Designing the 'perfect' dRF

[sbug]

What about a pure b&w version of a digital rf body? In theory, it would give you some amazingly detailed images since you weren't blending a red, a blue and two green pixels together. Or am I not thinking clearly?

 

[RML]

The perfectest dRF is the one you hold in your hand. I happen to hold one right now. 😛

 

[GeneW]

Remy, you're just making us jealous 😀

Scott, I frankly don't know. Kodak once had a B&W FF digital -- if I'm not mistaken Brian Sweeney has one. Remy and other RD1 owners could tell us about how the RD1 does B&W. I've heard it's very, very good. If so, I'd hate to give up the option of shooting colour.

Gene

 

[peterc]

I see "full frame" mentioned a lot in this discussion. Full frame, or a 35mm film size sensor, in digital 35mm cameras is something hampered by physics. It's hard enough to do in an SLR (Canon uses a software cheat to get acceptable corner results, Nikon [as I understand it] didn't go the cheat route since it deemed enhancing the underexposure at the corners of the frame wasn't acceptable) and even harder to do in a rangefinder because of the shorter lens rear element to film plane distance.
The physics comes in because light passes through the lens and, as you get to the edges, hits the sensor/film at an angle. Film doesn't care that much about the angle at which the light hits. Sensors like the light to hit head on. From what I've read, the light fall off at the corners in the Canon 5D is something like 2 - 2 1/2 stops. Software in the camera is used to compensate for this vignetting.
Many rangefinder lenses extend into the camera body, making the angle when the light hits the film/sensor even steeper.
While microlenses could be used to alleviate this problem, this would probably eliminate some lenses from use at all and be a compromise at best for others.
A smaller sensor (APS size) allows for true RAW files (no in camera processing). However, it does force a redesign of wide lenses due to the so-called crop factor.

Peter

 

[Honus]

I am waiting for a sub $2K digital rangefinder. The specs of the RD-1 would be fine. I don't need full frame. I don't need 10M pixels. A fairly noise-free 1600 iso image capability with an M-mount and a real rangefinder/viewfinder is all I ask.

 

[GeneW]

There's no question that FF sensors present challenges for lens design, Peter. APS-sized sensors have a lot going for them except for the crop factor. This hurts RF shooters more than SLR shooters, because with SLR's you at least gain on the tele side of the equation.

Let's watch what Leica comes up with. The 1.3x crop factor makes the dM closer to FF than the Nikon/Canon APS digitals. Maybe Leica will find a compromise most of us could live with.

If I were a betting man, I'd say that while what Nikon has said is true in one sense, it's also convenient for them to say that when they don't have a FF sensor ready. I fully expect them to join the FF game within the year (person hunch only)...

Gene

 

[peterc]

I fully expect them to join the FF game within the year (person hunch only)...

Possibly, Gene. But Nikon has only 2 full-frame cameras left in the stable (F6 and FM-10) and both are film. Nikon has also invested heavily in the DX lens series ... a set of well-regarded lenses (they're even popular with pros) that would become useless with FF cameras.

Peter

 

[nrb]

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.

Agree 100% with the full frame specification to allow for the proper use of wide angle existing lenses.
While such a camera does not exist I think that film and a good scanner will do the job.

 

[nrb]

What about a pure b&w version of a digital rf body? In theory, it would give you some amazingly detailed images since you weren't blending a red, a blue and two green pixels together. Or am I not thinking clearly?

Yes, loud and clear.

 

[aad]

I'd go with Frank S., with the final proviso of no battery, or at least no need to change them, a la eco-drive watches or some other way of running the thing. My guess is that's 10 plus years out, but maybe not.

 

[Bryan Lee]

The camera your dreaming about wont even look like the rangefinder that we know today. It will look more like a small Hassalblad or a little box with M or LSM lenses on the front and no other glass. Youll just wear a kind of glasses with the rangefinder inside the lense. That way no matter where you hold the camera or what direction you point it in you will see what it sees, no more getting on the knees for waist level focusing.

 

[ray_g]

I am keeping my fingers crossed that the Sony-KM collaboration will bring about a digital Hexar AF with fixed 35/2 (in digital equivalent) and/or a digital Hexar RF.

With in-body anti-shake.