johnbuckley Posted September 29, 2015 Share #1321 Posted September 29, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Estragon, sitting on a low mound, is trying to take off his boot. He pulls at it with both hands, panting. # He gives up, exhausted, rests, tries again. As before. Enter Vladimir. ESTRAGON: (giving up again). Nothing to be done. VLADIMIR: (advancing with short, stiff strides, legs wide apart). I'm beginning to come round to that opinion. All my life I've tried to put it from me, saying Vladimir, be reasonable, you haven't yet tried everything. And I resumed the struggle. (He broods, musing on the struggle. Turning to Estragon.) So there you are again. ESTRAGON: Am I? VLADIMIR: I'm glad to see you back. I thought you were gone forever. ESTRAGON: Me too. VLADIMIR: Together again at last! We'll have to celebrate this. But how? (He reflects.) Get up till I embrace you. ESTRAGON: (irritably). Not now, not now. VLADIMIR: (hurt, coldly). May one inquire where His Highness spent the night? ESTRAGON: In a ditch. VLADIMIR: (admiringly). A ditch! Where? ESTRAGON: (without gesture). Over there. VLADIMIR: And they didn't beat you? ESTRAGON: Beat me? Certainly they beat me. VLADIMIR: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 29, 2015 Posted September 29, 2015 Hi johnbuckley, Take a look here NEW M.. This year.. This Fall.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter Kilmister Posted September 29, 2015 Share #1322 Posted September 29, 2015 "Back soon, Godot." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted September 29, 2015 Share #1323 Posted September 29, 2015 Only if it's affordable and competitive in terms of size and features compared to an A7, i.e. lenses around the $2000 mark, body around the $3000 mark. I think that is wishful thinking........The only thing that I have seen around 2 to $3k from Leica is a camera strap or 1/2 case :) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 29, 2015 Share #1324 Posted September 29, 2015 It is interesting to see you have migrated back to the M forum on this subject. What do you know that we don't? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freitz Posted September 29, 2015 Share #1325 Posted September 29, 2015 It is interesting to see you have migrated back to the M forum on this subject. What do you know that we don't? MjH? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 29, 2015 Share #1326 Posted September 29, 2015 Neil D. He proceeded to the S side in a rather public manner. We can assume MJH knows quite a few things we don't know. But he won't be telling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted September 29, 2015 Share #1327 Posted September 29, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is also about image quality. Digital corrections are a new tool in a lens designers toolbox and a good lens designer will use whatever tool does the best job in achieving some objective. Declaring digital corrections taboo is not a rational position. Unless of course one designs lenses for analogue cameras where digital corrections are not an option. Leica has a lot of experience in grinding complex aspherical surfaces and I suppose an additional aspherical surface would go down well with traditionalists. But aspherical lenses can create issues of their own, such as second-order aberrations and a less than pleasing bokeh. Each tool has its pros and cons and these should be evaluated carefully rather than excluding useful tools for purely ideological reasons. I am very happy to accept firmware corrections as tools for the lens designer, so long as the collateral damage from those digital corrections is not nearly of the magnitude that is plainly obvious in the peripheral areas of the Q files. Jono makes a shrewd comment that the M 240 certainly makes digital corrections to help M lenses. I hope that such a level of firmware disturbance of the raw image is the ceiling of the SL Maestro. This seems an entirely logical position, IMHO, just as the realization that FWD (front wheel drive) is a poor bargain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1328 Posted September 30, 2015 It is interesting to see you have migrated back to the M forum on this subject. What do you know that we don't? Correct Jaap........I did pop over to see how the peasants in the M forum were gettiing on and at the same time I am interested in getting the new SL as its doing my head in lugging that monster of a S around with me all the time. Not really peasants..............love you all long time :) Neil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1329 Posted September 30, 2015 How is Leica's EVF. I had one for my M (240) I think that's what it was............... and it sucked Terrible. I haven't had a chance to look through the EVF on the Q but I believe that one is much better. Hopefully the SL will have something special up its sleeve that will blow us all away. Suggest YOU decide if the Q EVF is any good instead of asking for internet opinions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1330 Posted September 30, 2015 Suggest YOU decide if the Q EVF is any good instead of asking for internet opinions. Would if I could but in KL there is a 3 month waiting list................plus as we all know the internet is a great resource Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1331 Posted September 30, 2015 That seems harsh. They did get the bit right about there being a new camera this year! Dahhh. Anyone could have said that 3 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1332 Posted September 30, 2015 Would if I could but in KL there is a 3 month waiting list................plus as we all know the internet is a great resource FWIW, I think the Q EVF is superb, the best I have used. When I picked up my camera earlier this year I turned it on and looked through the finder. Then I turned the camera around to the front to look for the finder window; I was thinking it must be a rangefinder. It is not, and it is not like looking through an optical view/rangefinder but it is very good for an EVF. The way I use it often is to set it for 35mm. Then I am looking through a finder with 35mm framelines and can see around them. It is the closest you can come today to an optical finder IMHO. I hope when the new M comes out it has as good an add on EVF as the Q's internal one. I would also be willing to use a Q type finder built in to an M-type body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1333 Posted September 30, 2015 Would if I could but in KL there is a 3 month waiting list................plus as we all know the internet is a great resource Can't believe you have not tried one at a Leica dealer by now so I will stop this BS with you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1334 Posted September 30, 2015 Correct Jaap........I did pop over to see how the peasants in the M forum were gettiing on and at the same time I am interested in getting the new SL as its doing my head in lugging that monster of a S around with me all the time. We know that couldn't be true....as you noted just a few months ago.... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/246666-trading-in-all-my-leica-m-gear-for-a-new-leica-s/?p=2838928 Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1335 Posted September 30, 2015 We know that couldn't be true....as you noted just a few months ago.... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/246666-trading-in-all-my-leica-m-gear-for-a-new-leica-s/?p=2838928 Jeff Jeff its heavy. It takes unbelievably fantastic pictures but its heavy. I now need something a wee bitty smaller with AF for walking around town........... The SL seems like it could fill that gap Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlesL Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1336 Posted September 30, 2015 ...As things stand I can focus optically on a single leaf on a tree and know exactly what I am focussed on ........ I cannot see how any digital system could offer this degree of clarity and precision... I do this sort of thing on Fuji X cameras because the EVF can display 3x/10x magnification. It is manual focus of a digital system. The EVF on the Leica Q uses the highest resolution currently available, far more than the EVFs on current Fuji X cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1337 Posted September 30, 2015 Jeff its heavy. It takes unbelievably fantastic pictures but its heavy. I now need something a wee bitty smaller with AF for walking around town........... The SL seems like it could fill that gap Hi Neil, I thought you said when we asked you before you first bought into the S system that you were a big muscular guy and the S would be no weight whatsoever? ;-) Regards, Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1338 Posted September 30, 2015 Hi Neil, I thought you said when we asked you before you first bought into the S system that you were a big muscular guy and the S would be no weight whatsoever? ;-) Regards, Mark Been on a diet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1339 Posted September 30, 2015 Jeff its heavy. It takes unbelievably fantastic pictures but its heavy. I now need something a wee bitty smaller with AF for walking around town........... The SL seems like it could fill that gap I distinctly recall you biting my head off for saying just that not too long ago... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted September 30, 2015 Share #1340 Posted September 30, 2015 it's apparently the AF mechanism, motor etc. which makes the lenses big . . . . Let's not forget that some of the best autofocus lenses ever made, the Contax G series, were notably small and light. The bulking up of digital era lenses is almost certainly driven primarily by optical rather than AF issues. A lot of people here have dismissed the Sony A7 series on the basis of the supposedly large size of the lenses, so it will be interesting to see how they respond to the new Leica lenses which I suspect (and presumably you know) will be at least as big as their Sony/Zeiss equivalents. You can see the same thing happening in the DSLR world - pretty much every Canon updated lens, like the new 35mm f1.4, has a larger/longer form than its film era predecessor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.