lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #181 Posted August 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Don't worry, you will still be able to use the new camera completely manually, just like your beloved M. [...] I'm afraid not... No optical RF anymore... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Hi lct, Take a look here NEW M.. This year.. This Fall.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #182 Posted August 6, 2015 [...] the accuracy for longer focal lengths by the baseline of the RF windows, so that would be no different from an optical system either. Unless the electronic RF can work with image magnification. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 6, 2015 Share #183 Posted August 6, 2015 That would only magnify the inaccuracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 6, 2015 Share #184 Posted August 6, 2015 I'm afraid not... No optical RF anymore... I think the proposed system, after some grumbling by grumpy old users like you and me, would be accepted as being a superior type of rangefinder. Although we might get excited posts about rangefinder lag in the forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #185 Posted August 6, 2015 That would only magnify the inaccuracy. Are you sure? This could work like the goggles of the Elmarit 135 no? Higher magnification = higher RF accuracy for both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkonkkrete Posted August 6, 2015 Share #186 Posted August 6, 2015 I think there will be an optical viewfinder with electronically superimposed RF for manually focussing classic M lenses in a way that feels practically identical to the current optical RF, just implemented electronically rather than mechanically. The only disadvantage would be that you can't (visually) focus without turning the camera on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #187 Posted August 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think the proposed system, after some grumbling by grumpy old users like you and me, would be accepted as being a superior type of rangefinder. Although we might get excited posts about rangefinder lag in the forum. And lesser performances of the electronic RF in low light perhaps... I will stay tuned as a grumpy old user you can trust me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkonkkrete Posted August 6, 2015 Share #188 Posted August 6, 2015 Or maybe superior performance of the electronic RF in low light Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #189 Posted August 6, 2015 Or maybe superior performance of the electronic RF in low light Low light = noise. Not good for RF accuracy but i have no idea really. We shall see... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 6, 2015 Share #190 Posted August 6, 2015 Are you sure? This could work like the goggles of the Elmarit 135 no? Higher magnification = higher RF accuracy for both. The goggles optically lengthen the baseline for more accuracy by magnifying before the rangefinder merges the images . An electronic magnification will magnify after the measurement. The same way a magnifier eyepiece will make the RF patch easier to see, but not more accurate as such. (remark subject to review by optical experts ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe1888 Posted August 6, 2015 Share #191 Posted August 6, 2015 Not sure we're talking about the same thing. The electronic rf still uses the main ovf, so there is still vf blockage, and inaccurate frames, and no exposure preview. If you're talking about an EVF based camera, then yes, I would like to have one to use side by side with the classic M. But in terms of electronic rf, I would still prefer the good old way It's a hybrid viewfinder. You can switch between optical and electronic viewfinder. Both provide rangefinder focusing. In optical mode the optical image superimpose with the little sensor image (next to the letter "M"). If the viewfinder pixels are little enough, there is no visual difference to the viewfinder of the M240, and there is no benefit when using the OVF only. The EVF mode uses three images: 1. main sensor, 2. little sensor next to letter "M", 3. little sensor next to viewfinder. Picture 2. and 3. are superimposed and embeded as a little rectangular in an image that fills the whole viewfinder. That mixes the benefits of rangefinder focus and EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #192 Posted August 6, 2015 The goggles optically lengthen the baseline for more accuracy by magnifying before the rangefinder merges the images . An electronic magnification will magnify after the measurement. The same way a magnifier eyepiece will make the RF patch easier to see, but not more accurate as such. (remark subject to review by optical eapert ) I won't follow you on that. As i understand it, magnification is a factor of RF accuracy no matter how it works. So the magnifier eyepiece you refer to does enhance magnification hence RF accuracy the same way as 135 goggles. Subject to the same review of course... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted August 6, 2015 Share #193 Posted August 6, 2015 The goggles optically lengthen the baseline for more accuracy by magnifying before the rangefinder merges the images . An electronic magnification will magnify after the measurement. The same way a magnifier eyepiece will make the RF patch easier to see, but not more accurate as such. (remark subject to review by optical experts ) That would depend on what exactly you magnify. Depending on the resolution of the two "image receptors" (the two auxiliary cameras used for the RF), you could magnify those images before correlating them. Consider the resolution of the cameras built into phones and the cost of those components. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #194 Posted August 6, 2015 [...] In optical mode the optical image superimpose with the little sensor image (next to the letter "M"). If the viewfinder pixels are little enough, there is no visual difference to the viewfinder of the M240, and there is no benefit when using the OVF only. [...] Unless those little pixels are not fast enough to display and/or show too much digital noise... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted August 6, 2015 Share #195 Posted August 6, 2015 The frames might be more accurate as the Bildfeldschwund can be programmed in. However, the angle of view for wideangles is determined by the optical viewfinder and the accuracy for longer focal lengths by the baseline of the RF windows, so that would be no different from an optical system either.Exactly! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted August 6, 2015 Share #196 Posted August 6, 2015 Unless those little pixels are not fast enough to display and/or show too much digital noise... I don't think we should expect the display technology to produce an EVF which can not be told from an OFV within the next few years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #197 Posted August 6, 2015 Exactly! I'm afraid not. RF accuracy depends on the effective base length of the RF i.e. its mechanical base length multiplied by magnification. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted August 6, 2015 Share #198 Posted August 6, 2015 It's a hybrid viewfinder. You can switch between optical and electronic viewfinder. Both provide rangefinder focusing. In optical mode the optical image superimpose with the little sensor image (next to the letter "M"). If the viewfinder pixels are little enough, there is no visual difference to the viewfinder of the M240, and there is no benefit when using the OVF only. The EVF mode uses three images: 1. main sensor, 2. little sensor next to letter "M", 3. little sensor next to viewfinder. Picture 2. and 3. are superimposed and embeded as a little rectangular in an image that fills the whole viewfinder. That mixes the benefits of rangefinder focus and EVF. Somehow I don't think Leica will implement this. Just my gut feeling. If they do, they would definitely not phase out the classic model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 6, 2015 Share #199 Posted August 6, 2015 Somehow I don't think Leica will implement this. Just my gut feeling. If they do, they would definitely not phase out the classic model. Not phasing out the classic model could be the expected aim of such a move as well... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted August 6, 2015 Share #200 Posted August 6, 2015 I'm afraid not. RF accuracy depends on the effective base length of the RF i.e. its mechanical base length multiplied by magnification. Indeed you're right, but what I'm agreeing with is that ultimately it works the same as an analog rangefinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.