Why is no one else currently building a digital rangefinder camera? I mean, I get that the whole "insignificant niche" argument worked 10 years ago. But since cameras as a whole have become an insignificant niche, why not give people what they want? Because I'm pretty sure many people want a Leica but can't afford it. Just look at how popular the meme camera X100 has become - isn't it time for someone to capitalize on that?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Two things I can think. Can just anyone use the Leica M mount? I know other brands have in the past but I assume they paid to do so, and I would imagine Leica would be less willing these days. Secondly making a mechanical rangefinder isn't exactly a simple or cheap process, both the R+D and the manufacture. I would say it's probably out of the reach of any no-name start-up, you won't be seeing a rangefinder coming from kickstarter. The cheapest full frame body you can get new is what, an A7 III? I wouldn't be surprised if a rangefinder from Sony doubled that cost (same for Canon or Nikon) and I just don't think the market would be there for them to justify it. People will just get a used M9 for the same price.
>>4330477Wouldn't have to be M mount (although designing a new mount for rangefinders would probably also cost a small fortune)But development and production costs for Leica aren't big enough to actually justify the price. I'm thinking about a price point of around $2000 for the body with a 35mm (or 35mm equivalent) lens. This should be reasonable if you look at the money people sink into the X100VI.APS-C would be fine.
>>4330477>Modern digital M mount Clearly no one did their homework.
>>4330477Pixii is proof that a startup rf would cost a kidney and a half and under deliver to what you’d expect for the cost. That being said, I question whether the r&d would really be massive for existing camera makers. It would basically be an xpro with the hybrid vr swapped for mirrors innit. You can already manual focus on the thing, that’s halfway there.
>>4330485>>4330486>>4330477I'm not talking about startups, though. I wouldn't trust a startup to make ANY style of camera. There are at least five large camera manufacturers with the financial capacities to pull of a proper new rangefinder system and offer a camera that is close enough to Leica for $2000 or less.
>>4330502They have no incentive to do this when what they already make sells just fine. /pee/ can hate it all it wants but the xpro was the closest thing we’ve had recently, and Fuji seems like they’ve all but abandoned it. The numbers aren’t there. The fourteen acoustics on /pee/ that want it won’t make a successful product.
>>4330475yeah I would absolutely buy a $2k Z mount rangefinder. hell I would even switch to $any_brand if they made one of thoseI'm just too poor to spend $8k+$6k on a leica + lens combo and even if I weren't poor I'd rather spend that money on a used toyota hilux
>>4330486>Cost a kidneyIts 2700 euros for a BRAND NEW digital rangefinder.A mint Leica M 240, a 10 year old camera, is just as much and does less.Idk bro if you want a high tech rangefinder its pretty worth.
>>4330511From a brand that could vanish overnight and leave you fucked for repairs and anything that might go wrong? Seems like you’re risking a lot with that 2700eur
>>4330516Not really considering the alternative is buying used or coughing up 10k for a new M11, besides people buy old contaxes for just as much with zero chance of repair. The G2 comes to mind.Its all relative I guess.
>>4330581I get where you’re coming from in a way, but I would trust an old mechanical camera much sooner than a new digital wonderbox. At least the old one you might be able to eventually fix if you go slow enough. Electronics die? Yeah, good luck.
>>4330475>camera X100>going for refurbed canon r6mkii pricesJust fucking why, what is the appeal for these besides zoomers buying shit from influencers/insta/tiktok.
>>4330475Sony A7C-series are rangefinders.
>>4330589Oh no im thinking about the electronic contaxes like the G2
>>4330622Here’s the (you) you were fishing for is go away and let the adults continue the thread.
>>4330475You could buy a Leica if you just saved up. They're really not that expensive dude. If you cant stop blowing loads on crP NGMI
>>4330628I wasnt fishing for you's. Just telling it how it is. How is the A7C not a rangefinder?
>>4330631Anon, are.. are you really this retarded? >how is this device with no optical viewfinder whatsoever not this other device with a specific design and function of optical viewfinderYou do realize that rangefinder doesn’t mean “looks like a foolji” despite what fujislugs would have you believe, right?
>>4330633It has the EVF on the left side. Those are rangefinders. The ones with the EVF in the middle are regular cameras.
>>4330636Har har semantics i r so smart.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RangefinderHeres the definition everyone uses.
