pico Posted May 4, 2014 Share #61 Posted May 4, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) There are special gloves supporting capacitive touch displays; these should do the trick. True, and there are a couple good thimbles for those who just want a one-touch experience rather than gestures. (A handy person can make his own.) Soon-to-come are already patented 'hover' sensitive input devices (screens, hearing devices, appliances) and we already have some remote gesture patents, although I don't think they work well with a tiny screen. Will Leica license the tech? I'm looking forward to haptic technology because it's really hard to feel a pixel. Buick motors found that true decades ago with their touch-screen. (Still, we have them again today in cars.) tookaphotoof: Mjh and Nick, that's exactly what puts me off. Having to buy special 'clothing' to be able to operate a camera. As if a Leica doesn't cost enough by itself already. You are just full of optimism and joy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 4, 2014 Posted May 4, 2014 Hi pico, Take a look here Will the next M be a T+ ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tomasis7 Posted May 4, 2014 Share #62 Posted May 4, 2014 Mjh and Nick, that's exactly what puts me off. Having to buy special 'clothing' to be able to operate a camera. As if a Leica doesn't cost enough by itself already. You can use any gloves on Nokia devices. Leica can buy a licence from them and implement it on M 360. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted May 4, 2014 Share #63 Posted May 4, 2014 Mjh and Nick, that's exactly what puts me off. Having to buy special 'clothing' to be able to operate a camera. As if a Leica doesn't cost enough by itself already. I have spent a few Euros on a pair of gloves so I could operate my iPod touch even when it is freezing cold. With smartphones having become so common I wonder how many people do not already own such gloves (in those parts of the world where gloves are needed)? See Touchscreen Glove Reviews. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted May 4, 2014 Share #64 Posted May 4, 2014 Bingo. 5£ glove versus 5000£ camera in decision. I know what I will do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted May 4, 2014 Share #65 Posted May 4, 2014 Interesting discussion IMO. Speculative discussion about our favorite tools is always controversial. I'm with those that think the rangefinder IS the M. Without it, the whole shooting dynamic changes. TTL viewing whether with an OVF DSLR or an EVF Mirror-Less camera is a different dynamic, a different way of seeing and interacting with the world around us. Doesn't matter if EVF becomes crystal clear and achieves a refresh rate that makes it as good or better than a OVF window … it is still TTL viewing. Being small and mirror-less no longer distinguishes the M from all other cameras as it once did. The rangefinder window does. The question going into the future is … will upcoming generations embrace rangefinder type photography? Will they have the patience to master the rangefinder way of seeing? Not that some won't, but will enough of them "get it"? For most loyal M users it is an acquired taste (or acquired skill set), often developed over time, and sometimes in the time of film cameras which didn't change nearly as often as today's digital based cameras. Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing a separate digital oriented Leica of an even higher spec than the T … so the M need not be encumbered with tack-ons to appease TTL shooters, or video abilities that are outdated before the camera ships, or feel the need to emulate a cell phone interface. IMO, the M should stand on the merits of rangefinder photography, Leica should promote and teach those merits, and believe in itself without hedging it's bets. On a different note: a question for our more tech savvy members: Is it possible to include focus confirmation with a mechanical rangefinder configuration? Given the age of many M users' eyes, that is one concession to technology that would help support Rangefinder viewing without necessarily changing the dynamic. - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted May 4, 2014 Share #66 Posted May 4, 2014 <snip>On a different note: a question for our more tech savvy members: Is it possible to include focus confirmation with a mechanical rangefinder configuration? Given the age of many M users' eyes, that is one concession to technology that would help support Rangefinder viewing without necessarily changing the dynamic. - Marc I would say no. There is no way for the camera to tell what you have chosen to attempt to focus on in the rangefinder window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted May 4, 2014 Share #67 Posted May 4, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I would say no. There is no way for the camera to tell what you have chosen to attempt to focus on in the rangefinder window. *Bresson turns in his grave* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougg Posted May 4, 2014 Share #68 Posted May 4, 2014 I would guess "yes"... with common AF bits and pieces providing a focus confirmation light in the viewfinder when the center subject is in focus. I think this would be very useful. I use this method already with manual-focus lenses on the S2 and Pentax dSLRs. The issue of parallax is not unsolvable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted May 4, 2014 Share #69 Posted May 4, 2014 Is it possible to include focus confirmation with a mechanical rangefinder configuration? While it was possible in principle it doesn’t work reliably as Leica found out – they had actually considered (and tentatively implemented) this as a feature for the M. With a rangefinder camera you have two optical systems and you use their parallax to good effect, namely to nail the focus. But with focus confirmation based on the live view image there is a third optical system with its own parallax, and it would be difficult to indicate in the viewfinder what exactly the sensor says is is focus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted May 4, 2014 Share #70 Posted May 4, 2014 I would say no. There is no way for the camera to tell what you have chosen to attempt to focus on in the rangefinder window. I was just wondering if Contrast Detection focus confirmation could be implemented because it is often used in cameras that lack a mirror box like the Olympus OM-D E-M5 for example. I recall that my Contax SLR had focus confirmation even though it wasn't an AF camera … and it was quite useful when working with some faster lenses like the Zeiss 85/1.2. We already have lit dots indicating exposure, so one in the corner indicating focus could work. Just wondering. - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted May 4, 2014 Share #71 Posted May 4, 2014 For example, imagine the 45 degree angle ruler photograph used to DIY test focus accuracy. Now ask your camera which millimeter line you focused on. Did it tell you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted May 4, 2014 Author Share #72 Posted May 4, 2014 Lots of users seem to be relying on the EVF on their M's to ensure accurate focus especially with the faster lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted May 5, 2014 Share #73 Posted May 5, 2014 Interesting discussion IMO. Speculative discussion about our favorite tools is always controversial. I'm with those that think the rangefinder IS the M. Without it, the whole shooting dynamic changes. TTL viewing whether with an OVF DSLR or an EVF Mirror-Less camera is a different dynamic, a different way of seeing and interacting with the world around us. Doesn't matter if EVF becomes crystal clear and achieves a refresh rate that makes it as good or better than a OVF window … it is still TTL viewing. Being small and mirror-less no longer distinguishes the M from all other cameras as it once did. The rangefinder window does. The question going into the future is … will upcoming generations embrace rangefinder type photography? Will they have the patience to master the rangefinder way of seeing? Not that some won't, but will enough of them "get it"? For most loyal M users it is an acquired taste (or acquired skill set), often developed over time, and sometimes in the time of film cameras which didn't change nearly as often as today's digital based cameras. Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing a separate digital oriented Leica of an even higher spec than the T … so the M need not be encumbered with tack-ons to appease TTL shooters, or video abilities that are outdated before the camera ships, or feel the need to emulate a cell phone interface. IMO, the M should stand on the merits of rangefinder photography, Leica should promote and teach those merits, and believe in itself without hedging it's bets. On a different note: a question for our more tech savvy members: Is it possible to include focus confirmation with a mechanical rangefinder configuration? Given the age of many M users' eyes, that is one concession to technology that would help support Rangefinder viewing without necessarily changing the dynamic. - Marc I agree with this entirely. The M camera is fundamentally a rangefinder, limited to film age technology (with a digital sensor), and it should stay there - it has a purity of purpose which we can all understand: compact manual focus primes of the best quality CRF focus confirmation limited focal length range from 16mm (with a WATE) to 135mm - for me this is 21mm to 90mm simple controls over aperture, shutter and ISO Turning it into something else just confuses the situation - it doesn't need AF, an upgraded LCD or any of that sort of thing (though it perhaps needs to do what it does better) and it seems that LiveView has been a mixed blessing for the M(240) with a reasonably crappy EVF. I would prefer a return to the purity of purpose of the next iteration of the M, and perhaps the T mount as a platform for electronic wizardry. Till that happens, my M9 & Monochrom remain state of the art (and they look very nice next to my M3). Sadly, they're not "camera for life" any more, but that's another story - it is the space they inhabit. I would hate the next M (360?) to move further into that confused uncharted territory started by the M(240). Jury remains out on whether or not my cameras are joined by a T of any flavour! Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted May 5, 2014 Share #74 Posted May 5, 2014 But with focus confirmation based on the live view image there is a third optical system with its own parallax, and it would be difficult to indicate in the viewfinder what exactly the sensor says is is focus. Wow, that is a real problem. AF confirmation can be done on the sensor, but the sensor isn't seeing exactly what the optical viewfinder is seeing. The Fuji X-Pro1, X100 and X100s have the same problem. The focus box in the optical viewfinder shows approximately where the sensor is focusing, but not exactly. It even moves to compensate for parallax. But even so, it doesn't give you the feeling of knowing exactly where the sensor is focusing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted May 5, 2014 Share #75 Posted May 5, 2014 Puts offers this interesting view on the future of the M. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted May 5, 2014 Author Share #76 Posted May 5, 2014 Puts offers this interesting view on the future of the M. Jeff Interesting. He's basically saying the same as I have in starting this thread, so I'm not the only one who is wondering if we are seeing an idea of what the M - or rather its eventual replacement - will become. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlindstrom Posted May 5, 2014 Share #77 Posted May 5, 2014 What if one thinks it this way.. - keep functionality of current M240 (naturally usual electronic updates) - make it milled brass or aluminium, similar process to one of the T - remove all buttons from back, make it like the T with touch screen - make the main body size of M6 classic, but with raised shoulder for lens mount. This would allow rest of the body to be thinner while maintaining same lens vs. sensor distance - add extra sensor for automatic switching between LV and EVF, when evf in place - bring back the 1/8000 shutter Just a wild idea of one way forwards..it would provide technical advances, yet maintaining the rangefinder which is key for Leica experience! //Juha Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted May 5, 2014 Share #78 Posted May 5, 2014 Thinking of it, if they added an ISO dial on top I wouldn't care if they removed all the buttons at the back and gave it a touchscreen. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted May 5, 2014 Share #79 Posted May 5, 2014 Thinking of it, if they added an ISO dial on top I wouldn't care if they removed all the buttons at the back and gave it a touchscreen. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I have Epson Rd1 and I think the layout is so good. I didnt have to deal with the screen as it was closed down when the camera had all manual controls incl ISO. Indicators looked like a Seiko watch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted May 19, 2014 Share #80 Posted May 19, 2014 Why would that be, given that the rangefinder is the defining characteristic of the M? AF systems have been around for decades; if the move from manual to automatic focusing was universal and inevitable, it would have happened long ago. a RF will be attractive for how many people and how long ? it's over , it's from another time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.