Jump to content

Rumor: Leica to Announce Digital Rangefinder Without an LCD Screen at Photokina


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 164
  • Created
  • Last Reply
What is that picture supposed to demonstrate?

I suppose it demonstrates that a digital camera with a flange distance of 18.0 mm doesn’t need to be much deeper than a film-based camera with a flange distance of 27.8 mm. <yawn>

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, coming back to the original rumour, it is of course quite possible to visualise a camera with just a battery display and frame counter. The rest can be done through Bluetooth on a smartphone.

The real question is: will anybody (Leica) have the courage to build it and would there be enough people buying it? I might be tempted...

 

 

I'm sorry Jaap, to me that sounds like crap. I mean such a camera. :p

I don't have the option when shooting film, but when I take my M240 with me I regularly switch iso. And what if my phone ran out of juice? Or what if I forgot to take my phone with me? Stuck with iso 200 for the day?

With 64GB cards costing next to nothing I really don't care about the frame counter. It's impossible for me to fill that card within a day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Notice on the A7 about 2/3 of the body thickness is behind the focal plane index marked on the top. On a film M body the FP mark is very near the back of the body. So for comparison it should by the thickness of an A7 plus an M adapter on the front.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry Jaap, to me that sounds like crap. I mean such a camera. :p

I don't have the option when shooting film, but when I take my M240 with me I regularly switch iso. And what if my phone ran out of juice? Or what if I forgot to take my phone with me? Stuck with iso 200 for the day?

With 64GB cards costing next to nothing I really don't care about the frame counter. It's impossible for me to fill that card within a day.

 

ISO change was the dial at the back, remember ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it demonstrates that a digital camera with a flange distance of 18.0 mm doesn’t need to be much deeper than a film-based camera with a flange distance of 27.8 mm. <yawn>

 

Uh ?

When I use a Leica-R adapter, my NEX flange distance is 47 mm.

Yet the body remains much thinner than the M's. Black magic ? :eek::p

Link to post
Share on other sites

The NEX-7, for instance, is a bit deeper than the M, measured from flange to display.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2599264-post37.html

 

Apart from the biased comparison (the other side of the NEX7, much thinner, is not shown in the pictures), this demonstrates that regardless of flange distance, it is the industrial design of the body that really matters. You don't handle the camera by the mount.

 

Leica's M bodies are in desperate need of a "remodel".

They did a good job with the T, now it is the M turn.

Now, even with a T to M adapter, anyone will admit the T body is much thinner than the fat M Typ 240. And yet the flange distance is the same and the T has a nice LCD.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should I ? I don't handle the camera by the adapter.

 

 

The registry distance is made up by the adaptor. It's not a valid comparison to compare a thin body with an adaptor to one with the right registry distance built in

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the grounds of comparison. As far as ergonomics are concerned, i prefer holding my thinner X-E2 with an adapter than my M240 without one. I don't forget that the latter is a full frame camera though so i just hope that the next M will be thinner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lunch time brainwave.... Solution to camera thickness issue :)

(range finder mechanism thickness is a separate story).

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

Lunch time brainwave.... Solution to camera thickness issue :)

(range finder mechanism thickness is a separate story).

 

Love the brainwave ;)

But I am afraid the double mirror will introduce light loss, aberrations, and calibration issues :(

 

Keep it simple.

There is no need for the entire camera body to be thicker than the flange distance. Flange distance only matters for the lens mount segment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the brainwave ;)

But I am afraid the double mirror will introduce light loss, aberrations, and calibration issues :(

 

Keep it simple.

There is no need for the entire camera body to be thicker than the flange distance. Flange distance only matters for the lens mount segment.

 

Of course. It was simply a joke. :) (since M thickness issue keeps popping up)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...