jaapv Posted July 15, 2013 Share #161 Posted July 15, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) No - in general. In all other situations, especially with long lenses the view gets rather nervous with 5x and especially with 10x, which means focus-recompose is a natural workflow. If the subject is suitable Focus Peaking is preferable imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 Hi jaapv, Take a look here The Sony A7 thread [Merged]. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanG Posted July 15, 2013 Share #162 Posted July 15, 2013 Why would they? It is simpler to design the lenses so there are no sharper angles. Very compact cameras can be built that way, with extremely short flange distances. That’s the current trend in the industry, and for good reasons. Having said that, it is true that sensor manufacturers are also working on sensors with a more robust response to varying incident angles. But sensors are manufactured for all kinds of applications – surveillance, industrial applications etc.. Not everything developed in this field is destined to be used in photography as we know it. Well that is one advantage of this sensor that is stated at the top of the article. "The companies claim higher dynamic range and sensitivity than current CMOS sensors, along with the ability to receive light at steeper angles - making it easier to design cameras with wide-angle lenses and allowing lenses to be mounted nearer to the sensor." Yes this might apply to surveillance cameras too,but looking at how small some of those already are, along with designs such as the GoPro which can be de-fished via software, I don't see that need driving the above statement. I think the reason this announcement mentions surveillance cameras has more to do with the better low light ability and high dynamic range of these sensors. I think the lens design aspect plays out more with M4/3rds and larger cameras. As an extreme example, consider that MF cameras often need lens cast correction when a lens is shifted or tilted. Besides more compact wide lenses, a sensor that can accept light from a wider angle will open the door to more capability for lens movements using simpler w/a designs. E.g. a 35mm f4.5 Grandagon lens for 6x9 view camera has a 120 degree angle of view and is much smaller and lighter than a 24 or 17 TSE lens. And this is a fairly old lens design by now. All I am getting at is that once cameras can accept light from a wider angle, such as via this technology, and also don't need a mirror box, then there will be a wider range of possible lens designs. Just look at an Olympus XA film camera to see the size of the full frame cameras that I am thinking of. And due to having the ability to correct for various lens "defects" e.g. curvature, vignetting, C/A, digital will have even more possible choices than was available on film cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 15, 2013 Share #163 Posted July 15, 2013 How much additional depth (if any) would a curved sensor add to the camera body? -- -- Maybe Ricoh style lens+sensor module would work well with curved sensors? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 15, 2013 Share #164 Posted July 15, 2013 How much additional depth (if any) would a curved sensor add to the camera body?-- -- Maybe Ricoh style lens+sensor module would work well with curved sensors? Consider that a theoretical curved (really concave spherical or parabolic) sensor, if even possible would be totally unsuitable for M lenses which project an image onto a flat field. I think you have to think through what kind of manufacturing facility would be required to make such a sensor, compare that to other solutions, and also consider that it would require a complete line of lenses designed just for it. The additional depth of a camera would be the least of the problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 15, 2013 Share #165 Posted July 15, 2013 Consider that a theoretical curved (really concave spherical or parabolic) sensor, if even possible would be totally unsuitable for M lenses which project an image onto a flat field. Which is why I was wondering about Ricoh style modules (and not for the M, but for a new system camera). I think you have to think through what kind of manufacturing facility would be required to make such a sensor, compare that to other solutions, and also consider that it would require a complete line of lenses designed just for it. The additional depth of a camera would be the least of the problems. I'm not espousing that Leica should do this for the M. I think whatever issues can be resolved with a firmware update, should be resolved with it. I like the way the M system works, and hope Leica doesn't deviate from it. If they want to introduce a new and separate system that's fine with me (though I think we agree that Leica won't be doing so any time soon). I'm jus curious about what is realistically possible if a company, say Sony, were to develop and introduce a new system.* *I don't think Sony will be I introducing and maintaining three separate lines of interchangeable lens camera and lens systems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 15, 2013 Share #166 Posted July 15, 2013 CaptZoom, what will happen in the future is anyone's guess. Curved sensors will not be one of the things that I would take a million to one bet on. The Fuji/Panasonic idea seems promising. If Leica can make angled microlenses work surely others can too if they want. Afterall Leica is not actually designing or making that stuff. While I think innovation and progress is fine on its own, it begs the question, what more do most of us need from future cameras and will these things really improve our photos? Or do we just like having the best and playing with gadgets? Most of the issues I see of a company needing to innovate is so that they can remain competitive and vital in a field that has fast paced technological changes. Not because I am demanding these things. The Nokia 41MP phone camera and the GoPro come to mind as disruptive technology. Likewise DSLRs and other cameras are shaking up the film world. The next step is moving from DSLRs to smaller mirrorless platforms. Global electronic shutters will happen and grabbing stills from brief or long film clips will be another approach. AF, EVFs, etc. will only get better. For me it now comes down to the fact that very many inexpensive cameras are quite capable so the need to spend a lot on a camera is pretty much gone. I'd be much more interested in finding ways to get better color out of interior scenes that are shot under energy efficient bulbs that have a discontinuous spectrum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 15, 2013 Share #167 Posted July 15, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) ^We're in agreement. I think the future of (commercial) photography is in video. Grabbing stills from a video shoot in only going to improve and for a wide variety of applications, the quality will be good enough. Unlike other artistic disciplines, photography has been in flux since its inception. Not one system has dominated for more than a few decades. The advent of digital photography and the staggering rate at which technology within it is advancing, makes this exciting times to be in the field:) -- -- I like shooting with a rangefinder and having the control layout of the Leica M series. There are some other cameras now that have the latter, but the former is supported by only one company. If another company were to release a digital RF camera, I would most certainly take a serious look at it. But I don't see why any company would want to invest in an RF system given the market for them is minuscule. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 16, 2013 Share #168 Posted July 16, 2013 LOL the rangefinder was "obsolete" decades ago but many enjoy shooting with that technology. I'm guessing you bought a Leica because you thought it had some magic IQ? Actually, it is the only FF camera for my beloved M lenses Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 16, 2013 Share #169 Posted July 16, 2013 So you are arguing sculpture is obsolete and defunct technology? An obsolete technology indeed, but great an art. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted July 16, 2013 Share #170 Posted July 16, 2013 LOL the rangefinder was "obsolete" decades ago but many enjoy shooting with that technology. I'm guessing you bought a Leica because you thought it had some magic IQ? I know of no other viewing system that lets you see what is about to come into or go out of frame as you look through it, Maybe obsolete for some but not for me. In fact this is the main reason I use a leica M plus the small form factor compared to a DSLR Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 16, 2013 Share #171 Posted July 16, 2013 I know of no other viewing system that lets you see what is about to come into or go out of frame as you look through it, Maybe obsolete for some but not for me. I use my left eye. It has much higher FOV than the rangefinder and also works with ultra wides. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted July 16, 2013 Share #172 Posted July 16, 2013 maybe but it is no the same thing as looking through the OVF which while giving you the benefits that I gave above also helps concentrate on the image. But hey each to his own we all work in different ways and I often shoot from the 'hip' where no sort of finder is used Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 16, 2013 Share #173 Posted July 16, 2013 An obsolete technology indeed, but great an art.I know of no newer technology to turn rocks into sculptures.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 16, 2013 Share #174 Posted July 16, 2013 3D printing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 16, 2013 Share #175 Posted July 16, 2013 Is there a 3D printer that can handle granite? An interesting thought, I'm sure we will see printed sculptures before long. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted July 16, 2013 Share #176 Posted July 16, 2013 I use my left eye. It has much higher FOV than the rangefinder and also works with ultra wides. Indeed. Quite so. In fact for me the "outside the frame lines thing" only really works with a 50mm on my M9s. <=35 I can't even see the whole frame, >=75 and I can see so much outside the frame lines it's ridiculous and detrimental to composing INSIDE the frame lines. I could even shoot a 35mm L on my canon with a 50mm frame in mind, see 'outside' the frame and crop in post with the higher MP count. And I can do that for all focal lengths. But I agree it's subjective and personal opinion all round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 16, 2013 Share #177 Posted July 16, 2013 Is there a 3D printer that can handle granite? I have no idea! My comment was more tongue and cheek than serious. An interesting thought, I'm sure we will see printed sculptures before long. Someone made a SLR with 3D printing: http://www.geek.com/news/working-slr-camera-made-using-3d-printer-1561573/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 16, 2013 Share #178 Posted July 16, 2013 Today DXO announced that version 8.3 supports the iPhone 4, 4S & 5, Samsung Galaxy 3 & 4, as well as recent GoPro models for lens correction and image optimization. So maybe people are using these for more serious things than many think. I now sell commercial aerials - still and video shot with a GoPro mounted to a small radio controlled quadcopter. The thought never would have occurred to me a year ago. And I have used my cell phone for scouting shots and some other applications where it was the most convenient solution. The images turned out much better than I expected. And this article is interesting. We're taking more pictures than ever ... so why are cameras dying off? - NBC News.com So Nikon is worried and looking for new directions in order to survive. Now I think the M cameras will be less impacted than other models from the technological changes that are affecting all brands. Mostly due to the unique aspects of it and the commitment of its hard core users. But Leica as a whole will not be immune to these pressures which will come from many directions... from cell phones becoming more sophisticated hybrid camera/phones with various accessories to better featured M4/3rds and APS models on to higher end full frame mirrorless cameras that are sure to become available before long. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted July 16, 2013 Share #179 Posted July 16, 2013 Indeed. Quite so. In fact for me the "outside the frame lines thing" only really works with a 50mm on my M9s. <=35 I can't even see the whole frame, >=75 and I can see so much outside the frame lines it's ridiculous and detrimental to composing INSIDE the frame lines. I could even shoot a 35mm L on my canon with a 50mm frame in mind, see 'outside' the frame and crop in post with the higher MP count. And I can do that for all focal lengths. But I agree it's subjective and personal opinion all round. luckily the 50mm is my most used lens Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted July 16, 2013 Share #180 Posted July 16, 2013 Today DXO announced that version 8.3 supports the iPhone 4, 4S & 5, Samsung Galaxy 3 & 4, as well as recent GoPro models for lens correction and image optimization. So maybe people are using these for more serious things than many think. I now sell commercial aerials - still and video shot with a GoPro mounted to a small radio controlled quadcopter. The thought never would have occurred to me a year ago. And I have used my cell phone for scouting shots and some other applications where it was the most convenient solution. The images turned out much better than I expected. And this article is interesting. We're taking more pictures than ever ... so why are cameras dying off? - NBC News.com So Nikon is worried and looking for new directions in order to survive. Now I think the M cameras will be less impacted than other models from the technological changes that are affecting all brands. Mostly due to the unique aspects of it and the commitment of its hard core users. But Leica as a whole will not be immune to these pressures which will come from many directions... from cell phones becoming more sophisticated hybrid camera/phones with various accessories to better featured M4/3rds and APS models on to higher end full frame mirrorless cameras that are sure to become available before long. Mobile phones are getting better but battery life is getting shorter. In contrast new digital cameras are getting better and better with improved battery performance, new M included. I notice latest Nokia phone is being marketed as 41Mp wonder, big deal for those who fall for such parameter. What is really cool, for me at least, is full frame sensor and it is safe to say that full frame sensor in mobile phone want be happening any time soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.