sanmich
Veteran
Huh...are we speaking of the same Andre?
sorry, my bad
I have two uncles, one is Andre the other...Henri
My poor Brain 😱
back to the regular schedule....
Huh...are we speaking of the same Andre?
not really
Andre had a GREAT printer, that could rescue catastrophic negs.
The fact remains that Andre does not need a meter, does not need a screen or histogram, and definately does not need a good printer. He is a real amazing shooter.
Cal
As far as sensor goes 36X36 has two possibilities: one is make a 16 mega pixel 36X36 sensor; and the other is make a 24 MP sensor. One offers a bigger pixel which has its performance advantages; the other with higher pxel count has its own merits. I for one would favor the 16 mega pixel for tonality and high ISO capabilities. I see the only real expensive cost here to develope is making a new 36x36 sensor. If a 16 MP sensor is developed then even the old firmware that is used in my MM can be mostly used.
please stop, it's humiliating 😀😱
I've always thought that we may see a 24x24mm sensor in a compact camera first someday due to price... but I think we will most likely see the first square sensor in a medium format camera.
I think Leica's history is too closely tied to 2:3 for them to consider a square. It would be cool though.
Pure sadism, I tell you 😀
all right, all right... WHO'S Andre??
I don't think you will ever see a 36 x 36 from Leica. Enlarging the format may compromise the performance of some of their magnificent but hyper-expensive lenses, and I don't see that happening.
Cheers,
Dez
Dez,
I'm not so sure if modern Leica ASPH glass has a large enough image circle to cover the 36X36 square, but if the German reputation of overkill and over design prevails then it would be foolish for Leica not to pursue making the jump.
For example, shooting this panorama film camera complicates my life enormously because you have four frames on 120 film and in one day you shoot 20 rolls and that’s already $200. So you must have somebody who gives money and then they expect that you finish something.
I was using this Fuji panoramic — but the problem was everyone stopped developing the film. You can’t get 220 film anymore and you needed to carry about 35 kilograms extra. I went to Leica and they did one camera for me that was digital panoramic, which is this S2 camera, and they make two lines and set it on black and white. I made four trips with it together with the film camera. In the last two trips I realized I was taking more pictures with this Leica and I am enjoying it more. The result is very comparable. The lens was exactly the same.
I enjoy digital more. I don’t carry a computer. I come inside in the evening, and until 12 o’clock I look at the screen on the back of the camera, and I eliminate.
I would argue that it isn't so serious since it is more of a collector's camera than a users camera.
If you look at the MTFs of modern Leica lenses, they are really obviously designed for a 43mm image circle (diagonal of 24 x 36mm rectangle) — no more, no less.
With the same image circle you can cover a square 30.6 x 30.6 mm. That is not really a major gain over a 24 x 24mm crop. Only about 25%.
Hence, there is no way you will ever see a 36 x 36 sensor from Leica.
Worth noting, though, is that Leica made a masked, wide-format, black-and-white S2 for Josef Koudelka:
Now, that is a desirable special-edition Leica. It is a Leica for a photographer. And they didn't leave off the LCD, either:
Not at ~3x the price. Even I'm not that open to such a price increase for something that is, for all intents and purposes, the same...
This thread has been an interesting read. One of the reasons I like my M(240) is that I can (and do):
- turn off auto review (disable the little TV screen on the back of the camera)
- set my ISO to 400 (which is my favorite film speed)
- set the camera to make DNG files only
and I have the same shooting experience that I get with my M6. I have thought about getting a lot of 1GB SD cards and taking out a full card to save just like I do with film. I would get about 42 frames per card. Probably would cost about the same as a roll of film and developing.
I like the idea that I set my own limits and don't rely on the camera manufacturer to dictate how I take pictures.
This thread has been an interesting read. One of the reasons I like my M(240) is that I can (and do):
- turn off auto review (disable the little TV screen on the back of the camera)
- set my ISO to 400 (which is my favorite film speed)
- set the camera to make DNG files only
and I have the same shooting experience that I get with my M6. I have thought about getting a lot of 1GB SD cards and taking out a full card to save just like I do with film. I would get about 42 frames per card. Probably would cost about the same as a roll of film and developing.
I like the idea that I set my own limits and don't rely on the camera manufacturer to dictate how I take pictures.
If you were really feeling cool about it, you could stick a 3" diag piece of leatherette over the screen. 🙂
D