jaapv Posted December 21, 2009 Share #81 Posted December 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) That kind of argument is a bit senseless - the motivation to choose a certain technology is a design decision. I tend to believe the basic reason for Leica was image quality. After all, the reason Canon uses CMos is because those sensors are cheaper - and Canon owns the factory....That Leica is not tied to one technology is clear - the X1 has a CMos sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 21, 2009 Posted December 21, 2009 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Who would like an M 9 autofocus?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nicoleica Posted December 21, 2009 Share #82 Posted December 21, 2009 That kind of argument is a bit senseless - the motivation to choose a certain technology is a design decision. I tend to believe the basic reason for Leica was image quality. After all, the reason Canon uses CMos is because those sensors are cheaper - and Canon owns the factory....That Leica is not tied to one technology is clear - the X1 has a CMos sensor. I don't think that cost is the only reason Jaap. CMOS also uses less power and generates less heat. These factors are needed for some features that other manufacturers offer. CCD still has an edge in absolute image quality, and is ideally suited for uses where heat generation is not a problem. (Larger devices, and for use in space for example.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 21, 2009 Share #83 Posted December 21, 2009 I know Nicole, no argument here. I just meant it as a counterpoint to "Nobody but Kodak offered etc.." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share #84 Posted December 21, 2009 I have seen still few comment on why not having only two arrows, like the exposition one's, to confirm the exact focus that become more difficult to evaluate with longer lens. This will leave unchanged the actual lens, and add a item that do not change the manual attitude of the camera. I agree to do not accept bigger lens, or discharge the beautiful past glasses to fit an autofocus mechanism but a viewfinder help in some condition is really useful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted December 21, 2009 Share #85 Posted December 21, 2009 Sorry Jaap. I was agreeing with you, although in re-reading my post it may not have looked like it. I was also throwing in a couple of extra reasons why others use CMOS as against CCD. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted December 21, 2009 Share #86 Posted December 21, 2009 Who would like an M9 with optional autofocus or aided focus with viefinder help?In case of not or yes why? Not me, thanks. Although I'm aging and my eyes would appreciate some aid, autofocus is not for me because: 1a) Sometimes it autofocuses where I do not want it to do and therefore I have to exclude/override it. So where's the point? 1b) Autofocus and hyperfocal don't mix well. And hyperfocal is quicker than any autofocus. 2a) It's noisy and annoying 2b) In dim light it would need an extra lamp to help 2c) It would therefore vanish one of the things I most appreciate in any M camera: allowing me going stealth 3) All M-lenses should be made again and I would have to give away for cheap those I already own 4a) Saint-Exupery said: "Perfection is not when there's nothing left to add, but when there's nothing left to remove". 4b) Henry Ford claimed that all what is not there cannot break. 4c) Not exactly sure that it is the quotes from St.Exupery and Ford are correctly reported but you got my point. 5) I've been shooting without autofocus in the last 30 years or something and I managed to survive. Yes, although being 2 stops younger than Lars Bergquist I'm old enough to like my M camera and lenses the way they are. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokkacream Posted December 21, 2009 Share #87 Posted December 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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. Why is Liveview overdue to the M9????? NO! It's defenitely not, what I ever want to see on a M9. I'm so happy to eventuallly have found a camera which lives from having reduced features to the core features, so that I can concentrate on taking photos again rather than shooting photos and staring on LCD displays. Why not stopping this ever returning and tiring discussion, changing the forum and just picking one of those hundreds of other cameras out there with lots of this core killing overdue features? It's so tiring, Dude. I do hope that the Leica M stays what it is. Just a "M". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsaxe Posted December 21, 2009 Share #88 Posted December 21, 2009 The reason I bought a M9 was because it was half the size of my Canon 5D. I got sick of jerks yelling "Nice Camera" whenever the saw me in the street. Now nobody ever notices me and I like it that way. My second point is that all previous lenses would be obsolete and could probably never be adapted. For autofocus, I always thought that the Digilux series was the way to go. Although I never even saw one it made sense from a purely design point-of-view. I thought all it needed was a better viewfinder and some updating to today's standards since it is a three year old design. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
proenca Posted December 21, 2009 Share #89 Posted December 21, 2009 Yes, although being 2 stops younger than Lars Bergquist I'm old enough to like my M camera and lenses the way they are. , brilliant. same here. I'm few more stops younger than you and I'm again old enough to like my M the way it is : uncomplicated, simple and fast. I remember when I pick a dSLR and the thing hunts and hunts for focus, and I moan and moan and whatever picture I was trying to take its gone. perhaps becasue the camera was trying to focus on a low contrast area. or because you had the wrong AF mode selected or the wrong lever selected in the lens, etc etc. When I miss the focus on my M8 is because : a) - I misdjudged the hyperfocul and/or - I focused wrongly So its down to : ME Prefer that way Makes me grow and learn from my mistakes and not having something to blame. So a M with AF ? Hell no Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted December 21, 2009 Share #90 Posted December 21, 2009 yes I think that the only reason not buy a M9 for me is the lack of autofocus and for the price and the size of the S2 I prefer an Hasselblad Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted December 21, 2009 Share #91 Posted December 21, 2009 Rather than using AF to capture those fast-moving kids - how about using this hot-shoe accesory to slow them down? Wackiest hot-shoe attachement - Photo.net Casual Photo Conversations Forum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 21, 2009 Share #92 Posted December 21, 2009 Rather than using AF to capture those fast-moving kids - how about using this hot-shoe accesory to slow them down? Wackiest hot-shoe attachement - Photo.net Casual Photo Conversations Forum Adan... that is brilliant! I'm going to get one today and make one for my M8. I bet I get a lot better pictures this Christmas of the kids and grand kids. I bet my pictures of the adults are a lot more animated as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blatent liar Posted December 21, 2009 Share #93 Posted December 21, 2009 Auto what? Why does your picture need to be in focus? +1 Give your 'M' to someone worthy. -GF1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipir Posted December 21, 2009 Share #94 Posted December 21, 2009 Nein danke Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted December 21, 2009 Share #95 Posted December 21, 2009 Will Autofocus on the M look something like this? 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=1159597'>More sharing options...
JMacD Posted December 21, 2009 Share #96 Posted December 21, 2009 When shooting fast moving kids, shoot a 35mm at f8 and crop to get closer. When shooting sports that require a telephoto, pick up another camera. Ah, but the question was, would I like autofocus on an M? Of course! As long as the AF was perfect, and the lenses were the same small compact size, which will be challenging, as others have well noted. So I don't think the answer is an AF-M. However, Leica is talking about showing a new camera next fall. Given how long they allowed themselves to perfect a camera such as the S2 after showing it, I suspect the next camera will be very much like a full frame version of the Panasonic GH1. I strongly suggest everyone try a GH1 in their hands. The EVIL on this camera is very impressive. In 18 months, the EVIL will be as good as we might demand. So will the AF. I suspect this Leica will be an E series. It will optionally take M lenses, and R lenses. but it will be designed for E lenses. Don't laugh unless you have looked through the EVIL on a G1 or GH1, and then imagine an18 month evolution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted December 22, 2009 Share #97 Posted December 22, 2009 JMacD, you are an open-minded, forward-thinking individual. I think you're onto something. Camera evolution has not stopped, and I look forward to new developments in the future. Nomad64, autofocus has come a long way. It is no longer noisy and annoying on high quality cameras and lenses, and it doesn't require an assist lamp. Autofocus even works in light levels in the range of EV 0.5 to 0.8 without an assist lamp. That's an exposure of 1/50th to 1/80th sec. at f/1.2 at ISO 5000. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted December 22, 2009 Share #98 Posted December 22, 2009 Och, well, Leica have only been developing the rangefinder system for 90 years, so what do they know? 90 yrs. or 80 yrs.? It may be the best rangefinder but is it really perfected? Those here who manual-focus fast action seem to prefer the R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted December 22, 2009 Share #99 Posted December 22, 2009 I don't think that cost is the only reason Jaap. CMOS also uses less power and generates less heat. These factors are needed for some features that other manufacturers offer. CCD still has an edge in absolute image quality, and is ideally suited for uses where heat generation is not a problem. (Larger devices, and for use in space for example.) Good point, remember that 'live view' camera's like the X1 generate more heat because the sensor is piwered up for viewing and focusing. CMOS is the 'appropriate' technology for that application. Regards .. Harold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 22, 2009 Share #100 Posted December 22, 2009 90 yrs. or 80 yrs.? It may be the best rangefinder but is it really perfected? Those here who manual-focus fast action seem to prefer the R. Do we really? I prefer the R for focal length. Focussing speed seems to me to be similar, better on the M than the R at short focal lengths even. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.