jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Socke said:jlw said:
Not that hard (I know, it has been posted before, but still....) But for anybody not wanting to lug over 1.5 kg's, there is of course the CV 12 mm.
Bill58
Native Texan
jaapv said:
ferider
Veteran
Trius said:
All we have to wait for is a full frame sensor with enough bits per pixel. The vignetting problem that forced Leitz to
reduce the sensor size can be dealt with in software if larger words per pixel are available: one stop of light loss in
the corner = 1 additional bit per pixel.
Say, a 24bit sensor for full format becomes available. This can then be used as 16bit sensor for a digital RF, using the additional
8 bits to correct corner light fall off.
Once this kind of sensor becomes available for other applications, or mainstream DSLRs it can be used by either Zeiss or
Leitz for a full-frame RF.
Roland.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Very good point. There are times that I just kick myself because I can't bring the image to look "natural" from a Canon image. You need perfect lighting in order to never have this problem. But that is also the problem with Nikon cameras: you need perfect lighting in order to get a perfectly crisp image. Once you're over ISO 400 with the current crop of Nikon dSLRs, it's game over (for me).Nachkebia said:Hm okeyyy and it is M mount? why would someone want it over zeiss digital ? because of canon`s plastic look? no thanks
It boils down again to have the right tool for the right situation. Even Swiss Army knives won't provide everything you need.
We'll always complain about something. Either we wait for the M15, the R-D50 or just adapt to some of the weak points each camera has. I really would love a camera made for Goldilocks, but whining over and over about cameras made for each of the Three Bears just makes me want to go like Daffy Duck and wait for the men in their clean white coats.
1dave
RFF Sponsoring Member.
That's easy enough to do by combining components from others, like Kodak, who are making sensors for the very best digicams/backs in the world, and adapting the Zeiss lenses. The body is nothing, the software can be bought from anybody.
A totally proprietary product is no longer the game, as Leica is finding out.
look to combined efforts for the next generation of digital products.
A totally proprietary product is no longer the game, as Leica is finding out.
look to combined efforts for the next generation of digital products.
xabi
Established
a zeiss ikon that sells for $2000, or $1500 better.
jaap
Jaap
Look at the M8 and you''l know why Zeiss hasn't launched a digital RF.
An digitall alternative for a film based RF has to be at least a full frame and far more then 10 Mb. Even an Eos 5 can't compete with a good film based Mf SLR.
And if you don,t believe me you should ask the engineers at Zeiss
An digitall alternative for a film based RF has to be at least a full frame and far more then 10 Mb. Even an Eos 5 can't compete with a good film based Mf SLR.
And if you don,t believe me you should ask the engineers at Zeiss
S
Socke
Guest
I've asked Zeiss engineers
but some 5 years ago at photokina 2002 when they where close to the Yashika/Contax booth. Then they told me it would be impossible with current lenses and mentioned the huge 17-35 for the Contax N and ND as a typical lens design for digital sensors.
As to fullframe in a digital RF, IMHO that is not as imporant as in a SLR where the viewfindersize is directly related to folm/sensor size.
But take that with a grain of salt, my widest lens is 28mm and I use a 35 mostly, so no problems getting even wider lenses for my needs with small sensors. This is a big problem for those who shoot 21 or wider.
We talked mostly about the possibility of a digital Contax G and they convinced me, that there was no sensor capable of handling a 28mm Biogon or even a 35mm Planar. I thought it should be possible to fit an APS Sensor and an adapted viewfinder into it so I'd just need to add a 21mm to my arsenal
With this said, a crop sensor in a M-Mount camera is no problem for me, I don't own M-Mount lenses and would buy a body with a f2 lens in the 63° FoV range as a starter if the viewfinder supports it.
That's my main problem with the Epson, fit a R2 or R4 viewfinder into a RD-1 and I'm a customer.
but some 5 years ago at photokina 2002 when they where close to the Yashika/Contax booth. Then they told me it would be impossible with current lenses and mentioned the huge 17-35 for the Contax N and ND as a typical lens design for digital sensors.
As to fullframe in a digital RF, IMHO that is not as imporant as in a SLR where the viewfindersize is directly related to folm/sensor size.
But take that with a grain of salt, my widest lens is 28mm and I use a 35 mostly, so no problems getting even wider lenses for my needs with small sensors. This is a big problem for those who shoot 21 or wider.
We talked mostly about the possibility of a digital Contax G and they convinced me, that there was no sensor capable of handling a 28mm Biogon or even a 35mm Planar. I thought it should be possible to fit an APS Sensor and an adapted viewfinder into it so I'd just need to add a 21mm to my arsenal
With this said, a crop sensor in a M-Mount camera is no problem for me, I don't own M-Mount lenses and would buy a body with a f2 lens in the 63° FoV range as a starter if the viewfinder supports it.
That's my main problem with the Epson, fit a R2 or R4 viewfinder into a RD-1 and I'm a customer.
Carzee
unpimp deine auto-kamera!
jlw said:
Um, EOS style 45pt autofocus anyone...
I must disagree. Canon is not in a 'handy' position to do a DRF because as far as I know they have no RF glass.
Maybe Canon's mega money could pay for Cosina to do a run similar to what they have already done for Zeiss... but that thought would be up against Canon's uber-global-marketing-Godzilla-international-conglomerate ego. Yes, that is the question... would Canon be able to market RF glass in anything other than white/beige barrels?
lament
Member
Canon has no RF glass? How quickly the world forgets...Carzee said:
wyk_penguin
Well-known
We have not forgotten that Nikon copied Contax and Canon copied Leica.
Last edited:
VinceC
Veteran
>>We have not forgotten that Nikon copied Contax and Canon copied Leica.<<
They copied the lens mounts. But Canon and Leica were very innovative with their 1950s RF-era lenses, making them faster and in more varieties than Contax or Leica.
They copied the lens mounts. But Canon and Leica were very innovative with their 1950s RF-era lenses, making them faster and in more varieties than Contax or Leica.
garethc
Established
Copies? Maybe. Cheaper? Yes. High quality? Yes!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Socke said:There was an interesting discussion on fotoimpex fotolaborforum.de why nobody buys forte and reintroduces PW14.
Marco Boedecker, the owner of Fotoimpex, told us that those who rescued Forte in 2004 are out of funds now and one needs another 2.5 million Euro to buy the assets and keep the company running until production is up again AND increase the price of the products to Ilford prices.
When Forte tried to adjust prices to a level with which they could stay in business, they lost 60% of their sales because the very price sensitive customers switched to cheaper products.
Mirco gets to the point, with 10 companies out of the paper business in the last two years we may not have too much choice in the next two years.
OTOH he points out that Hahnemühle Photo Rag 188g/cm² in A4 is 55 Euro per 50 sheets and 308g/cm² is some 76. Add ink into the equation and 50 24x30 Adox FB for 36 Euro look cheap
While an A4 printer is not so expensive, if you want to go to 30x40 you need an A3 printer and at 40x50 we're talking about a plotter where an inkset alone is around 380 Euro!
And how many 30x40 prints do you make a year? It is possible with most enlargers but not with a cheap printer.
So at the moment I have enough arguments to stick with film for my rangefinder needs, but it doesn't look so bright for the future. Prices for film, paper and chemicals will rise and hopefully somebody has a wide angle rangefinder solution, say 63° FoV, under 2000 Euro then.
My photolab prints beautiful, handprofiled and adjusted to my individual wishes enlargments (up tp 2 m wide if you wish, my personal record is 1.20 m wide) on Hahnemuhle (sorry, my keyboard chokes on Umlauts) or any other paper at very reasonable prices. Approx 10 to 40 Euro a go. A private investment in a printer and ink would cost magnitudes more as you point out.
gavinlg
Veteran
I would buy it in a heartbeat.
Paul T.
Veteran
My fantasy: Zeiss, via their long-term relationship with Sony, knows that they are working on a FF sensor, and are waiting until that's a reality before commissioning the Digital Ikon. Is there any real evidence this fantasy is true?
(And has anyone else noticed that this has become a phantom thread, which is labelled as having 'new' posts, when in fact the most recent one is days or even weeks old. A system glitch?)
(And has anyone else noticed that this has become a phantom thread, which is labelled as having 'new' posts, when in fact the most recent one is days or even weeks old. A system glitch?)
grainhound
Well-known
Paul T. said:
I've noticed this happening a couple of times, this thread being the most recent. I also wondered about a glitch. When I first saw this thread up again today, the time given for jaapv's post was 15 minutes ago. The date he posted on was 5-15-07. Coincidence or glitch?
Sparrow
Veteran
It’s when people vote in the poll…………..like a dripping tap, innocuous at first but after a while.................... BLOODY ANOYING
Dr. Strangelove
Cobalt thorium G
Full Frame digital with the Leica M mount would be very difficult and expensive. The 1.33x crop factor of the M8 already required very expensive solutions such as special microlenses in order to work. Zeiss would probably want the Digital Ikon to be a little more affordable than the M8 so my guess is that they would use the same 1.5x crop factor APS-C sensors that Nikon uses. The current ZM lenses could be used so that the 2/35 becomes the new normal lens and the 50 mm normal lenses become portrait lenses. The Sonnar 2/85 would make a great longer than portrait telephoto lens, something that the ZM line currently does not have. Even the 21 mm ultra-wides would still be useful with 1.5x crop factor. Only the shorter than 30 mm (35 mm equivalent) lenses would have to be redesigned. If somebody needs a faster than f/2 normal lens, it would be very easy for Zeiss to design one.Paul T. said:
Now, the real killer feature for the digital Zeiss Ikon would be autofocus possibility (new lenses with an AF motor would be required), which would make long tele lenses possible. A high quality auxiliary electronic VF (EVF) would be available for use with the AF lenses, since composing with LCD sucks. It would be something that no other camera company has and it would make the digital Ikon a real all-round photographic tool, which could compete even with DSLRs. It would also be much more expensive to develop than a straightforward rangefinder with a digital sensor, so I do not really believe that Zeiss has anything of the sort planned. Unfortunately.
back alley
IMAGES
Sparrow said:
very true!
it could be avoided if people set a close date when they start a poll.
i figure 10 days max is good for any poll.
joe