lct Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1481 Posted June 9, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry for the OT Luigi, what do you mean? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 9, 2013 Posted June 9, 2013 Hi lct, Take a look here Mini M? [MERGED] AKA X-Vario. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
01af Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1482 Posted June 9, 2013 When the latter increases, DoF does increase as well whilst other parameters remain constant. When depth-of-field increases then so does visual acuity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1483 Posted June 9, 2013 Leica.com has opened the block box a little more. It's clearly different from the previous (slow zoom 28-70mm) rumer. It's interesting that the rear ring of the lens is larger than its front. I take it's a sign of a retractable lens. I guess this implies it has a large zoom ratio. I hope it's APS-H, not APS-C After all it will have a high price tag anyway. A little bigger sensor than would make it stand out to be "Mini" i front of the APS-C "micro M". With more opening on the mystic Mini M, it is confirmed the French rumor is fake. But is is likely correct that it has the zoom lens. retractable lens definitely. Also, it has a flat top that matches the knob height, it's possible to have a built-in EVF. If so, it won't match the classical M OVF that is at the far left size that allows to use both eyes in the composition. The far left side of mini M seems installed the built-in flash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo.Battista Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1484 Posted June 9, 2013 Yes. Santa Claus is real, NASA faked the moon landing, the Easter Bunny brings the candy, and the Leica Vario X (Type 107) might really be a FF or super sized APS with AF collapsing F1.4-2.8 28-90 or 100 or he'll, why not 600mm zoom that might or might not detach and take M lenses. Anyone else thinking June 11th can't come fast enough and all these threads can go to the X section, or is it just me? Did you miss the sensor type? FF foveon-like sensor with huuuuge huge ISO capabilities.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TW528 Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1485 Posted June 9, 2013 With more opening on the mystic Mini M, it is confirmed the French rumor is fake.But is is likely correct that it has the zoom lens. retractable lens definitely. Also, it has a flat top that matches the knob height, it's possible to have a built-in EVF. If so, it won't match the classical M OVF that is at the far left size that allows to use both eyes in the composition. The far left side of mini M seems installed the built-in flash. I don't undertand how you could possibly still think the French rumor is fake. So far it's a perfect match to Leica's box teaser! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1486 Posted June 9, 2013 I don't undertand how you could possibly still think the French rumor is fake. So far it's a perfect match to Leica's box teaser! The french rumor looks to me has a non-retracted lens. Whatever, I'm just speaking loud my guess. Feel free to disagree, or, confuse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TW528 Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1487 Posted June 9, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well i'm not a Leica dealer but the DoF of the Mini's zoom is mostly shallower than that of the Digilux 2 in a smaller package, with a larger format, a better EVF and less digital noise. Those of you who did/do like the D2 should be on the Mini's waiting lists already. Slow lens. No EVF. No aperture ring. Not a replacement for my Digilux 2 in any way other than branding. I do think I'll get my Digilux 2 out today and shoot with it though and imagine what could have been. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TW528 Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1488 Posted June 9, 2013 That's because it does not have a retractable lens. Does the M 240 below also have a retractable lens since you cannot see the sides? You're seeing the same lens from different perspectives. The one on Leica's page is from the front. The one from the French rumor (and now multiple other sources) is from an angle. Same camera. Same lens. We all want it to be better but it's just wishful thinking at this point. 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/205247-mini-m-merged-aka-x-vario/?do=findComment&comment=2343708'>More sharing options...
TW528 Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1489 Posted June 9, 2013 Same thing here. Lens looks flat but it's not. 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/205247-mini-m-merged-aka-x-vario/?do=findComment&comment=2343710'>More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 9, 2013 Share #1490 Posted June 9, 2013 Same thing here. Lens looks flat but it's not. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Try these two.One is from Leica, there other one contains a quoted french rumor and another rumor (I don;t know here it is from). 1. Leica Camera AG - Home 2. Leica Mini M "Leaks" May Have Been Part of a Clever Marketing Scheme The Leica's picture is taken slightly from the side. It looks to me the lens is not extended, and the ring on the body side is wider. The bottom picture from the second link is different from the French ipad rumor, and it has a front knob at the front which is not shown in the french rumor. The second rumor has a little better spec than the French ipad rumor. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// You can tell I'm out of boring while doing this analysis. Are you really serious about this debate? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1491 Posted June 10, 2013 //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////Try these two.One is from Leica, there other one contains a quoted french rumor and another rumor (I don;t know here it is from). 1. Leica Camera AG - Home 2. Leica Mini M "Leaks" May Have Been Part of a Clever Marketing Scheme The Leica's picture is taken slightly from the side. It looks to me the lens is not extended, and the ring on the body side is wider. The bottom picture from the second link is different from the French ipad rumor, and it has a front knob at the front which is not shown in the french rumor. The second rumor has a little better spec than the French ipad rumor. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// You can tell I'm out of boring while doing this analysis. Are you really serious about this debate? The official Leica picture of the new camera was not taken slightly from the side. It is an optical illusion caused by the box around the camera being at an angle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1492 Posted June 10, 2013 When depth-of-field increases then so does visual acuity. I wonder if you're not confusing DoF with subject distance here. DoF depends on CoC (circle of confusion) which depends on film or sensor size as well as visual acuity, the latter depending on the subject size and distance aside from the sight of the photographer. All things equal i.e. for the same subject size and distance, the same focal length, the same aperture and the same sight of course, DoF depends solely on the size of the film or sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1493 Posted June 10, 2013 Still nothing new since http://tinyurl.com/mk6vpqu. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlindstrom Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1494 Posted June 10, 2013 Just as a small side note on Leica marketing.. If this "Paula" would be just an X-series with zoom lens, I don't think it would warrant the term "mini-m". This is just me, but how would a zoom lens make an X2 be more M? I would be inclined to say it makes it less M. Nothing zoomy about the real M (until 240 & R lenses anyway). Also if no evf, the the thicker top plate would just clean up the hump from the X2.. There has to be something more to this than what's beng speculated. Count me in as interested to hearing more on june 11th :-) //Juha Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1495 Posted June 10, 2013 Just as a small side note on Leica marketing.. If this "Paula" would be just an X-series with zoom lens, I don't think it would warrant the term "mini-m". This is just me, but how would a zoom lens make an X2 be more M? I would be inclined to say it makes it less M. Nothing zoomy about the real M (until 240 & R lenses anyway). Also if no evf, the the thicker top plate would just clean up the hump from the X2.. There has to be something more to this than what's beng speculated. Count me in as interested to hearing more on june 11th :-) //Juha Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD They're also callng the X2 a "Micro M," so I don't think there's much to read into the M moniker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1496 Posted June 10, 2013 The official Leica picture of the new camera was not taken slightly from the side. It is an optical illusion caused by the box around the camera being at an angle. It is slightly taken from the side, look at its "ear" for the neck strap. Compare that to the micro-M and nan-M on the side. Also, note the depth of the black box, it's about 1/4 of the width. The lens length in the French Ipad rumer wold be too long for that box. In fact, the depth of the box would be too short for any reasonable lens. The lens in Leica's box has to be in the retracted state. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1497 Posted June 10, 2013 Just as a small side note on Leica marketing.. If this "Paula" would be just an X-series with zoom lens, I don't think it would warrant the term "mini-m". This is just me, but how would a zoom lens make an X2 be more M? I would be inclined to say it makes it less M. Nothing zoomy about the real M (until 240 & R lenses anyway). Also if no evf, the the thicker top plate would just clean up the hump from the X2.. There has to be something more to this than what's beng speculated. Count me in as interested to hearing more on june 11th :-) //Juha Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD I had the same feeling. I had the thought it could APS-H, to be justified to be Mini over the "Micro-M - APS-C X2". This could make it stand out more in front of any other APS-C, such as NEX or EOS- M. I doubt it would be full frame. That is likely to compete with the Leica's M. It would become a substitution of Leica M, not a complement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1498 Posted June 10, 2013 It is slightly taken from the side, look at its "ear" for the neck strap. Compare that to the micro-M and nan-M on the side. Also, note the depth of the black box, it's about 1/4 of the width. The lens length in the French Ipad rumer wold be too long for that box. In fact, the depth of the box would be too short for any reasonable lens. The lens in Leica's box has to be in the retracted state. I don't think so. The strap "ears" on this camera are further near the front of the camera than on the X2, according to this: http://tinyurl.com/mk6vpqu I'd guess that Leica put them closer to the front to balance the longer lens, so that the camera doesn't tip forward on the strap. The box of the camera just appears to be a digital rendering around the camera, so the proportions aren't real, and it's throwing off the perspective. I've not yet seen anything to counter the linked leak above. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1499 Posted June 10, 2013 The box of the camera just appears to be a digital rendering around the camera, so the proportions aren't real, and it's throwing off the perspective. You mean Leica's own picture has the wrong proportoin about the black box? I doubt Leica would make such mistake, it would be even more insane if that's a mis-guile on purpose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted June 10, 2013 Share #1500 Posted June 10, 2013 You mean Leica's own picture has the wrong proportoin about the black box? I doubt Leica would make such mistake, it would be even more insane if that's a mis-guile on purpose. It looks like they just put a digitally rendered box around the camera at an angle, and it doesn't quite match up, so yeah, I guess that I do think its either on purpose or a bit lazy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.