to be room for your fingers, and for me, it isn't the focus that is the problem, but the apeture ring hidden between the focus tab and the hood.
Peter, that's not double tab. The focusing tab is the smooth concave one. The ridged tabs are for turning the aperture ring.
Oooooh. I get it. Do you use the index finger of your left hand Kris? Stupid question I know but some people seem to use finger(s) on their right hand with these tabs.
Originally posted by peter_n
Do you use the index finger of your left hand Kris?
Correct. My left middle and ring fingers support the base of the camera while the index finger adjust the focus.
CameraQuest web site updated - lots of details........
including price - announced at USD499, same price as R2....
Rich Silfver
09-19-2004, 21:30
I'm sure Joe doesn't approve of this quote from Mr Gandy: "Classic Leica mount Canon fans enjoyed a 1:1 finder with the Canon P with parallax corrected framelines, but with a mediocre flare prone finder."
:)
Designer
09-20-2004, 00:30
It seems a nice price!
MMmmm.. not a bad upgrade for no extra cost eh? :) ... Nothing earth shattering but lots of nice little things, I guess a few will moan about the battery dependence but its not a real issue these days... If the R3a outer frame edge is usable for a 35mm lens I might have to start saving some $$ :D
That R3A looks tempting, especially for someone like me who doesn't have an M-mount Bessa yet.
The price of the 40mm Nokton isn't too bad either. Cheaper than the 35 Ultron, & less than half of the price of the 35 Nokton. This 40 Nokton could become a killer.
I find $160 for the new light meter a bit steep. Consider what you could get from Gossen and other brands for that price. But it's a nice little add-on for my M2....
I guess I already know what I want for XMas. :)
oh!!
I want an R3A with a 40mm 1.4!
Looks nice and compact. Considered getting a Yashica Lynx once, but they are huge!
Brian Sweeney
09-20-2004, 02:10
I find it amazing that Cosina has that much dedication to classic cameras. Wouldn't we all like him to buy some of the film plants that are shutting down. They should give Ilford to him.
I'm kind of surprised about the releases. The R2A and R3A are just too similiar, and i think will take sales away from each other. And if the R3A's outside edges of the frame cover 35mm, why will anyone buy the R2A?
I would have thought CV could have released a R3WA, R3NA, R3TA - covering wide, normal and telephoto. The R3WA having 21/28/35 framelines, the R3NA covering 35/50/75, and the R3TA 50/75/90. I would have lined up to get the WA and a TA.
I want the Nokton Classic 40mm/1.4! Please someone stop me! :eek:
No need to stop you Peter... I also want one badly ! :D
Now the question is... Single or Multi coated ? Gandy says the reason for a SC lens is to give a somewhat more 'classic' look to images... Also, I read there 'initially the lens will be only in black & M mount'. Does that mean there will be other color/mount options in a future ?
Personally I wouldn't mind at all being able to fit that lens on my Canon 7 as well, lol !
Btw, keeping the same price as for a R2 is a very interesting movement. Now, people who were expecting something different will go for the still available mechanical R2's, while people jumping on the new Bessas will probably find the price great. Brilliant :)
Brian Sweeney
09-20-2004, 02:26
I am thinking that the 40mm F1.4 would be perfect for an M3. The whole frame should just about cover the 40mm field of view. Then people will stop making fun of the Summaron with Eyes.
The Japanese on the CV site here in Japan talks about using a design philosophy from the '50s and '60s, where the character of the image was expected to be different at full aperture and you stopped it down to get progressively sharper definition. Sounds like it really might be designed for a pre-aspherical look with smooth, soft "bokeh." The Japanese deliberately contrasts this "look" with the "sharp and contrasty from full aperture" look of modern lens design. The latter is what I have in my Classic 35/2.5. I must say I wouldn't mind a really smooth 40/1.4! If it offers anything like the wonderful image quality of my 50/3.5 Heliar, then I'm definitely going to want it...
Originally posted by Roger
The Japanese on the CV site here in Japan talks about using a design philosophy from the '50s and '60s, where the character of the image was expected to be different at full aperture and you stopped it down to get progressively sharper definition. Sounds like it really might be designed for a pre-aspherical look with smooth, soft "bokeh." The Japanese deliberately contrasts this "look" with the "sharp and contrasty from full aperture" look of modern lens design. The latter is what I have in my Classic 35/2.5. I must say I wouldn't mind a really smooth 40/1.4! If it offers anything like the wonderful image quality of my 50/3.5 Heliar, then I'm definitely going to want it...
Thanks for the translation Roger :D
Now, according to that, only 500 SC lenses will be made, how about a RFF special bulk order ? :angel:
I was a little disappointed yesterday, but I have to admit that I think we have to give a hand to Cosina for offering a seemingly better camera for the same price as the R2. With manual backup at all shutter speeds, AE, and perhaps an improved meter... Bravo!
The price makes everything, perhaps the cameras aren't ground breaking with a short baselength rangefinder, but they remain a very good quality machine which do there job exceedingly well.
Edit: I hate reading things on the screen. I printed the Cameraquest page, and there is no confirmation about he manual backup of the shutter, should the batteries go. It is obvious though that he only has the standard info provided to him from Cosina, so we will have to wait a week or so to hopefully get more info. Still nice though.
Pherdinand
09-20-2004, 03:11
Oh ****, it looks so nice, the r3a and the 40/1.4 :(
it's indeed compact as predicted (i mean the lens)
but i should sell everything to be able to buy it
:D
For the R3a I estimate that the full viewfinder area corresponds roughly to the field of view of a 33m lens. This is based on measurements of the cameraquest viewfinder images, which may not be accurate.
John
On Steve's site it says that "metered manual exposure is also possible" under the 'What is Aperture Priority?' heading. I would assume that means if the battery fails you can still use the camera, just no metering and probably wouldn't function in 'A' mode as well; or am I reading that wrong?
Yay, I don't want any of those... except maybe the meter. :D
Seems like there are more LEDs for the meter now btw.
I'm with Peter and taffer. That 40mm Nokton is a sweet lens at a very decent price - $349 - wow! But Gandy says the S.C. version is only for the Japanese market?
CV 40/1.4 Nokton (http://www.cameraquest.com/voigt4014.htm)
back alley
09-20-2004, 04:52
I'm sure Joe doesn't approve of this quote from Mr "Gandy: "Classic Leica mount Canon fans enjoyed a 1:1 finder with the Canon P with parallax corrected framelines, but with a mediocre flare prone finder."
i did read that rich and all i can say is that gandy has not looked through my p's finder. no flare, very bright and 1:1 finder 40 some years before this one.
joe
Pherdinand
09-20-2004, 05:04
As a side note, i have here a cheapo minolta x300 SLR (that i bought for 15 eur with MD 50/1.7 lens incl batteries, clean and working -couldn't pass a deal like this!) and i was greatly surprised when looking through the VF and noticing the 1.00x magnification with the 50mm lens!
I wouldn't wanna look through your p either, rich, especially not 40 year old p. Now, if that had been a single malt or a nice Remy Martin cognac.... :)
Huck Finn
09-20-2004, 05:06
Laika, the outer frame edge on the R2 approximate a 28mm angle of view, so I assume that it is the same on the R3A. I couldn't see a difference between the 40mm & 35mm framelines in the pictures. I wonder if there is any difference - other than the framelines being relabelled. On the R2, the framelines provide 87% coverage, 87% of the 35mm framelines would be . . . Voila! 40mm.
Todd.Hanz
09-20-2004, 05:09
The new Bessa are good looking cameras, AE means quiet shutter and that 40mm is sooooo small looking, very nice. Anyone put their money down to hold one yet?
Todd
I'm interested to hear how quiet these new R3/R2A's are compared to the "old" R and R2.
Originally posted by Todd.Hanz
Anyone put their money down to hold one yet?
Todd
Yes, I put a deposit on the R3a. Now I'll have to wait till just before christmas before I get my hands on it. I'll just warp it up, give it to my wife, and tell her to give it to me on Christmas morning :)
Contemplated the 40/1.4, but I think I'll wait to see how the performance is before deciding.
Huck Finn
09-20-2004, 05:48
Originally posted by Huck Finn
Laika, the outer frame edge on the R2 approximate a 28mm angle of view, so I assume that it is the same on the R3A. I couldn't see a difference between the 40mm & 35mm framelines in the pictures. I wonder if there is any difference - other than the framelines being relabelled. On the R2, the framelines provide 87% coverage, 87% of the 35mm framelines would be . . . Voila! 40mm.
I'm sure I'm wrong in this comment. I didn't take into account the higher magnification of the R3A. In fact, that's probably why they went to 40mm framelines instead of 35mm. Gandy sys that he thinks that the outer frame edge approximated 35mm, so I'll take him at his word.
sfaust - I'm most probably gonna join you in the deposit list. From what I've read and seen so far, the R3A is a no-brainer. Will add a 50/2.5 before some information is at hand on the characteristics of the 40/1.4. Cheers.
Contemplated the 40/1.4, but I think I'll wait to see how the performance is before deciding.
Me too. I'm really interested in it but I would want to use it at f1.4. So I'm going to wait for the reports.
What I don't get is this "Classic" and "S.C." designation. What is the difference between the "imagery of single coated lenses to multi-coated lenses" as Gandy puts it? I thought coating had to do with light transmission and glare reflectance rather than imagery. Maybe the single coat has less contrast?
Originally posted by KirkT
On Steve's site it says that "metered manual exposure is also possible" under the 'What is Aperture Priority?' heading. I would assume that means if the battery fails you can still use the camera, just no metering and probably wouldn't function in 'A' mode as well; or am I reading that wrong?
Kirk, the camera has an electronic shutter which will operate in Aperture Priority mode, or manual metering mode, but it remains electronic. There is no mention that it will operate without batteries as the Nikon FM3a does. There probably are one or two speeds that it will operate without batteries, but I have not seen that specific detail yet. There had been speculation that the shutter would be electronic with full mechanical back-up ala the FM3a. It is obviously not the same shutter as used in the Nikon since the top shutter speed is 1/2000, not 1/4000. Perhaps I am not too much a purist to say, "no big deal." I have rearly had batteries die on me while shooting, and the batteries this camera takes are sold everywhere.
Originally posted by peter_n
I'm with Peter and taffer. That 40mm Nokton is a sweet lens at a very decent price - $349 - wow! But Gandy says the S.C. version is only for the Japanese market?
CV 40/1.4 Nokton (http://www.cameraquest.com/voigt4014.htm)
Made for the Japanese market, but he says that he will be selling both versions of the lens in the States. The availability catch may be that he states that the S.C. version is a limited production lens with a production run of 500.
Originally posted by peter_n
Contemplated the 40/1.4, but I think I'll wait to see how the performance is before deciding.
Me too. I'm really interested in it but I would want to use it at f1.4. So I'm going to wait for the reports.
What I don't get is this "Classic" and "S.C." designation. What is the difference between the "imagery of single coated lenses to multi-coated lenses" as Gandy puts it? I thought coating had to do with light transmission and glare reflectance rather than imagery. Maybe the single coat has less contrast?
TBD I guess. In my mind I am thinking of the difference of that classic Leica "glow" vs the smoother classic Contax image.?:confused:
I think though of the good reviews that the 50 Nokton enjoys and think we can have high expectations for this lens.
Huck Finn
09-20-2004, 07:18
Originally posted by mourges
I'm kind of surprised about the releases. The R2A and R3A are just too similiar, and i think will take sales away from each other. And if the R3A's outside edges of the frame cover 35mm, why will anyone buy the R2A?
I would have thought CV could have released a R3WA, R3NA, R3TA - covering wide, normal and telephoto. The R3WA having 21/28/35 framelines, the R3NA covering 35/50/75, and the R3TA 50/75/90. I would have lined up to get the WA and a TA.
Mourges, I agree that the production of 2 cameras that are so similar appears to be overkill.
But why buy the R2A? The R2A allows you to go wider since its outside edges approximate 28mm coverage. In addition, it is harder to compose using the outside edges, so many people would rather have the 35 mm framelines. I think that the question they have to answer is why buy the R3A since the R2A is more traditional. I think that they have done this by offering the higher magnification & the fast 40 pancake.
I think that this is emulating the Leica M6 philosophy of providing different viewfinder magnifications for different users. I'm surprised that they didn't provide 28mm framelines on the R2A to provide 2 more distinctly different cameras - even if this meant a viewfinder magnification of .6 like the Konica Hexar RF.
It is unlikely that many CV users would buy both the 35 & 40 mm lenses, so you make your choice & go with the camera body that best fits your needs. The higher viewfinder magnification will make it easier to focus longer lenses. Does anyone see a 90/2.5 in the offing?
Back in the '70s, Leica marketed the CL as the ideal 2 lens (40 & 90) travel kit. A similar marketing approach by Cosina would answer your question, Mourges, & the question of all prospective buyers who wonder why I should switch from more traditional focal lengths to a camera with 40mm for its candid lens. The answer to the question would be: R2A for the traditional 35-50-90 lens kit, R3A for a 40-90 travel kit.
I think that the R3A is a very creative of Cosina to figure out a way to accomodate faster long lenses for those who are more interested in this end of the spectrum. It has been done by crimping the wide angle range a little bit.
Huck Finn
09-20-2004, 07:21
Originally posted by peter_n
I'm with Peter and taffer. That 40mm Nokton is a sweet lens at a very decent price - $349 - wow! But Gandy says the S.C. version is only for the Japanese market?
CV 40/1.4 Nokton (http://www.cameraquest.com/voigt4014.htm)
Peter, I read Gandy to be saying that he will have both versions available.
EDit: Oops! I hadn't noticed that Rover already made this comment. Sorry.
Originally posted by Huck Finn
Mourges, I agree that the production of 2 cameras that are so similar appears to be overkill.
But why buy the R2A? The R2A allows you to go wider since its outside edges approximate 28mm coverage. In addition, it is harder to compose using the outside edges, so many people would rather have the 35 mm framelines. I think that the question they have to answer is why buy the R3A since the R2A is more traditional. I think that they have done this by offering the higher magnification & the fast 40 pancake.
I think that this is emulating the Leica M6 philosophy of providing different viewfinder magnifications for different users. I'm surprised that they didn't provide 28mm framelines on the R2A to provide 2 more distinctly different cameras - even if this meant a viewfinder magnification of .6 like the Konica Hexar RF.
It is unlikely that many CV users would buy both the 35 & 40 mm lenses, so you make your choice & go with the camera body that best fits your needs. The higher viewfinder magnification will make it easier to focus longer lenses. Does anyone see a 90/2.5 in the offing?
Back in the '70s, Leica marketed the CL as the ideal 2 lens (40 & 90) travel kit. A similar marketing approach by Cosina would answer your question, Mourges, & the question of all prospective buyers who wonder why I should switch from more traditional focal lengths to a camera with 40mm for its candid lens. The answer to the question would be: R2A for the traditional 35-50-90 lens kit, R3A for a 40-90 travel kit.
I think that the R3A is a very creative of Cosina to figure out a way to accomodate faster long lenses for those who are more interested in this end of the spectrum. It has been done by crimping the wide angle range a little bit.
Huck, the one thing that they do give up to Leica though is the abiltiy of one camera to do it all. With it's long baselength rangefinder, a .72 Leica has no problem focusing long fast lenses, and has usable 28mm frame lines. As good as the new CV offerings are, the photographer still has to make a decision, should I choose a camera that has 35mm framelines and an approximation of 28mm, but will be challenged up close and wide open with long lenses, or should I forget the convenience of wide angle frame lines and be able to use my normal and tele lenses without a problem?
That being said, you can buy both the R2a and R3a for only 40% of a new M7 or MP and your shoulder will bear the burden of a heavier bag, instead of your wallet.
Originally posted by rover
Perhaps I am not too much a purist to say, "no big deal." I have rearly had batteries die on me while shooting, and the batteries this camera takes are sold everywhere.
In 'normal' circumstances batteries won't die easily. But we all know that when winter comes and the temperature drops deep down, batteries have a nack of not working when you need them. For my future trips to Mongolia in winter I'm sure to bring a non-battery operated camera.
Next month I'll have a chance to put both the CL and the Bessa R to the cold test. I'm curious to see when the CL's battery will give in and fail. :)
I agree with Huck that it would have made a bit more sense to aim either new Bessa at a slightly different audience. The R3A just seems to beg for 40/50/90 framelines, while the R2A would be perfect with 28/35/50 framelines.
Now that would have made the choice much more difficult for us punters. Some of us would even be "forced" to get both.... :)
taunusreiter
09-20-2004, 07:55
Since I'm not a R2-owner yet (but happy with my Bessa-R and a bunge of LTM lenses) this R3A looks very hot to me, expecially with the 1.4/40 lens...
I already have a 1.7/35 which is a sharp lens, but I prefer my older and considerable more compact Canon 2/35 for my Bessa-R. Now this will get me selling the 1.7 Ultron..
The 40mm is a great niche idea. I always like my old Rollei 35S with its 2.8/40 "Sonnar".
The R2A/ R3A is also a great idea. No big additional cost to produce 2 line-ups. Also the 1:1 viewfinder... great for focussing higher speed lenses (longer RF baselength) or shooting with both eyes open. I like the 1:1 at my Canon-P, though the 35mm framelines are hard to see with eyeglasses at this old camera... but I estimate the Bessa-Viewfinder would be wider, brighter, and maybe this small lever at the rewind knob is really a diopter compensation...
Anyway, this one tooks about 95% what I expect from my next RF camera, and to *much* lesser cost that I would expect to pay for.
...seems that Cosina finished to closed season for Leica to some extend. Poor M7...
I am very interested in these new developments, but one thing on the CameraQuest page caught my eye:
The effective baselength on the R3A is still less than that on the low-magnification .58 Leicas.
Doesn't that have a slight whiff of missed opportunity to you?
David
Originally posted by taunusreiter
Anyway, this one tooks about 95% what I expect from my next RF camera, and to *much* lesser cost that I would expect to pay for.
It might just be what I expect of my first M-mount RF
:)
Huck Finn
09-20-2004, 10:15
Originally posted by iMacfan
I am very interested in these new developments, but one thing on the CameraQuest page caught my eye:
The effective baselength on the R3A is still less than that on the low-magnification .58 Leicas.
Doesn't that have a slight whiff of missed opportunity to you?
David
Yes, it's less than the .58 Leica, but it's still pretty darn close. Would it have been worth the re-design costs to get from 37 to 40? But there is a big difference between the two. With the .58 magnification, Leica was aiming at wide angles, i.e. 28. With its 1.0 magnification, the R3A has an opportunity to better accomodate longer lenses.
Huck Finn
09-20-2004, 10:22
Originally posted by RML
I agree with Huck that it would have made a bit more sense to aim either new Bessa at a slightly different audience. The R3A just seems to beg for 40/50/90 framelines, while the R2A would be perfect with 28/35/50 framelines.
Now that would have made the choice much more difficult for us punters. Some of us would even be "forced" to get both.... :)
RML, it will be interesting to see what news breaks on the anticipated Zeiss-Ikon. So far, the hints on the Zeiss website suggest that it will cover the wide angle range of 21-50.
There is much speculation about who might have built this camera for Zeiss, including Konica-Minolta, Hasselblad, & Cosina. If the Cosina guess is correct, then maybe they avoided their own wide angle body to avoid competing with their sister product being sold under the Zeiss label. This is exactly what they did when they built a silver body for Rollei; they never produced one of their own.
Oh I understand completely, I was just making the point that the High mag Bessa still has a shorter EBL than the extra-wide Leica. Also, that huge gap round the rewind crank begs the question - why didn't they move the VF there, easily giving a much higher EBL.
David
If I ever get another film camera (rather than digital) the R3A is likely to be it. The 1x viewfinder is the strongest factor in this choice for both eyes open and easier focussing. With my weakening eyesight, the magnification is an issue.
Next is the possible use of the full frame to roughly frame either 35mm or 28mm lenses. As I estimated in a previous post, the full frame corresponds to about a 33mm lens. This means it would be about 85% of a 28mm, which would be usable with both eyes open for street use.
Next would be the 40mm / 1.4 which is really small for a lens this fast. Hope the performance is up to expectations.
Next would be AE, which would probably be my default setting. Not clear from what I read so far, but I get the impression that first pressure on the shutter locks exposure, so you can then compose, focus and shoot. Anyone know if this is correct?
John
There is an AE lock, I have not read how that is acheived though.
Originally posted by taffer
Thanks for the translation Roger :D
Now, according to that, only 500 SC lenses will be made, how about a RFF special bulk order ? :angel:
Taffer. this is just to confirm that I was writing about the general 40/1.4 not the limited run S.C. version of this lens. Everything I said is true of the multicoated standard version. The S.C. version additionally puts back the clock to '50s lens coating as well as lens design. I don't think I will want to do that, although on the CVUG mailing list someone has said that S.C. may be one of the secrets of that elusive "plasticity" Leitz lens users talk about. I am waiting until there is an exhaustive review, hopefully with a comparison of general vs. S.C. version, in the Japanese mags. These are very good at describing subjective effects, and don't necessarily assume that good test figures mean a good lens. To avoid purely subjective (and possibly biased) opinions, the magazine I prefer (Nippon Camera) always has three or four different photographers do the same set of tests, and publishes their scores side by side. It's interesting to see the differences between the opinions of Canon and Nikon users on Nikon and Canon lenses, for instance! It also helps you to discount the bias when you can see it clearly reflected in the scores the lens gets... More magazines should do this!
On CVUG today I asked if anybody knows what happens if the battery runs out on the new cams. Some suggested that 1/125 might still work.
Guess not. Here's Stephen Gandy's reply:
no battery, no pics
Gene
I find the whole battery issue a moot point, with one exception being extreme cold weather. I just bring a fully manual camera for the rare times I shoot in very cold climates.
In order to make sure I am never without a spare set of batteries, I usually open up a seam in my camera strap and pop in a couple spare batteries. They have a long shelf life, will always be there just in case,
and are very small and unnoticed in the strap. I use them to replace the camera batteries when they are depleted, and then replace the strap batteries with new ones to 'rotate the stock'. I have a second set in the camera bag. I've never been left without batteries in 32 years of shooting, and I've only needed them once.
Doesn't work if the camera needs AA's or D cells :D :D
back alley
09-20-2004, 19:05
i wouldn't let battery dependency be the deciding factor in choosing a camera. it's true i like not needing a battery to operate a camera but it's not hard to keep a spare set or two in every camera bag.
as far as cold is concerned, i used to keep spares in my pocket if needed but that was rarely the case, even when i used to do the long hike in the country (in winter) thing.
joe
mourges: “And if the R3A's outside edges of the frame cover 35mm, why will anyone buy the R2A?”
Composing with the outside edges can be troublesome at closer distances, as you don’t get parallax correction that way. I’ve tried this with a 25mm on my CLE, and the 45mm on the Bronica RF645, and it’s a pain. External viewfinders have even more parallax error; nicely moving viewfinder framelines are best!
taffer: “Also, I read there 'initially the lens will be only in black & M mount'. Does that mean there will be other color/mount options in a future ?”
Interesting observation! I would like a 39mm thread mount, since then I could fit either 50 or 35mm adaptors to bring up the most useful framelines in both CLE and M2. And I’d prefer chrome finish...
Huck: “So far, the hints on the Zeiss website suggest that it will cover the wide angle range of 21-50. ”
I doubt that the ambiguous comment referred to the viewfinder, rather the lens lineup instead. Unless it’s a variable magnification thing, having a 21mm frame would force an unacceptable compromise at the other end, making even the 50 frames very small. I bet they’re just crowing about having so many lenses in that range available right away. But it will be interesting to find out what they really meant by that...
Originally posted by Doug
taffer: “Also, I read there 'initially the lens will be only in black & M mount'. Does that mean there will be other color/mount options in a future ?”
Interesting observation! I would like a 39mm thread mount, since then I could fit either 50 or 35mm adaptors to bring up the most useful framelines in both CLE and M2. And I’d prefer chrome finish...
That's it ! Another question is which framelines does that lens select when placed on a Leica M ? At this point it's pretty clear lots of Leica users will feel a strong interest about this lens.
Also, there was that CV 40mm external finder, why leave out all the potential LTM users ? :) However, maybe what that sentence means is the lens may be built with the Contax/Nikon RF mount in a future to give some fresh air to the R2S/R2C market.
I honestly think the initial price is already really good, I suppose the non inclusion of an aspherical element marks the price difference with the 35/1.7 ultron.
And the Zeiss puzzle is still unveiled :bang:
It's going to be an interesting month :)
Pherdinand
09-21-2004, 02:13
OK guys, I see the cameraquest price... not bad... but that's in the US.
Based on your expertise(if any), how much more will the new stuff be in Europe? (Feel free to speculate.) And, in general, how does one avoid paying much more in Europe for the same stuff? Tax on new stuff should be way too much so buying cheap and importing it, i guess, won't work...
:confused:
A friend of mine on a work related trip to taiwan bought a sony DSC F-whatever digicam, threw away the box, scratched the top plate(!), shot hundred tourist-type pictures, and they still kept on bugging him at the airport in Amsterdam that he should pay taxes :D
taunusreiter
09-21-2004, 02:41
Originally posted by Laika
MMmmm.. not a bad upgrade for no extra cost eh? :) ... Nothing earth shattering but lots of nice little things, I guess a few will moan about the battery dependence but its not a real issue these days...
if you like no-battery cameras go for a Bessa-R as a backup (if you not already have one). Automatic exposure, electronic shutter and battery independence doesn't go together well, at least not for an affordable price...
If the R3a outer frame edge is usable for a 35mm lens I might have to start saving some $$ :D
..probably, if you wear no glasses when focussing.. with glasses your eye isn't near enough to see the complete finder viewing field. It least, this is my experience with my Canon-P. And my glasses are quite thin.
Thats simple: R3A for that guys prefering to use more "Tele" stuff, R2A for guys preferring "true" (35mm and lower) wideangles. To me, since I already have a Bessa-L and -R, the R3A would complete nicely.
regards, Frank
Huck Finn
09-21-2004, 09:19
Huck: “So far, the hints on the Zeiss website suggest that it will cover the wide angle range of 21-50. ”
I doubt that the ambiguous comment referred to the viewfinder, rather the lens lineup instead. Unless it’s a variable magnification thing, having a 21mm frame would force an unacceptable compromise at the other end, making even the 50 frames very small. I bet they’re just crowing about having so many lenses in that range available right away. But it will be interesting to find out what they really meant by that... [/B]
Doug, I thought I'd post some of the quotes from the Zeiss teasers so others can also ponder these inscrutable hints.
"Back with Passion"
"Who has this choice . . .? . . . do you know a system that immediately offers you 5 different focal lengths between 21mm & 50mms?"
"On September 23 (Thursday) you can see more proof of our expertise (on the website)."
"Join us (at Photokina) as we unveil a new innovation that you would have never expected."
My take on it:
1. "a new innovation" makes me think of something digital these days.
2. But it's something "that you would have never expected." I would expect digital, so is it something else?
3. "Back with Passion" makes me think retro - maybe a new twist on something old.
4. "proof of our expertise" makes me think that they will not just be resurrecting something from the past, rather some kind of breakthrough.
5. "a system that immediately offers you 5 different focal lengths between 21 mm & 50 mms." This is the really inscrutable part. The picture shows a fixed focal length lens, so probably not just a lens with multiple focal lengths - although that could be part of it. Why restrict the comment to 21-50? If they are trying to stress their comprehensive lens range, why not 21-90? Zeiss already makes 5 different focal lengths between 21 & 90 - 6 if you count the 35-70 vario sonnar.
In my opinion, a new twist on something old would in fact be a RF camera with framelines for 5 focal lengths, 21-50, in the viewfinder. Something to get excited about - "back with passion." Maybe it would have variable magnifications. That would be truly innovative & would be "proof of our expertise." The Leica-length baseline shown in the picture would enable them to use the low magnification that would be required for wide angle framelines & still have a reasonably long effective base length. Yes, this would make the 50mm framelines small - but maybe 50 wouldn't be its primary function. Maybe that's just something the user would have to live with as a compromise to get the other benefits - the way one has to live with the small view for a 90 currently.
I would run right out & buy such a camera - & would pay a high price for it if required. Sales would be good simply because no one else makes such a camera. If manufactured in M-mount - as suspected - Leica owners would flock to it as well because Leica provides nothing remotely similar - aside from the overlap of 28-50. This would be a truly wide-angle, rangefinder camera.
I can't wait to find out . . . but I'll have to. :bang: :confused:
1. "a new innovation" makes me think of something digital these days.
2. But it's something "that you would have never expected." I would expect digital, so is it something else?
An hybrid digital-film camera with interchangeable backs ? I wouldn't expect that ! :D
Huck Finn
09-21-2004, 10:48
Could be . . . one of the pictures displayed on a teaser - a cityscape in Germany - had a 1:2 size ratio - certainly not a standard 35mm shot unless it was cropped . . . or manipulated digitally. It looked more panoramic.
"Panoramic"? Did I hear that word? (he says pricking up his ears...) If they coupled a 21mm Zeiss lens with a 2:1 aspect ratio, yes, that would be borderline panoramic. But it would have to be Xpan type 2:1, i.e., a negative 48mm wide, to be really attractive. And if that aspect ratio were available for all lenses with FLs from 21 to 50, well, WOW! That would be great!! The main problem I have with the TX-1 is the few available lenses (not to mention the price of the 30mm lens!).
Pano would be pretty cool, especially if it can be switched back to 24x36 as in the XPan. But I don't see a 2:1 aspect ratio in the viewfinder window, the mask window, or the few through-viewfinder shots I've seen.
The lens mount looks to be M-Leica. I think they'd get a lot of flack with a 48mm wide film frame when all current M-lenses fail to cover the sides, vignetting badly.
And the body casting would have to be stretched horizontally to allow this, wouldn't it? I don't see any external hint of that in the illustration...
If there's a Pano option, I think it'd be done in the APS way by cropping the top and bottom of the 24x36mm frame, masking it to 18x36mm. In this way, all existing lenses will cover the format, the frame counter needn't change gearing, the cast camera frame need only fit the moving mask, an off-the-shelf 35mm format shutter can be used, and the viewfinder only needs a separate set of framelines to move into place.
This would take it out of direct competition with the XPan, and allow much greater flexibility and a much lower price point. What do you think? :-)
Um, er, well, not to put too fine a point on it, I think it sucks. Who needs it? I can trim the top and bottom of my negatives after I see the whole frame, and I might want to take more off the bottom (or more off the top) rather than having even strips blanked off at top and bottom. I agree that there are all sorts of difficulties in going the Xpan route--but I can't help hoping (however unlikely it is) that this is what they plan. But I guess this is only even remotely possible if they plan to go digital and have an upgrade path available. And with even 24 x 36 full-frame sensors prohibitively expensive, who's going to want to wait and pay for a 24 x 48 sensor? Oh dear. I feel depressed.
Originally posted by Pherdinand
Based on your expertise(if any), how much more will the new stuff be in Europe? (Feel free to speculate.)
In Germany, the old R costs around 750 euros, I guess the new one will fetch about the same. The same goes for lenses - a 50/1.5 does over 500 euros versus $345 at Cameraquest. And yes, that is quite a bit more. But what can you do? Send an e-mail to mister Gandy...
^^^^
Or talk to Dr. Yao...
Pherdinand
09-22-2004, 01:24
to who?
Thanks Jeroen. That's something i was afraid of. The body will cost as much here as the body and the 40mm together, over the see... :bang:
Dr. Joseph Yao: http://www.nemeng.com/leica/004e.shtml
Never dealt with him myself, but so did a friend of mine in Spain, without a single problem.
Dr Yao seems well-connected; he offered some of the very first user commentary on the Epson RD1. (It was particularly useful to learn that its RAW buffer allows photos as fast as one can operate the camera)
You know, the way they describe it, and given Cosina's habit of selling similar based cams to multiple manufacturers, (Rollei 35RF) what about a Zeiss branded and lensed version of the RD-1?
That's innovative, unexpected, and unashamedly retro.....
guess we will know soon.
tim
Huck Finn
09-22-2004, 20:27
Tim, the latest teaser on the Zeiss lens: "Guess which lens took this picture." So, maybe Doug is right & it's more about the lenses than about a camera. Zeiss is not a camera builder.
BTW, the camera in the Zeiss website picture doesn't look like the RD-1 . . . if that means anything.
FWIW, former Shutterbug editor Bob Shell says flat out that it's a film camera. From various clues, it's certainly based on a Bessa framework.
That still leaves a lot of intriguing questions about the range/viewfinder and other features, price, etc. Certain to have electronic shutter with AE, what with the non-availability of the previous Bessa mechanical shutter. With bottom rewind crank, it won't take the Bessa trigger winder. M-bayonet mount for sure.
What justifies the effort to design a long-baseline RF? (or is it lifted off the Hexar?) Contax tradition? Ensuring that the fast/long Leica lenses will focus properly? Could it be a clue to some other surprising camera feature? Just a way to distinguish the Zeiss-branded product from the pedestrian Bessas, for higher market position and price?
So far, Mr K has tried not to tread directly on Leica's toes. But now he's been forced into AE when he earlier said no. And he's bypassed his own dislike of digital to cooperate with Epson on just that. Is he enabling Zeiss to go toe-to-toe with Leica?
That focal length teaser is still puzzling... If the lenses are rebarreled from the Contax G glass, why do they say 50mm and not 45mm? Huck, is the "vaporware" Rollei 50mm finally appearing or what? 21-28-35-45-50, that's five focal lengths! Why no mention of the 90mm?
I eagerly await the answers! We should soon know...
Huck Finn
09-23-2004, 04:53
Doug, the Rollei RF project was messed up from the beginning. Who announces a lens in 2002 & stil hasn't produced it 2 years later? No, I don't believe that we will ever see that 50 Planar lens. Rollei-USA is down to its last 35 RF & is not planning to bring in any more, so I assume that it is dead, defunct. Too bad IMO. At $1200 (body & lens), the camera finally makes some sense. Killer lenses. Interesting as well that it is finally getting some advertising in the B&H magazine ads. It went for its first year and a half without a mention.
I agree with you about the odd lens teaser. Like you, I haven't understood either why 50mm & not 45. I can't imagine that they would produce both a 45 and a 50. What would be the point? A 24 or 25 would make more sense.
The sample picture of the camera looks more like a Hexar RF to me than anything else, so could Konica-Minolta be involved? Since their merger, there have been rumors of a resurrected Hexar RF once the merged corporation got its feet on the ground. But why partner with Zeiss for lenses? K-M is more than capable of producing top-flite lenses - & have. Of note here is the fact that the Hexar RF had the same Leica-length baseline as this new Zeiss-Ikon.
Cosina has yet to build a RF body that is not a modification of that same basic SLR body they started with. A new Zeiss-Ikon, built as depicted, by Cosina would be a huge departure for Cosina - although it certainly could be done. I would assume that Zeiss was funding the R&D if that were the case; it wouldn't be worth it for Cosina to take a flyer on it because this is certainly not guaranteed to be a big seller - more of a niche product like most of the RF world.
The other body that it resembles is the Hasselblad x-pan. The interesting slant to this is that it is the one of the three companies that already has a partnership with Zeiss. Of course, Kyocera does too, so they have to be considered as well. Why would Zeiss initiate a new Japanese partnership with Cosina when they already have one with Kyocera? And how did the x-pan wind up in the hands of Fujifilm? Did Hasselblad give it to them? Or was there a third party who built the same camera for both of them & is now building a modified version for Zeiss? The possibilities are endless. LOL
One thing for certain is that this new camera is not built by Zeiss. They are a lens maker, not a camera builder.
Re the shutter, I'd guess you're right about it being electronic. Not only has Cosina gone to an electronic shutter, but Konica had an electronic shutter on the Hexar RF and Contax (Kyocera) has an electronic shutter. Is the x-pan electonic as well?
There might be reason for both a 45 and 50mm if that offers a choice of maximum aperture, as Leica does with four different 50mm lenses. The 45 would be f/2 as on the Contax G, and a new 50mm could be f/1.4. And that's when I thought of the long-waited Rollei Planar (wasn't that an f.1.4?)
The Zeiss body looks to be based on the Bessa with a different top and RF (eyeball that hinge for the film door, dead-ringer for Bessa). That shouldn't be too drastic an effort, especially if the RF parts are already available from the reputed third-party company who supplied it to Konica.
I expect you're right about cooperative development, both in engineering and funding. There appears to have been similar cooperation with Epson for the RD1.
Could the Zeiss camera be a chopped XPan? It's clearly not as wide. Seems to me modifying the XPan would be much more challenging than using the Bessa frame. I don't know what the XPan shutter is like, but it obviously has to be bigger.
Huck Finn
09-23-2004, 17:18
Doug, I hadn't thought of adding a 50 for the purpose of having an ultra-fast lens in the system. You make an excellent point! The proposed Rollei 50 Planar would not be a candidate for that because it is an f/1.8 lens. However, it would really be something to see Zeiss revive their f/1.5 Sonnar - historically the first of the ultra-fast 50's. On his website, John Lind says that to this day it is the best lens he has ever used! Things get more & more interesting . . .
- Stupid question alert -
What kind of effect are you going to see on the picture if you use Sonnar-type lens? I tried to do Google search Planar vs Sonnar and managed to come to this Dante Stella site full of maths on light transmission. :confused:
The forthcoming Zeiss camera looks a bit like the two new Cosina-Voigtlanders (R2A/R3A) but with the rangefinder patch window further over to give a longer baseline. You can see that this WOULD have been possible with the R2A and R3A, but hasn't been done. My guess (totally without any inside knowledge) is that Cosina may have created the longer RF baseline camera body for Zeiss having accepted as a condition for this that they would not then be able to market this themselves. Both companies would probably want to avoid a repeat of the Rollie fiasco. (And even there, CV did not produce a similar LOOKING design.)
President Kobayashi runs his company as an OEM centered business, and does very well at it. If my guess is anywhere near the truth, I expect he will make more money creating bodies for Zeiss for use with Zeiss lenses, than marketing them as an "own brand."
Anyway, not long to wait now!
Since full-frame sensors seem unlikely for a digital RF any time soon, on cost grounds, and seeing that effective focal lengths are multiplied by 1.5 or 1.6 (or even 2.0) depending on which sensor you use, your 50mm lens will function as at least a 75mm, and your 90mm as a 135mm. That's very near the limit of what's actually reliably focusable, if not a wee bit past it--certainly for faster lenses. So maybe the longer baseline is part of an attempt to ease the focusing problem for longer FL lenses when used with a digital back for the new camera. Epson's approach was to use a 1:1 viewfinder. The new Zeiss probably won't do that because of the claim to cover 21mm FL lenses.... that says something more like 0.55:1 for the viewfinder factor. So a long baseline is highly desirable. No? I mean, longer baseline and smaller viewfinder image, desirable for standard 35mm film, essential for digital back?
We'll soon know, anyway!
Huck Finn
09-23-2004, 19:59
Originally posted by Kris
- Stupid question alert -
What kind of effect are you going to see on the picture if you use Sonnar-type lens? I tried to do Google search Planar vs Sonnar and managed to come to this Dante Stella site full of maths on light transmission. :confused:
Kris, the Sonnar was a breakthrough lens design back in 1932 because it contolled for flare with little or no coating - at a time when the development of coatings was in a very primitive state. As a result, ultra-fast lenses were able to be developed for the first time. These fast Sonnars are known for their flat field - which I think would be particularly useful when shooting wide open for the purpose of minimizing depth of field. They are also known for edge to edge sharpness although this may vary with aperture & how the design is tweaked in individual cases.
In contrast the Planar couldn't control the problem of flare & as a result didn't come into its own until the development of coatings became more sophisticated. Most high aperture Japanese lenses today are planar designs or a derivative of it.
On Dante Stella's website, read his article "Nikkor Lenses for Leica" for a quick history of Sonnar design development.
His brother, Davidde, has a review: "Zeiss Sonnar Copies."
www.davidde.com
John Lind has extensive information on his website under both the Zeiss Ikon Contax & Rollei 35 sections.
http://johnlind.tripod.com
Finally, you can reference this article for details of Zeiss designs, including both Planar & Sonnar.
www.panix.com/~zone/photo/czlens.htm
Huck Finn
09-24-2004, 10:14
Kriswhile we're on the topic of Sonnars, I came across this interesting discussion of the Nikkor 50/2 LTM over at photo.net. This lens is a Sonnar design, a derivative of the Zeiss Sonnar - as mentioned in Dante Stella's article on Nion lenses for Leica. One of the posters mentions that high contrast is a characteristic of Sonnars. There are a couple of really nice pictures posted in the discussion.
www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009aHU
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.