MP3 Posted August 17, 2007 Author Share #61 Posted August 17, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) If Oly's latest 4/3 liveview sensor is doing 10MPx, there is no reason why a FF (maybe even liveview from Panasonic) is not possible. 4/3 is just a quarter of FF in terms of size, so just stitch 4 4/3 into 1 FF. Having said that, Pana's sensor is never famous for noise control, but that may be a firmware issue rather than the sensor alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 Hi MP3, Take a look here Is R10 or a brand new Digital-R coming ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sdai Posted August 17, 2007 Share #62 Posted August 17, 2007 If Oly's latest 4/3 liveview sensor is doing 10MPx, there is no reason why a FF (maybe even liveview from Panasonic) is not possible. 4/3 is just a quarter of FF in terms of size, so just stitch 4 4/3 into 1 FF. This shouldn't be counted as that, Matthew. There're 1/2" image sensors with a 3.3µm pixel pitch, so based on your theory, they can be stitched together to make a 35mm FF sensor boasting 79MP in total size (approximately 10910x7273). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MP3 Posted August 17, 2007 Author Share #63 Posted August 17, 2007 Pardon on my joke =) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted August 17, 2007 Share #64 Posted August 17, 2007 Surely more realistic (jokes apart and all that) would be FF at the same pixel density as the present DMR. The magnification factor is (I think) 1.37, so it would be 10x1.37x1.37 = about 19MP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graham_mitchell Posted August 18, 2007 Share #65 Posted August 18, 2007 Surely more realistic (jokes apart and all that) would be FF at the same pixel density as the present DMR. The magnification factor is (I think) 1.37, so it would be 10x1.37x1.37 = about 19MP. Bingo. Sounds perfect to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted August 18, 2007 Share #66 Posted August 18, 2007 Surely more realistic (jokes apart and all that) would be FF at the same pixel density as the present DMR. The magnification factor is (I think) 1.37, so it would be 10x1.37x1.37 = about 19MP. The theory is sound, but pixel density is not the only factor, and maybe not the most important one. Making a much larger, more complicated chip, the manufacturing complexity rises dramatically, but the rejection rate also. It may be that much of the expense of manufacturing such a chip has to do with this, and it may thus determine the feasibility. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
berndr Posted August 19, 2007 Share #67 Posted August 19, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello, when we have a look at resolution of high quality digital slide makers there are three catagories for 35mm slides: low res: 4096x2731 about 11Mp high res: 8192x5494 about 45Mp very high res: 16384x12288 about 200Mp It would be very good to reach the second catagory for a 35mm camera and a 40Mp R10 would realize this. For me this is the range when the digital technologie will be comparable to the classical analog slide film photography. I would get high quality slides out of my digital cam. Just the prices for those digital made slides must decrease. Kind regards, Bernd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 19, 2007 Share #68 Posted August 19, 2007 ...when we have a look at resolution of high quality digital slide makers there are three catagories for 35mm slides:low res: 4096x2731 about 11Mp high res: 8192x5494 about 45Mp very high res: 16384x12288 about 200Mp... Any link about those digital slide makers Bernd? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 19, 2007 Share #69 Posted August 19, 2007 Right now, the R is effectively dead - the R9 doesn't comply with RoHS and the DMR has gone - and selling hugely expensive R lenses to stick on the front of a re-badged Panasonic and achieve a crop factor of 2 is hardly a good use of these lenses. By Photokina next year, we'll likely have a new Nikon (say, D3X) and a Canon (say, EOS 1Ds Mk III) so Leica are going to have to be pretty radical if their new digital SLR is going to rival these and be spoken about in the same breath. That then begs the question, can a serious professional dSLR contender do without the system support "stuff" that Canon and Nikon users take for granted like autofocus, AWB which works, wireless connectivity, flash metering and if not, does Leica have the resources to develop them? The most recent figures published suggested R sales were about 1/4 of M sales and that was long before the M8 came out. Who knows what the figure is now, but it's a considerable leap of faith for Leica to develop an R10. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
berndr Posted August 19, 2007 Share #70 Posted August 19, 2007 Hello, here are some links about digital slide makers: Computer Graphics Group - Specializing in Lasergraphics slide makers and film recorders for 35mm slide presentations and digital imaging and photo retouching Welcome to Polaroid.com - Please select your country And in german languague (sorry!): Diabelichter Kind regards, Bernd. PS.: I made a mistake the high resolution is: 8192x6724 about 55Mp Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted August 19, 2007 Share #71 Posted August 19, 2007 Mark, The R10 is, however, under development, and Steve K. Lee is an avid R fan, so it is only a question of time. The price of the R9+DMR would already explain why the M is selling better, and the size and weight only adds to that. The new R10 will be smaller than the R9, and since it will be a single unit, the price ought to be much more reasonable, due to lower manufacturing costs (less things to fit and check). Besides, the R line still has some of the very best SLR lenses in the world, and Leica can not feasibly abandon this and still expect customers to keep faith. It needs to be done and it will be done. The target is apparently Photokina 2008, according to a Leica employee I spoke to in person last week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 19, 2007 Share #72 Posted August 19, 2007 Carsten, I've no doubt it is in development but I detect some different priorities between Lee and Kaufmann, and Bill has posted an Amazon link to the Canon EOS 1Ds III camera. Such is the competition Leica (and Nikon) will face with their next offerings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
krabat Posted August 19, 2007 Share #73 Posted August 19, 2007 I don't think Leica should try a direct competition with the N and C DSLR "flag-ships". It would be better to create an own digital SLR Leica-like camera in the best meaning of its tradition, with greatest acceptance by the Leica community. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted August 19, 2007 Share #74 Posted August 19, 2007 There's one thing I can bet on ... end results: A 17MP DALSA FF CCD + 100 APO-Macro-Elmarit combo will easily leave a Canon 21.1 FF CMOS + EF 100 Macro in dust. Now let's play nice, 100 dollars ... who will take it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicar7 Posted August 19, 2007 Share #75 Posted August 19, 2007 Anybody have a clue about rumored R lenses to accompany the eventual R10 announcement other than they will be AF? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted August 19, 2007 Share #76 Posted August 19, 2007 Today i visited Leica NJ,i had 2 concerns ... #1: turns out my DMR and R9 are working to spec, however a few of my lenses need to be "tuned" they are focusing short ... Rich This has me intrigued. How can SLR lenses need to tuned because they are focussing short??? It's not a rangefinder where the focussing is transmitted mechnically, creating the opportunity for lenses to be the culprits in poor focussing. An SLR uses a calibrated optical viewfinder. If the viewfinder screen's focal plane and the sensor's (or film) focal plane are calibrated, proper focus results. What you see is what you get. And here in lies the problem with many DMRs. In offering a retro fit camera back solution Leica knew that a variety of fitting tolerance outcomes could lead to mis-focussing results. 1. The viewfinder and sensor would be ideally calibrated - correct focus. 2. Front focussing would result from the lens to viewfinder distance being shorter than the lens to sensor distance. 3. Back focussing would result from the lens to viewfinder distance being longer than the lens to sensor distance. The solution to 2 is put a shim under the viewfinder or machine back the film rails, but this would muck up proper focussing when using film! The solution to 3, putting a shim between the sensor and the film rails, is more practical and doesn't muck up focussing with film. So, DMRs are oriented to back focussing. Use a long enough lens and you'll see it. I haven't had to bother as I haven't bought one (though I have trialed one with an 800mm lens) but I was reliably informed that Leica service have a solution for back focussing where its a problem to users. Conclusion - don't beat up on your SLR lenses if focussing problems arise. Beat the bodies up with some delicate shims instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted August 19, 2007 Share #77 Posted August 19, 2007 Anybody have a clue about rumored R lenses to accompany the eventual R10 announcement other than they will be AF? I have no clue but a safe bet ... AF Summilux-R 1.4/50 ASPH. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted August 20, 2007 Share #78 Posted August 20, 2007 Hello, here are some links about digital slide makers: Computer Graphics Group - Specializing in Lasergraphics slide makers and film recorders for 35mm slide presentations and digital imaging and photo retouching Welcome to Polaroid.com - Please select your country And in german languague (sorry!): Diabelichter Kind regards, Bernd. PS.: I made a mistake the high resolution is: 8192x6724 about 55Mp Has anyone projected slides from one of these digital slide makers? Are they good? I'm thinking that instead of taking shots on Fuji Astia with my gorgeous R8s or M cameras I could buy an R9 + DMR + M8, shoot digitally and then buy a Lasergraphics LFR Mark III and turn the output into slides. I'm sure they wouldn't be too far behind the translucent quality and colour fidelity of lovely positive film. hehe Seriously, do tell if you've been impressed with slide makers. Just seems bizarre, that's all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angora Posted August 20, 2007 Share #79 Posted August 20, 2007 Yep, but the point is that you can swap backs with the H3D – a 22 MP back for a 39 MP back, or the 31 MP back if you need to double the sensitivity. You are limited to those three digital backs and one film back, but they are certainly interchangable. And you can detach the back for cleaning the sensor. Now whether this is possible to achieve with R-system quality at an R-system price tag, I don’t know, but the DMR seems to suggest that it isn’t impossible. On the other hand, a somewhat less modular solution would certainly be less costly and also be more compact. Making the back swappable is a good idea for future demands. Let's say that for the taping out of the R10 there would be one kind of back and one type of body (the size of an R8). People could tune their back à la carte, by ordering more buffer memory, spare parts... They may even customize it at home, depending on their knowhow and if Leica intentionnally make it easier for them to make changes. There may be a commercial opportunity for a lighter, smaller body... they could design it in advance and keep it on the paper until the very last moment, as the ergonomical modifications would be minimum and the software/hardware would've been handled separately - and continually improved up to the launch of the new body. This logic would open the *utopian* way to a "unified back for R & M cameras", providing that the "joint back pack" (sensor + cpu + buffer mem on the mobo) would'nt exceed the dimensions of the M8 Here it would be really interesting. All of that would change the business model of the brand. Putting it more than before into the electronic side, with all the challenges it carries... (mostly in terms on life cycle) Still Leica should consider this way they seem to abandon due to the mild DMR experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telyt Posted August 20, 2007 Share #80 Posted August 20, 2007 Conclusion - don't beat up on your SLR lenses if focussing problems arise. Beat the bodies up with some delicate shims instead. There ought to be be some adjustment screws for the viewscreen under the pentaprism, just like on the Leicaflex and SL. Shims not needed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.