My ideal camera - does it exist?

[keytarjunkie]

You can get a split-prism screen for the 7D. Katzeye sells one for $160 with their special low-light brightness enhancing magic powder stuff. Or $105 for just their regular screen with a split prism, which I'm sure is still pretty good.

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/item--Canon-7D-Focusing-Screen--prod_7D.html

You can look up reviews...Katzeye screens are generally really good quality. The stock DSLR focusing screens are set up for all those slow f/4-5.6 zooms to keep overall brightness levels up...these are more for faster f/1.2-f/2.8 lenses and increases ease of focus for them. At least with the cheaper screen I bought (Canon makes a similar product which is good), if you stop down past f/4 the viewfinder will be noticeably darker than with the stock screen. Most of the time we aren't interested in DOF preview though so it doesn't matter to me! It might to you.

Having a split prism greatly increases the accuracy of focusing, especially with lenses 50mm and longer on a APS-C camera.

 

[Lax Jought]

You can get a split-prism screen for the 7D.

The thing is, if I was to drop something from my camera equipment, it would be the DSLR. I really like the small Leica form factor. I was referring to, say, if I got the Fujifilm XPro-1 for example, maybe I could apply this to the focusing mechanism on that thing.

 

[goffer]

You won't be able to use a split screen on the xpro 1 as it's a straight through viewfinder or electronic viewfinder. Splitscreens will only work on reflex type systems (SLR or TLR).

You can go with the nex line coupled with a hawks factory helicoid adapter which allows you to close focus with your M glass. Only thing is you don't get any split screen/rangefinder focusing method.

 

[Lax Jought]

damn, it seems I have further study ahead of me to explore these options. But this is interesting, I never knew these 3rd party accessories existed at all before I started asking about this.

 

[LKeithR]

My ideal camera would be an updated Digilux 2 with an APS-C sensor. Being a Pentax guy I think the D2 lens and controls combined with the sensor/processor of the K5 would make a pretty awesome combo. I also think the K-01 would be pretty close to ideal if they would put a proper viewfinder in it...

 

[kanzlr]

I'd have thought a decent EVF would be far more friendly to low-light manual focussing than any mechanical r/f system.

yep, I was able to focus a CV 35/1.4 nicely with the NEX-5N EVF in a cellar just lit by a few candles.

couldn't have done that as well with the RF I think.

 

[Lax Jought]

Can I have a look at the photo of that?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

The camera you talk about doesn't exist, but if you resolve your video requirements far from a great camera designed for photography, you'll get what you need. You don't need to record video with a camera made for photographers...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Lax Jought]

The camera you talk about doesn't exist, but if you resolve your video requirements far from a great camera designed for photography, you'll get what you need. You don't need to record video with a camera made for photographers...

Cheers,

Juan

Yes I know that, I'm not making demands, just wishing it existed.

I already have very good video cameras that can take RAW images frame-for-frame but it's the size of a large DSLR. For convenience I was just looking for a small compact camera for ad hoc video recording.

The Panasonic LX3 when it came out did some really good video with its 24p frame rate. It also had a fast f/2.0 lens so technically speaking it could do some decent video.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Yes I know that, I'm not making demands, just wishing it existed.

I already have very good video cameras that can take RAW images frame-for-frame but it's the size of a large DSLR. For convenience I was just looking for a small compact camera for ad hoc video recording.

The Panasonic LX3 when it came out did some really good video with its 24p frame rate. It also had a fast f/2.0 lens so technically speaking it could do some decent video.

Precisely. You can do "decent videos" with lots of cameras that take photographs. But the best cameras don't care about video. Or they're not really great/comfortable for video...

That's a good reason for using different machines for both things... But there's another reason... They're opposite things: in one of them you go far from reality because you avoid time, and tell a story with something that doesn't really exist and we never see: a frozen situation. In the other game, video, you stick with time, and you stick with reality the way we see it... (Both as general rules for most photography and most video...)

So, doing one thing is one mood, and doing the other thing is a quite different mood, in case we really want to go deep in any of them... That's why I don't find it easy to change from one thing to another as quickly as for needing one tool doing both things... I find it natural using different machines, but I understand your opinion can be different, as the masses' opinion is, I guess, from the general interest -and sales- in digital cameras with video recording. I have never owned any digital camera except for my FujiS3Pro, and it has no video recording, but I have used nice video recorders and they're great! Just the way I like things... Not better, not worse... Good luck finding your tool!

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Lax Jought]

I think you're looking far, far too much into this Juan...... I was just wishing for an all-in-one camera that can function as my carry-everywhere camera.

 

[Lax Jought]

So... I guess my dream camera is coming to light after all...

 

[jsrockit]

So... I guess my dream camera is coming to light after all...

How so and by whom?

 

[Lax Jought]

The upcoming Leica M!

 

[Lax Jought]

With the exception of macro but I can definitely live with that. Maybe a camera bag with the Leica M, one 50mm lens, and Fujifilm X10 might be all I need. (And my M8.2).

 

[Joosep]

Yup, the M seems to be your drug.

Rangefinder doesnt play nice with macro.
When close focusing the DoF goes smaller, if DoF is smaller you need a bigger baselenght for more accurate focusing (in lay man terms, the rangefinder window has to be further away from the viewfinder). If this would be done, then you wouldnt be able to "match-up" the rangefinder spot, because the image from the rangefinder will be different at close distances from the viewfinder image.

A simple example.
Take a pen, put it about 30cm away from you, look at it, now move your face about 7cm right, now you see a different angle/side of the pen. The rangefinder would not work. You would have to put the rangefinder window closer to the viewfinder, but it wouldnt be accurate enough then.

Not to mentioned the bigger parallax.

 

[hxpham]

Perhaps try out a DSLR with a replacement manual focusing screen? It really helps a lot compared to the stock screens.

 

[j j]

Rangefinder doesnt play nice with macro ... Not to mentioned the bigger parallax.

The M will have live view and that will negate those issues.

 

[Lax Jought]

I hadn't thought about that. Looks like the new Leica M might turned out to be better than I expected.

 

[Joosep]

The M will have live view and that will negate those issues.

I thought it was blatantly obvious that I was talking about rangefinder focusing.