jmahto Posted May 12, 2014 Share #461 Posted May 12, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I doubt there is a compact stepper motor with enough movement-resolution to work.. Damn Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 12, 2014 Posted May 12, 2014 Hi jmahto, Take a look here Leica T performs digital lens correction , a claim by dpreview.com. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mjh Posted May 12, 2014 Share #462 Posted May 12, 2014 Why would one replace a relatively simple mechanical transmission by a more complex electromechanical/electronical solution where there are even more things that could go wrong? 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted May 12, 2014 Share #463 Posted May 12, 2014 Why would one replace a relatively simple mechanical transmission by a more complex electromechanical/electronical solution where there are even more things that could go wrong? To make it more compact back to front making the body thinner. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 12, 2014 Share #464 Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) Why would one replace a relatively simple mechanical transmission by a more complex electromechanical/electronical solution where there are even more things that could go wrong? Since this is about the M, I'll comment. I don't know about the reliability but in things like hard drives these devices seem pretty reliable. AF motors are pretty reliable. Focus by wire works well and this would be similar. The advantage of an electronic connection would be that the user could micro calibrate the focusing mechanism and store the data for each lens. New lenses could eliminate the cam entirely and just use electronic connections between the lens and the body to transmit focusing information, f stop, and other lens data... making the focus more accurate and transmitting whatever is needed for software lens correction. AF lenses (primes and zooms) could also be developed for the M. Additionally, with the rangefinder only connected electronically, it would be possible to make the rf/viewfinder modular so it can be replaced by different models with zoom or a wider field of view, some kind of hybrid design, or with an EVF or a larger video monitor. User's various modular viewfinders could be transferred onto new bodies that would be less expensive to make if no viewfinder is included. And they would be backwardly compatible so older cameras could make use of any new viewfinder that is developed in the future. The camera could use the T lens mount with new AF FF lenses. There would be an electro/mechanical adapter for M lenses that would pick up the cam info and transfer that to electronic signals. So if the camera has a range of removable viewfinders Leica would have the most versatile camera system possible... something nobody else is likely to ever do. It would help fight obsolescence. As for the M as it is, I guess it could stay basically the same forever with just technical upgrades of sensors, electronics, and maybe changes to the interface. (Even touchscreen.) But I think technology has matured to the point that upgrading to future models may become less enticing to people who are happy with their Ms. Edited May 12, 2014 by AlanG 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2014 Share #465 Posted May 12, 2014 To make it more compact back to front making the body thinner. Which would not work as the reason for the thicker body lies in the flange-sensor distance plus the electronics needed behind the sensor ( motherboard and LCD) and not in the rangefinder mechanism. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted May 12, 2014 Share #466 Posted May 12, 2014 Which would not work as the reason for the thicker body lies in the flange-sensor distance plus the electronics needed behind the sensor ( motherboard and LCD) and not in the rangefinder mechanism. The flange-sensor distance doesn't need to change. The dimension of Leica T shows that the body with all the electronics can be thinner. Yes, the lens mount may protrude a little (the way it is done in NEX, A7 etc. and in T with adaptor for M). My understanding is that the current mechanical linkage of RF keeps the body fat. If it had been elector-mechanical then the body could be thinner as T. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 12, 2014 Share #467 Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Which would not work as the reason for the thicker body lies in the flange-sensor distance plus the electronics needed behind the sensor ( motherboard and LCD) and not in the rangefinder mechanism. The flange to sensor distance should change and be as small as on other mirrorless cameras. An M adapter with electronic cam pickup could make up this distance. BTW I don't know how many are familiar with how focus by wire allows for various levels of manual focus precision. (When some AF lenses are used for manual focusing.) If you turn the ring very quickly the focus moves a larger amount than if you turn it slowly. I'm not saying for sure that the lenses should go this route but it may be an option if it works faster and better. Edited May 12, 2014 by AlanG Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted May 12, 2014 Share #468 Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) BTW, I also realize that M with T style thinner body is a non starter (for classic look). ... oh well... Edited May 12, 2014 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 12, 2014 Share #469 Posted May 12, 2014 The flange-sensor distance is a fixed value and the motherboard/LCD need at least 4 mm, so there is no wiggle room. An M adapter with electronic cam pickup could make up this distance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted May 12, 2014 Share #470 Posted May 12, 2014 I doubt there is a compact stepper motor with enough movement-resolution to work. Gears would be helpful, in that case. I could even think of a solid state solution, given today's resolution of cameras, sensors and displays. Insert small video cameras at fixed viewing angles at opposite ends of the body and have the user shift the images until the desired parts are aligned within the EVF. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted May 12, 2014 Share #471 Posted May 12, 2014 The flange-sensor distance is a fixed value and the motherboard/LCD need at least 4 mm, so there is no wiggle room. I think Alan is suggesting that the lens mount would be a de facto new mount altogether with a shorter flange to sensor distance. This new mount would work natively with new AF lenses and would work with 'legacy' M lenses via an adaptor to make up the difference in flange-sensor distance. In other words, pretty much an entirely new Frankenstein camera resembling a T camera with some kind of mechanical-electronic 'RF' bolted on. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 12, 2014 Share #472 Posted May 12, 2014 The flange-sensor distance is a fixed value and the motherboard/LCD need at least 4 mm, so there is no wiggle room. So how is it possible to use M lenses on the T? Same concept. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted May 12, 2014 Share #473 Posted May 12, 2014 So how is it possible to use M lenses on the T? The T isn’t a rangefinder? No coupling between lens and body required. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted May 12, 2014 Share #474 Posted May 12, 2014 I think Alan is suggesting that the lens mount would be a de facto new mount altogether with a shorter flange to sensor distance. This new mount would work natively with new AF lenses and would work with 'legacy' M lenses via an adaptor to make up the difference in flange-sensor distance. In other words, pretty much an entirely new Frankenstein camera resembling a T camera with some kind of mechanical-electronic 'RF' bolted on. Thankfully that won’t happen. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 12, 2014 Share #475 Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) I think Alan is suggesting that the lens mount would be a de facto new mount altogether with a shorter flange to sensor distance. This new mount would work natively with new AF lenses and would work with 'legacy' M lenses via an adaptor to make up the difference in flange-sensor distance. In other words, pretty much an entirely new Frankenstein camera resembling a T camera with some kind of mechanical-electronic 'RF' bolted on. Well the T already uses adapters for M lenses that transfer 6 bit coding electronically. So giving that adapter the ability to transmit distance information hardly seems crazy to me. And what is wrong with removable viewfinders and removable rangefinders? That is how early Leicas did it and now there are new advantages for that approach to be revived. If you want an M just for use with long R lenses or new AF long lenses, why would you need the optical viewfinder? The concept is to give the user a lot of choices. Leicas already have removable EVFs and removable optical viewfinders that are added on top of the cameras. I'm just suggesting refining this concept more to make all the viewfinders removable and better integrated and more sophisticated. E.g. why not still have a rangefinder patch inside ultra wide angle optical viewfinders? Leica surely has thought of improvements for the viewfinder over the past 60 years and this would be a way to implement them. Edited May 12, 2014 by AlanG Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted May 12, 2014 Share #476 Posted May 12, 2014 Because you dont take a simple tool that's accurate and works like a charm, introduce more complexity that you then call "sophisticated": It's bad engineering. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 12, 2014 Share #477 Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) Because you dont take a simple tool that's accurate and works like a charm, introduce more complexity that you then call "sophisticated": It's bad engineering. This is a new camera for the future, not the old one. They have to go somewhere eventually. The mechanical connection and its need for adjustment has limited precision and no way to compensate for specific characteristics of some lenses. Digital adjustment will make focusing more accurate. Edited May 12, 2014 by AlanG Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted May 12, 2014 Share #478 Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) Well the T already uses adapters for M lenses that transfer 6 bit coding electronically. So giving that adapter the ability to transmit distance information hardly seems crazy to me. And what is wrong with removable viewfinders and removable rangefinders? That is how early Leicas did it and now there are new advantages for that approach to be revived. If you want an M just for use with long R lenses or new AF long lenses, why would you need the optical viewfinder? The concept is to give the user a lot of choices. Leicas already have removable EVFs and removable optical viewfinders that are added on top of the cameras. I'm just suggesting refining this concept more to make all the viewfinders removable and better integrated and more sophisticated. E.g. why not still have a rangefinder patch inside ultra wide angle optical viewfinders? Leica surely has thought of improvements for the viewfinder over the past 60 years and this would be a way to implement them. like this? Leica take your idea and release F-mount. aka Frankenstein. Add 5 vf on a plate mounted on the top. it doesnt look essential 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! Edited May 12, 2014 by tomasis7 Quote 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/226415-leica-t-performs-digital-lens-correction-a-claim-by-dpreviewcom/?do=findComment&comment=2588845'>More sharing options...
AlanG Posted May 12, 2014 Share #479 Posted May 12, 2014 (edited) You do know that if you don't consider new possibilities, progress stops. There was a time when Leica did not consider the SLR, did not consider AF and was also behind technologically when digital came about. I think Leica is looking forward now and I am not saying my suggestion is the only way to go... just an option to consider if they want to go to a FF AF camera someday and still have some kind of focus coupling with the M lenses and optical viewfinder for new lenses. It will give Leica engineers the opportunity to see if they can advance the optical VF/RF in various ways (including having it zoom when changing lenses) and if successful this will help keep Leicas different from other cameras. Otherwise we have pretty much reached the end of rangefinder development. Consider that such an optical VF/RF could also work on the T in place of an EVF. So much of the development has been done already. They just need to make this device and add a focus sensor to the M adapter and voila, a rangefinder T for M and T lenses. Next would be to see if a FF model makes sense. Meanwhile the M can go on with basic upgrades as long as it sells well. There is not much else to do with it. That is probably why they developed the T. Edited May 12, 2014 by AlanG 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted May 12, 2014 Share #480 Posted May 12, 2014 This is a new camera for the future, not the old one. They have to go somewhere eventually. The mechanical connection and its need for adjustment has limited precision and no way to compensate for specific characteristics of some lenses. Digital adjustment will make focusing more accurate. Precision is not profit to try and increase it. Precision is as much as needed to do the job, and the job is done for the last 6 decades. The beauty of the M is it's VF and the fast responce RF 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.