Live View in the next digital M: A universal Camera.

[JoeV]

I'm not sure if I fully understand people's interest in a digital RF with live view. Is it because they feel a live view finder is superior to a traditional optical rangefinder?

My experience is comparing a G1 with an old FSU Zorki IV -- hardly a fair comparison. But the G1's EVF is pretty darn good at getting manual focus in all kinds of light. BTW, the contrast detect autofocus is pretty good, depending on what spot pattern you have setup.

The other question I have regards people's interest in using legacy M-mount glass in digital cameras with sensors larger than the G1's. I know the M8 does this quite well; one criticism of the G1 when using an adapter to mount M-series lenses is off-axis abberations, caused by the legacy lenses not being of telecentric design. How does the M8 get around this problem? Do they also manipulate the RAW file to compensate, or are the photosite wells in the M8 sensor not as shallow as the G1 (or do they use a different microprism design) to compensate for lack of telecentricity in legacy glass?

~Joe

 

[ferider]

SLRs don't implement live-view by using a second sensor in front of the shutter. They (4/3 cameras, 40D, 50D, 5D2, D90, G1, GH1, etc.) all use the main sensor.

There's really no reason not to offer live-view anymore. It's a very simple feature to implement, and if done right it doesn't get in anyone's way.

Depends on what you call "Live".

In any case, pretty irrelevant for an RF.

Roland.

 

[jaapv]

I'm not sure if I fully understand people's interest in a digital RF with live view. Is it because they feel a live view finder is superior to a traditional optical rangefinder?

My experience is comparing a G1 with an old FSU Zorki IV -- hardly a fair comparison. But the G1's EVF is pretty darn good at getting manual focus in all kinds of light. BTW, the contrast detect autofocus is pretty good, depending on what spot pattern you have setup.

The other question I have regards people's interest in using legacy M-mount glass in digital cameras with sensors larger than the G1's. I know the M8 does this quite well; one criticism of the G1 when using an adapter to mount M-series lenses is off-axis abberations, caused by the legacy lenses not being of telecentric design. How does the M8 get around this problem? Do they also manipulate the RAW file to compensate, or are the photosite wells in the M8 sensor not as shallow as the G1 (or do they use a different microprism design) to compensate for lack of telecentricity in legacy glass?

~Joe

The M8 uses a sensor specifically built for the M8 by Kodak with offset microprisms towards the edges, no AA filter and a less-than-minimal IR filter, combined with vignetting reduction through lens recognition and firmware.

 

[Sam N]

Depends on what you call "Live".

In any case, pretty irrelevant for an RF.

Roland.

Wow... I guess I stand corrected for the Olys. Very interesting... do newer Olympus cameras work the same way? The Canons and Nikons use the main sensor.

 

[Ronald M]

I believe that is the M9X model due in June 2011. You will be able to upgrade the M9 for $2300 and there will be an adapter tube to use Viso lenses without the viso.

We will still be stuck with manual or preset lenses however. This is to be mitigated with a powerful amplifier so you can see through lenses stopped to F11. The down side is a backpack with a battery will be required to power the affair and an optional 1000` extension chord including internatioal adapters.

Herr Kaufman has great plans.

 

[jaapv]

Errr... You may have missed it, but we ARE halfway April already🙄😉

 

[emraphoto]

an "idiotgram" and live view would make a pretty decent meter. ditch the handheld and you can go even lighter. isn't that part of the rangefinder "way"?

 

[shadowfox]

shadowfox, if you're at all familiar with my photographs you should realize by now that the hair styling, wardrobe, location, lighting, and posing are all directed by Monkette, my toy monkey, and she's a big fan of low tech. VERY low tech. She even dictates what kind of film I'm allowed to use! No digital for her. No way!

Also consider the fact that I'm about never looking at the camera when I shoot the self-portraits. How could I see the screen? You're just jealous that I have such a sweet and loving toy monkey as an assistant.

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com

Al, Will please...

I am familiar with your blog but no, I didn't realize that you've almost never see the camera when you take your portraits.

But... that will change once you have a swiveling LCD :angel:

... and yes, I'm jealous of Monkette. I wish I have her fervor on being low-tech only...

 

[georgef]

The point of adding these features is, as the OP clearly stated, to make more people interested in the LEICA RF bodies than currently are. And at this point in time, OLY and PANASONIC will steal the market right under LEICA's feet if a new, UP TO DATE camera is not introduced.
A better sensor is paramount, for sure, but the camera overall can be much better! More than 50 years have passed since the inception of the original LEICA RF. Even Oskar Barnack would be interested in the new technology (which, by the way does not have to get in the way of the photographer's vision).

 

[johnastovall]

No, the digital M are just fine with out Live view. You want live view buy something other than Leica.

 

[JPSuisse]

Hi all,

Live view sounds of very dubious value to me personally. Alas, It maybe would never fly today, but the tool I would replace my M8 with would be the dMP. A camera that feels and works just like my MP, but with a full format sensor. I don't even need or want more megapixels or a display. OK, maybe a little better high ISO performance and even better color would be fine!! 🙂

Of course, I don't care, if other people want to buy a camera with tons of functions, but I don't really want that camera. I am not in a position to guess what Leica should or should not offer, because I am not camera equipment, marketing specialist. Maybe you should have made this a pole on this subject to find out the true feelings of the RFF members. 😱

JP

 

[Al Kaplan]

Shadowfox, Monkette swears by a Weston Master V with the Invercone incident light adapter even though her own fur is within a quarter of a stop of 18% neutral grey.

Go back to the nineteen-sixties. The Leica M3 had a self timer and automatic frame counter reset. The M2 was available in versions with and without a self tmer and you had to set the frame counter yourself. The M1 had a viewfinder but no rangefinder. That was replaced with the MD and then the MDa which even lacked viewfinders. On a Visoflex or as a microscope/instrumentation camera there's no need for one.

Fine, make an all-the-bells-and-whistles M8, M9, M10. Go for it. But I still think that there's a market for a thinking photographers' camera: full frame sensor, real shutter speeds with access via a dial where you'd expect it to be. The same with ISO. It's a pain in the butt switching between bodies with different controls and placement. Leitz found that out first with the Leicaflex, their first camera with a built in meter, and then again with the M5. And again with the "wrong-way" shutter dial a year or two ago.

It seems that you can lead a camera designer to electronics but you can't make him think. I envision a good solid M sized and shaped body, PC synch socket in addition to the useless hot shoe. Stick the electronics where the film and take-up thingie are in current film M bodies. Keep the flip-up removeable back and removeable baseplate. Maybe later introduce an LCD screen equipped flip-up panel, and offer a thicker Leicavit sized base plate for the increased battery power required, and perhaps a place for storing an extra "film card" or two. A real KISS design!

For those who like Gizmo Design Concepts (GDC) put a trigger on the base plate connected to an internal generator and storage battery. Excersize those left hand fingers.