back alley
IMAGES
i have nothing worth 5 g's to sell!
guess i'll be sticking with film...
sounds like a nice camera though.
joe
guess i'll be sticking with film...
sounds like a nice camera though.
joe
chris91387
Well-known
... (dreaming) if only Leica had 0% financing for 60 months just like GM .....
- chris
- chris
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
no kidding.. but that would still work out to $75 (plus tax) every month for 5 years
Nemo
Established
I would like to know how is the back of the camera.
The LCD screen and the number and disposition of the buttons.
I would like to know how the digital medium has affected the ergonomics of the M saga.
The LCD screen and the number and disposition of the buttons.
I would like to know how the digital medium has affected the ergonomics of the M saga.
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
Jorge Torralba said:
Jorge,
when you say "mechanical frame lines", do you mean that one can select for it via a lever, like on a Bessa R2A/R3A etc? That is, it is not actuated by the mount, but by manual selection by lever?
thanks
Chaser
Well-known
Sensor crop should be 1.33x not 1.5x I belive
KoNickon said:
Iggy
Member
Wouldn't fancy cleaning the sensor
Chaser
Well-known
It should not be noticably different than the 0.72 mag...at least not all that much worse.
LCT said:Would be interesting to see how it can focus a 75mm lens at f/1.4 or a 90mm at f/2 with a .68x VF magnification...
nico
Well-known
rover said:
M or Ltm mount?
Nico
FrankS
Registered User
How large is the screen on the back? I need 2 1/2" to see well. (Can't get used to wearing bifocals.)
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
FrankS said:
I don't know about that...the MP started out at 2,200 dollars new and is now about 3,600 dollars new....
telenous
Well-known
I want to say 'Oh, no' and 'Oh, yes' at the same time.
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
Jorge, in the past you've had a 'very reliable' contact that made the claim about the coding on the lens mounts driving the frame selectors.
Did it turn out that he was full of it and if so do you plan on scrapping the idea of providing mount coding at RFF?
Did it turn out that he was full of it and if so do you plan on scrapping the idea of providing mount coding at RFF?
FrankS
Registered User
Rich Silfver said:
The MP is a mechanical film camera, the M8 is an electronic digital imaging device/computer peripheral.
jano
Evil Bokeh
JoeFriday said:
And mine's been broken so many times *whimper* I wonder if they would take it in pieces.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Greeeeeeeeeeennnn...greeeeeeeennn!!!Nick R. said:
Must...resist...looking at balance...better go out...and shoot...pictures...
(what's the Powerball at now?)
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Wait, I thought it was supposed to be the same or about the same shutter as found on the R8 and R9, and that goes to 1/8000. That's a very squinty viewfinder too. Better than a .58Jorge Torralba said:
I guess I have to see it.
Can't wait.
No, I can.
No, wait. Yes, I can.
(or is that "yes I can't"?) --- I'm cornfused.
Is it September yet?
John Shriver
Well-known
The M8 has one helpful design feature for focusing accuracy -- the sensor is always in the same place. No film flatness uncertainly. So that's one less source of error in focusing. So perhaps focusing the 75/1.4 or 90/2 (with the smaller required circle of confusion due to the crop factor) is going to be reasonable even with a 0.68 finder. But, yeah, that's a WIDE finder, wider than the 0.58 on film. Equivalent of .51 corrected for crop factor.
Of course, another thought. The resolution (lines/mm) of the sensor may set a limit on the required circle of confusion. No point being fussier about focus than what the sensor can resolve...
As for comparing the Leica finder to the Canon variable focal length finders, (1) they aren't feasible with bright line frame lines, and (2) nobody else has a sharp-edge rangefinder patch, allowing split-image focusing. Zeiss/Cosina took a pass on the sharp edge, as did Canon in the 7 and 7s. The Leica RF patch is even parallax corrected along with the framelines (it's in the same sheet of metal).
Of course, another thought. The resolution (lines/mm) of the sensor may set a limit on the required circle of confusion. No point being fussier about focus than what the sensor can resolve...
As for comparing the Leica finder to the Canon variable focal length finders, (1) they aren't feasible with bright line frame lines, and (2) nobody else has a sharp-edge rangefinder patch, allowing split-image focusing. Zeiss/Cosina took a pass on the sharp edge, as did Canon in the 7 and 7s. The Leica RF patch is even parallax corrected along with the framelines (it's in the same sheet of metal).
Rich,
The lack of electronic frame lines does not mean I will not encode the lenses. On the contrary, I am working on aquiring the necessary machine to do the work. At best, if I encode a non Leica lens it will at least transfer focal length data to the camera.
The lack of electronic frame lines does not mean I will not encode the lenses. On the contrary, I am working on aquiring the necessary machine to do the work. At best, if I encode a non Leica lens it will at least transfer focal length data to the camera.
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
I like everything I've read about this camera so far - apart from the .68 viewfinder. For someone like me that shoots almost exclusively with a 50 and 90mm lens a 0.68 viewfinder would be a significant downside.