Or they could put a digital viewfinder on it.  The nice thing about this
would be that you could ALWAYS have DOF preview engaged, and not have a
dark image to try and see properly.

I think with digital, using a rangefinder would be less of a problem
anyway as you could always verify stuff on the LCD if you wanted.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: 02 September 2002 10:36
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace 
> (inc stuff on Pentax digital)
> 
> 
> but arent all high end digital cameras
> SLRS? I dont think it would be possible
> to make a SLR which could take the leica M
> lenses do to short flange to sensor distance.
> Maybe they could develop the world's first
> digital rangefinder?
> JCO
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:19 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace 
> (inc stuff on 
> > Pentax digital)
> > 
> > 
> > From "http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/get-it.shtml";
> > 
> > Manufacturers. Don't get me started! Well, maybe a little.
> > 
> > The saying goes that "The Internet changes everything", and to some 
> > extent it's true. But try telling that to some of the large 
> Japanese 
> > manufacturers. Epson is a good example. They release products in 
> > Europe ahead of North America and then when reviews appear 
> online and 
> > questions start to be asked their U.S. office plays dumb. 
> New printer. 
> > What new printer?
> > 
> > They then ship essentially the same product but with quite 
> different 
> > accessories, and a different product number. Most memorable is the 
> > fiasco of not including the Gray Balancer that ships with 
> the European 
> > Photo Stylus 2100 with the North American 2200 model. Back 
> before the 
> > Internet (say, prior to 1995) no one would be the wiser. An 
> American 
> > might buy a UK photo magazine months later, read about the 
> difference, 
> > shrug and think that these were two different products. Not 
> anymore, 
> > and Epson just doesn't get it.
> > 
> > Not to pick only on that estimable printer manufacturer. We all owe 
> > them a debt of gratitude for their advances in photographic inkjet 
> > printing technology. There are other examples. Mamiya is 
> one already 
> > mentioned, for assuming that consumers still can't figure 
> out the huge 
> > price differential being charged for the same product in different 
> > countries. Click. Ahh, so that's what the price is in the U.K.
> > 
> > Pentax is another, but for different reasons. They make two 
> excellent 
> > medium format cameras, the 645 Nii and the 67ii. There is a huge 
> > installed base of lenses, especially for the 67, which has 
> been around 
> > for some 30 years. But almost alone among medium format makers they 
> > are being sidelined by digital. Most medium format makers 
> have models 
> > with interchangeable backs. This means that digital backs 
> can be used, 
> > and they increasingly are by professionals. The economics of 
> > professional photography demand this, if nothing else.
> > 
> > But the Pentax 67 can't take any backs, and the ones on the 
> Pentax 645 
> > are inserts, not full backs. Unless Pentax addresses this situation 
> > soon they will be marginalized in the medium format arena as 
> > photographers increasingly move to digital. There may be 
> nothing they 
> > can do with the 67 format, but certainly they can bring out a body 
> > that accepts digital backs and that uses the array of autofocus and 
> > prior lenses for their 645 system. If they don't, and soon, 
> legions of 
> > photographers with investments in Pentax MF systems will start to 
> > abandon them.
> > 
> > Then there's Leica. Dear old Leica, maker of arguably some of the 
> > finest (and needless to say, most expensive) 35mm 
> photographic lenses 
> > ever made. There's no way that they have the financial 
> wherewithal to 
> > develop a digital camera that can utilize them themselves. But, 
> > they've recently partnered with Matsushita (Panasonic), and Leica 
> > branded lenses are showing up on Panasonic digicams, and Leica is 
> > OEMing these under their own brand.
> > 
> > Matsushita also makes advanced imaging chips. In fact the 
> chip in one 
> > of the major high-end DSLRs from another major camera 
> manufacturer is 
> > from them. So, how about taking Panasonic's chip technology and 
> > manufacturing capabilities and marrying these with a some high-end 
> > Leica glass? That would put Leica back on the map and would 
> give them 
> > something worthwhile to do other than produce green lizard-skin 
> > covered M6's for the Japanese collector market.
> > 
> 
> 

Reply via email to