The market for "economical" and weight vs performance tradeoffs where Schneider Digitar excel was probably too narrow in the first place. Even if sensors would have been compatible I think they would have sold poorly anyway, sad but true. I liked it, but I bought almost all my gear second hand. Schneider only saw my money on the SK60XL. If high end digital backs had been like $5k rather than $30k, then the economical tradeoff niche could have worked, but digital backs has been so crazy expensive for so long time that lens cost doesn't matter that much. And the weight thing, it's important for me, but how many actually a system carry 7 lenses for 20km?
I think the big tech cam market is for those that want
the best regardless costs. And best in tech cam land is best pixel peep. And that is not going to change. The only thing that's changing is that 135 is improving, which means that tech cam needs to continue keeping the distance. Alpa adds $1k (or is it $2k?) on the lens mount only, but exceptionally few really cares. Lenses can cost anything, as long as they produce the pixel peep.
It's interesting that the ASPH 120 is considered a niche lens due to that it's long. My 120 is one of my most used lenses, and my 35 is one of the least used (I do landscape)... I've long realized that I don't really match the typical tech cam client, which means that I'm not surprised when it pulls away in a direction I don't like
I think I'll stay in at least one more sensor, but I also think that there will be a point when 135 has enough high resolution lenses with tilt capability that it matches or exceeds 4x5" film quality (which is sort of a benchmark for me), and to keep the distance MFD tech will then move into bizarre space with ultra-heavy ultra-complex and ultra-expensive lenses, but you can always sell on being "the best". That will be the time when I move back to a smaller format, unless there's still older working MFD solutions that meets my requirements (which I hope, because I really like my Linhof...).
Oh well, US clients have more money. It's not black and white.
If we would speak to an European dealer (I have) I think the story would be
slightly different although I guess that Rodie leads the way there too, but perhaps more due to compatibility. I know they do get people that are interested in budget solutions, and sometimes it ends up with 4x5" film actually. Tech cam packages with CFV-50c and Silvestri tech cams and Schneider lenses have been put together by the dealers, with very attractive prices. They are getting an increased amount of enthusiast (non-professional) clients, and many of them are interested in budget solutions. But as digital backs are so expensive, at least up to the CFV-50c, the Rodenstock vs Schneider price difference is fairly irrelevant. Rodies are not
that expensive if you put the widest angles aside.
Timing has been dreadful for Schneider. Now when CMOS backs are making MFD view cameras much more attractive and drags more enthusiast budget-sensitive people into the mix (view camera solutions are soo much cheaper), the sensor is simply not compatible, and even if it was it's too late. Schneider probably decided that they would pull out a long time ago.