whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
Any rampany roumors out there?
B
bedaberger
Guest
we only need to sleep one more night! ;-)
italy74
Well-known
Honestly, I think that if Zeiss misses this opportunity, next realistic date will be photokina 2010 where they play "at home"
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Lots of rumours -- this is the internet, after all -- but none of them, I suspect, with any foundation in reality: again, this is the internet...
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
pkreyenhop
Established
A friend's girlfriend whose father in law used to know somebody who had a relative working at Zeiss told me that it is not due before 1/4/2009 - so it's still going to be a couple of sleeps.....
sojournerphoto
Veteran
Apparently my source told me that the camera is ready, but they won't realease it until after the recession
OK, I'm lying. I haven't a clue
OK, I'm lying. I haven't a clue
Andrew Sowerby
Well-known
They sent me a prototype for testing. Noise free at ISO 25,600.
Overconfidence
Member
Sounds like they're going to alienate a lot of rangefinder users...
alan davus
Well-known
Rumour is it will be introduced at the next PMT.
Avotius
Some guy
I dont count on anything coming. Sensors still are not there yet for what a rangefinder needs.
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
how can you dare to spoil these rumours by throwing in facts?
sojournerphoto
Veteran
But....
But....
but the back illuminated design appears that it may offer some ope for wider acceptance angles and so potentially allow a FF rf design in due course.
Mike
But....
but the back illuminated design appears that it may offer some ope for wider acceptance angles and so potentially allow a FF rf design in due course.
Mike
nbphoto
Member
How about the FF sensor used in the nikon d700? Would that work, its good at higher iso. It only has to be the same size as 35mm film and sensitive to light after all.
Last edited:
sojournerphoto
Veteran
No, the prpblem is that wide rf lenses sit closer to the film plane than slr designs because the slr elnses have to be designed to sit in front of the mirror. This means that the light from a wide rf lens hits the film/sensor at a more oblique angle than that from an equivalent focal length slr lens (it also means that a 15mm Voigt costs about 20% of the price of a 15mm canon L series - OK a bit of simplification, but...). As sensors are quite refelctive and the light has to pass through layers of colour filter and down a 'well' sensors become much less sensitive as the angle of incidence departs from perpendicular. For a full frame sensor the efficiency loss is so great that the cameras are not yet workable, and hence the MS and RD1 both use smaller than 35mm frame sensors. This also why Leica code lenses for the M8.
Mike
ferider
Veteran
And that is what Leica marketing and associates want you to believe.
With the true 16bits/color in the new sensors there is enough room to correct for vignetting, at least of moderate (21mm and above ?) wide angles, and to end up with a decent dynamic range - at least as good as the M8's.
If making a FF M9/ZI or other has business appeal is another question.
Roland.
With the true 16bits/color in the new sensors there is enough room to correct for vignetting, at least of moderate (21mm and above ?) wide angles, and to end up with a decent dynamic range - at least as good as the M8's.
If making a FF M9/ZI or other has business appeal is another question.
Roland.
Last edited:
DGA
Well-known
It is all comes to market and profitability.
The FF D-RF market is small anyhow and (up to now) happy with film.
I assume a digital ZI should cost about $3500, and FF might be even higher than $5000
That is a lot of money.
In light of the marketing story of the M8, I don't think Zeiss/Cosina will get into such an adventure.
(But then, again, Epson did. So... I don't know)
If such a camera had been there, and I had the money,
I would have definitely bought me one.
The FF D-RF market is small anyhow and (up to now) happy with film.
I assume a digital ZI should cost about $3500, and FF might be even higher than $5000
That is a lot of money.
In light of the marketing story of the M8, I don't think Zeiss/Cosina will get into such an adventure.
(But then, again, Epson did. So... I don't know)
If such a camera had been there, and I had the money,
I would have definitely bought me one.
sojournerphoto
Veteran
And that is what Leica marketing and associates want you to believe.
With the true 16bits/color in the new sensors there is enough room to correct for vignetting, at least of moderate (21mm and above ?) wide angles, and to end up with a decent dynamic range - at least as good as the M8's.
If making a FF M9/ZI or other has business appeal is another question.
Roland.
I think you are right to a point, except I don't think any non-mf maker offers 16bit output and there is good reason to believe that 12 would be enough for almost all dslr's. Having said that, in my opinion the file quality of the 1Ds3 is above that of the 5D, though whether that requires or is because of 14 over 12 bit conversion is beyond my power to test. The difficulty arises in how far can you go in correcting vignetting whilst retaining acceptable dynamic range and low noise in the corners (and to what iso), whilst making a product you can sell in sufficient numbers to be worthwhile. I hope we see digital Ikon at some time, but meanwhile I shoot film rf and dslr.
Mike
Olsen
Well-known
I don't think that Zeiss/Cosina will go into such an adventure. They are making a lot of money indirectly out of the M8-sales, while Leica is loosing money on M8. It cant be tempting for any camera producers to enter the D-RF camera segment with all the problems that Leica has been through. The launch of the M8 points to all the obstacles. Ranging from crop factor to IR/UV filtering and high ISO performance. None of these issues are easy to solve, if possible at all, with today's sensor technology. The first making a real breakthrough on this will not be in a position sell such a camera for less than 8 to 10,000 dollars. The producer the most dedicated to the task would be Leica.
At best, Zeiss/Cosina could come up with a decent up-date of RD-1. That would be picking a current sensor from a high volume D-SLR, with a high crop factor and try to fit it into a RF outfit.
ferider
Veteran
Hi Mike,
using the cosine-fourth law, and a 21mm lens in 35mm format, i.e. FOV of 90 degrees, theoretical vignetting is around 2 stops. That is, unless there are additional losses, for example in sensor filter layers, etc., one needs 2 additional bits to correct for FF. So, if 12bit output is enough, 14bit/per colour on the sensor (like in the D3x) should already do.
And then, like you say, there already are bigger 16bit sensors. If the costs would not matter (and here comes the business argument) one could build the smaller 35mm FF 16bit sensors, too, even at higher yield than the bigger sensors. So technically it is very well possible ....
Since RF users are not exactly top priority for the big manufacturers out there, my guess is we'll have to wait for the current top-of-the-line sensors to become 2nd tier and more affordable before we will see a FF RF or something similar (I still believe we'll see an RF-style overlay of LCD framelines and digital patch over an optical viewfinder, one day ....
)But then, in any case, as you, I am quite content using film in my RFs ....
Cheers,
Roland.
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
One could just put a Voigtländer 15/4.5 SL lens on a Nikon D700 and try it out. The lens is the same, and the sensor is full frame.
Philipp