Is R10 or a brand new Digital-R coming ?

[EH21]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Going back to AF...

If Leica develops AF it will be worthless unless its got selectable points and quite a few of them not just 3 or 5. You can not focus and recompose and still expect your subject to be sharp and so a center point is not going to cut it unless you like having your subject smack in the middle of your image. I've been playing with a rollei 6008 AF camera. The Rollei has 3 AF sensor spots which all are essentially right in the center. It's totally slow and worthless. It's way easier to MF on that camera. If Leica comes out with autofocus, I sure hope it has multi selectable points. Otherwise it better have a switch to turn it off.

[wlaidlaw]

Eric,

 

I agree, having had cameras with good and bad AF. The Contax G2, whilst super accurate (long base single axis phase detection system) was hopelessly fussy about picking up a focus, needing strong, unequally spaced vertical elements on a landscape image and horizontal ones on a portrait image. The systems on the Sony R1 and Nikon D200 are excellent, particularly the Nikon both in its performance, cleverness and user selectability. If the R10 system is as good or better than the Nikon, I would not be complaining. With the state of current technology no AF system is going to be perfect but then neither is my manual focusing on the M8. I was trying to take some pics yesterday inside Aix en Provence cathedral and the light was just not good enough for me to get perfect focus with the Nokton wide open. I have binned most of them. A really good AF system might have done better.

 

Wilson

[sdai]

AF is not rocket science these days ... what challenges Canon and Nikon is the continuous focusing accuracy under high speed which is not expected in the case of a R.

 

What we need is a properly arranged array of sensor with a mixture of cross type, horizontal and vertical sensors ... and a AF lock button. If they can manage to have 5 to 9 cross type sensors, that'll be more than sufficient.

[EH21]

The problem is that with a shallow DOF that wonderful Leica glass provides, one can not focus with a center point and then recompose the image before taking the shot. The focus needs to be done with the AF point on the subject with the framing for the composition. That's why my Rollei AF is mostly useless - who wants the subject smack in the center every time? So I'd hate it if Leica just adds something like that. They would need many points spread out over the frame and a means to quickly select which point to use. My (Canon 1Ds had 40 something points and that was just enough to use properly with their shallow DOF 85mm f/1.2 and 135 f/2.0 lenses) If not, then they may as well just leave it out and put the money into a better viewfinder or higher image quality.

 

I'm thinking that anyone that's serious about moving subjects such as sports will be buying the 1Ds III or new nikon anyhow so I don't feel that this would be a requirement for Leica. In fact if they could increase the viewfinder size I don't think they would need AF at all. But if they are going to do it, they'd better not do half the job.

[sdai]

The problem is that with a shallow DOF that wonderful Leica glass provides, one can not focus with a center point and then recompose the image before taking the shot. The focus needs to be done with the AF point on the subject with the framing for the composition. That's why my Rollei AF is mostly useless - who wants the subject smack in the center every time?

 

That's not hard at all, all we'll need is a really high sensitivity cross type sensor (one decent sensor in the middle is enough ) then you press the AF-L button and recompose. Even the budget Sony A700 can have a double cross sensor in the middle now.

 

I'm not familiar with the 6008 but with the Contax 645 and Hassie H, there's no problem working with those fast primers and shallow DoF at all ... the Hassie even gives you a focus aid LED display whether your focus point falls in front of or behind the object.

[telyt]

That's not hard at all, all we'll need is a really high sensitivity cross type sensor (one decent sensor in the middle is enough ) then you press the AF-L button and recompose. Even the budget Sony A700 can have a double cross sensor in the middle now.

 

Focus-Lock-Recompose is unreliable with shallow DOF. Even Canon admits this.

[EH21]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Doug,

You are correct. I'm not sure where people are learning that technique but its not going to work for anything close even with the lens stopped down. Sdai, you should try it out - focus recompose does not work with a center point for most real life situations unless you are shooting wide angle lenses totally stopped down. But who buys leica glass to shoot at min aperture? Most of leica lenses are at their best wide open.

 

With my Canon 1Ds, I did enjoy being able to set the focus point I wanted for the composition and place it on the model's eye and get a sharp image. But this is hopeless in the field when things are moving fast and you can't plan out your shots in time. I'm sure that's why some people actually prefer MF because when you get good, you can catch more moments that way than by trying to adjust which focus point the camera will use. I did get pretty fast with the canon but I think MF would be faster still. Plus even if you select the point in the frame that would fall on the eye, it doesn't mean the camera will focus on the eye instead of a bit of hair or the ear or the nose for example.

 

For AF to be really useful it has to be multipoint (like 30-50 points) and the makers have to provide a quick way to select the point you want to function without taking your away from the viewfinder. I would hate it to see Leica add AF function such as a center point only just to be able to market it that way. Laymen might not know the difference but seasoned users will know its BS and prefer a big bright viewfinder so they can do the job themselves. It's actually going to be quicker and more intuitive anyway.

 

I've never used but hear about the canon eos-3 that had some sort of device that could detect what your eye was focusing on and set that in the camera. Don't know if it ever worked but that would be cool!

Eric

[jrc]

Focus-Lock-Recompose is unreliable with shallow DOF. Even Canon admits this.

 

All recompose is unreliable with shallow depth of field, including rangefinder. The problem is not that you can't get focus, the problem is the moving subject or the moving camera; if nothing is moving, then it's not a problem with either system. A rangefinder is simply a mechanical center-spot-focus, and if you did a controlled test, I'd bet you'd find that a guy who was good with a Nikon could shoot a series of focused/recomposed photos faster than a guy who was good with a Leica. Not that that means much -- but the key in this argument is technique, not equipment. You have to learn to recompose with some celerity.

 

JC

[telyt]

.. but the key in this argument is technique, not equipment. You have to learn to recompose with some celerity.

 

 

My subjects fidget far too much to rely on F-L-R. If I don't focus as-composed I either get mis-focussed pictures or miss the picture entirely. I have 40 years' experience with these subjects BTW, I doubt my technique is the problem. Canon agrees.

[Likaleica]

Wow! Nice photograph, Doug. Well-composed, light perfect. Everything spot on.

 

I agree. I went from R8 + 400mm apo-telyt to Nikon D2X and 200-400 f/4 zoom in the hopes of getting more shots in focus. WRONG! My best photos have been done with manual focus, either Leica or Hasselblad with 300 f2.8 apo lens.

 

Am thinking of going DMR/R9 combo, but the heft of the DMR causes me to pause. Sounds like you use SL2 and DMR. Do you ever find the DMR too bulky? It almost seems like a Hasselblad would be lighter!

[telyt]

Do you ever find the DMR too bulky?

 

yes, but I love the image quality, and there aren't many lenses for the Hasselblad that will give me the 560's angle of view on the DMR.

 

BTW Tim, are you the fellow I bought my 1.4x APO-Extender from? I'm delighted with it.

[Likaleica]

I had to check my records, but yes, back in December 04. I am glad it went to such an accomplished photographer as yourself, despite the fact that I regret that I sold it!!

 

Leica lures me back. I kept most of my stuff and did not want to "go there" with the DMR, but all the comments on all the forums and from owners I know makes me think DMR is the way to go (unless and until an R10 arrives).

 

Your work is magnificent.

[EH21]

I'm still missing focus on some images compared to my 1Ds and selective focus, but I'm consistently getting better with it. I really prefer the files from the leica/dmr and definitely look forward to a newer R body with more pixels and hopefully bigger sensor and bigger viewfinder. I never felt the weight of the r8/dmr was a problem.

[sdai]

Focus-Lock-Recompose is unreliable with shallow DOF. Even Canon admits this.

 

After spending 18 hours straight in my office, I'm now too tired to argue on any subject ... especially when you're mostly right.

 

Just some quick thought ... Canon users have no need to practice FLR, now with the 1D3, there's one cross type sensor in the middle, 8 in the inner circle and 10 surrounding the frame edges, and I'm turning on Cn 3-8 ... so when I switch across these cross type sensors using the thumb wheel, surrounding none cross type sensors are activated as well.

 

Now it's time to go to the hotel next door ... 5 hours later, I should be at my desk again. Folks, this is how a good citizen manages to pay for a R10 ... and I don't blame it's too expensive, good stuff never come cheap. Good night.

[telyt]

Tim, I'm not sure if this will help or hurt (your wallet) but I wrote a summary of my first year with the DMR, you can read it at http://tinyurl.com/2ftz6o

[mjh]

All recompose is unreliable with shallow depth of field, including rangefinder. The problem is not that you can't get focus, the problem is the moving subject or the moving camera; if nothing is moving, then it's not a problem with either system.

It’s not just moving subjects – with focus-and-recompose, your focusing will always be at least slightly off, which will bite you unless the depth of field is deep enough to mask the focusing error.

[wlaidlaw]

It’s not just moving subjects – with focus-and-recompose, your focusing will always be at least slightly off, which will bite you unless the depth of field is deep enough to mask the focusing error.

 

Michael,

 

I don't see why it should unless you are swaying backwards or forwards a lot. I was using my brother's D200 last month with the 85/1.4 AF Nikkor and was having no problems at all with focus and recompose. This was somewhat to my dismay, as I had been extolling the virtues and advantages of MF on my M8 and saying how I did not think AF could really cope with a lens like the CV 35/1.2 I had on the M8 at the time. The Nikon was focusing in light levels where I would have struggled with the M8. I am looking forward to trying the D300 he has on order. He has switched over in the last 6 months from being a dedicated Canonphile, with a 30D and 5D to being a Nikon bore. He now only uses his Canons when he needs a long telephoto with IS.

 

Wilson

[mjh]

I don't see why it should unless you are swaying backwards or forwards a lot.

I guess an illustration says more than a thousand words:

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!

[FastFashnReloaded]

I've wasted a lot of my spare time on many of these Japanese, Chinese rumor sites, Guy ... so far, FF, auto focus, 16MP have been mentioned about the R10. There're also talks that the senior management of Panasonic is very disappointed at the poor market performance of their 4/3 offerings and the intention to retract from this particular segment after all.

 

"There're also talks that the senior management of Panasonic is very disappointed at the poor market performance of their 4/3 offerings and the intention to retract from this particular segment after all."

 

Links? Proof? I seriously doubt that Panasonic will be getting out of the DSLR market.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[FastFashnReloaded]

Eric,

 

I agree, having had cameras with good and bad AF. The Contax G2, whilst super accurate (long base single axis phase detection system) was hopelessly fussy about picking up a focus, needing strong, unequally spaced vertical elements on a landscape image and horizontal ones on a portrait image. The systems on the Sony R1 and Nikon D200 are excellent, particularly the Nikon both in its performance, cleverness and user selectability. If the R10 system is as good or better than the Nikon, I would not be complaining. With the state of current technology no AF system is going to be perfect but then neither is my manual focusing on the M8. I was trying to take some pics yesterday inside Aix en Provence cathedral and the light was just not good enough for me to get perfect focus with the Nokton wide open. I have binned most of them. A really good AF system might have done better.

 

Wilson

 

The Contax G2 was NOT "hopelessly fussy". I had a G1 and a G2, and focus was generally just fine. The only times I had focus issues is when I was not paying attention.

 

Did you actually own one, or are you just, excuse my French, blathering on?

 

Certainly the line deserved better than what those fraking idiots at Kyocera did with the G and SLR Contax lines.