ampguy
Veteran
d700 looks nice by itself.
d700 looks nice by itself.
has a 5mp mode, which gives area around the framelines like a rf vf. I have several ~$20 Nikkor lenses, that no Leica lens comes close to.
Nikon equivalents of M-mount lenses, while larger, are usually better, and 1/50th or so the price.
d700 looks nice by itself.
has a 5mp mode, which gives area around the framelines like a rf vf. I have several ~$20 Nikkor lenses, that no Leica lens comes close to.
Nikon equivalents of M-mount lenses, while larger, are usually better, and 1/50th or so the price.
Ray Nalley
Well-known
The M mount is an albatross around Leica's neck as it moves into the digital age. I can't imagine that a company producing a new, from scratch, dRF would do anything but create a completely new, all electronic mount.
kevin m
Veteran
I will buy it when I see it.
kevin m
Veteran
Leicasniper, is that you?
ampguy
Veteran
yes, pretty unfathomable
yes, pretty unfathomable
perhaps next year they will roll out a 7-bit coding scheme
yes, pretty unfathomable
perhaps next year they will roll out a 7-bit coding scheme
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Oh, yes, I'd love to see that. It would make the screams of the FD shooters pale by comparison & kill Nikon. Be a wonderful result.
:angel:
William
Ray Nalley
Well-known
Well, it wouldn't kill Nikon, because only a few thousand people would likely even notice. But it could be interesting.
Tuolumne
Veteran
Ray Nalley
Well-known
Who is Leicasnipper?
Tuolumne
Veteran
Yes, it would - but I was just engaging in wishful thinking. With a 1.5x design they could actually make an M-Mount with no trouble. Epson did, so obviously Nikon could easily. For my money I would like to see as simple a design as possible - focus confirmation is all I think it needs. Do you really think confirmed RF users want auto-focus? I don't. Oh yes, your can throw in AE and P operation, if you'd like. That's all.
/T
Edit: Forget P operation. You'd need auto-aperture for that which you can't do with the M-Mount. So, AE is all it needs, together with "M", of course.
Last edited:
sienarot
Well-known
*IF* Nikon were to put out a non M-mount dRF, at least you could have a bit of comfort with the possibility that Zeiss/Cosina would put out lenses for it.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Ray,
What couplings do you want?
If it's a rangefinder it ain't gonna have focus connexions, by definition. Focus confirmation doesn't require connexions, and I'd be astonished if a combination MF/AF system were possible with true mechanical RF coupling (too much mechanical inertia). EDIT: It would certainly be utterly impossible with Nikon S-mount without (slow!) stepper motors.
If you want AF, you can have aperture priority (already exists).
Yes, you can add shutter priority with automatic stopdown -- with a MUCH bigger, heavier, slower-responding lens.
So what is this 'all electronic mount'? And where's the albatross?
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
MikeL
Go Fish
I think you mean Sitesniper, or Leicamystic.
Ray Nalley
Well-known
If you aren't going to make any changes, then Nikon really has no reason to build a new dRF. The M8 says it all.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I guess I'm assuming they would use an existing mount/flange distance and would be hampered by the problems Leica encountered.
A new mount would let them push things out a few mm and do full frame...as long as it wasn't so many mm that the camera would be too fat for RF folks to love.
I'd be happy to see anything at all they could come up with frankly.
ferider
Veteran
1) Nikon doesn't need a business reason, they can make it just for "fun"/culture/status/marketing as long as the margin will be > 0. They have done it in the past.
2) One could imagine an AF system that works with M mount. For example with a moving sensor and contrast or IR-guided AF (like the Hexar AF). Switch AF off, put the sensor to infinity position and you can use your M mount lenses manually.
3) the traditional Leica RF coupling can be replaced with an optical viewfinder + EVF type RF patch, blended into the viewfinder together with electronic framelines, electronically parallax _and_ size corrected.
Lens choice dialed-in via menus. No "coding" necessary. Use some of the "spare" bits of the Nikon sensor for software vignetting correction.
Extend the M mount to allow aperture coupling, too, with non-M, Nikon custom lenses.
Voila. The dream camera.
Roland.
PS: and as a side effect, offer a good Nikon/M adapter for Nikon classic S mount lenses
2) One could imagine an AF system that works with M mount. For example with a moving sensor and contrast or IR-guided AF (like the Hexar AF). Switch AF off, put the sensor to infinity position and you can use your M mount lenses manually.
3) the traditional Leica RF coupling can be replaced with an optical viewfinder + EVF type RF patch, blended into the viewfinder together with electronic framelines, electronically parallax _and_ size corrected.
Lens choice dialed-in via menus. No "coding" necessary. Use some of the "spare" bits of the Nikon sensor for software vignetting correction.
Extend the M mount to allow aperture coupling, too, with non-M, Nikon custom lenses.
Voila. The dream camera.
Roland.
PS: and as a side effect, offer a good Nikon/M adapter for Nikon classic S mount lenses
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The M8 is already quite portly next to a film camera.
Sure, it's (relatively) easy to add RF coupling to an existing mount -- I'd go for Nikon F -- and even easier to add focus confirmation, IF you don't mind a body that's got a 2/3 inch or 17mm lump on the front.
Cheers,
R.
Tuolumne
Veteran
You could say the same for any Leica-M film camera. Yet CV and Zeiss found a market for their cameras. Leica doesn't have the final word on anything, especially not with the M8. Too many problems that still need to be fixed. Price still to high for most.
/T
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I wonder if people would mind? I supposed they would.
I wonder how far you could chop down a D700 if you chose to convert it to a rangefinder?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Sure, unless you want it to work well with lenses under 90mm.
Why do you think Leica hasn't done it? Spite?
Cheers,
R.