Should the M9 successor have a Hybrid Viewfinder

[contaxgary]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the coming M10 will sport not only the fast ASIC Maestro chip, but also a redesigned rear interface.

 

Maestro for sure.

The mechanical rangefinder is a weakness in any of these cameras.

 

The technology exists to make focusing electronic. This would allow for the removal of a part of this camera that can go out of alignment. It also would allow for greater accuracy. An electronic rangefinder rectangle could reside within a bright optical viewfinder and simulate the appearance of a mechanical rangefinder, but without the inaccuracies and the need for mechanical adjustment. This would also allow for only one frame to be displayed at any one time. Also, low light focusing would be much improved. This last point is an important one in that the next generation will certainly have much better ISO performance.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[bill]

The mechanical rangefinder is a weakness in any of these cameras.

 

*sigh*

 

Mechanical does not equal weak. The rangefinder is a unique selling point. It is one of the primary reasons I have and use Leica. It does what it is supposed to do with a minimum of electronic clutter.

 

Just say no to the Bloatware Bunnies!

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!

 

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[contaxgary]

*sigh*

 

Mechanical does not equal weak. The rangefinder is a unique selling point. It is one of the primary reasons I have and use Leica. It does what it is supposed to do with a minimum of electronic clutter.

 

Just say no to the Bloatware Bunnies!

[ATTACH]222852[/ATTACH]

 

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Electronics does not need to mean clutter and the rangefinder is a weakness. I use my two M3s with my fast 50/90mm lenses, but accuracy is still in question, especially in low light. I just sent in two of my cameras for rangefinder alignment. Now, that wasn't because mechanical rangefinders don't go out of alignment.

[pgk]

M Series Leicas = Rangefinder Cameras

 

None Rangefinder Camera = NOT M Series Leica

 

Perhaps everyone who wants an electronic focus system should petition Leica to produce a NEW type of camera.

 

Do we really have to bumble along with this pointless discussion. I want to use an M Series RANGEFINDER Camera and I don't want electronic gizmos on it. If the M series were to bloat and go down the road of electronic gizmos then it will lose its fundamental attraction as a rangefinder camera. What is so difficult to understand about this?

 

The rangefinder is NOT a weakness. I have no problems with focus that aren't down to user error, low light or otherwise.

[Bob Andersson]

Hi Paul,

 

First time I've ever been accused of bumbling.

 

The point to the discussion is that Fujifilm's implementation of a hybrid viewfinder is an innovation and that it may be applicable to the M-system without taking anything away from the current experience. On DSLR forums we often see the argument "I don't want video on my DSLR" as a mantra used to imply that DSLRs shouldn't have video at all. I have video on my 5D2, I've hardly ever used it and so wouldn't really miss it but it's presence doesn't stop that camera from producing class leading stills IQ. As a result I have no problem with it being there.

 

Same deal potentially with hybrid viewfinders and rangefinders. If the technology can be applied in such a way that customers such as yourself aren't even aware that it's there (except perhaps that the frame lines are even more accurate) then surely you wouldn't argue against it? But, with that condition in place, if the addition of such technology allows more flexibility for those who want to use it that way or even allows Leica to continue to capture a greater share of new customers wouldn't that be a good thing? I guess a lot depends on how Leica expects to fill its order book in five and ten years time, something I'm sure Leica already knows and won't be sharing outside the company ever! If they are comfortable that the M9, or something virtually identical to it, will sell in sufficient quantity then fair enough: keep things just as they are. I'll perhaps concede that this discussion is pointless insofar as Leica is extremely unlikely to be reading it and using it to gauge customer reaction. But, even rapidly approaching my seventh decade on this planet, I still enjoy a little thoughtful speculation even if I have no power to make anything happen and I'd hope that most contributors approach this thread in that way as well.

 

Bob.

[contaxgary]

Bob:

 

Thanks you. You made the point much better than I. Personally, I don't use my 1DMKIII because I love the rangefinder for many reasons. I don't want to change the basic function of the camera. I just think that there are better ways to implement this genre of camera and I would like to have options when shooting in very low light, which one can do with the next generation of sensor. I don't want a rear screen, not many more buttons to push. I also believe that Samsungs new lens interface will gain some traction. Things are changing. Maybe we need a different genre of camera, but I think that Leica will find it to their advantage to move into the future in a measured way. I suspect that the warm reception shown to the Fuji X100 has them rethinking their approach.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

*sigh*

 

Mechanical does not equal weak. The rangefinder is a unique selling point. It is one of the primary reasons I have and use Leica. It does what it is supposed to do with a minimum of electronic clutter.

 

Just say no to the Bloatware Bunnies!

[ATTACH]222852[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Youi're right Bill. The weakest link is the user. maybe we should cut out the photographer and connect the camera directly to the computer.

[diogenis]

It would not be a functional replacement for the present manual exposure display. Which was introduced with the M6 in 1984 btw; the M5 and the CL used meter needles.

 

A live histogram, wherever you want to put it, does of course demand a CMOS sensor, because it is a form of live view (like focus confirmation by contrast from the sensor). I do think Leica will go CMOS sooner or later. For now however it is interesting to note that no medium format camera I know of uses CMOS. I may be wrong there. For me, medium format went out with film so I'm not very updated.

 

The paleolithic old man

 

It would be THE perfect functional replacement and the reason for M rangefinders to evolve, using a new tool that is the signature of digital. There is NO need to change anything else in the camera, and I'm sure Leica can do it without cluttering the VF.

edit: think of the possibilities: having secured your composition, you could easily switch off the main screen, conserve battery, shoot like an old M...

 

I don't know if it needs a cmos sensor or not, this is just an idea for engineers. Maybe they can fit it with the current ccd as well by poling the sensor to read its data, say once a minute, or maybe when the user touches the trigger. Maybe they cannot and they have to witch to cmos anyway. Time will tell us.

[usayit]

Yes... I think it is possible for Leica to incorporate a hybrid viewfinder (among other things) and improve yet maintain the classic experience of an M body rangefinder. They managed to convince a bunch of us to buy M8's and M9's that are equipped with several extra buttons, an extra dial, LCD display and electronics within. Any purist afraid of changing the "formula" with "electronic gizmos" just have not come to the realization that Leica already did that when they progressed to the M8. The ability to preview the previous shot on the LCD screen is certainly not an absolute must for creating photos, not part of the original M-body formula, yet improves the M-body shooting experience without detracting from the classic design.

 

I'm pretty confident that Leica is more than capable of accomplishing both...

 

Am I wrong to assume that Hybrid viewfinder (or not) is a separate discussion from Autofocus (or rangefinder)?

 

I was under the assumption that it is possible to have a hybrid viewfinder incorporated into a mecahnical rangefinder mechanism maintaining the original method of focusing. From the diagram of the Fuji X100 it certainly seems possible as they replaced the brightline illumination window with a unit that can project information overlaid in the optical viewfinder. I would surmise the rangefinder mechanism (and focusing patch) would remain untouched but we would have electronically projected framelines and additional information on top of that.

[contaxgary]

and what would be nice is electronically projected frame line... no 's'.

[giordano]

I don't know if it needs a cmos sensor or not, this is just an idea for engineers. Maybe they can fit it with the current ccd as well by poling the sensor to read its data, say once a minute, or maybe when the user touches the trigger. Maybe they cannot and they have to witch to cmos anyway. Time will tell us.

 

I wish people would think just a little about what they post.

 

"fit it with the current ccd ... by polling the sensor to read its data, say once a minute"

 

THINK ... The CCD sensor is hidden behind the shutter and doesn't have anything to poll except immediately after the shutter has opened and closed.

 

THINK ... The only point of having a live histogram at all is to help set the correct exposure before making the shot. For that, the histogram needs to be updated in real time (or nearly so) like the other exposure information. Updating "say once a minute" would be utterly useless.

 

"this is just an idea for engineers": that's not an excuse for leaving your brain at home.

[pgk]

Same deal potentially with hybrid viewfinders and rangefinders. If the technology can be applied in such a way that customers such as yourself aren't even aware that it's there (except perhaps that the frame lines are even more accurate) then surely you wouldn't argue against it?

Well Bob, that is the ultimate point. I have a 5D2 and have used it for video but you are right in it can be totally ignored - the camera might be used without the user ever being aware of the video facility at all. However many of the ideas muted on the forum would radically change the M concept and whilst I have no fundamental problem with this, I question whether the result would remain an M type rangefinder camera? It might use M lenses but would it be an M rangefinder and I would be extremely doubtful that the facilities being discussed could be effectively 'hidden'. I personally like the M in its current incarnation, although I already see some 'bloat' and feel that a simplified version would be a more 'purist' camera.

[Bob Andersson]

Hi Paul,

 

We agree. One thing that hadn't occurred to me until it was raised a few posts back is, adding your proviso that Leica could pull of the trick of hiding the extra features unless and until wanted, it would actually be possible to dispense with the rear LCD screen during normal use. Might please some and it would certainly simplify Luigi's life.

 

Bob.

[diogenis]

I wish people would think just a little about what they post.

 

"fit it with the current ccd ... by polling the sensor to read its data, say once a minute"

 

THINK ... The CCD sensor is hidden behind the shutter and doesn't have anything to poll except immediately after the shutter has opened and closed.

 

THINK ... The only point of having a live histogram at all is to help set the correct exposure before making the shot. For that, the histogram needs to be updated in real time (or nearly so) like the other exposure information. Updating "say once a minute" would be utterly useless.

 

"this is just an idea for engineers": that's not an excuse for leaving your brain at home.

 

Why on earth should I care what they are going to do to add it? It is not for me to solve this. All I am asking is for that feature alone. The question is John, do you want a hybrid viewfinder with more stuff on it or not?

[AlanG]

I find that no matter what information is displayed in the viewfinder, I have no problem concentrating on the image. I think one's brain concentrates on what is important to you and ignores the rest.

[viramati]

Firstly I am not a Techy but I was wondering if it would be at all possible, or wished for, to do away with the LCD display on the back of the camera and just have a hybrid finder which you could you use to see histogram etc. this would free up the back of the camera for maybe adding an analogue iso dial etc. Just a thought

 

Just read Bob's post which is saying something similar

[stealthman_1]

I wish people would think just a little about what they post.

 

"fit it with the current ccd ... by polling the sensor to read its data, say once a minute"

 

THINK ... The CCD sensor is hidden behind the shutter and doesn't have anything to poll except immediately after the shutter has opened....

 

And you have committed the sin yourself.

 

Why does the picture taking sensor have to be the sensor that generates the histogram?

[Artichoke]

I wish people would think just a little about what they post.

 

"fit it with the current ccd ... by polling the sensor to read its data, say once a minute"

 

THINK ... The CCD sensor is hidden behind the shutter and doesn't have anything to poll except immediately after the shutter has opened and closed.

 

THINK ... The only point of having a live histogram at all is to help set the correct exposure before making the shot. For that, the histogram needs to be updated in real time (or nearly so) like the other exposure information. Updating "say once a minute" would be utterly useless.

 

"this is just an idea for engineers": that's not an excuse for leaving your brain at home.

Fujifilm's S3 was the first DSLR to offer live view

I rarely used it and only when the camera was mounted on a tripod

Giordano's point is well taken

the shutter has to be open in order to poll the scene

polling needs to be continuous to be of any practical use

while an EVF hybrid has some appeal, I doubt this can be implemented without significantly subverting the fundamental strengths of the digital M's design

using electronically generated framelines has some appeal & could probably be implemented without compromising the excellent optical VF of the Ms

parallax correction would almost certainly be more accurate

exposure compensation indication would be welcome by me in the VF, but I doubt I would find focus confirmation all that useful as the whole point of RF focus depends on precise placement of the focus point

this is not so simple to achieve with electronics from my experience with high end AF systems in Nikon cameras

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[giordano]

The question is John, do you want a hybrid viewfinder with more stuff on it or not?

 

Sometimes it would be nice to have more information in the viewfinder, but I'm not going to get worked up about it either way and if it came to a choce I'd rather have better 75mm framelines.

 

On the particular issue of a live histogram in the viewfinder, it would certainly be useful on occasion. But I feel that a simpler display could be more useful: one that concentrated on the highlights and on the shadows. After all, exposure problems only ever come with the highlights or the shadows; getting the midtones right is a doddle.

[contaxgary]

I don't understand the "more stuff" concern. We are talking about a very expensive camera which might go up by $500 to $1000 in order to add additional electronics. That is chump change for all you Leica folks. In return, you can, if Leica can get the firmware right, selectively add features, OR NOT. Even if you don't, you can take advantage of the simple pleasures of more viewable single framelines and potentially more accurate focus and parallax correction with the same user interface...should you choose. What is not to like?