Designing the 'perfect' dRF

[GeneW]

The announcements of the scaling back or discontinuation of several film cameras (Nikon, Xpan, and for those with longer memories, Olympus) underscore that, in terms of camera manufacture, the future lies primarily with digital. There are some active threads at the moment on the shortcomings of digital cameras, from an RF shooter's point of view. If you could design the perfect digital rangefinder, what would the specs look like? Who would you like to build it?

Personally, I think the Epson RD1 is a good prototype of the kinds of features that would appeal to me.

- Controls such as shutter speed on the outside, where they can be adjusted quickly without resorting to menus
- Common lens mount -- the Leica M mount is fine with me
- Foldable LCD screen so it can be put out of sight
- Good VF
- FF or close to it sensor

In my dreams, the internal computer and sensor would be modular, allowing them to be removed and replaced when technology advances. I don't know if this is feasible.

Manufacturer: CV (perhaps in collaboration with another company). I think they're the only ones who could make such a camera relatively affordable

Gene

 

[rover]

The benefit of fast wide lenses goes hand and hand with RF photography. A full frame sensor would be a necessity for me if my wishes were to come true.

 

[kaiyen]

I have stated many times that 35mm-sized sensors (I prefer not to call them full-frame, since that term doesn't indicate which frame size is being referenced) will never become prevalent or affordable. However, I also agree that fast, wide lenses are a key part of RF photography. I just don't know how those two issues will be reconciled in the long run.

Having said that - other than point-n-shoot digitals, are there many that don't have shutter speed controls as direct-access buttons or dials? Even my 5 year old 2MP ollympus has a manual mode that turned the 4-way button into an aperture _and_ shutter control. It was actually quite quick with which to work.

anyway. I am hopeful that this conversation won't turn into some insane wish list. We all want everything and the kitchen sink, but it's important to keep perspective on things. For instance, a company will likely never offer that modular of a choice when it comes to upgrading, as it would cut into future sales. It works with digital backs for MF because MF has always had modular backs (and even the most recent backs are still $10K, which is probably a good margin anyway).

allan

 

[lido]

All of the above, plus should be made of metal and have at least little resistance to weather elements (environmental seals). As far as fast wides, that would be awesome, but it is hardly feasible to build affordable full frame sensor at this time.

I would be really happy with the equivalent to Bessa R2 with full frame sensor.

 

[bmattock]

Take a standard Leica Digilux 2 / Panasonic DMC LC1:

1) Optical viewfinder (RF patch optional, but nice).
2) Remove zoom.
3) Faster ISO.
4) Bigger sensor for 'OOF' effects.
5) At popular prices - say, sub $600.

I can live without zoom, I don't need an LCD (but I'll let it go it there is one). The new Ricoh Digital GR is close also, but aggravatingly and fatally flawed (for me) in that it has a tiny sensor and a big LCD but no optical viewfinder. And no, a stuck-on external viewfinder is not the same. And slow ISO. Sigh.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[wlewisiii]

Personally I'd buy an Epson right now if it was full frame. As it stands, I could imagine buying the Canon EOS 5D for that reason but I'd still rather have the Epson able to fully use the lenses mounted on it.

William

 

[jaapv]

The benefit of fast wide lenses goes hand and hand with RF photography. A full frame sensor would be a necessity for me if my wishes were to come true.

A Summilux ASPH - 15/1.4 could sweeten a 1.33 crop sensor for you? Just starting a rumour......

 

[JoeFriday]

another thing to keep in mind is start-up time, shutter lag and recycle time between shots.. I've used a few digital cameras that were worthless due to the shutter lag

also, manual focus would be (nearly) essential.. I absolutely hate AF cameras that hunt for focus when I need the shot NOW

 

[bmattock]

another thing to keep in mind is start-up time, shutter lag and recycle time between shots.. I've used a few digital cameras that were worthless due to the shutter lag

also, manual focus would be (nearly) essential.. I absolutely hate AF cameras that hunt for focus when I need the shot NOW

I can get past the startup if it has a sleep mode - pretty common now. I can get past the shot-to-shot, probably. But shutter lag is death. Even my DSLR has it when I'm running AF in not-so-good light. I've nearly spiked the camera into the concrete once or twice, and I *have* missed bloody good shots because I was pressing and pressing on the shutter release for all I was bloody worth, and the lens was still hunting - or had given up and wasn't moving at all, but the focus indicator wasn't lit, so no photo. By the time I had the presence of mind to flip the lens to MF and take the shot - too late, much too late.

I have thrown a smaller less expensive digicam against a wall because it did not go off when I pressed the shutter release. If it thinks it is smarter than me, it dies howwibly.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Poptart]

I've only recently aquired a real (albeit obsolete) digicam. I use it all the time for quick shots and product work. My only real qualms are the digital lag, the "battery saving" power-off timer, and the low-light lcd blackout. Otherwise it's fine. I spent $50 for it; I'd be heartily p.o.ed if it had cost $3K like an epson. But I don't consider digital a serious tool for any real art production. I think it's perfect for commercial stuff but it just looks too flat for art.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Full-frame; first thing to make it "perfect" for me. I'm pretty confident they will be affordable.

Heck, the EOS 1Ds is now a museum piece, hardly two years on the market, and the 5D is about 1/4th of its retail price. FF affordable within the next few years? Ya betcha.

 

[GeneW]

FF sensors may be expensive to produce now, but I suspect the price will keep falling -- witness the EOF 5D. Within a couple of years, it may start hitting the sweet spot, especially if Nikon joins Canon in the FF market.

I doubt I'll be able to afford the digital M, but I hope it's innovative and successful enough to drive dRF design to the next level. The newly-designed wides Leica has hinted will go with the dM could be interesting as well. Maybe it will drive out an Epson RD2 competitor.

Looking back over the evolution of PC's, I remember when a fully-equipped TRS-80 Model III with a whopping 48K cost at least $3500 Cdn. The original IBM PC with 128K was in the $8000 range. I'm assuming that digital photography has just about entered the IBM PC stage and that it will get better, faster, and cheaper over time.

Now if we could just get the industry to get past the 'me-too' P&S digicams... Time for a modern-day Maitani (chief designer of the Olympus OM-1, small Zuiko lenses, and Olympus XA) to design something more than a little computer with a little zoom lens stuck in it.

Gene

 

[jaapv]

Oops-the reason I don't consider the Canon 5D useful for my needs is the larger sensor- Im holding out for an APS-size 10 MP body. It gets too expensive in long lenses for me otherwise-and too heavy.

 

[rover]

As the market continues to expand for DSLRs the technology will continue to move forward and I do believe affordable full frame sensors are in the furture. Bottom line, they produce better results than smaller sensors and competition will continue to drive improvement in quality to secure market share. Today the DSLR market is the most profitable area for camera manufacturers. Canon and Nikon own in excess of 75% of that market. To gain in roads on these giants you have to offer something they do not. Likewise, to retain marketshare, or kill the competition, Nikon and Canon have to continue moving forward. Manufacturing abilities and efficiencies will continue to impove and sensor technology will advance. When the limits of the APS sized sensors is reached and an increased # of pixels starts producing a lower quality image, the sensor will grow.

 

[FrankS]

My ideal Drf camera would be my M2, M3 or M6 with a switchable digital back where the back door is now. The digital back can stick out a bit farther than the normal film back. The sensor would be the size of 35mm film frame so the lenses and framelines would all jive. A battery would go where the film cannister is, and the memory would go where the film spool is.

 

[Jason_K]

My ideal digital RF would include:

* A full frame sensor
* M-mount
* Optical viewfinder
* Quality images (no niose) at high ISO settings
* All metal body and chassis - weather seals would be nice
* CF or SD card

 

[kaiyen]

Here's a different question: how much would you be willing to pay for an RF that meets your needs? To be blunt, the idea of a $600 digital RF that meets the needs stated in this thread makes me kind of chuckle. I don't see that happening for at least 3 or 4 more years. The 5D costs $3300 right now and Canon stripped quite a few of the really advanced features out of the 1ds to get there.

Just curious.

allan

 

[GeneW]

Allan, for me a 3-4 year time frame is fine. I'm in no hurry.

Gene

 

[kaiyen]

Gene
Ah - okay. That changes my perception of these types of discussions quite a bit. So let's add an adendum to my question - how much are you willing to pay, and how long are you willing to wait?

allan

 

[GeneW]

Gene
Ah - okay. That changes my perception of these types of discussions quite a bit. So let's add an adendum to my question - how much are you willing to pay, and how long are you willing to wait?

allan

My perspective is that of a film RF shooter who would consider moving to RF digital when the right camera is available at the right price. What would I pay in 3-4 years for such a camera? Let me put it in relative terms -- the same as what a FF SLR will cost then.

Gene