The future of the digital rangefinder?

In the world outside a very small group of knowing camera nuts like us, rangefinders do not and have never existed. It has been decades since a consumer RF was on the market. As Jim says, a sophisticated digital P&S is the real hope.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
In the world outside a very small group of knowing camera nuts like us, rangefinders do not and have never existed. It has been decades since a consumer RF was on the market.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why the Leica M survived. It is commonly known as a niche market. Re consumer RF. The Bessa is still on the market, complete with CV lenses. If that is not a `consumer ` RF, nothing ever has been.
 
It occurs to me that perhaps the "professional photographer" is as endanged as the rangefinder camera. Hobbyists like me have created a cheap glut of adequate photography that may put a lot of people out of business. If you're, say, selling allergy medicine, why pay a premium for excellence when you can have good enough for a buck?
 
Ask yourself if you want to be lugging around a moma big pro DSLR or a small RF digital with arguably the best glass ever manufactured?
 
$5700 10mp DRF or $2700 21mp DSLR with HD video. If you are a PJ that has to shoot stills for the paper and video for the web, it's a no brainer.
 
i've said it before, and i'll say it again.
if digital rangefinders want to find themselves at the top of the game again, all they have to do is incorporate a high def video mode into them.
what better camera than a RF to use as a combo still/video camera. You can look through the viewfinder the whole time, continue to focus, adjust apertures....it's the perfect camera for what many companies are already trying to push...what with the latest 5d mk II and sony's having high def video modes, leica could steal the spotlight.
 
bmattock said "Rangefinders are more of an affectation now"
If range-finders live on, it will be because they have a range-finder.
Will there ever be dslr firmware that recognises eyes? The RF camera is just a different sort of car - it's for driving in natural light at slow speed. DSLR drivers are strobies from neccessity, they can't focus.
 
downstairs, that is just misinformed. If RF's are so superior to DSLR's, why aren't they the primary camera of photographers whose paycheck depends on it, pro photographers. The unintended consequence of your statement is to suggest that most professional photographers are fools.

Plenty of outstanding photographers are focusing in low light just fine with DSLR's.
 
Jamsee, I don't see a compelling reason, other than cost and size reduction to the manufacturer, to replace the current viewing system. The breakthrough I would like to see is in replacing the shutter mechanism with a non-mechanical one. An LCD that is switched from transparent to opaque electronically. Infinitely variable from hours to 1/100,000 of a second. It would be absolutely silent. And then lens apertures that worked the same way.

That would be useful.
 
Couldn't have said it better myself.

BTW, welcome to RFF, Jim! Knowing what you have contributed to other forums, I know we're in for in treat having you join RFF.

To everyone here, Jim is not only a great photographer, but he is equally as good at pp, a vital step in turning a good picture into a great one.


Jim Radcliffe said:
So... the future is probably good for Rangefinders in the hobbyist and pro sector but I doubt they will ever become mainstream. The cost alone would keep most at bay... I can't remember anyone in the last 10 years asking me if I could recommend a good manual camera.
Click to expand...
 
tmfabian said:
i've said it before, and i'll say it again.
if digital rangefinders want to find themselves at the top of the game again, all they have to do is incorporate a high def video mode into them.
what better camera than a RF to use as a combo still/video camera. You can look through the viewfinder the whole time, continue to focus, adjust apertures....it's the perfect camera for what many companies are already trying to push...what with the latest 5d mk II and sony's having high def video modes, leica could steal the spotlight.
Click to expand...


.....................a top idea
 
hlockwood said:
While I can see how vignetting can be corrected by software/firmware because it only involves intensity...
Click to expand...

It is not only about intensity.. Different colors have different wavelengths and hit the sensors in different places, not only at one spot. So there might be color problems because of this.

But mostly means some colours will not hit the sensor at all, or only with very little intensity. This is pretty much the same thing as very bad vignetting, when there is no intensity at all. It can't be easily corrected, because you have no information at the first place.

Also, correcting intensity will always create noise, so you cannot correct it too much or the image quality will decrease obviously.
 
Svitantti said:
It is not only about intensity.. Different colors have different wavelengths and hit the sensors in different places, not only at one spot. So there might be color problems because of this.

But mostly means some colours will not hit the sensor at all, or only with very little intensity. This is pretty much the same thing as very bad vignetting, when there is no intensity at all. It can't be easily corrected, because you have no information at the first place.

Also, correcting intensity will always create noise, so you cannot correct it too much or the image quality will decrease obviously.
Click to expand...

Well, whether on a flat or curved sensor, chromatic aberration is an ever present design challenge. It is handled reasonably well in modern lens designs.

Once the CA is optimized, however, one is back to an intensity issue. And yes, if there is "very bad vignetting" the local amplifier gain has to be ratcheted up, and the signal-to-noise ratio may be unacceptable. But this is hardly a quantitative argument.

The argument against my suggested curved sensor is that the M lenses would no longer be usable. So, if focal shifts were not correctable in software/firmware (probably true) we would no longer be talking about an M system - as we know it.

Meanwhile, I'll try to come up with a better solution. :D

Harry
 
tmfabian said:
i've said it before, and i'll say it again.
if digital rangefinders want to find themselves at the top of the game again, all they have to do is incorporate a high def video mode into them.
what better camera than a RF to use as a combo still/video camera. You can look through the viewfinder the whole time, continue to focus, adjust apertures....it's the perfect camera for what many companies are already trying to push...what with the latest 5d mk II and sony's having high def video modes, leica could steal the spotlight.
Click to expand...
I do not see serious photographers looking for an RF with video (even HD). Leica would not be able to steal the spotlight with a camera that costs 3 times the 5DmkII and doesn't auto focus. Consumers have moved beyond a viewfinder to a screen and I do not think the masses will want to look through a small hole to frame a shot. I don't think you are being realistic at all.
 
Hmmm. I would use the hi def video mode.

I like the idea of still pics + a few moving images + audio as its own medium, a la magnum in motion. Video begs the shooter to have more of a plan, of course, and some idea of what he is trying to document/tell - I don't walk around shooting in video mode on my LX3, for example. But when the right story presents itself the results can be great. Shoot stills for awhile, record an interview, record ambient sound, shoot a few moving images, combine the parts later.

I don't want it to interfere with normal image making - all those controls have to be dialed in. But a video mode on the other side of the dial, shot through m-mount lenses... it would be cool.
 
It seems to me that there will soon be a number of "SLRs" on the market that no longer contain a mirror or pentaprism (e.g. G1 and NX somethingorother). People seem to still call them SLRs because they still look like one.. but they've lost everything that makes them an SLR. Perhaps the samsung version will be APS-C, although maybe not. But let's say canon, nikon, sony et.al. made a FF, professional grade camera of this nature... seems to me if they had an EVF that professionals liked and could use, they'd sell fantastically. They'd be doing exactly what lecia did years ago, allowing photographers to downsize their gear. They'd face the same issue of light angles etc... but wer're talking about a camera with a much larger market than an M9, so perhaps greater incentive to invest in the R&D to make a sensor that could take steeper light angles. If this were to happen, I'm sure that one of the current RF manufacturers would throw this technology into a digital M at that point. But frankly I think it's silly to think leica is the only one who might want a sensor that can handle steep angles of light. It's just that the other guys would build a different camera around it.
 
You may not have a need for it, and in fact many people will never need it, but the truth of the matter is that photojournalism is making that move, and making it big. The drawback to the 5dmkII and other DSLR's with movie mode is that there is no autofocus while in video mode (the autofocus sensor is under the top layer of the mirror...when it flops up to expose the sensor...no more AF) And since all you're looking at is a screen where MF accuracy is highly questionable...the rangefinder system would outperform any DSLR with video mode by leaps and bounds.

But yes, serious photographers are looking more to still cameras that offer video for various reasons. I teach at a photography school, and in the PJ class they're required to utilize these functions and create multimedia presentations.

sjw617 said:
I do not see serious photographers looking for an RF with video (even HD). Leica would not be able to steal the spotlight with a camera that costs 3 times the 5DmkII and doesn't auto focus. Consumers have moved beyond a viewfinder to a screen and I do not think the masses will want to look through a small hole to frame a shot. I don't think you are being realistic at all.
Click to expand...
 
Leica waits to reclaim supremacy

Leica waits to reclaim supremacy

Original 4/3 - m4/3
APS-C dslr – hybrid APS-C
Full frame dslr – Leica FF hybrid (leica’s already there with the shorter flange/sensor distance)

Leica FF hybrid with evf, uses existing compact m-mount lenses; includes HD video. Light weight, compact, FF digital system. (no mechanical rf)
Nikon and Canon will have to manufacture new compact lenses for this new format or the user will have to add an adapter so existing FF dslr lenses will work. Big lenses plus a big adapter will defeat the purpose of the new FF hybrid system. Leica waits for the digital revolution to come full circle. :)
 
I would like to know why Kodak makes "a lousy partner" right now. Their track record in high end sensors is pretty damn good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom