Jeff Ascough under NDA for new Rangefinder

zumbido said:
So. Why, exactly, is a rangefinder supposed to be mutually exclusive of autofocus?

Also, why is the current century-old implementation of the rangefinder in Leica cameras supposed to be the only, or even best, way to do it? There are others, and they're used in much more critical applications.

Also, why would anyone be hung up on a relatively fragile Leica-style rangefinder mechanism, when focusing by coinciding images could be done (on, say, an EVF camera) without that fragile mechanism?

I'm genuinely curious. There's a lot I don't know...
Click to expand...

Right, that is what I have suggested in the past. It shouldn't be that difficult to mirror-in the sensor image or part of it in an optical viewfinder and use the lens data exchange to the body for more visual information in the viewfinder. DOF simulation for example.

met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
 
Kevin said:
Wait ... I thought it's going to be full-frame, not a cropped-sensor cam !!
Click to expand...

The reason I guess crop is the supposed standard lens. A 35/1.2 on full frame is an expensive piece of glass, but much more reasonable to imagine as designed for crop sensor. And the focal length translates to a normal on 35mm.

I would be really, really excited if this were in fact a Micro 4/3 camera, but my money's on a new system entirely.

Ernst Dinkla said:
Right, that is what I have suggested in the past. It shouldn't be that difficult to mirror-in the sensor image or part of it in an optical viewfinder and use the lens data exchange to the body for more visual information in the viewfinder. DOF simulation for example.
Click to expand...

Or, alternately, a system by which projected in-focus highlights are superimposed on a direct viewfinder. It would be great if we got to see a new implementation of the viewing/focusing system we all like so much.
 
Unless it uses an existing 35mm-compatible mount, 'full frame' is meaningless. There are two reasons for using big sensors. One is lower pixel density = less amplification = less noise, and the other is to give us the angles of view we are used to. Postulate a new (?AF) mount with telecentric designs and no 35mm legacy lenses, and who cares about 24x36mm?

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Unless it uses an existing 35mm-compatible mount, 'full frame' is meaningless. There are two reasons for using big sensors. One is lower pixel density = less amplification = less noise, and the other is to give us the angles of view we are used to. Postulate a new (?AF) mount with telecentric designs and no 35mm legacy lenses, and who cares about 24x36mm?

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...


Well that's an easy question ... the people with 35mm legacy lenses of course! 😀
 
Roger, I disagree. Apparently a lot of people care; look at micro-4/3rds cameras. Most people here put anything but not actual m4/3 lenses on them 🙂
 
I suspect that most manufacturers will appreciate the appeal to a hardcore group planning to use legacy lenses (OK, Samsung didn't). Those people are likely to be early uptakers. So there is an argument for making it 'full frame'.

Granted, at this point, we are arguing about how many angels are dancing on the head of a pin that only exists in a tweet...
 
If this is a "stealth" camera and comes with a 35mm f/1.2 AF lens, then it is probably not equipped with a 24x36mm sensor.

On the other hand, if you have been using Pro Canon gear for a while, anything half the size could be considered stealth !
 
That this slightly ridiculous morsel ends with AF (April Fools) is hard to ignore: “The standard lens is suppose to be 35mm f/1.2 and there are two more lenses. The rangefinder is full frame with magnesium alloy electronic shutter and supposedly with very good AF”
 
snausages said:
That this slightly ridiculous morsel ends with AF (April Fools) is hard to ignore: “The standard lens is suppose to be 35mm f/1.2 and there are two more lenses. The rangefinder is full frame with magnesium alloy electronic shutter and supposedly with very good AF”
Click to expand...

I completly agree with you, it sounds like an April's Fools Day joke. Bad joke.
 
jsrockit said:
This is BS. If the price as right, an APS-C rangefinder will do just fine.
Click to expand...

I agree. Leica has priced the M9 so high that's it's almost not relevant to 90% of potential buyers.

If someone released a good RF camera at half or even 1/3rd of the cost of the M9, Leica could potentially be in a lot of trouble. But that's what they get for putting all their eggs in one basket and telling people to suck on it who asked for a second lower cost body.

But who knows? Maybe it's the long rumored Leica EVIL solution...
In that case I'll have to eat my words.
 
Here's the first entry from his blog on this.

AF Rangefinder pics - first look...
These are the first images shot from the new AF rangefinder I've been using over the past couple of weeks. The camera is still under wraps, but I can tell you that it is a game changer.

I've been involved in some testing with it, in particular the way the AF reacts to low light (one of the problems that dogs many DSLR's). It is pretty good. Not as good as my Canon 1DIV's but c'mon this thing is a fraction of the size and weight. There is full manual over-ride with each lens. You simply use the focus ring, and it goes to proper manual focus, not like the DSLR attempt at MF.

It is a proper RF, a little bigger than a Leica M9, but comfortable in the hand. The extra size is mainly to incorporate the VF which has some ground breaking technology involved in terms of the framelines.

Here are some shots taken over the past couple of weeks.

**Update - sorry I've had to pull the images as the traffic caused my server to crash. I'll look at some other way of hosting the images. Bear with me. **
Click to expand...
 
So it's a Canon, right? It must be because he's making comparisons. A set of new lenses and a proper viewfinder. Hmm...
 
Could it be a Nikon rangefinder with the D700/D3 sensor?
That would be a game changer, especially if it came with an AF 35mm 1.2 lens with superb manual override.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
New York Annual NYC Camera Beauty Contest 2026 (early 2026)
Replies
14
Views
846
Calzone
C
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
K
One for do it yourself repairers -- Warning: rambling tale of semi-woe
Replies
16
Views
1K
ChrisPlatt
ChrisPlatt
B
New year resolutions (photo-centered) for 2025
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
JohnGellings
J
lxforrest
A DIY retro digital camera project - Blog #6 detail of screen free camera design
Replies
3
Views
275
lxforrest
lxforrest
Back
Top Bottom