Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/04/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I could be wrong but the 2 versions of the RD-1 ie the RD-1 and RD-1s looked like Epson re-announcing the same camera to sell existing unsold in stock parts. My RD-1 is the same as a RD-1s which simply has the latest software and an extra "s" engraved on the top plate. My point is that it is extremely unlikely that anybody could possibly manufacture a lower price digital rangefinder at the volume of sales likely for a non-autofocus camera with expensive lenses. Lets not forget that the CV and ZM lenses, whilst less expensive than Leica lenses are still very expensive compared to mass produced autofocus equivalents from the big makers. Production volume has a m-a-s-s-i-v-e influence on production cost. The R8/9 lost Leica a fortune. It would not surprise me to learn that the development and tooling costs for the S2 were similar to those for the R8, and since it is MF and AF it can sell at a higher price, and may even eventually sell in bigger numbers. If Nikon and Canon can not sell the 100,000s of premium models at a profit there is no chance at all that a FF manual focus rangefinder selling probably less than 1% as many can be made cheaper. IMHO. As an engineering consultant I have costed quite a few ambitious projects from enthusiasts, all have worked out spectacularly too expensive because of amortising tooling and development cost over tiny volume. FD On 1 Apr, 2012, at 06:08, Tim Gray wrote: > I'd have to disagree. How many versions of the RD-1 did they put out? > Three? I know they were all very similar, but there was clearly some > incentive to keep offering it. > > Regardless, I bet if there was a reasonably price (> $4000) digital > rangefinder, they'd have good sales. Assuming of course they could turn a > profit at that price point. I'd buy one for sure. I bet most people who > had an M9 would buy one too as a backup.