No more Contax...

"bmoag" wrote in message
news
I never understood how Yashica/Kyocera found the Contax brand name
profitable for the last two decades.



Well, the marketing thrust was not the cameras, but the lenses. Their
signature slogan was something like "The essence of Carl Zeiss Lenses."

Real bummer to see them go. Sorry for anyone that was building a system,
and now has to decide whether to stick with this orphan or move over to
something else that remains in production. I can't imagine pros--who
require equipment in good repair, to make their livings--remaining with
this.

Might be some bargains on eBay for amateurs whose requirements are less
stringent. We shall see.

"bmoag" wrote in message
news
I never understood how Yashica/Kyocera found the Contax brand name
profitable for the last two decades.



Well, the marketing thrust was not the cameras, but the lenses. Their
signature slogan was something like "The essence of Carl Zeiss Lenses."

Real bummer to see them go. Sorry for anyone that was building a system,
and now has to decide whether to stick with this orphan or move over to
something else that remains in production. I can't imagine pros--who
require equipment in good repair, to make their livings--remaining with
this.

Might be some bargains on eBay for amateurs whose requirements are less
stringent. We shall see.

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

"Tony" wrote in message
. com...

I think Olympus is one of the more successful P&S manufacturers. They
will probably be out of the DSLR business as soon as they can dump the
remaining stock, but will "pretend" it is still a going concern they way
they did with the OM system for a few years after they had stopped making
them.


They have decent market share, around 11%, but it's falling. I expect that
they'll end up merging their digital camera business with another
low-market-share manufacturer, just like Konica-Minolta. It's hard to be a
survivor in a commodity market, with no higher-end products. Too bad they
got into the 4:3 mess. Pentax and Konica-Minolta look like they may make a
go of it in the consumer D-SLRs.


This would parallel what they did in film cameras (dropped new SLRs).
As Oly SLR (film) fans, we have now bought a different brand, 'cause few
lens mfgs make new lenses for our old Olys. Sad- we bought Olympus for
decades. I even bought an Oly digicam. I doubt if I will buy another,
though. Not that my Oly digital was bad when I bought it, but if I were
in market for new digicam today, I think other brands offer more bang
for buck.

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

"Tony" wrote in message
. com...

I think Olympus is one of the more successful P&S manufacturers. They
will probably be out of the DSLR business as soon as they can dump the
remaining stock, but will "pretend" it is still a going concern they way
they did with the OM system for a few years after they had stopped making
them.


They have decent market share, around 11%, but it's falling. I expect that
they'll end up merging their digital camera business with another
low-market-share manufacturer, just like Konica-Minolta. It's hard to be a
survivor in a commodity market, with no higher-end products. Too bad they
got into the 4:3 mess. Pentax and Konica-Minolta look like they may make a
go of it in the consumer D-SLRs.


This would parallel what they did in film cameras (dropped new SLRs).
As Oly SLR (film) fans, we have now bought a different brand, 'cause few
lens mfgs make new lenses for our old Olys. Sad- we bought Olympus for
decades. I even bought an Oly digicam. I doubt if I will buy another,
though. Not that my Oly digital was bad when I bought it, but if I were
in market for new digicam today, I think other brands offer more bang
for buck.

"Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
news:WsUVd.151328$0u.836@fed1read04...

My brother pays less than one TENTH the tax I pay...because he bought my
grandmother's
house...and this family transfer "grandfathered him in" at her original
tax rate. Our
houses are worth roughly the same amount...yet I pay over $5K/year while
he pays about
$400/year (the dirty dog!).

This is the second biggest problem with proposition 13, people that use
thousands of dollars of services (or tens of thousands) yet legally evade
property tax. We have a lot of that in my neighborhood, which has very good
schools. Many adults are living in the houses they grew up in as children,
making six figure incomes, sending their kids to school, yet paying 1/10th
the property tax that they should be paying. Warrren Buffet, when advising
Arnold Schwarzenneger, pointed to the property tax inequity as one of the
biggest economic issues in California, as did the Rand Corporation in a
recent study. But proposition 13 is sacred, because it also applies to
commercial property. When a commercial investor buys say a shopping mall,
they are careful to structure it such that they don't get reassessed.

What's needed is a system that lets the original owner opt to defer the
properly assessed property tax, and pay a lower rate based on the original
price, until the property is sold, so they don't get taxed out of their
home. I think that one state does do this already.

"Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
news:WsUVd.151328$0u.836@fed1read04...

My brother pays less than one TENTH the tax I pay...because he bought my
grandmother's
house...and this family transfer "grandfathered him in" at her original
tax rate. Our
houses are worth roughly the same amount...yet I pay over $5K/year while
he pays about
$400/year (the dirty dog!).

This is the second biggest problem with proposition 13, people that use
thousands of dollars of services (or tens of thousands) yet legally evade
property tax. We have a lot of that in my neighborhood, which has very good
schools. Many adults are living in the houses they grew up in as children,
making six figure incomes, sending their kids to school, yet paying 1/10th
the property tax that they should be paying. Warrren Buffet, when advising
Arnold Schwarzenneger, pointed to the property tax inequity as one of the
biggest economic issues in California, as did the Rand Corporation in a
recent study. But proposition 13 is sacred, because it also applies to
commercial property. When a commercial investor buys say a shopping mall,
they are careful to structure it such that they don't get reassessed.

What's needed is a system that lets the original owner opt to defer the
properly assessed property tax, and pay a lower rate based on the original
price, until the property is sold, so they don't get taxed out of their
home. I think that one state does do this already.

In article et,
Jeremy wrote:

Rollei TLRs had little in the way of additional accessories and lenses,

No need for the past tense - Rolleiflexes (not cords) are still available
brand new. The current models have such luxuries as TTL flash metering.

I really like my old Rolleiflex 3.5E Xenotar. It's smaller and lighter than
my DSLR and a half-decent lens, doesn't need a battery, and takes utterly
superb pictures. The sharp optics and medium format film are mitigate
against only having a standard lens to an extent because it allows a decent
amount of cropping - far more than my DSLR can handle.

Lack of wide-angle is a pain though, but that's what my Mamiya 7 is for. I
can fit the Mamiya 7, with its 43mm ultrawide *and* the Rolleiflex in the
same bag that I can put my 10D and two lenses (three at a push if they're
small lenses) in, and still have room for a 35mm rangefinder and a couple of
lenses, or a spot meter in the front pouch.

In article et,
Jeremy wrote:

Rollei TLRs had little in the way of additional accessories and lenses,

No need for the past tense - Rolleiflexes (not cords) are still available
brand new. The current models have such luxuries as TTL flash metering.

I really like my old Rolleiflex 3.5E Xenotar. It's smaller and lighter than
my DSLR and a half-decent lens, doesn't need a battery, and takes utterly
superb pictures. The sharp optics and medium format film are mitigate
against only having a standard lens to an extent because it allows a decent
amount of cropping - far more than my DSLR can handle.

Lack of wide-angle is a pain though, but that's what my Mamiya 7 is for. I
can fit the Mamiya 7, with its 43mm ultrawide *and* the Rolleiflex in the
same bag that I can put my 10D and two lenses (three at a push if they're
small lenses) in, and still have room for a 35mm rangefinder and a couple of
lenses, or a spot meter in the front pouch.

"Lourens Smak" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Courtesy Assured" wrote:

Well, it would be pointless to re-hash the well documented deficiencies
of
the 4/3 system - just about everyone is already aware that it produces
noisy
and relatively poor quality images(or, if they don't know, they've only
to
read some reviews)

Instead of reading reviews, I actually use the E-system, (among other
camera's) and I can only say it has surpassed all my expectations by a
wide margin. The E1 is a high-quality pro-level tool. (unlike Canon's
offerings on the same price-level) It beats the Nikon D1x hands down,
and this was the top level Nikon up to a week ago. E1 production has
already stopped by the way, expect some interesting news in a few
weeks/months, while stock is being cleared. You are so hoplessly
misinformed it isn't even funny. Admit it, peanut-brain, you are just
repeating nonsense you heard on the web, like a parrot. Does your mother
know you are using her computer?

Have fun looking through your plastic f/5.6 20D kit-lens. Now THAT is an
example of an overpriced lens... $100 optics and Canon sells it for
$500. They must laugh their asses off.

I don't know that you're smoking but it's sold for $100, the kit lens is the
18-55.

Greg

In article ,
"Courtesy Assured" wrote:

As for the fabled E-1 - if you like it, and are happy with the unsharp noisy
images it produces, fine. Perhaps it is, as you claim, a 'High level Pro
tool' - but without any 'High level Pro's' actually using it.

Still, perhaps you know something they don't?

duh.... I am a pro; I have used (and still use) anything from
medium-format digital backs to a D1x or 1Ds, including the E1. I have
shot digitally since 1992. I will also use film if I have to, but only
6x6 or 4x5". 35mm is history. I use my E-system for travel photography
and some magazine assignments. (glossy mag type) My stock-agency sells
about 600 E1-images at the moment (mostly travel) and I haven't had a
single reject yet, and quality-control is very strict with this company.
(one dust-speck on a single image, and you can resubmit everything...)
There are even a few iso 800 shots among those 600.

Here is a sample magazine shot I did:
http://www.myfourthirds.com/files/0277/LPIC0035.jpg
page is 24x34cm.

So I guess I must know something they don't... fact is when you have to
shoot at f2.8, with a wide lens, the E1 can outperform even the original
1Ds. I can spot 1Ds images in print by the purple fringing. And I prefer
low-iso + f2.8 over high-iso, must be because I come from the slide-film
days. High iso looks bad with any digital camera, one camera is just
slightly less bad than another. Not just because of noise, but color and
dynamic range suffer also.

However, it seems clear that your decent into personal abuse is symptomatic
of your own dissatisfaction with your wildly overpriced antique.

Again, why are you doing this? I am telling you I own one, and that it's
a great machine. Why can't you believe that? Do yourself a favor, remove
the lenscap from your brain.

I am not alone, in fact it is pretty easy to find proof of that on the
web, here's an example from today:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=12509485

I'm not surprised to learn that E-1 production has ended - and as for the
'interesting news' that you are anticipating, I believe that this will prove
to be the announcement from Olympus that they have finally decided to stop
holding their corporate fingers in the fire, and are pulling out of the DSLR
market altogether.

How about this? Do you believe this?

14-35mm f2.0
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/html/Hot...E14-35mmF2.JPG

35-100mm f2.0
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/html/Hot...35-100mmF2.JPG


90-250mm f2.8
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/html/Hot.../E90-250mm.JPG

After all, Fuji came to their senses, didn't they?

What do you mean? By releasing an overpriced 6MP body in 2005 that is
based on an antique amateur-Nikon?

Lourens