Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi, Simon - Obviously I don't know the answer to the last question, although someone earlier suggested that the Zeiss designs might indeed be better suited to use with digital sensor cropping. No, I wouldn't expect Leica people will switch - why should they? The question is whether Zeiss can grow the market. As to mount a Noct on a Zeiss and what kind of statement does it make? Gee, I thought we make our statements with our photos, and not with our brand names....And if the Zeiss is as good as an M but cheaper, I'd be happy to tell people that I'm not stupid enough to pay extra just to get a red dot. ;-) Or, put another way I'd be happy to tell people that what matters is the glass, and by purchasing the cheaper body I could afford the expensive lens. Best B. D. -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of animal Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 4:11 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon I didn,t try to engage you in a discussion about lens performance data. Your 4.5 versus 2.8 remark deflates my Voigh.. remark obviously . I just believe that if the lenses are not better then Leica's people will not make a switch. Also to me the newborn doesn,t look as nice as a M. Another good reason not to buy one. Significantly brighter viewfinder would be nice of course. But mount a Noctilux on a Zeiss? What kind of statement does that make other then i don,t want to spend a thousand more on a real Leica? Would the new lenses be better suited for a full frame digital sensor? best regards simon ----- Original Message ----- From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 12:30 AM Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > I'm not going to get into one of the lpm debates with you, Simon - you > and I view these issues, and photography, from very different > perspectives. > > And, yes, why not use a Cosina 15? Well, it's an f 4.5 and this will > be a 2.8; it's seat-of-the-pants focused and this will be rangefinder > coupled; and my guess is this will have a better build - all valid > reasons even if image quality were no better. But I'm certainly not > against good image quality. > > B. D. > > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf > Of animal > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:22 PM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > Well if performance is no factor then why not stay with the existing > cosina lenses like their 15mm,or put a sublime old 15 mm on a R? > > simon > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 12:10 AM > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > But that's the point, Simon - I'm not talking about "performance" of > > anything; I'm talking about availability of, and price of, product. > > And if Leica thinks the path to survival lays through winning a > > bunch of Erwin Puts bench tests by .xxx%, they're dead on arrival. > > Fractions > > > of percentages aren't going to matter - actually having a product > > will. If Leica can now turn on a dime and put out a real digital M > > six > > > months from now - BEFORE Zeiss comes out with one - and price it so > > that it appeals to more than a handful of people for whom money is > > no object, then they have a chance. If not... > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf > > Of animal > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 5:54 PM > > To: Leica Users Group > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > As you mentioned earlier i think ,nothing is known about the real > > performance of the new system. Isn,t it a bit premature to anounce a > > winner before a match? best regards simon jessurun amsterdam > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> > > To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 10:53 PM > > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > IF that's Leica's response to an entire line of new Zeiss t-star > > > lenses, a film rangefinder body, and what will undoubtedly be a > > > digital body, then we most assuredly have the answer to the > > > question. Because if Leica survives as the Hermes of cameraland, > > > it might as well not survive. > > > > > > And there's another point to think about here, folks - Leica is > > > still around today for only one reason: > > > > > > In the early 1960s, Zeiss/Contax and Nikon abandoned the > > > pro-rangefinder playing field. Nikon, which made what was > > > definitely > > > > the best body at that time - the SP - decided to put all its eggs > > > in > > > > the SLR basket, a decision which was a loss for those of us who > > > love > > > > rangefinders, but was obviously a winner for Nikon. And Contax > > > must have decided that there wasn't going to be enough rangefinder > > > business > > > > > to keep them going. > > > > > > So that left the barren playing field to Leica, which, other than > > > improving it's lens line, hasn't done anything truly innovative > > > since bringing out and abandoning the M5. And, when you think > > > about it, really hasn't done anything innovative since the "O." > > > > > > But because there have been enough photographers committed to > > > using rangefinders, and enough dilitants committed to owning > > > Leicas - and a scarf company willing to buy up a grand old brand > > > name - Leica's limped along to the present day. > > > > > > Now, however, we are on the downward slope of the technology range > > > taking us into the next age of photography. Any company that wants > > > to survive in the new age is going to have to be a real part of > > > that > > > > age. > > > > > And up to this point, Leica has, as usual, limped along at the > > > back end of the parade. > > > > > > So this time Zeiss - well the Zeiss/Kyocera/Hassleblad/Contax > > > coalition > > > - has decided to stick around and pickup the pieces. Unless Leica > > > is prepared to move, and move very quickly - perhaps by talking > > > Nikon, Canon, or Olympus into a rangefinder partnership, Leica's > > > days are, sadly, very much numbered. I say "sadly" with total > > > sincerity, because > > I > > > am enough of a traditionalist to be touched by the Leica heritage > > > - > > I'd > > > rather be shooting in a new age with a grandchild of HCB's M3s, > > > than > > > > shooting with a Kocerstein's monster patched together with parts > > > from > > a > > > washing machine, a high-milage care, and a disposable camera. :-) > > > > > > B. D. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org > > > [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On > > > Behalf > > > > Of Dan C > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 4:33 PM > > > To: Leica Users Group > > > Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: New Zeiss Ikon > > > > > > > > > Leica has responded in part by offering the a la carte Leica. But > > > have you > > > seen the prices? Do I really want to spend upwards of $4,000 USD > > for > > > the > > > privilege of picking the colour of my camera? Are there enough > > > people > > > > > out there willing to do so to keep Leica afloat? > > > > > > -dan c. > > > > > > At 04:26 PM 29-09-04 -0400, B. D. Colen wrote: > > > >Emanuel says.. > > > >"The old era of Zeiss - Leitz rivalry was a heady time for 35mm > > > >design," and asks... > > > > > > > >"Now, in these days, how will Leica respond?" > > > > > > > >--- > > > >As they, sadly, always have ... With too little, too late, and at > > > >too > > > > > >high a price. > > > > > > > >These are not the heady days of the Zeiss/Leitz competition - > > > >which, if > > > > > > >we recall, were actually the days of the Zeiss/Leitz/Nikon > > > >competition. > > > >;-) > > > > > > > >These are the days of the Zeiss/Kyocera/Cosina/Hassie consortium > > > >moving > > > > > > >in to clean up the remaining scraps from the rangefinder table - > > > >scraps > > > > > > >that could have been Leicas had Leica moved 18 months ago, or > > > >even further back, when the Cosina handwriting was writ large > > > >upon the wall. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more > > > information > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more > > > information > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information