dickgrafixstop Posted June 20, 2011 Share #1 Posted June 20, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) found this an interesting summary of Ken Rockwell's review of the Fuji x100. Reminds me of a comment I once put in an underling's performance review, "whether he's right, or whether he's wrong, he's never unsure!" Die Zukunft der Fotografie M: The Future of LEICA M Photography The fixed lens is superb, but Fuji really could have stuck it to LEICA if they threw away the 23mm lens and replaced it with a hole, a LEICA M mount, and a full-sized 24 x 36mm sensor. Fuji could have called it the M10, and pitched it as "The Future of M Photography." (LEICA has no trademark on the letter M or "M10" as far as I know.) In a Japanese minute Fuji could have advanced LEICA photography by over 50 years. The LEICA M9 still uses viewfinder technology that is actually a cost-reduced downgrade from the superior finder of 1954's LEICA M3. The X100's finder is 60 years ahead of LEICA, which like Harley-Davidson, is decades of tradition unhampered by progress. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Hi dickgrafixstop, Take a look here "the future of "M" photography" - one view. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted June 20, 2011 Share #2 Posted June 20, 2011 M10 has trademark protection. (as M9,8,etc, and presumably it has been extended into the future as well by now) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted June 20, 2011 Share #3 Posted June 20, 2011 Do we need another thread on this... Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted June 20, 2011 Share #4 Posted June 20, 2011 Fuji really could have stuck it to LEICA if they threw away the 23mm lens and replaced it with a hole, a LEICA M mount, and a full-sized 24 x 36mm sensor. The viewfinder of the X100 in its present incarnation wouldn’t work with interchangeable lenses. Also the X100 is mainly an AF camera whereas M lenses are focused manually. Who would buy an ‘M10’ without a rangefinder? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted June 21, 2011 Share #5 Posted June 21, 2011 Not that it matters to what products Fuji may produce in terms of features - but Leica does have a trademark on "M". The Olympus film SLR line started on the 1970's as the "M-1." Leica legal complaints forced Oly to change name to the "OM-1." Besides which, why would Fuji want to give up a name they've just established? They don't need to copy Leica's naming conventions. Just call it an X101 or X200. "The viewfinder of the X100 in its present incarnation wouldn’t work with interchangeable lenses." Why not? - just change the area of the LCD-projected framelines. Going wider than the basic "35mm" lines would be tough (but can we say " '24mm' w/accesory viewfinder?") - "50" or "90" lines would be easy. The optional grid overlay would have to shrink also, but that's trivial screen-drawing routines. The full-EVF view would not match the magnification of the optical viewfinder (the EVF would show longer lenses full-viewfinder, thus magnified) - but who says it has to? Flip to the EVF for zoomed-in "exact" view (maybe for manual focus, or just the larger view) - flip back to see a small box, Leica-style, to watch what's happening outside the framelines. I doubt putting an "M" mount on an X100 interchangeable-lens variation makes sense, for either Fuji or Fuji's customers. It would mean adding unnecessary thickness to the petite X100 - simply in order for people to put non-Fuji lenses on the camera. Why does Fuji need that? Just design a new mount with all the contacts needed for AF and such, and sell lots of nice, dedicated $1,000 Fuji 16, 24, 33, and 60mm lenses. I realize, given that this is a Leica forum, that there's a tendency here to think the world is "all about Leica" and what the rest of the world can do for Leica users. But, you know, it really isn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted June 21, 2011 Share #6 Posted June 21, 2011 Why not? - just change the area of the LCD-projected framelines. This is possible in principle – that’s why I said “in its present incarnation” – but far from trivial to actually implement. There are still some issues with correctly identifying the area the AF is focusing on even now; there would be quite a few problems to solve before longer focal lengths could be tackled. I think I’ve mentioned before that I would like to see electronically created frame lines in a rangefinder camera that wouldn’t have those AF issues. But the X100 isn’t a rangefinder camera. Yes, Fuji has built rangefinders before (and does so even now), but I don’t see the X100 evolving into such a camera. I doubt putting an "M" mount on an X100 interchangeable-lens variation makes sense, for either Fuji or Fuji's customers. It would mean adding unnecessary thickness to the petite X100 - simply in order for people to put non-Fuji lenses on the camera. Why does Fuji need that? Just design a new mount with all the contacts needed for AF and such, and sell lots of nice, dedicated $1,000 Fuji 16, 24, 33, and 60mm lenses. Indeed. Leica lenses could be adapted (like they can be adapted to all those EVIL cameras), but a Fuji camera with an M mount isn’t really likely. It would be overly restrictive and not in Fuji’s best interest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted June 21, 2011 Share #7 Posted June 21, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sticking to the thread title, if Leica stopped making M cameras tomorrow, the existing stock of in-use M-cameras would go on working for years, outliving many, if not most of their owners! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 22, 2011 Share #8 Posted June 22, 2011 I don't know about Fuji, but at this point, I'd think Cosina would really want to make some kind of FF digital (Rollei, Zeiss, Voitlander or Epson) rangefinder body if they could manage it at an acceptable price. Since lenses are generally the most profitable part of camera systems, and since they already make the lenses and rangefinder film bodies... what are they stupid? I don't think so and thus it is just a matter of getting the sensors (with suitable microlenses) at the right price since everything else is already available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J_Thompson Posted July 8, 2011 Share #9 Posted July 8, 2011 And a discussion of Charlie Sheen belongs on the Digital Forum because? His former series is even shot on film, so there's no tie-in there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macjim Posted July 8, 2011 Share #10 Posted July 8, 2011 I see the future being a good one. The M10 will in my mind come out with a sapphire glass screen and a better quality LCD, styled like the M9 Titanium and with the electronic frame markers too. Gone will be the extra window to illuminate the finder. Regarding the x100 dual viewfinder, well it would be a nice idea but it would over complicate the simplicity of the M Rangfinder ideology. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted July 8, 2011 Share #11 Posted July 8, 2011 ... styled like the M9 Titanium and with the electronic frame markers too.. ...please, no... :(:( Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted July 8, 2011 Share #12 Posted July 8, 2011 LCD frame-lines that show only the lens currently mounted. Frame lines should have a switch to be red or white. Built-in adjustable finder diopter. Faster transfer. Add an RCA type plug for intervalometer, radio, distant triggering. Maybe make it an adapter to the USB. Handgrip option with supplementary battery that couples (parallel) with existing battery. Include additional shutter release on grip. USB ability to preview on an optional larger, but modestly sized image screen device with solid state storage, all with a size that can be worn with strap, or belt, or have a stand that folds out for desk use and is a tripod clamp, too. (Imagine a thinner Garmin sized device). Include GPS in device that can be disabled. Does anyone think that a carbon fiber top, bottom plate or body would work out? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 8, 2011 Share #13 Posted July 8, 2011 How about adding a mirror and a viewfinder which actually shows what will be recorded on the film or the sensor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted July 9, 2011 Share #14 Posted July 9, 2011 How about adding a mirror and a viewfinder which actually shows what will be recorded on the film or the sensor? Good one.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.