We received a letter asking us to ask Zeiss about producing a camera. A camera of this kind of spec is often discussed over at different enthusiast site like RFF, FM, APUG etc.., it has certain number of supporters, also about the equal number of nay-sayers. Those discussions often turn into arguments about actual buyers in the end, or the insignificance of the niche market (think Leica?).
Here is the content of the letter:
I recently read, the average Leica owner owns 1.4pieces of lenses, so one great lens per owner would certainly do also from marketing aspects:
So I ask you to ask the Zeiss guys, why are they not producing a fixed lens Zeiss RF like the Fuji X100 but FF, real RF (means MF only), without all the Fuji gimmick. I would die for a high IQ camera with a focal length somewhere between 35 and 50mm and f2 to f2.8. This would also avoid the CMOS disadvantages for RF's. And if I could add some more wishes, throw away the displays, meanwhile WB is so good, mine is always on AWB, or on Kelvin if I take pictures at night; for the settings I see them in the viewfinder, so I don't need a display. And make it a rugged small tool. And yes, focus confirmation in the RF.
I want to throw away my 5DII but stay with Zeiss lenses, that's why. The 5DII is good enough in all aspects, but toooooo big.
I know a lot of people who would go for something like my wish, tech is all there, I don't know what Zeiss is waiting for. We would pay good for such a pro-tool.
I decided to give a *
PERSONAL* answer to this wish. (repeat, this answer is personal, subjective, or even fictional, so even if you absolutely hate it, disagree with it, or even get annoyed by it. Stay calm, this is a small opinion of an individual among billions of netizens).
First of all, we need to face the fact that manufacturing is hardly profitable in the 21st century. Second, technology advancement is so rapid that producing day-to-day intellectual properties becomes very competitive and exhaustive. For a company to stay on top of others and ahead of the game, the first step would be to step away from those two mentioned aspects. This is what Zeiss did. Zeiss's business model is very different from Zeiss 20 years ago or Leica, or Canonikonympusonicohuji. Restrict ourselves to Zeiss photography division (just to avoid counter examples). Zeiss produces optic designs, lens formulae, product ion standards, quality control management etc.... They are not the typical manufacturing like assembling iPads, or day-to-day technologies like squeezing pixels onto a sensor. They are unique aspects of Zeiss that it carried from the previous century, and they will allow Zeiss to play the game in the 21st century in a unique way. Think IBM, they are another company that made this transition of their business model for the 21st century. Think Kodak, they are a company who failed the transition. And think Canonikonympusonicohuji, are they really that successful as companies? compared to Zeiss?I suppose we would be seeing more business model transitions for the manufacturing sectors in developed countries. The transition will be either to a niche market fetcher or turning oneself into the ``service'' sector.
This is it. I haven't spelled out that many solid points, but the ideas are there.
