zlatkob Posted December 21, 2009 Share #61 Posted December 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) RickLeica, you're reply is entirely facetious so there's nothing in it for me to discuss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 21, 2009 Posted December 21, 2009 Hi zlatkob, Take a look here Who would like an M 9 autofocus?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
J_Thompson Posted December 21, 2009 Share #62 Posted December 21, 2009 ... and fast-moving children & grandchildren with normal lenses too. Quite correct, Zlatkob! That area of photography completely slipped my mind. I guess you could add frisky dogs to that list, as well! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 21, 2009 Share #63 Posted December 21, 2009 zlatkob... you said, "RickLeica, you're reply is entirely facetious so there's nothing in it for me to discuss." Sorry I was trying to be funny to make my point. I guess, I can no more comprehend you wanting to add an AF system to a range finder camera than, someone wanting to add a coupled range finder to an AF SLR. The notion of either would compromise the essence of the other. My interest in either hybrid camera... zero. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted December 21, 2009 Share #64 Posted December 21, 2009 Let's talk technical realities for a moment. First, lenses. AF requires some kind of drive to move the lens to do the focusing. Is the drive to be in the lens (as in more and more SLR lenses these days - Silent Wave or the equivalent? If so - here's a link to .pdfs showing the cross-sections of all Leica M lenses. Leica Camera AG - Downloads Pretty much solid brass and glass. Where, exactly, are the motor elements supposed to fit (and do you (generic "you" - not aimed at any one forum member) know how big silent wave motors are? - hint: compare diameter of Canon 50 f/1.4 lens to Leica M 50 f/1.4 lens). Or is the drive supposed to be in the camera (as in older AF SLRs) driving the lens via a drive shaft? You still need to figure out space for some gearing inside the lens. There's a reason why AF lenses, except the ones that are huge to begin with, like 300mm+, are built as a balloon-frame: a thin plastic or metal skin over an inner skeleton. It is the only way to free up space for the AF mechanism. Even the Contax G lenses are just a thin titanium skin screwed onto an open framework. I dropped a 135 M lens (40 years old) the other day - bounced off my car and onto cement. Picked it up and went on shooting. One small ding in brass 3mm thick. If it had been an EOS or Nikon AF lens, I'd still be picking up plastic shards. Second, AF measurement: What is the plan for determining focus? 1. Use the image sensor? Requires Live-view, and thus far most live-view focusing has been pretty slow. Along with LV having other disadvantages. Used in Leica X1. 2. SLR-style Contrast-detect AF sensor behind the lens? Looked inside a Leica M recently? No mirror. No way to reflect the focused image onto a sensor. 3. Contax-G-style active IR system? HowStuffWorks "How Autofocus Cameras Work" Oh, goody - accurate out to 20 feet. (which explains why my Contax G2 thought everything beyond that was "infinity" - and focused at infinity instead of the subject). Now, anyone who has the engineering talent of a stone-age man with a hand-axe ought to be able to at least rough out some sketches of how AF could be incorporated into an M9 body and lenses. If you don't have the skill or knowledge to do that - frankly, I don't see that you're qualified to hold an opinion on the subject. ---------------- On the subject of small, fast-moving kids - I shoot 'em all the time with my non-AF Leicas. At f/1.4. (see below) If I can do it, anyone else with talent can do it. Think of the M9 (or any Leica M) as a skill test. If one is skilled enough, one gets to use it. If one isn't skilled enough... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/107011-who-would-like-an-m-9-autofocus/?do=findComment&comment=1158670'>More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted December 21, 2009 Share #65 Posted December 21, 2009 RickLeica, OK, fair enough. I understand your view in not wanting to turn one into the other by way of a hybrid. However, let me state it this way: A. Key advantages of the M rangefinder are small size + high quality (camera and system), seeing the subject during exposure, seeing outside the frame, and no mirror shake. SLRs don't offer anything that matches this combination. (Manual focus with the rangefinder patch is, for some purposes, an advantage too, so I'm not arguing for replacing the M system, only for an alternate system). B. One of the advantages of the DSLR is autofocus for fast moving subjects (sports with telephotos, grandkids, frisky dogs). If there were a way to retain the above key advantages of the M, while also adding speedy and accurate autofocus, I believe it would be an attractive camera for some people (as some have stated in this and other threads), especially those who have fast-moving subjects or weak eyesight or who are tired of the weight of a DLSR system. While it would take some clever engineering to achieve it, I think that any open-minded photographer can see the advantages of having AF in a small, super-high-quality system. Leica is already into AF "hybrids" of sorts (the S2 combines DSLR shape + medium format, while the X1 combines point & shoot + Nikon-sized APS-C sensor) so maybe there's just a small possibility that they would do some sort of hybrid with AF in an M-sized interchangeable lens camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbaron Posted December 21, 2009 Share #66 Posted December 21, 2009 The following is an edited extract from the Leica website, which may help explain why M lenses are, and always will be manual focus. "50 years of M evolution has concentrated on development, rather than change for its own sake. So M's are not burdened with over-complication. There are no gadgets. No unnecessary electronic trickery. Nothing to confound the act of photography. Just the most evolved optical performance. And utter mechanical reliability. Closer to the key moment. The rangefinder system captures the natural vitality of a situation. The photographer is part of the action and frames his subject - a scene, a mood, a moment - through the rangefinder without losing view of what's happening outside the viewfinder frame. He can therefore anticipate the decisive moment and release the shutter at exactly the right time - typical of the M. Magnum photographer Elliott Erwitt said: "With an SLR you compose the picture in the camera. With the Leica rangefinder you have to see the picture, recognize it and then frame it." Leica M images convey an effortless, authentic impression, because they are composed with foresight and captured in a fraction of a second. The photographer even sees his subject during the exposure, and even in the most difficult available light situations, the bright, high-contrast viewfinder allows extremely fast and exact focusing. Together with the short shutter delay, the rangefinder principle makes Leica M cameras the fastest in the world. Compact, discreet, concentrated. No other professional camera is as compact as a Leica M. As a mirror housing is not required, the M8, for example, is less than 37 mm front-to-back. The M lenses also benefit from the short distance to the image plane, delivering an excellent performance with amazingly small weights and dimensions. Being so exceptionally compact, M cameras and lenses are ideal for travel and reportage photography. Mirror vibrations and the resulting blurred images are not an issue for M photographers. The inconspicuous, clear-cut design and barely audible shutter release are another reason for the unique charisma of M photography. The best lenses for the best pictures. The designers of the ultra compact Leica M lenses pursued one single aim - to enable top-quality analog or digital photos. Their unsurpassed performance stems from Leica engineers' principle of focusing their efforts and innovation power on finding a clear, straightforward optical solution. A solution that often requires few optical elements and therefore puts as few obstacles in the way of the light as possible. This natural design, realized with high-quality glass types and perfect craftsmanship, produces exposures of an unmistakable character. Over 50 years of compatibility. In the fifties, Leica engineers demonstrated far-sightedness by creating a timeless standard - the Leica M bayonet mount. This has ensured system compatibility right up to today's digital M8. Thanks to the adherence to this standard, nearly all M lenses can be used with the digital Leica. However, system compatibility does not mean just preserving the status quo, but moving forward. With the new 6-bit coding, the LEICA M8 recognizes which lens is mounted and uses this information for further processing." Can someone please tell me, and the rest of the forum, if there is another professional, reasonably compact manual focus camera system currently available? What will those photographers who prefer manual focus cameras use if the Amateur Design Committee gets its way? Nothing! There isn't anything remotely similar to an M. An M is an M. It's a rangefinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted December 21, 2009 Share #67 Posted December 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Let's talk technical realities for a moment..... Where, exactly, are the motor elements supposed to fit (and do you (generic "you" - not aimed at any one forum member) know how big silent wave motors are? - hint: compare diameter of Canon 50 f/1.4 lens to Leica M 50 f/1.4 lens). Andy, obviously lenses with AF would need to be bigger. However, not as big as the Canon 50/1.4. SLR lenses aren't bigger simply because of the addition of AF. Compare the Canon 50/1.4 to the Leica R 50/1.4. That's the fairer comparison. Is the Canon a lot bigger because of AF? Perhaps a little wider in diameter. Similarly, compare the Leica M 50/1.4 to the Leica R 50/1.4 — both are manual focus and yet the R is bigger. So, SLR lenses are by their nature bigger. Adding AF to an M lens would make it bigger but would not make it SLR-sized. Look at the 24mm AF lens on the Leica X1; it's not very big and yet it covers an APS-C sensor and it has AF. On the subject of small, fast-moving kids - I shoot 'em all the time with my non-AF Leicas. At f/1.4. (see below) If I can do it, anyone else with talent can do it. Thanks for the example, — and I know it can be done — but is that a good example? The child is apparently near a window at the zoo and you've captured her in motion. But that's not the same difficulty as photographing subjects walking or running toward or away from the camera, especially with 50mm to 90mm lenses, especially in poor light. I know, I know, I know it can be done. I recall someone posted a wide-aperture perfectly focused photo of a dog running toward the camera, captured with an M. So, yes it can be done, no doubt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted December 21, 2009 Share #68 Posted December 21, 2009 What will those photographers who prefer manual focus cameras use if the Amateur Design Committee gets its way? redbaron, I addressed that in post #65. Here it is again: (Manual focus with the rangefinder patch is, for some purposes, an advantage too, so I'm not arguing for replacing the M system, only for an alternate system). Leica can make more than one camera at a time. Hence, when they made the S2 and the X1, they didn't suddenly terminate the M system. Likewise, the M and R cameras co-existed for a long time. So just imagine that they continue making the M just as it is, with manual focus, while also introducing a new camera .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbaron Posted December 21, 2009 Share #69 Posted December 21, 2009 redbaron, I addressed that in post #65. Here it is again: Leica can make more than one camera at a time. Hence, when they made the S2 and the X1, they didn't suddenly terminate the M system. Likewise, the M and R cameras co-existed for a long time. So just imagine that they continue making the M just as it is, with manual focus, while also introducing a new camera .... I was typing as you posted. The OP was asking about an AF M, not a new camera. My post was not directed at you specifically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 21, 2009 Share #70 Posted December 21, 2009 You guys are in the wrong forum. Just add an optical viewfinder with electronically projected focussing contols to the X1 and you are there.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted December 21, 2009 Share #71 Posted December 21, 2009 I get what you are going after. You want an M that is small and uses the great Leica lenses and has that quality Leica feel and you want AF. Here is what I want: In a future, and I am totally serious, there will be a small camera (like the M) that has a 200MP sensor Today's 24 MPixel 36x24mm sensor cameras are not far from the theoretical and practical resolution limit ( 36x24mm becomes diffraction limited at f7 with 40 mpix). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted December 21, 2009 Share #72 Posted December 21, 2009 Perhaps it would be possible to implement autofocus for the M-system by having the position of the sensor move within the body in order to focus. With this approach the design of the lenses would not have to be modified. Accurate electronic focus confirmation would of course be required for such a system. Keeping the dimensions of the body reasonable would be a challenge. For the M-system to have continued relevance among future generations of photographers, the enduring merits of the M-system have to be delivered in product thats is compelling enough to get new apopters. That means thinking about innovating, and features like autofocus (and a host of others). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 21, 2009 Share #73 Posted December 21, 2009 Beware of the Swiss knive syndrom. Rangefinders are not made for shooting fast moving subjects. There are a lot of good (d)SLRs for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted December 21, 2009 Share #74 Posted December 21, 2009 Perhaps it would be possible to implement autofocus for the M-system by having the position of the sensor move within the body in order to focus. With this approach the design of the lenses would not have to be modified. Accurate electronic focus confirmation would of course be required for such a system. Keeping the dimensions of the body reasonable would be a challenge. Contax tried that with the AX: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ...the worst case of middle-aged spread until the M8 arrived. It was an engineering tour de force, with the entire shutter crate moving back and forth on ceramic rods (Kyocera's influence). A bonus was the ability to have "macro" with normal lenses. It was hardly a commercial success, however, and was massive compared to the RX. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ...the worst case of middle-aged spread until the M8 arrived. It was an engineering tour de force, with the entire shutter crate moving back and forth on ceramic rods (Kyocera's influence). A bonus was the ability to have "macro" with normal lenses. It was hardly a commercial success, however, and was massive compared to the RX. Regards, Bill ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/107011-who-would-like-an-m-9-autofocus/?do=findComment&comment=1158808'>More sharing options...
redbaron Posted December 21, 2009 Share #75 Posted December 21, 2009 For the M-system to have continued relevance among future generations of photographers, the enduring merits of the M-system have to be delivered in product thats is compelling enough to get new apopters. That means thinking about innovating, and features like autofocus (and a host of others). The most enduring merit of the M is its manual rangefinder focussing mechanism. That's why it's called an M; Mesucher. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 21, 2009 Share #76 Posted December 21, 2009 Could be called B like Bessa or Z like Zeiss Ikon as well. A rangefinder is a rangefinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 21, 2009 Share #77 Posted December 21, 2009 Perhaps it would be possible to implement autofocus for the M-system by having the position of the sensor move within the body in order to focus. With this approach the design of the lenses would not have to be modified. Accurate electronic focus confirmation would of course be required for such a system. Keeping the dimensions of the body reasonable would be a challenge. For the M-system to have continued relevance among future generations of photographers, the enduring merits of the M-system have to be delivered in product thats is compelling enough to get new apopters. That means thinking about innovating, and features like autofocus (and a host of others). Well, with the short register it would mean that the sensor/shutter assembly would slam into the back of the lens when focussing...And it still does not solve the real problem: how to measure focus on a non-SLR, non-liveview camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted December 21, 2009 Share #78 Posted December 21, 2009 One way to implement AF is to switch sensor to Live view type, which is overdue anyway. The contrast detection could signal focus in the RF window as a confirmation to the main method (the rangefinder it is). As a bonus additional EVF could be mounted in the flash shoe. Of course instead of the motors the old manual job would be still in place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 21, 2009 Share #79 Posted December 21, 2009 So you want CMos - there was an interesting article in a recent LFI, concluding that CCD still held the edge in image quality. Maybe the time has not come (yet?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted December 21, 2009 Share #80 Posted December 21, 2009 CMos or PMos...What can LFI write? That nobody but Kodak offered to make the microlens tuned sensor in the 34x26mm size on the deadline imposed by the sudden decision to introduce M9 ? Only Kodak could meet the deadline because they already had the needed technology. Doubling the size of the sensor in 5 years is slower than Moore's law stipulates, but nobody else had the microlens offset technology on the shelf. Kodak's sensor busines is mostly govenment: military and aerospace and such. Not a tremendously competitive sector ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.