jdlaing Posted December 8, 2015 Share #421 Posted December 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) 24mm fits the viewfinder window edge to edge. No frame lines needed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 8, 2015 Posted December 8, 2015 Hi jdlaing, Take a look here Leica M (Typ 262) - Reduction to Rangefinder Photography (at 1000 € less). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Exodies Posted December 8, 2015 Share #422 Posted December 8, 2015 How does parallax adjustment work with that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2015 Share #423 Posted December 8, 2015 Not for you. One should not impose one's own limitations on others. The rangefinder system as such works fine, up to and including the Apo-Telyt 135. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted December 8, 2015 Share #424 Posted December 8, 2015 External optical VF are medieval and a PITA to use. For you, yet again here we are extrapolating our own experiences and preferences to become universally applicable. Personally I am fond of an external VF especially for w i d e angle lenses. Having used the LTM Leica series (Barnack) extensively they are second nature. And see above comment. I am all in favour of sharing experience and advice but it does need qualifying or tempering, thankfully we are all different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2015 Share #425 Posted December 8, 2015 How does parallax adjustment work with that? 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253302-leica-m-typ-262-reduction-to-rangefinder-photography-at-1000-%E2%82%AC-less/?do=findComment&comment=2944865'>More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 8, 2015 Share #426 Posted December 8, 2015 Given the great acceptable dof and ability to work without having to worry about critical focussing, it can be hugely liberating to use an OVF with an ultra- wide lens. Pre-set your exposure or use A mode and with your usual photographic experience to guide you you'll find you have the ultimate P&S camera. Nothing will be easier of faster to use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 8, 2015 Share #427 Posted December 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Haha i was typing "brain" when i saw Jaap's image above. Funny that OVFs are not considered accurate enough by people asking for more megapixels in order to crop even more when they "compose" at home with their PC. Such people are not on the LUF of course! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 8, 2015 Share #428 Posted December 8, 2015 One should not impose one's own limitations on others. The rangefinder system as such works fine, up to and including the Apo-Telyt 135. One should not raise false expectations either. The fact Leica offers: - A 24mm external optical viewfinder - A 1.4x rangefinder magnifier, "recommended for focal lengths 75mm or more" (cited from Leica site) Should be enough for the average person to understand the RF limitations. Then again, this is for us normal people. Other forum users are free to use their special super-powers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted December 8, 2015 Share #429 Posted December 8, 2015 CheshireCat - Other forum users are free to use their special super-powers. The final clue -- The new SL = Super Leica, over and out - Superman.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 8, 2015 Share #430 Posted December 8, 2015 The final clue -- The new SL = Super Leica, over and out - Superman.. Wait for the next model, Superman ! I hear the SL body is made of Kryptonite, which limits your megapixel powers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2015 Share #431 Posted December 8, 2015 One should not raise false expectations either. The fact Leica offers: - A 24mm external optical viewfinder - A 1.4x rangefinder magnifier, "recommended for focal lengths 75mm or more" (cited from Leica site) Should be enough for the average person to understand the RF limitations. Then again, this is for us normal people. Other forum users are free to use their special super-powers. There is something wrong with the logic: Because I cannot the system cannot. Yes, Leica does offer a magnifier. Most users don't need it and quite a few don't even like it. If it were a necessity it would be standard equipment supplied with the relevant lenses. Now it is just an optional accessory, recommended from 75 mm upwards because, if one uses it on shorter lenses, one cannot see the framelines. Not recommended because Leica thinks it needed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 8, 2015 Share #432 Posted December 8, 2015 It's a while since I owned an M135, but the Elmarit-M 90 is one of the easiest of all lenses to focus accurately through the unassisted VF. It doesn't require any superpowers, and I rarely even have to put on my cape and exterior underpants to use it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted December 8, 2015 Share #433 Posted December 8, 2015 _1406_4.jpg In other words, start practising fifty years ago? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 8, 2015 Share #434 Posted December 8, 2015 Mmmm...the truth of the matter is a little unclear. Leica states that the shutter cocking mechanism of the 262 is quieter than that of the 240. But not why. Implicit is something different in the shutter mechanism itself. To me it matters little, since I find the 240/246 quiet enough anyway. The Blog link in the original post says that the cocking system is new, not that the 240 mechanism was tweaked. This was apparently done for speed, not merely sound. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted December 8, 2015 Share #435 Posted December 8, 2015 My guess is that behind the marketing language is the fact that when you run a semiconductor line, you get lots of chips and test them to see if they meet various speed and functional requirements. The ones that go fastest sell for the most, but there is a market for the slower ones as well. I question that. A chip either works, or it does not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted December 8, 2015 Share #436 Posted December 8, 2015 I question that. A chip either works, or it does not. If you google around you will see that is exactly how Intel and AMD rate their speed. They test the chip at different speeds and then select each one for the maximum speed it can reach. If all the chips pass they randomly select ones for the lower speeds. As yield is much better these days you often get a lower speed CPU which can be overclocked quite safely - an extensive hobby these days. Of course if the chip doesn't work its chucked back onto the beach Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 8, 2015 Share #437 Posted December 8, 2015 In other words, start practising fifty years ago?Indeed, that is what I did. However others may be quicker on the uptake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted December 8, 2015 Share #438 Posted December 8, 2015 I question that. A chip either works, or it does not. I remember the time when they sold 8k RAM chips where each one was either the top or the bottom half of a faulty 16k chip. The name on the case said whether you had to use the lower or the upper half of its address space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 8, 2015 Share #439 Posted December 8, 2015 I question that. A chip either works, or it does not. Yes, but how fast can it work is a different story. In any case, I don't think this has nothing to do with the M sensor. How much do you think the M sensor costs ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 8, 2015 Share #440 Posted December 8, 2015 Yes, but how fast can it work is a different story. In any case, I don't think this has nothing to do with the M sensor. How much do you think the M sensor costs ? $859.50 each. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.