Jump to content

No Autofocus with M Lenses


Stevez4

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There is no autofocus function when using M lenses.  I have just tried out the camera.  Focus is quick and accurate. Focus peaking better. But no autofocus.

 

Is it worth the price and  the weight?  

 

I am sure this is a joke? Starting a thread making a point out of this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's debateable, a Nikon starts to sound cheap at £2.39 per gram, so you need to ask yourself if you need all the benefits of upgrading to £5.90 per gram.

 

 

Steve

 

you are right, or we can go other way. Instead of weight that really is not so important we go for the cost of each picture we take (usable or not). Price of the camera is USD 7,450 (just body) and they promise at least 200K actuations. Thats .037 per shoot. Compare with the 5DMIII (USD 2800 and 150K Actuations) @ .018 USD per shoot.

Edited by fcomarin69
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually this has got me thinking.  The M lenses are coupled internally to the RF mechanism on the M, so that moving the focus ring moves physical mechanisms inside the camera, right?

 

So...Is there any reason why that mechanisms could not in principle be inverted and motorised?  So that internal to the camera a motor would move the coupling mechanism and thereby adjust the focus ring of the lens?  Perhaps it would require too much torque to be practical.  Sorry if this idea has been discussed before, and already debunked.

 

Curious to hear your thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.... So...Is there any reason why that mechanisms could not in principle be inverted and motorised?  So that internal to the camera a motor would move the coupling mechanism and thereby adjust the focus ring of the lens?  ...

Take the lens off your M and have a look at the coupling mechanism. Chances are that the inverted mechanism would push the lens out of the socket.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

...or cost per photo that's a keeper.  

 

So the first one with an SL and 24-90 cost $13K.

By the 100th photo that's a keeper each one cost $130

By the 1000th photo that's a keeper only $13.

 

...a bargain!

 

:rolleyes:

 

We could shoot large format transparencies for that $.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Kkonkkrete,

 

Actually Hasselblad did that a while ago to automate the diaphrams on some of its lenses for the cameras in the 500 Series.

 

These mechanisms made the lenses larger & more bulky. With today's advances in mechanical miniaturatization it might be possible to do this in a somewhat more elegant manner than these Hasselblad lenses.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We could shoot large format transparencies for that $.

We could improve on that rate by shooting keepers only. You begin. :D

 

Actually Hasselblad did that a while ago to automate the diaphrams on some of its lenses for the cameras in the 500 Series.

Nikon did that as well with the F2. If I recall that correctly, they merely turned the aperture ring with a motor and a friction wheel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So...Is there any reason why that mechanisms could not in principle be inverted and motorised?  So that internal to the camera a motor would move the coupling mechanism and thereby adjust the focus ring of the lens?  Perhaps it would require too much torque to be practical.  Sorry if this idea has been discussed before, and already debunked.

 

I'm not even sure it is possible to turn the lens focussing mechanism by pushing on the cam, no matter how much force was applied. It sounds like an incredibly inefficient transfer of energy that will most likely result in simply distorting the material (brass?) of the lens focussing cam.

Edited by wattsy
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chances are that the inverted mechanism would push the lens out of the socket.

 

Or perhaps explode out of the back of the camera (removing the photographer's head in the process). :D  (Not actually sure if that's possible – Newton's 3rd law and all that – but it sounds suitably dramatic).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

[........................]

So...Is there any reason why that mechanisms could not in principle be inverted and motorised?  So that internal to the camera a motor would move the coupling mechanism and thereby adjust the focus ring of the lens? [...................]

Curious to hear your thoughts.

Yes, unfortunately, some mechanical transmission system are not reversible, definitively. ;)

Edited by papimuzo
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...