The problem with both the Rollei and the S has nothing to do with their cameras, but with sales/service/support. .......snip
I find all the talk about market share funny.
People that don't know the dow from the S+P can quote apple and Facebooks stock price, pretty much on the hour.
As far as Leica owning 20% of the mfd market, how do they get their numbers? I've never seen Phase or Hasselblad's or Leica's posted sales numbers and we all hear rumors of "best year ever" and other quotes. who knows?
What I do know is what moves a current or prospective professional to a new system. First thing is how many cameras do you need. With Leica I'd need two, because their repair times are slow.
Then you get into what Paul ask's . . . tethering. Now i'm not wild about always tethering, but clients are. They want to see every frame as fast and easy as possible. As far as I know the Leica's do not tether quickly.
The thing that kind of blows me away is I went to see the S or S2 last week and the Leica Rep said, "computers, I don't know anything about computers". The Grey perfectly hair styled ceo hobbyist standing at the counter thought that was great and humorous, I thought shit, if Leica's guys don't care about computers I'll never get these images on a screen in a timely matter, which is a shame because the camera if well built, focuses fast, has a nice file and seems well built. The CEO was obviously the Reps main focus, me I was just a pro that would probably complain if a lens wasn't calibrated and took three weeks to get back.
Also I do use computers and send my own e-mails so obviously my response is computers . . . I have to know computers.
Anyway . . .
The S2 is expensive but if you use them for a number of years, not too bad, well not "that" expensive until you figure in lens prices. Then it get's into rarified air.
The thing is for me, when I look at any of the newest backs and mfd cameras, I kind of wonder what I'm gaining over my ghetto contax's and older Phase backs. Sure a little more detail, a little faster autofocus, maybe a little bigger viewfinder with a prism, but overall since I've shot a billion paid images with the Contax's (and still do) I have to ask myself if dropping 30, 40 or 50 grand for a new system will increase my billings or give me something I just don't have.
And what does Contax have a 2% or 5% market share? I don't care.
In fact, so many people have asked for cmos and live view on medium format, I've kind of come to a conclusion after owning a bunch of ccd and cmos cameras, that ccd's non aa filtered cameras seem to have a more robust and deeper look. In fact I think they are less homogenous than the basic Nikon or Canon and that's the goal not to always look like one of the crowd. BTW: I'm not talking micro detail, heck I don't care about that as much as the overall look and it just may be the moon and sun have aligned funny, but lately I've had multiple new clients mention images we've shot that are all ccd based, thinking they were shot on film and thinking they look different.
That's the first time I've heard that from clients, so I guess if I was selling mfd cameras rather than dodge the high iso, live view thing of cmos, I'd push the unique look of ccd's.
If I had fast, cost effective repairs and service, I would definitely push that.
Then again, I don't sell cameras.