I have been into photography for the last 4 years and in that time amassed a decent range of canon equipment. I've been accustomed to using the optical viewfinder and the great image quality of a large sensor and decent glass. However I find the more I shoot the more I want something simpler and less intimidating for general street photography and candid shots. I bought an olympus epl1 and found it to be a good camera, but still just didn't like the use of the screen for shooting. Just generally for myself YMMV, I found I couldn't get comfortable with it.
What I have found I really want is a simple digital rangefinder camera. From what I can see, Leica is the only one that makes a full frame digital rangefinder. Although it would be awesome to get one, I cannot justify the entry price for the camera. It just seems insane to me how much it cost for that body. I know leica fanboys will disagree with me and tout the level of craftsmanship and how it's worth it. While I don't disagree with the quality, time and effort put into the camera, I feel there is a market for people that don't necessarily need the creme de la creme. Just like some people will find the value in a ferrari, others will be more than happy driving as fast with a corvette.
Surely... sony, canon, or nikon has the technological know how to produce a full frame digital rangefinder that is within economical reach of mere mortals. Imagine if say... sony makes a simple digital rangefinder with a good full frame sensor (we know they have the technology for a good fulll frame sensor), then can mate it with old contax zeiss lenses... Am I the only one that would be interested in such a product? If canon and nikon can build full frame dslr cameras with all the bells and whistles for an entry price of 2K, surely, someone can fit a rangefinder system, with a full frame sensor and an lcd screen together for that price or under.
This would not cannibalize on any of their existing dslr systems or their compact camera market. It may put somewhat of a dent on Leicas market though.
Maybe I'm the only one that thinks this way?? Just a thought.
I would love to buy an inexpensive digital rangefinder, however for the moment I'll have to settle with film (my Bessa R is in the mail ). With some of Fuji's recent success I have dreams that an inexpensive digital rangefinder will materialize. Have you ever though about an RD-1 (yeah I know it's not FF)?
Ya I saw the RD1, it's quite an old sensor and an option. The fuji looks promising however, it's not a true rangefinder and if you stick a manual lens on it, I don't think it will be very good. Mind you I haven't tried it with an adapter and manual lens. It's just from what I've heard. If they made a Fuji X-pro1 as a proper rangefinder... I'd be all over it. Price point is reasonable too.
I have exactly the same need and was asking a similar question few days ago....
I do not fully understand Leica...but maybe I am not capable of understanding the price vs value:-) Probably cannot appreciate. I tried Leica M9 and it is not very easy to use, not it is on pair with modern cameras and their capabilities, yet you need to pay $9000 for Leica Monochrome + $5000 for a 35 mm lens.
But they exists and people purchase them...so it means everything is OK and it is me who doesn't get the point:-)
The market for rangefinder cameras is very small. This is already the case for decades. That's why in the end of the film era only a very small amount of manufacturers where left in the market offering rangefinder cameras. Since digital this has become worse and I am afraid for you the market is not going to change rapidly. People get used to electronic viewfinders faster than there is demand for optical rangefinder type cameras. So most probably the future is more to EVF based "rangefinder" styled cameras than those with a real rangefinder (with all the manual focus mechanics included). So yes, I guess Leica is the only serious company offering the type of camera you are looking for.
Then the 5D suits YOUR needs better which is fine. This doesn't mean the Leica is an inferior camera.... Every since I have started using a RF, my D700 is collecting dust.
My 2 cents... I'm sort of in the same boat. Although I realize the X10 is not without flaws (which camera is?), I too am considering getting rid of my 5Dc and trading up (down?) for the exact same reasons the OP listed.
Haven't quite decided yet if it's the right move...
But I keep telling myself.. "the best cam is the one you have with you" and "great shots don't require great cameras"
Not to hi-jack the OP's post, but I'm interested to learn about others as well who made the switch.
Light_pilgrim wrote:
I have done it and I do not understand:-) I can deliver higher quality with my 5D MKIII time after time.
Obviously rangefinders aren't for everyone, otherwise they would be the norm and the DSLR the exception. Definitely they are more difficult to use, but once you get accustomed to that different style of shooting, it becomes second nature. I believe those who dislike the M didn't give it enough time and gave up on it too quickly. I personally am new to RF as well, after over 30 years of shooting with SLR, I started exactly a year ago with film RF, and only recently bought an M9. I wish I could have done it earlier.
Gary Clennan wrote:
Then the 5D suits YOUR needs better which is fine. This doesn't mean the Leica is an inferior camera.... Every since I have started using a RF, my D700 is collecting dust.
you can only sell manual focus only cameras to a very small market, the low volume necessitates a high price. if canikonsony come out with similar sized FF camera it will be autofocus (and not a rangefinder) to target a bigger market.
Perhaps the market for RF digital cameras may be small because there is no choice out there. If there were a cheaper alternative to the Leica M, then I would buy one. Until then I shall keep dreaming.
Leica system require your time to understand your lens and camera, require you remember the setting and take over the control so that once moment come you never miss.
This is totally different than other camera I used which put more and more automation into it and try to control everything for you.
I much prefer the leica way, I can do DOF/EV compensation by either turning aperture or shutter directly, no need to push a botton and turn as my D700. shoot in manual mode is a huge pain with modern DSLR if light changing. It make a huge difference to me.
I won't brag about file quality of it,(its mileage will vary depend on your skill) but usability wise, there is no comparison.
Used M8's are selling under $2k US these days, so that's a pretty good option if you're dying for the digital rangefinder experience, and it is 1.3x crop, which isn't too bad.
arthurb wrote:
Perhaps the market for RF digital cameras may be small because there is no choice out there. If there were a cheaper alternative to the Leica M, then I would buy one. Until then I shall keep dreaming.
there used to be one. i believe it sold worse than the much more expensive m8. i doubt there will be another.
). With some of Fuji's recent success I have dreams that an inexpensive digital rangefinder will materialize. Have you ever though about an RD-1 (yeah I know it's not FF)?