elansprint72 Posted October 1, 2008 Share #41 Posted October 1, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) You just don't get it. It is the designation of the format. the other info you are looking for is also included. Really? Thanks for making my point again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 1, 2008 Posted October 1, 2008 Hi elansprint72, Take a look here S2 spotted 'on the loose'. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
adan Posted October 1, 2008 Share #42 Posted October 1, 2008 I beg to differ. When you know what you're thinking about it is not meaningless. 4/3 is the ratio of a sensor not the size. 4 units wide by (X) 3 units high. Not quite. The 4/3rds system gets its name from the sensor diagonal. The aspect ratio match to 4:3 is coincidental. A 2/3rds sensor also has a 4:3 aspect ratio. So does a 1/1.8" sensor. Sensor Sizes: Camera System: Glossary: Learn: Digital Photography Review All image sensors smaller than quote-APS-unquote derive their names, in a very indirect way, from the TV world. They are named for the image area they equate to on a vidicon tube (old TV/video image capture technology). So a 4/3rds sensor is the same size and shape (thus the 4:3 TV-screen aspect ratio) as the imaging area on the front of a 4/3rds - e.g 1 and 1/3-inch - diameter vidicon tube. A 2/3rds sensor covers the same real estate as did the imaging area on a 2/3rds-inch-diameter vidicon tube. Note that the imaging area on a vidicon tube was a rather small patch of phosphor that did not come close to covering the end of the vidicon tube. (in the picture, the coppery-colored patch on the near end of the tube). http://www.labguysworld.com/Vidicon_001.jpg So the name has no direct link to that imaging area (i.e. 2/3rds of an inch is about 17mm, but a 2/3rds sensor or vidicon tube has an imaging diagonal of only 11mm). A 4/3rds sensor is literally just a 2/3rds sensor doubled in dimensions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhsimmonds Posted October 2, 2008 Share #43 Posted October 2, 2008 Just back from my hols and so much has happened at Leica whilst I was away! In fact I did look at my emails and got a lot of info from LFI and elsewhere about the new S2 prototypes whilst away. I am impressed with it's shape and size, but would like to know it's weight please? However more importantly for me, what is the full spec of the sensor and processing "engine"? I want to know if it produces a 16 bit per colour image file for instance like the DMR? Most integrated digital cameras including the MF Mamiya ZD only produce 14 bits per colour files. We know the Mpx sensor size, but what of the file size? The DMR produces 19.7 Mb DNG files which convert to 57 Mb uncompressed Tiff's, so does anyone know yet what file sizes the S2 will produce? Similarly the ISO range needs to be stated. Digital MF is notoriously slow both in ISO and buffer speed. I have seen some reference to a buffer equivalent to 1.5 fps? I am suspicious of any specs for the moment as the camera is still in the advanced stages of development and I do remember the hiatus over the M8's early predictions of producing 16bits per colour DNG files..........when I understand that it doesn't really?! When and only when I get answers to these questions and of course confirmation of prices will I allow myself to get too interested in the S2, as nice as it looks! Incidentally whilst on hols in wild west USA, I managed to speak to quite a few pro's. Nearly all were using large format (10x8) film for landscape "fine art" (how I hate this handle) and 35mm (mostly Nikon D3) for wildlife. One was using a MF Fuji range finder film camera for his stock landscape photography. One Pro was even using a 100 year old beautiful large format wooden framed camera weighing over 100 lbs adding another 50 for tripod and accessory gear! He hauled this lot around rugged canyon country too........once out of his 4x4 that is! Wonderful to see this stuff being used and not stuck in a museum somewhere. I saw some of his images...............just stunning in both sharpness, colour quality and dynamic range. Will the S2 get some of this market.........from the new pro's perhaps but not these guys I would predict. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberti Posted October 13, 2008 Share #44 Posted October 13, 2008 OMG, this guy is not a photographer or a point-&- shoot camera user, at best; I've never seen any SLR user holding camera like this with the left hand! Or may be one of those rich guys who loves hoarding Leica, but doesn't know how to click a good photo. The other 'strange' effect is that this 'photographer' uses another eye than most of us. I have not seen even lefthanded people use the left eye. But anyway, I am very very curious, and it might be the little extra. I do hope that there will be 'real' lenses soon, with a real distance ring that I can hold... This 'photographer' or passer-by has never handed a bulky lens it seems. alberti Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted October 14, 2008 Share #45 Posted October 14, 2008 The other 'strange' effect is that this 'photographer' uses another eye than most of us. I have not seen even lefthanded people use the left eye. I use my left eye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted October 14, 2008 Share #46 Posted October 14, 2008 So do I. So do lots of people. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgcd Posted October 14, 2008 Share #47 Posted October 14, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I use my left eye. I'm another one who does... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlancasterd Posted October 14, 2008 Share #48 Posted October 14, 2008 And me - always have, whether using a rangefinder or SLR... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.