Jump to content

jaapv

Moderators
  • Content Count

    66,207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    40

Everything posted by jaapv

  1. Actually I have a feeling that I’m just starting out. The calendar tells me otherwise.
  2. Well, to be precise it was another of his theoretical blunders. Ming Thein discovered a focus problem in certain circumstances.Lloyd blasted the world with “focus shift” Technically impossible on an AF system without auto aperture. It turned out to be a misaligned focus point.
  3. Yes. They are thinking of a Contax-like solution (moving the sensor) which would mean that the sensor would shift 15 mm backwards. Imagine a 15 mm thicker M10! Or shifting the lens forward. Which would mean a substantial motor inside the body. Plus larger battery. Plus extra electronics. The M240 would be petite... Making dedicated MAF lenses would mean electrical connections in the M mount (how?) and thicker MAF lenses with viewfinder obstruction. Of course, we all know that Leica could easily overcome all these technical quibbles if they could only shake their conservatism. It is well
  4. That's not quite realistic. These AF adapters work by moving the lens, not by turning it.
  5. Well, I'm not Central European and not bilingual (something like quadrolingual really ) You were the one to advocate Google translate
  6. Yes, by an adapter that is possible because of Sony's short flange distance. On an M body it would need to sit inside the body. Where would you put it?
  7. That is not quite correct. He sometimes lacks basic photographic knowledge. On one occasion he put a red filter on the Monochrom and wrote an upset/angry blog that it exhibited misfocus and he needed "to investigate this fault further". There are more of such gaffes.
  8. That is an article about JPEG camera output, not about raw, he does the DNG conversion outside the camera from the JPG file. It has no application to this particular question.
  9. Colour space in a camera is an JPG setting only - on any camera.
  10. The only thing being that the CL was an addition to an existing system and predictions for specific lenses were probably based on previous sales. Leica is not Sony or Canon, their production is too small to twist a handle and speed up the robots.
  11. Not my experience, but then I don't mix Windows with Mac.
  12. Leica MP: 1956 Leica MP2: 1958 M4-2: 1977 M4-P: 1980 M6: 1986 M6TTL: 1998 M7: 2002
  13. I've never noticed any problem with CL files on my Macs from the start. It must have been some setting that was corrected by your update, or you were running some venerable version of OSX. Sabretooth Tiger perhaps?
  14. Well, that is putting it a bit strongly. I do prefer manual focusing, it is the simplest way to decide which part of a photograph is in focus, which should be a decision of the photographer and not of the machine, but there are situations where AF has its uses. It is a lot better than zone (mis)focussing, for instance. And it does help in sports reportage and snapshots.. But for serious photography, manual focus is preferable. Much too bothersome to get an AF point just on the spot where you want it and hope that it does indeed pick up on the detail which you intended. Having said
  15. You don't need a tripod if you export the stack as TIFFs and reimport in Photomerge. Photoshop will align automatically. It will take quite a bit of processing time, though.
  16. This sounds like a poor choice of camera and blaming the tools. What is wrong with a nice digital back for this type of photography? Even if I am no fan of Lloyd, I cannot believe that somebody who is into photography can be so blinkered. Surely there is more.
  17. So you are willing to pay at least 1000$ for a system to reduce CA and then put it on a contraption that negates the investment? Look at it this way: Who is going to pay through the nose for the best manual focus lenses available and turn them into second-rate AF ones, when Leica offers the attractive L system, Sony and Fuji have wonderful systems, Nikon is coming to this market with Canon not far behind? Completely self-defeating.
  18. How else are you going to fit a moving sensor in? Or a moving mount for that matter? And you didn't address the FLE problem.
  19. I had to wait three years to get a Morgan (quite some years ago, but I think nothing has changed)... To get more up-to-date: Tesla anybody?
  20. Because Leica will not accept the loss of quality with lenses with floating elements, nor can find any space at all in the M mount to even fit an adapter for M lenses. The register distance is a given. The only technical possiblity would be a movable-focussing sensor, which would add at least 12-15 mm to the body depth, which is completely unrealistic. The other option would be an AF line of M lenses, which poses severe, if not insurmountable difficulties through the lack of electrical connections.
  21. i think Leica did not anticipate such a succes of the CL and the resulting demand for the lens - it is undoubtedly a batch production. I have the impression that it was far less popular on the T/TL.
×
×
  • Create New...