[rollei_list] Re: rollei_list Digest V3 #151
- From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:14:30 -0700
That is because you can sell many lenses compared to a camera body.
So if you were in business it would be far more profitable to sell
lenses against several manufacturers bodies as opposed to sell one
body with matching lenses.
Think about it. I have one lens that I can sell 4-5 times, once for
Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Minolta (SONY), etc. Or I can sell one body to
compete against Nikon, Canon, etc. Which makes more sense?
On 6/26/07, Jan Decher <Jan.Decher@xxxxxxx> wrote:
I have said this for years. Why do we have independent lens makers but no
independent camera body makers? Sigma could offer their SD 14 in different
mounts, including Leica R, Contax C/Y, and Contax N and it could breathe new
life into all these great orphaned lenses that never got an affordable
viable digital body to attach to.
Strange no company (Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Novoflex, Cosina...) saw this
market niche.
Jan
On 26 Jun 2007, at 02:34, FreeLists Mailing List Manager wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:20:51 -0400
From: Michael Eric Berube <pj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: OT: A Better Bayer?
Yep. No argument. Some are dogs and I don't believe that their QC is
quite up to the standards of some of the Camera companies either, but
when you find a good example of some of their better lenses (EX line is
almost all fantastic) you've got a great tool. I use an 18-50/2.8, a
50-150/2.8 and I rented a 10-20/4-5.6 for a wedding this last weekend
and was very impressed and will very likely get one. Their new 70/2.8
Macro is getting rave reviews as one of the sharpest Macros ever made.
Again, they already make some 4:3 lenses, they'd be brilliant to make a
camera that took those lenses but used their Foveon tech.
(I don't think they make lenses in Rollei mount though.)
:)
Be well,
Michael Eric Berube
--
Peter K
Ó¿Õ¬
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
http://www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
- References:
- [rollei_list] Re: rollei_list Digest V3 #151
- From: Jan Decher
Other related posts:
- » [rollei_list] Re: rollei_list Digest V3 #151
- » [rollei_list] Re: rollei_list Digest V3 #151
- » [rollei_list] Re: rollei_list Digest V3 #151
- » [rollei_list] Re: rollei_list Digest V3 #151
I have said this for years. Why do we have independent lens makers but no independent camera body makers? Sigma could offer their SD 14 in different mounts, including Leica R, Contax C/Y, and Contax N and it could breathe new life into all these great orphaned lenses that never got an affordable viable digital body to attach to. Strange no company (Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Novoflex, Cosina...) saw this market niche. Jan On 26 Jun 2007, at 02:34, FreeLists Mailing List Manager wrote: Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:20:51 -0400 From: Michael Eric Berube <pj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: OT: A Better Bayer? Yep. No argument. Some are dogs and I don't believe that their QC is quite up to the standards of some of the Camera companies either, but when you find a good example of some of their better lenses (EX line is almost all fantastic) you've got a great tool. I use an 18-50/2.8, a 50-150/2.8 and I rented a 10-20/4-5.6 for a wedding this last weekend and was very impressed and will very likely get one. Their new 70/2.8 Macro is getting rave reviews as one of the sharpest Macros ever made. Again, they already make some 4:3 lenses, they'd be brilliant to make a camera that took those lenses but used their Foveon tech. (I don't think they make lenses in Rollei mount though.) :) Be well, Michael Eric Berube
- [rollei_list] Re: rollei_list Digest V3 #151
- From: Jan Decher