charjohncarter
Veteran
I'm intrigued by their digital rangefinder. They say it is not analogue. That could mean that it just doesn't use mirror and prisms, but does it mean that it still uses an analogue device to measure the lens focusing movement or not? To me if it is sensing lens focusing by touch then it would be called semi-analogue. But if some how they use contrast sensing from the two sensors then it would be completely digital.
This may seem like a small point but if it is the later then that would open the possibility of using any lens on this camera. Probably they are using the first type of RF. The second would possibly be new tech and would really add to the cost.
This may seem like a small point but if it is the later then that would open the possibility of using any lens on this camera. Probably they are using the first type of RF. The second would possibly be new tech and would really add to the cost.
YYV_146
Well-known
If you want something less than $1,500 and works with Leica lenses (in IQ terms) as well as the M9, a modified A7 will suffice. The M240 is in my understanding still a bit better because of the microlenses, though.
As for the price, we'll see. I just find it hard to believe that they can undercut Leica at any significant rates, unless they plan on selling many, many of these.
nightfly
Well-known
Looks interesting, I wish them luck.
However the charm to me of the M9 is the lovely sensor (mine is as yet uncorroded)
Would have to see what the images out of it look like.
The form factor isn't much uglier than my M9 with the grip and thumb thingy I had to put on it to make not feel like it was going to fall out of my hand. But personally unless they can underprice the used Leica market, not much advantage to me at least.
If they could bring this thing to market for around $2000 or less, good on them. Much more and I'd buy a used Leica.
However the charm to me of the M9 is the lovely sensor (mine is as yet uncorroded)
Would have to see what the images out of it look like.
The form factor isn't much uglier than my M9 with the grip and thumb thingy I had to put on it to make not feel like it was going to fall out of my hand. But personally unless they can underprice the used Leica market, not much advantage to me at least.
If they could bring this thing to market for around $2000 or less, good on them. Much more and I'd buy a used Leica.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I don’t see any mention of the real problem of short register cameras - the incidence angle, nor how they are going to couple the lenses without breaking patents - This is a far way from on the market, I think it is a classic example of Vaporware - and wishful thinking....
YYV_146
Well-known
Lens coupling can just be via a regular RF mechanism, no? I thought the M mount is in public domain and so is RF coupling. Otherwise how does voigtlander and Konica made RFs that take Leica lenses?
As for short register optics, a thin cover glass gets you most of the way there. Some fine-tuning from CMOSIS's side probably won't hurt, either. I am under the impression that they are either developing the sensor from scratch or commissioning a design from CMOSIS, which would put them in the same IQ (and M lens compatibility) league with Leica.
hansformat
Member
l like the form factor...very clean smooth lines. I don't mind that it is fully manual - in fact I like that. If the price is less than 1/2 of Leica 240 I think it could work. Leica might challenge with stripped down 240 at a lower price point.
willie_901
Veteran
Other mirror-less cameras have short rear-lens element to sensor distances. These brands do not struggle with sensor cover glass issues and many of them work well with M/LTM lenses. For instance Fujifilm actually offers a M-mount adapter. This is just one example. The The SONY Sony A7/A7R/A7S bodies are another example. If I remember correctly there is even a third-party commercial modification to install a thinner sensor cover glass for at least one of these bodies.
So, what is the cause of the unique challenges Leica faces with the M8 and M9 with regard to short register optics?
So, what is the cause of the unique challenges Leica faces with the M8 and M9 with regard to short register optics?
DougFord
on the good foot
The whole presentation feels like a sales pitch to you know who.
Focusing white chess pieces against a black background in an ambient light controlled environment is one thing, but vary the ambient light and I'd imagine things start to get interesting.
I wonder just how well this technology performs in the world outside of the lab?
Focusing white chess pieces against a black background in an ambient light controlled environment is one thing, but vary the ambient light and I'd imagine things start to get interesting.
I wonder just how well this technology performs in the world outside of the lab?
Huss
Veteran
I need the OVF. I tried out the Sonys and could not deal with the lag in the EVF when used indoors. You can see this if you have it to your eye and pan. Come to a stop and the image in the EVF is still moving around playing catch up. I can also snap my RF into focus much more quickly than using the image magnification, then recompose, then check focus etc of the Sonys. It's the simplicity of use that I find so attractive with the Leicas, which is why the Konost is so appealing.
I also see no reason to downgrade to a 12mp camera that does not play well with all my M lenses, when my M-E at 18mp does.
But I think the main thing is I really like the RF format. C'mon Cosina/Zeiss/Voigtlander/Konost!
rbelyell
Well-known
then you dont have a problem with sony you have a problem with non rangefinders. and thats fine and understandable. i much prefer them, or slr split screen, as well. btw, ive no such problem, at least that my untrained eye notices, with the rx1 and external sony vf. its the best digital vf ive ever used bar none.
tony
tony
Huss
Veteran
No problem with OVF SLRs, except they don't take M lenses.
As an aside, I found the image in the Fuji XTI EVF to be much better, except its refresh rate makes me nauseous! No such issue with Sony or Olympus EVF.
Anyway, I'm excited about the Konost and hope that it somehow progresses.
uhoh7
Veteran
I kind of like the look of it...
Jockos
Well-known
The problem is on the edges of the sensor because of the angle of which the light rays strike the sensor, but if your sensor size is less than 35mm film, you dont have to deal with the extreme angles at the edges.
Since no one but Sony (and Leica, if you don't count the mirrors in the RF) offers a full frame mirrorless, no one else has the problem (to the same extent).
Mcary
Well-known
Same here
As someone who wants a Rangefinder/Rangerfinder style cameras with optical view finder I like the fact that someone is willing try something different. Sure it may not be ready for prime time but who knows what it could lead to down the road.
Internet is full of people with the view that since they love/prefer shooting with one type of camera be it a DSLR, Mirrorless, Rangefinder that there doesn't need to be any other options.
Monochrom
Well-known
To me a rangefinder must have two images merging just like an analogue RF...don´t want it if their RF is a super ultra maginification...
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Referring to the pictures above, that Biogon is not a small lens, is it?
But it looks small compared to the camera body.
But it looks small compared to the camera body.
Huss
Veteran
Funny fake pic, unless the referee on the pitch took it.
Redseele
Established
I think the design makes it look small at first look. Yesterday I saw a Leica T for the first time. Even when I saw pictures of people holding it before I was very surprised to see that the actual camera is actually pretty big and solid (almost the size of a film Leica M).
To me a rangefinder must have two images merging just like an analogue RF...don´t want it if their RF is a super ultra maginification...
I agree completely.