guywalder Posted May 16, 2007 Share #41 Posted May 16, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) gee what is it with LUF and resistance to change!? The M3 had a more practical compromise regarding framing than the M8, and that was 50 years ago And from Leica themselves. That said I sympathise with Marc's interest in keeping the M simple. In fact, since I find the M8's whole on-board picture review capability so-so (compared to what is already available elsewhere) I find myself warming to the idea of paring it down even further. How about reducing the number of buttons, dials and levers, reduce the screen size, protect it better, even make it B&W (to check a full size histogram and framing, when essential), and make all the buttons user programable via pc, similar to what Nikon started with the F5. Each user could make the review as simple or as complex as they want! OK, ok! Leica and software, maybe a bad idea after all, but a nice dream... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 16, 2007 Posted May 16, 2007 Hi guywalder, Take a look here The next M3. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gravastar Posted May 16, 2007 Share #42 Posted May 16, 2007 ........................Similarly, the electronical finder frames, in order to move and change size smoothly, would require another optical zoom system. There are not many cubic millimetres left unused inside the M8. Would you love a much larger camera? Like the M5? Let's face it, we are not talking about a bigger and better home TV................................. The beauty of electronic variable frame lines is that it would probably make more room in the camera. To do this you would replace the mechanically switched frame line masks with a single fixed wafer thin transmissive LCD. That could have a sufficient number of closely spaced frame "slots" to make a zooming frame possible. You could dispense with all the mechanical linkages from lens bayonet to masks associated with the original system. Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
howard_cummer Posted May 16, 2007 Share #43 Posted May 16, 2007 I don't think you can mess with the frame lines very much and retain the character of the M - but you could put in a live view CCD and have that as an option for accurate framing. It works very well on the Digilux 3 and the Lumix L1 as well as the Olympus 330E Howard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted May 16, 2007 Author Share #44 Posted May 16, 2007 There are things that can be profitably improved in the M8. Sure. But dreaming about feats of magic does not get us anywhere. Real improvements will be implemented in the electronic hardware – eventually. And then we will probably even be able to upgrade, like in the old days when a Leica I could be successively upgraded to a Leica I interchangeable – Leica II – Leica IIIa – even one with IIIf flash sync a quarter of a century later. That sort of thing did happen! Anything that would change the footprint of the camera would be of course unacceptable (unless it made the camera more compact). While in the switch from III to M the camera grew in volume, the M5 was a step to far. I don't think anyone need be concerned that Leica will repeat that fiasco. I am not going to comment on the practicality of the engineering as I haven't a clue. The beauty of electronic variable frame lines is that it would probably make more room in the camera. To do this you would replace the mechanically switched frame line masks with a single fixed wafer thin transmissive LCD. That could have a sufficient number of closely spaced frame "slots" to make a zooming frame possible. You could dispense with all the mechanical linkages from lens bayonet to masks associated with the original system. This sounds interesting but I defer to real engineers on the subject of what is possible. I understand users concern about having a good thing screwed up, but no one expresses concern or horror when Leica announces they will be replacing an outstanding and popular lens with an improved design. They have not messed with the finder (except for some ill concieved cost cutting measures with the M6) because it still has no competition and I would assume that the old prototype improved finder now up for auction either decreased reliability or was to costly to produce. Should any of what I have proposed be possible within the space available I am sure Leica will not implement it if it decreased reliability or increased costs. I am also sure as they have done with the M8 that they will strive to maintain the look and feel of the film M's. Some may be able to compensate with dead accuracy for the innaccuracies in crop and parralax of every lens they own. But judging from comments I've heard from other long time users (I bought my first used M4 at Olden in NY in the early 70's) online and in person the approximate nature of the framing is not considered a 'feature' but rather a weakness of the system that we live with because the benifits of the M finder far outweigh the drawbacks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4season Posted May 16, 2007 Share #45 Posted May 16, 2007 The Fuji GA645zi had a zooming finder with glowing electronic framelines, and it was pretty good, but not really a make-or-break thing as far as I was concerned. In the M8, a live histogram display in the finder might be far more useful for me: It tells much more than a simple "> o <" ever could. This was one of the nicer features of the Digilux 2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted May 16, 2007 Author Share #46 Posted May 16, 2007 The Fuji GA645zi had a zooming finder with glowing electronic framelines, and it was pretty good, but not really a make-or-break thing as far as I was concerned. In the M8, a live histogram display in the finder might be far more useful for me: It tells much more than a simple "> o <" ever could. This was one of the nicer features of the Digilux 2. I am not proposing a zooming finder. That would kill the transparent 'nothing between you and the subject' ideal of the M RF finder. The optical view would be static. The frame lines would 'zoom' but the movement and size change of the framelines would be slight. If this could not be done smoothly so it is not a distraction then it would not work. The lines should not look like a glowing video game console either but be similar if not finer then the current lines. I am loathe to crop anything away from a shot and don't like allowing for a margin of safety when framing. The more accuracy the better providing the user experience does not change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted May 16, 2007 Share #47 Posted May 16, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) In the meantime, I'd still be interested in having Leica release an M8 a la carte option (also available as a retro fit) that set the frame lines to be accurate at about 5 feet or so. That could be done without new technology and I'm going to discuss it with them soon. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted May 16, 2007 Author Share #48 Posted May 16, 2007 In the meantime, I'd still be interested in having Leica release an M8 a la carte option (also available as a retro fit) that set the frame lines to be accurate at about 5 feet or so. That could be done without new technology and I'm going to discuss it with them soon. Cheers, Sean Where is the point of focus set for the M8 now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted May 16, 2007 Share #49 Posted May 16, 2007 Where is the point of focus set for the M8 now? The frames are said to be accurate at the closest point that each lens will focus. Since there are a lot of lenses now focusing down to 0.7m, that means that the expanded field of view at 10 m is quite significantly outside the frame for lenses with 50mm or greater focal lengths. It's more than the one or two frame line widths that you sometimes hear suggested. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted May 16, 2007 Author Share #50 Posted May 16, 2007 The frames are said to be accurate at the closest point that each lens will focus. Since there are a lot of lenses now focusing down to 0.7m, that means that the expanded field of view at 10 m is quite significantly outside the frame for lenses with 50mm or greater focal lengths. It's more than the one or two frame line widths that you sometimes hear suggested. scott Well they can have only one set point for each focal length and the new 50/1.4 focuses closer then the previous model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.