k-hawinkler Posted January 17, 2010 Share #41 Posted January 17, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Live View is a complete travesty of the M philosophy. If you want LV than just get an X1. If there ever was going to be LV on an M it would be the first step of the end for the M-finder. A perfect excuse to do without this part of the M. One of, if not the most costly part of the M and hardest to make. I have seen people ask for really silly things on an M. Especially on the German forum one guy even asked for a tilt screen. Simply outrageous. Get a Canon G11 instead please... There are more pressing maters to improve on an M than just making it an expensive compact system. Software is one of them, AWB is another, a proper top LCD info screen and a more forgiving sensor for non-Leica wide angles. Secondary would be better battery life, lower noise at hight ISO, GeoTaging and a integrated Wifi for downloading the contents without opening the bottom or plugging a USB. Asking for Live View absolutely kills the purpose of an M. Many have said here that pictures on an M just look better. Have you ever stopped to think why? It is not only because the lenses are amongst, if not, the best in the world but mainly because unlike a brain-dead SLR you actually have to stop, think and prepare your shots instead of just shooting away. Autofocus, Live View, tilt screens, etc... will simply defeat the M's purpose and sure as hell I will have in this case have no problem in going full Canon or Nikon. Actually, I would pray for a digital R-system.. This feels like a rant to me. You seem to build up an argument in order to tear it down. I certainly wouldn't put Autofocus and Live View into the same category. I have no use for Autofocus on an M. However, Live View could help those folks with imperfect vision. Wifi is certainly a good idea as well. My hope too would be that the M9 gets improved along the lines you laid out before Leica ever will get around to Live View. Sincerely, k-hawinkler Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 17, 2010 Posted January 17, 2010 Hi k-hawinkler, Take a look here Live view. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nikkor AIS Posted January 17, 2010 Share #42 Posted January 17, 2010 Travesty of the M Philosophy . I nearly spit coffee on my key board:p While I still dont have a M9 I do have three Lecia M (M3,M6,M7) and have shot few thousand frames in the last month or two on "film". Im not a purist by any means because I love my D3 and my Leica m system the same. Equal but different.. And in the time Iv spent with the M system. I don"t see how have Live view on a digital camera goes against the M philosophy:rolleyes:. Perhaps Im out of step with the party line. What I can tell you is when using lens like a 15 Voightilander, and the 21 Super Angulon live view would be really helpful for precise framing. And when using lens like the 50 1.0 Noctilux it would be very nice to confirm focus. Call me a heritic but I for one would "love to be able to shot video using my Noctilux. Especailly since I just sold my 5D2 to but a minty Lecia M7:D. Gregory Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #43 Posted January 17, 2010 This feels like a rant to me. You seem to build up an argument in order to tear it down. I certainly wouldn't put Autofocus and Live View into the same category. I have no use for Autofocus on an M. However, Live View could help those folks with imperfect vision. Wifi is certainly a good idea as well. My hope too would be that the M9 gets improved along the lines you laid out before Leica ever will get around to Live View. Sincerely, k-hawinkler What I am emphasizing here is that I want a Ferrari that not only looks like a Ferrari but feels like a Ferrari. What I don't want is a Ferrari that feels like a Cadillac Fleetwood... with cup holders, air conditioning in the seats LEDs everywhere, DVD display for the kids in the back, etc. If I wanted this I would simply get the Cadillac and not ask Ferrari to make me one. Better yet. Why don't you (we) ask Leica to work on the digital R-System and have them put all that in there? It certainly makes more sense or not? As to the help with 15mm or 21mm lenses. I only have to say that people have been shooting these on Ms for decades without even once coming up with "Live View" as a request. Agreed that the viewfinders are sometimes a pain to cary around but they give good clarity and a good idea of what you are taking in the shot. By the way, isn't this discussion a bit ahead of ourselves? As far as I know CCD sensors are not capable of LV, are they? The question would be; Would you favor the change from CCD to CMOS? Maybe there should be somebody asking this question on another thread... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #44 Posted January 17, 2010 Why heretic? So would I! This has nothing to do with the M. Incidentally, I am sure that there must be some mods or some guy that has os is playing around with that idea somewhere on the net... Just like some Schneider Film lenses that have been moded for Leica M-mounts. Glad you are still an M7 user. So would I if I had the time and space to have a darkroom once again. Unfortunately marriage, work and the smell of sulfur/chemicals have made me transit to digital. Which I am thankful for since without that I would simply give it up. I have no access to a darkroom and developing in my area is simply awful. I used to get very annoyed when I got my negatives/slides/prints back. :( Sorry I can't quote you. The system is telling me that "I am posting 5 pictures and the limit is..." Must be a bug. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #45 Posted January 17, 2010 And when using lens like the 50 1.0 Noctilux it would be very nice to confirm focus. Well, A Nocta on autofocus would be a nightmare fully open. Just thinking of how I have to turn off Autofocus when working with a Macro at close range. The depth of field is just too narrow. You aim, you autofocus and then shoot. If you move just a fraction your focus is gone. If you work with a tripod autofocus is redundant and if you are at close range it is a nuisance. The Ideal camera for a Nocta is indeed the M let alone the new Nocta that has an even naroer Depth of Field... I really can't see this going to well on a DSLR. The focus would be everywhere except on where you want it to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor AIS Posted January 17, 2010 Share #46 Posted January 17, 2010 Canon 50 1.0 on 5D2 Taken with lecia 50 1.0 Noct and M3 @ 1.0 on XP2 Im not suggesting that the Noctilux 50 1.0 should be Auto focus:o im just saying that if the M9 had l live view than HD vidio is hop skip and a jump away. The D3/D3s is a good example. And I still say that the 50 1.0 Noct would be cool to use with a M system in HD video. I often used my Canon 50 1.0 on the 5D2 on video mode and while focusing was a challenge it was totally possible. Gregory Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
artur5 Posted January 17, 2010 Share #47 Posted January 17, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, A Nocta on autofocus would be a nightmare fully open. Just thinking of how I have to turn off Autofocus when working with a Macro at close range. The depth of field is just too narrow. You aim, you autofocus and then shoot. If you move just a fraction your focus is gone. If you work with a tripod autofocus is redundant and if you are at close range it is a nuisance. The Ideal camera for a Nocta is indeed the M let alone the new Nocta that has an even naroer Depth of Field... I really can't see this going to well on a DSLR. The focus would be everywhere except on where you want it to be. Do you realize that any fast short tele available for M or reflex cameras ( 75/1,4, 90/2, 80/1,4...) shooting full open from the same distance, has less DOF than a Noctilux at f/1 ..? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 17, 2010 Share #48 Posted January 17, 2010 X1? Sorry, then I prefer GF1... At least can change lenses, including M ones. If there ever was going to be LV on an M it would be the first step of the end for the M-finder. A perfect excuse to do without this part of the M. One of, if not the most costly part of the M and hardest to make. Maybe it is high time to add\replace EVF? No more issues with sending camera lenses for calibration, no more guessing AF, tilt shift, ultra wide angle, no more problem for people with weaker eyes - no need to sell Leica system. I have nothing against RF. I want to use it. But adding LV is simply step ahead causing many BENEFITS - which you do not see. Not AF. Just LV. But it does not mean you CAN STOP OTHERS. Pls be more OPEN! For me your requests about AWB, top LCD, lower noise - are NOT IMPORTAN, BUT - I do not NEGLECT your NEEDS. I RESPECT THEM. Fine - ask for them! But pls understand others! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #49 Posted January 17, 2010 Do you realize that any fast short tele available for M or reflex cameras ( 75/1,4, 90/2, 80/1,4...) shooting full open from the same distance, has less DOF than a Noctilux at f/1 ..? Yes, that is true... forgive me but since I usually use the Nocta for close range indoor photography and the teles for long range outdoor I just see the very close range DOF of the Nocta as the main problem. Just a matter of habit. Makes great personal shots though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #50 Posted January 17, 2010 X1? Sorry, then I prefer GF1... At least can change lenses, including M ones. Maybe it is high time to add\replace EVF? No more issues with sending camera lenses for calibration, no more guessing AF, tilt shift, ultra wide angle, no more problem for people with weaker eyes - no need to sell Leica system. I have nothing against RF. I want to use it. But adding LV is simply step ahead causing many BENEFITS - which you do not see. Not AF. Just LV. But it does not mean you CAN STOP OTHERS. Pls be more OPEN! For me your requests about AWB, top LCD, lower noise - are NOT IMPORTAN, BUT - I do not NEGLECT your NEEDS. I RESPECT THEM. Fine - ask for them! But pls understand others! Sorry , the GF1 would have been my choice as well... What is EVF? English is not my native tongue so most of your abbreviations are still foreign to me. Your needs and requests are fine with me. I am only voicing my opinion as you are voicing yours. Wanting to not have something is just as valid as wanting to have something. So please do not get aggravated over somebody that does not want something. From you I would ask just the same, be more open and please stop shouting. As I mentioned before, I believe we are debating something that is a non-posibility unless the kind of sensor is changed from CCD to CMOS. That in itself will be a much bigger and in depth debate that I think somebody else should open. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 17, 2010 Share #51 Posted January 17, 2010 What is EVF? Electronic view finder - the kind of system the Digilux 2 used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #52 Posted January 17, 2010 Im not suggesting that the Noctilux 50 1.0 should be Auto focus:o im just saying that if the M9 had l live view than HD vidio is hop skip and a jump away. The D3/D3s is a good example. And I still say that the 50 1.0 Noct would be cool to use with a M system in HD video. I often used my Canon 50 1.0 on the 5D2 on video mode and while focusing was a challenge it was totally possible. Gregory ... and I am not saying that a f1.0 lens should not be, what I am saying is that it would be very difficult for the camera to focus, but most of all the problem is what the camera chooses to focus. How has it been with your Canon? Do you have to set it on single focusing? I imagine continuous focusing could be a bit problematic. In any case I don't think that using the Nocta for HD video is that far out. If Panasonic make a GF with this feature you might have your wish sooner tan you think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Posted January 17, 2010 Share #53 Posted January 17, 2010 LV would be very popular with some lenses and certain lighting situations--not to mention those with aging eyes. As an option, I'd like to see LV, but, at what price? How LV would potential impact the M series camera concerns me. Changes such as, price, VF, battery, camera's footprint, camera's carcass material, back LCD, Leica's M mystique, etc. What changes would you be willing to accept? I'm not opposed to changes provided the camera doesn't lose its tradition (mystique), basic footprint (don't want it to look like an X series camera), and VF (agree with DFV on this). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 17, 2010 Share #54 Posted January 17, 2010 ... because unlike a brain-dead SLR you actually have to stop, think and prepare your shots instead of just shooting away... I'm confused. Is the M a fast and quick camera or one you have to stop and think to use? If you are working on a tripod, any camera will require you to "stop and think." And if you are shooting hand held it is simply up to the photographer as to how much effort to put into a photograph. The camera has absolutely nothing to do with this. Can't you use the M and most other cameras either way? (Well it is hard to use a view camera quickly but some have.) If anything, live view as configured on most current DSLRs, makes you work more slowly and carefully. Consider all of the various accessories that used to be available to expand the usefulness of M photography. Live view would simply expand the current camera's functionality. It wouldn't take anything away from it. I really think Leica went astray back when they combined the rangefinder and viewfinder windows. Talk about ruining the Leica tradition. Who needed that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted January 17, 2010 Share #55 Posted January 17, 2010 I really think Leica went astray back when they combined the rangefinder and viewfinder windows. Talk about ruining the Leica tradition. Who needed that? No, it was long before that. The day that they built it into the camera, and coupled it to the lens. All of that extra automation ruined the concept. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor AIS Posted January 17, 2010 Share #56 Posted January 17, 2010 Taken with 50 1.0 5D2 and live view acting like a mirror up/mode Focusing fast glass wide open is never easy for stupid machines.,. I must say that for the most part my Canon 50 1.0 AF focused very accurately on the 5D2. There where times that I used the live view feature to check the focus point before making the exposer. It's my belief that since Leica has gone digital on the M than everything digital is now on the table at some point and time. Many will reject the whole digital process and stick with film. I just cant see not wanting a feature that can add another dimension to the digital experience. Things like live view and HD video are not a matter if for the Leica digital M , but when IMO. Gregory Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 17, 2010 Share #57 Posted January 17, 2010 ... and I am not saying that a f1.0 lens should not be, what I am saying is that it would be very difficult for the camera to focus, but most of all the problem is what the camera chooses to focus. How has it been with your Canon? Do you have to set it on single focusing? I imagine continuous focusing could be a bit problematic. In any case I don't think that using the Nocta for HD video is that far out. If Panasonic make a GF with this feature you might have your wish sooner tan you think. I think you are confusing two issues - Live View and Auto Focus. They can be related as there are live view AF modes, but they are not necessarily linked. In live view mode on a Canon 5DII, one can magnify the view either 5x or 10x and examine any part of the image. This allows for very precise manual focusing with any lens. With tilted lenses, this is about the only way besides tethered shooting to actually see if the depth of field is how you want it. You can even stop down the lens and the viewing image will remain bright. Tilt shift lenses do not have auto focus. There is also an AF - full time mirror up live view mode that uses contrast detect off the sensor for focusing. This is slower than standard phase contrast auto focusing but has the advantage of letting you precisely choose the area that the AF will use. And of course because you are in live view mode, you can visually confirm that focus is accurate. I have used every kind of camera design that has ever been made and there is no other focusing and framing method that provides this level of control, precision, accuracy and feedback. But maybe you feel it is against the Leica way or "mystique" to have this level of precision and accuracy. If so, why did Leica make those Visoflexes, Micro-Ibsos, and Focaslides for all those years? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted January 17, 2010 Share #58 Posted January 17, 2010 I have already "Live view" in my M9. My eyes are my live view. That is the most important when somebody use a Leica M. One has to take the picture with the eyes and later everything happens in just an instant. The viewfinder just places the frame. The technique becomes really important. ¨The control of the light and focus have to be learnt and practiced. All with a quick moved of your fingers. One has to be trained and ready when something happen. You can use another camera and system but the joy is not the same. I don't know why some people wants to change the "M philosophy" instead of using another cameras. I use another camera that works much better for Macro and Telephotography. Where is the problem? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 17, 2010 Share #59 Posted January 17, 2010 ...I don't know why some people wants to change the "M philosophy" instead of using another cameras. I use another camera that works much better for Macro and Telephotography. Where is the problem? Not everyone sees it as an "either/or" situation. I can't say I believe there really is an "M philosophy." After all, some say the M is a quick basic camera and some say you have to learn the camera and work slowly and deliberately to get the most out of it. But if you feel there is some kind of philosophy at play, I don't see how having more versatility would affect it. One can make the same argument about any feature in any camera. If one brand doesn't have that feature, the proponents of that brand profess how they don't need it... It probably has been that way since cameras got shutters. Who needs a shutter? My hat has always worked well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 17, 2010 Share #60 Posted January 17, 2010 But maybe you feel it is against the Leica way or "mystique" to have this level of precision and accuracy. If so, why did Leica make those Visoflexes, Micro-Ibsos, and Focaslides for all those years? To make it a system camera besides all the SLRs. They dropped them during the early Leicaflex years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.