Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Jan 21, 2005, at 9:49 PM, Frank Filippone wrote: > What I am saying is that the price difference of Leica Lenses to Nikon > ( > for example) is not related to labor rates. It is profit and demand > driven. > We will pay the rather extraordinary prices they demand if we want to > own > (new) Leica lenses and use RF bodies. We have no choice. > If they do not go with the M mount the market will be nil for a > digital M. > More to the point, there is no reason to change the mount. ( RF with > AF?) Ok, you are right. They should not change the mount. But I think don't think they should compromise on the sensor size etc, in exchange for 100% compatibility with all of their current lenses. I would rather lose a lens or two in exchange for a better design that will pay off in the long run. > > Hasselblad no longer support film. They are selling existing > inventory. It > is over for Hasselblad in the film arena. The long range goal of a > top end > Digital MF camera is somewhat a doubtful market goal. There may not > be a > large enough MF market when 35mm Cameras can put out 10MP or more now. > For > about 1/3 - 1/4 the price! Remember that the Hasselblad sensor is not > 6x6 > cm. ( I now forget the actual size.) Yes, they are in trouble, but although it may be too late, to me they seem to have more of a clue than Leica. > Tight lipped or no clue.... the really big question. Exactly! feli > Frank Filippone > red735i@earthlink.net > ________________________________________________________ feli2@earthlink.net 2 + 2 = 4 www.elanphotos.com