DES Posted August 3, 2009 Share #81 Posted August 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think that this is almost going into overkill, but it really depends on what you want. If I was wanting to make a living out of this, then the M8/Viso etc would be my last choice, but as I dont, and I love the complicated faff on with all this old gear..including flash!! I'll be sticking with it. I love it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 3, 2009 Posted August 3, 2009 Hi DES, Take a look here Visoflex users stand up !. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted August 3, 2009 Share #82 Posted August 3, 2009 Have you managed to source a flash adapter for the M8 or do you use the straight finder? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DES Posted August 3, 2009 Share #83 Posted August 3, 2009 I use the angled finder (not yet got the straight one) and remove it after focus for the flash, I know a fart on but it has given me some good results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted August 4, 2009 Share #84 Posted August 4, 2009 A screwmount viso is not recommended to be used on a M mount camera. You can make it fit with the LTM to bay adapter, but I suppose they are concenned with the rotation being perfect. You could get crooked horizons. The set up you show is a viso I plus bellows. The Viso 1 can be used alone for lenses 135 and longer. 90 and 65 will not focus to infinity on viso 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted August 4, 2009 Share #85 Posted August 4, 2009 I wonder. Would Frank rather Leica spent their precious R&D Euros on making a better M (M8.3, M9, M10 whatever), or on a new Visoflex, which might allow an M to take photographs a bit like an SLR, when there are dozens of fine SLRs on the market already, making very good macro photographs? Especially since Leica have recently announced that they have no interest in the SLR market? (The S2 does not count as a mainstream SLR, for these purposes) I would have thought that, as a man who claims to turn round failing companies, the answer would be obvious. Don't waste time on a very niche product - work on the product that is going to make you some proper money. Andy I have several comments: First at a Business Level 1 My understanding is that the bulk of the Leica R&D has gone towards the S2 program, NOT the M camers. This has been a huge gamble and has involved the design of a new camera, new sensor devt., new software etc with Phase One and a host of lenses for this new system......plus hopefully if they are to be successful Leica will have allocated a large bucket of cash for: training program, marketing program etc etc..... 2 My understanding is also that the M9 has NOT enjoyed anything like the R&D spend of the S2. This however is the product that symbolises what Leica has been about and is the revenue generator today plus offers a business platform to drive forward with. 3 The S2 program if it is to be a succes has to displace entrenched competitors in a niche, where Leica has not been present (Fashion photograpy). Its chances of success seem limited according to the many pages since last Thursday am when the £16K price was announced in a somewhat ad hoc way. Time will tell and I wish Leica well as they seem it has been reported many times in various threads to have "bet the company" on the S2 initiative 4 The M8 has far less competion within the high end rangefinder segment niche where Leica is already the dominant player. To my view the Leica R&D should have been aimed at protecting their M niche...and then use this as a platform to grow the niche into new areas. Various observers have said the same thing: > Position an entry level (low cost) digital M with its lenses > Add a M9 > Add more exotic lenses ..especially super wide and fish eye > Other? As a Leica user 5 I want the Leica M to go back to being a system camera offering...and hence a modern Visoflex that maybe is based on EVF technology. Jaapv has identified what is wrong with the 40 year old Visoflex III on an M8 but recognises that these are due to no coupling beteween lens and camera (auto exposure for example) I would like to see Leica address these shortcomings. 6 I accept that Leica M9 needs to be the No1 priority and full frame seems to be at the top of most people's list, plus getting a sensor that everyone is happy with (if that is possible). I believe that No2 priority is to address the need for super wide but this is going to be less urgent if a full frame is available. For me the priority is a modern way of using a M9 back (or M8) to do Macro photography. The number of superb photos using an old Visoflex on this thread seems to suggest that others have the same need. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 4, 2009 Share #86 Posted August 4, 2009 I didn't identify what is wrong with the Visoflex as a piece of gear, I identified what is wrong with the Visoflex as a concept. By its nature it is not able to offer the refinements an SLR offers, and which are needed for -other than nostalgic considerations- shooting in macro and tele. The concept, imo, is no longer viable in this day and age, although some of us, myself included delight in using this piece of gear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted August 4, 2009 Share #87 Posted August 4, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The sensor is not as good as the M8, but it is adequate, and the rig is far more practical to use in a clinical setting. In comparison the Visoflex/M8 lacks: 1. Flash synchronisation 2.TTL flash 3.Autofocus 4. Responsive shutter release 5. Virtually no VF blackout 6.Liveview 7.Zooming facility 8. Automatic diaphragm No contest. I have used the M8 /Viso for macro, as one of the first to do so two years ago, and the results are excellent, nearly as good as the DMR, but the lack of automatic diaphragm and flash possibilities makes it a lovely plaything, but not something to be taken seriously. Jaapv you are not getting my point....If Leica specified a M10 with the appropriate connections to a bellows and lens unit then it would be possible to address each deficiency that you identify assuming for example EVF technology, or a mirror housing. I am NOT repeat NOT suggesting that Leica remanufacture their 40 year old design (Visoflex III) and force it onto a M8 or M9 or M10....I have NEVER suggested that. I am saying that the itesm such as flash sync could be addressed quite easily in a new accesory that REPLACES the Visoflex but provides an improved functionality. 1. Flash synchronisation Easy to do? 2.TTL flash Possible? 3.Autofocus Need Autof Focus lenses but why not do this in a M10 4. Responsive shutter release Easy to do 5. Virtually no VF blackout ?? 6.Liveview EVF implemented on M9? 7.Zooming facility EVF gives this I guess 8. Automatic diaphragm Need special lenses suitably adapted....Maybe this should be a M10 feature Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 4, 2009 Share #88 Posted August 4, 2009 I didn't identify what is wrong with the Visoflex as a piece of gear, I identified what is wrong with the Visoflex as a concept. By its nature it is not able to offer the refinements an SLR offers, and which are needed for -other than nostalgic considerations- shooting in macro and tele. The concept, imo, is no longer viable in this day and age, although some of us, myself included delight in using this piece of gear. I couldn't have put it better myself, Jaap. Thank you. I'm now out of this thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted August 4, 2009 Share #89 Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) I have reported certain contributors to this thread... http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RSPCA/RSPCARedirect&pg=RSPCAHome For wilful flagellation, necrophilia and bestiality. Regards, Bill Edited August 4, 2009 by bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 4, 2009 Share #90 Posted August 4, 2009 Jaapv you are not getting my point....If Leica specified a M10 with the appropriate connections to a bellows and lens unit then it would be possible to address each deficiency that you identify assuming for example EVF technology, or a mirror housing. I am NOT repeat NOT suggesting that Leica remanufacture their 40 year old design (Visoflex III) and force it onto a M8 or M9 or M10....I have NEVER suggested that. I am saying that the itesm such as flash sync could be addressed quite easily in a new accesory that REPLACES the Visoflex but provides an improved functionality. 1. Flash synchronisation Easy to do? 2.TTL flash Possible? 3.Autofocus Need Autof Focus lenses but why not do this in a M10 4. Responsive shutter release Easy to do 5. Virtually no VF blackout ?? 6.Liveview EVF implemented on M9? 7.Zooming facility EVF gives this I guess 8. Automatic diaphragm Need special lenses suitably adapted....Maybe this should be a M10 feature No Frank - I do get your point. The problem is that the point is nonsensical. The thing you speculate would cost more than a high-end Canon or Nikon, need dedicated lenses and would drive up the cost of the mother body by at least 1000 Euro. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted August 4, 2009 Share #91 Posted August 4, 2009 No Frank - I do get your point. The problem is that the point is nonsensical. The thing you speculate would cost more than a high-end Canon or Nikon, need dedicated lenses and would drive up the cost of the mother body by at least 1000 Euro. On what basis do you make these assertions. You are saying that a "new tech Viso type functionality unit" which has: > no shutter, > no memory card or card reader electronics, > no internal exposure meter, > no monitor screen and its electronics > No JPEG conversion software > No sensor > No ??????etc .....................all of which a Canon or Nikon DSLR has in ADDITION to the mirror housing cannot be made at a lower cost than the unit I am suggesting Is it that Leica cannot make anything cheaply using the skilled craftsman manufacturing approach that I know you like so much? .....If that is what decisions are based on I believe that Leica has much bigger issues than a Visoflex. I accept that even a Leica plastic rear lens cap is £12, and a UVIR filter £100+ .but this is pricing to value ratherthan cost based pricing. I think Leica would do well to figure out the cost to make my "nonsensical" gadget and then price it to value Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted August 4, 2009 Share #92 Posted August 4, 2009 On what basis do you make these assertions. You are saying that a "new tech Viso type functionality unit" which has:> no shutter, > no memory card or card reader electronics, > no internal exposure meter, > no monitor screen and its electronics > No JPEG conversion software > No sensor > No ??????etc .....................all of which a Canon or Nikon DSLR has in ADDITION to the mirror housing cannot be made at a lower cost than the unit I am suggesting Is it that Leica cannot make anything cheaply using the skilled craftsman manufacturing approach that I know you like so much? .....If that is what decisions are based on I believe that Leica has much bigger issues than a Visoflex. I accept that even a Leica plastic rear lens cap is £12, and a UVIR filter £100+ .but this is pricing to value ratherthan cost based pricing. I think Leica would do well to figure out the cost to make my "nonsensical" gadget and then price it to value Sorry I forgot you say it will add 1000€uros to the M body price. This really is ridiculous...for some interface electronics, and some contacts towards the new gen Viso unit.....1000 €uros extra price!!!? Surely not even Leica would for such small extra cost charge that extravagant extra price! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted August 4, 2009 Share #93 Posted August 4, 2009 I have reported certain contributors to this thread... RSPCA || Latest For wilful flagellation, necrophilia and bestiality. Regards, Bill I do not think you have contributed so far to the debate have you or did I miss something? I always like reading your insightful comments. Bless Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 4, 2009 Share #94 Posted August 4, 2009 On what basis do you make these assertions. You are saying that a "new tech Viso type functionality unit" which has:> no shutter, > no memory card or card reader electronics, > no internal exposure meter, > no monitor screen and its electronics > No JPEG conversion software > No sensor > No ??????etc .....................all of which a Canon or Nikon DSLR has in ADDITION to the mirror housing cannot be made at a lower cost than the unit I am suggesting Is it that Leica cannot make anything cheaply using the skilled craftsman manufacturing approach that I know you like so much? .....If that is what decisions are based on I believe that Leica has much bigger issues than a Visoflex. I accept that even a Leica plastic rear lens cap is £12, and a UVIR filter £100+ .but this is pricing to value ratherthan cost based pricing. I think Leica would do well to figure out the cost to make my "nonsensical" gadget and then price it to value I think we can be very thankful that you are not involved with Leica in any decision making position. What I have seen up until now has convinced me that you could run the company into the ground in a most spectacular manner within six months. You think you"*need* a new type Visoflex and make all calculations on the assumption that that is an universal wish. It is not. Leica would sell three of them. One to you and two to collectors - a Safari one and a White one. That is, assuming that the idea is technically viable under 5000 Euro, which it isn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts