New digital rangefinder

In a similar vein...

In a similar vein...

I have a bunch of these design studies as well... All full-frame...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnnyrangefinder/sets/72157605853812452/

Mostly Nikon-inspired...

Here is a RF design...

2683918286_8a3a2aa703_b.jpg


2683918158_a616b516c9_b.jpg


And my personal favorite, a modern Nikon 35Ti...

2644410235_194b8d0ab8_o.jpg



2644410037_8064a941f1_o.jpg


Cheers,

S.G.
 
leicasniper said:
"Oh for the love of GOD NO. If it was autofocus there would be 0 chance of me buying that thing."

But it would be much more likely that enough other people would buy the camera for Leica to thrive and keep making cameras.
Click to expand...

Well, they'd loose me and at least three other friends of mine...not that that's a huge number, but we all switched to leicas because they were manual focus RF. If they want to introduce a camera designed for the legally blind or what have you fine, but I certainly won't buy it, and everyone here on RFF would be seing a ton of equipment up for sale as I switch over to zeiss.

Leave AF for the DSLRS with the ginormous LCD screens that those users are soooo intent on using every chance they get.

Personally I'd like to see the m9 not have any rear LCD screen at all, just a screen to display WB, ISO, Battery life and what not. The manual cocking thing excites me, as does recessed buttons (tonight I was in a drunken stooper wandering around the city like a retard, and finally I discovered the much discussed random button pushing....and it is irritating.)
 
Last edited:
jaapv said:
I hope not - the 1Ds3 sensor would be a disaster on a rangefinder....
Click to expand...


Why? Assuming the issue of lens to sensor distance was solved...


I would prefer manual focus, but suspect that Leicasniper is right. RFs are a tad old fashioned and I certainly cannot focus as accurately and as quickly as my dslrs. In terms of where the foucs spots are the slrs also let me choose something nearer the edge of the fov. Still like using an old rf thought:)

Mike
 
leicasniper said:
Yup, I can still focus a camera manually. But why?...
Click to expand...

There is certainly no competition between "manual focussers" and "AF-useres" ;)
I think its a question what to prefer and when. If I can live with the automatic decision of a camera there is no sense to do all settings myself and get the same picture.
When I dont want the camera to focus crude patterns in the background and/or change all values between the shots I do it the manual way.

Depends on many things. Sometimes its simply one own´s taste...

Regards, Axel
 
leicasniper said:
It's not a decision between allowing a "mindless" camera to make random decisions and my doing everything manually.

I also don't allow the camera to focus on patterns in the background. I have as much control over where my DSLR focuses as someone with an RF has over where it focuses. I guess this idea that autofocus cameras focus where they want to comes from people who've only used cheap P&S autofocus cameras.

Ultimately, it's a matter of preference. I'm all for anything, though, that allows me to concentrate on the photo. I'll let the camera take care of purely mechanical operations like changing shutter speed and turning the focus ring.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. My dslr's focus where I want, and if I'm using a zf lens I have to do it for them, otherwise it's usually on auto, but not unthinking auto. Similar with exposure - usually aperture priority and thoughtfully managed via exposure compensation. If conditions are such that I want consistency shot to shot then I'll use manual, but with the camera's meter, not one in my pocket.

Incidentally, I just shot a roll of film in my Zorki and didn't use a meter. everything turned out OK, so clearly I'm not too far off:)
 
leicasniper said:
...
I also don't allow the camera to focus on patterns in the background...
Click to expand...

To do so I had to control the camera´s decision. Some times a step to much.

leicasniper said:
I have as much control over where my DSLR focuses as someone with an RF has over where it focuses...
Click to expand...

How can you realize this? I tried a lot but now I am mostly back to manual focusing.

leicasniper said:
I guess this idea that autofocus cameras focus where they want to comes from people who've only used cheap P&S autofocus cameras...
Click to expand...

May be so. My main experiences rely on using my EOS-(D)SLRs.

Regards, Axel
 
Good AF is a wonderful thing, when stuff is happening in a hurry in front of you. Bad AF is far worse than having to manual focus...this is why I sold my Contax G system...I was never sure if I was getting the picture or not. (Usually I did--but the uncertainty was driving me bananas.)

There's no reason an RF camera could be designed to allow AF or manual, just like a DSLR. I recently got a Pentax DSLR, and it seems designed specifically for people who want AF but also want to use their old MF lenses. A digital RF designed with this philosophy in mind would be wonderful.

There isn't anything artistically superior about focussing manually. In most circumstances, I find it more fun, but that's it really. I think the art of it is 75% in the framing of the scene, and 15% in depth of field and how you expose.

The last 10% is in developing/printing or digital post-processing...
 
I add this to every thread, in vain hopes....

Digital Hexar AF
Ok, make the lenses interchangeable if you must.

I'm with Leicasniper on the AF thing. Even with the relatively unsophisticated AF system on the Hexar, I seldom miss my focus mark.
 
leicasniper said:
The fly in the af digital RF prospects is that current M and LTM lenses can't be autofocused...
Click to expand...

Thats true. Comparsions with DSLR-autofocussystems are only theoretical because of the practical impossibility to place an autofocus-sensor in the short base of a rangefinderbody.
The only result today could be something like the contax G or one of the contrast-detection-AFs of digital compact cameras.
The last attempt to combine an APS-sized-sensor and contrast-AF was Sony´s DSC-R1. A (compared to rangefinders) heavy and bulky photomachine with a relative slow autofocus.
Same problems with the live-view-AFs in current DSLRs.

Regards, Axel
 
Last edited:
jaapv said:
That is why.....
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but that would appear to apply to any current full fframe sensor. One day, maye it will be achievable, but whether there's enough market I don't know. Hence the hope that someone will be able to adapt a major manufacturer's tech to doit
 
The camera is in production.

The camera is in production.

I saw your camera at the OC Fair this week. The problem is it is about the same size as the average DSLR. Bill


2685761243_e3fa90ca7a.jpg
 
Manhood ?

Manhood ?

leicasniper said:
Yup, I can still focus a camera manually. But why? Yes, there are situations where you need to focus manually. But not most of the time. It's just like aperture priority automation. I can set aperture and shutter speed manually. I've been using cameras for 40 years. But why not let the camera do the job of setting the shutter speed when it's going to set it the same place I would? Equally, I can focus manually. But for most photos, I focus using the RF and shoot when the RF says the image is in focus. Why turn that focusing ring manually when the camera can do it faster and more accurately?

( My ultimate goal is to get the photo, not reinforce my manhood to my friends.
Click to expand...
)
WOW, I never would have thought manual focus affected my manhood. One more good reason to stay with the M8. Bill

 
Please Leicasniper, if you want AF P&S, the Sigma DP is >>> that way. Most of the folks here wouldn't have signed up for this forum if they wanted no rangefinder or manual focus.
 
varjag said:
Please Leicasniper, if you want AF P&S, the Sigma DP is >>> that way. Most of the folks here wouldn't have signed up for this forum if they wanted no rangefinder or manual focus.
Click to expand...

While I certainly don't agree with leicasniper on all things, this being one of them, he certainly has the right to voice his opinion here. And while I would absolutely HATE an AF leica M, it's not something that's unheard of in the rangefinder world and it is certainly something worth discussing since many people equate manual focus with nostalgia.

He is of course absolutely correct that todays AF mechanisms are quick, simple, and totally under the users control, so any other jibber jabber here about how AF lets the computer decide what to focus on need not be mentioned.

I of course prefer the manual focus mechanism that RF's provide, in particular Leicas....and it's not because it's better, or quicker, or easier under low light...but because I prefer the tactile quality of focusing manually, and for me that's what makes me ENJOY using these cameras over AF DSLRS.
 
Leicasniper rights,

Leicasniper rights,

tmfabian said:
While I certainly don't agree with leicasniper on all things, this being one of them, he certainly has the right to voice his opinion here. And while I would absolutely HATE an AF leica M, it's not something that's unheard of in the rangefinder world and it is certainly something worth discussing since many people equate manual focus with nostalgia.

He is of course absolutely correct that todays AF mechanisms are quick, simple, and totally under the users control, so any other jibber jabber here about how AF lets the computer decide what to focus on need not be mentioned.

I of course prefer the manual focus mechanism that RF's provide, in particular Leicas....and it's not because it's better, or quicker, or easier under low light...but because I prefer the tactile quality of focusing manually, and for me that's what makes me ENJOY using these cameras over AF DSLRS.
Click to expand...

I find it strange that fat camera ( DSLR) people spend there time in a RF thread trying to convince me that I’m missing out on the wonderful world of Blasto 8000 technology. I’ve never visited a DLSR thread to postulate a RF. The Guy has rights, but his mantra is old and weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom