new shape Leica

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The perspective has nothing to do with the focal length or the crop. The perspective is solely controlled by the relationship between the distance between the camera, subject and background. As long as you do not change the standpoint of the camera there is no change in the perspective, only in the crop, which controls the angle of view. Focal length does not even enter into perspective. And yes, the image of a 35 is cropped down to the angle of view of a 50, just as you would do when cropping in the darkroom. But just like in the darkroom, it would not make one whit of difference to the character of the lens. And yes, the DOF would change due to the change in enlargement, which is the main factor that determines DOF.

 

If you wish to use an M8 and take the same picture from the same spot as you would with an M7, you will need to use a shorter lens. This will give you a different look as it will have greater depth of field at the same aperture. In the case of the Noctilux, there isn't even a shorter lens that has its same speed and comparable field of view. But if there were it would need to have a larger aperture to achieve the same depth of field.

 

My point is that M8 users accept having a system that is a radically different format than Leica ever used previously, but having alternative ways to view the image on the camera seems to be a big deal. Even though Leica always had alternative ways to view the image. And if you don't like electronic technology, what are you doing with an M8 other than drawing an arbitrary line of your own choosing?

 

How would you a have felt if Leica came out with a new film camera that had the 1.3 cropped format? Being willing to use full frame lenses in a cropped mode strays pretty far from the 24x36 tradition. See you can draw arbitrary lines wherever you like.

Edited April 14, 2009 by AlanG

[jaapv]

They should make an (electronic) Visoflex IV imo..

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[AlanG]

They should make an (electronic) Visoflex IV imo..

 

How would that work?

[marcusperkins]

They should make an (electronic) Visoflex IV imo..

 

Hmmm changing the subject so soon... I must have won the perspective argument

[SJP]

They should make an (electronic) Visoflex IV imo..

Agree, that would really be a value adding option.

 

For me (ME) the value of an M8 is that it is as close as you can get to a box with a pinhole in it in this digital age. Focus, shutter time, aperture, ISO that's all (except for the artistic stuff like: "what do we want to photograph"???) Plus the glasware is second to none, and that is irrespective of crop etc.

 

If Leica ALSO made a platform that used an electronic finder, live view, focus confirmation etc. using M bajonet then they would cover all the options.

 

They should not try to emulate a DSLR with the M series.

 

So what we should want is a Mx rangefinder (x>=8) and an MDE (M digital electronic)

[AlanG]

If Leica ALSO made a platform that used an electronic finder, live view, focus confirmation etc. using M bajonet then they would cover all the options.

 

 

What a great idea!

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmmm changing the subject so soon... I must have won the perspective argument

Not really- you introduced to many parameters to make it an argument at all... Different lens, step backward, etc...

[jaapv]

Agree, that would really be a value adding option.

 

For me (ME) the value of an M8 is that it is as close as you can get to a box with a pinhole in it in this digital age. Focus, shutter time, aperture, ISO that's all (except for the artistic stuff like: "what do we want to photograph"???) Plus the glasware is second to none, and that is irrespective of crop etc.

 

If Leica ALSO made a platform that used an electronic finder, live view, focus confirmation etc. using M bajonet then they would cover all the options.

 

They should not try to emulate a DSLR with the M series.

 

So what we should want is a Mx rangefinder (x>=8) and an MDE (M digital electronic)

It should not be too difficult, instead of a mirror a flip-up smallish sensor, EVF and there you are. Maybe not full liveview, but if the flip-up is fast enough... camera release through the USB port of course. Make the register correct for R lenses (thus the smallish sensor....), an aperture-closing thingamejig and make the shutter delay just slow enough for AE to kick in . No need for an R10...

[redbaron]

Why not make your own improved version and see how it sells?

[Guest John66]

Why not make your own improved version and see how it sells?

 

Exactly what we're trying to do at the moment...

 

But seriously, whilst I think there is real scope for a truly modern M, I'm also pretty sure that if Leica developed a 'mechanical' digital M (no screen, no jpegs, no AE, cards would have to be formatted in a computer etc, mechanical shutter and winder to power the camera as suggested many times on the forum), it would be a true success.

 

I can imagine most pros packing one just for the hell of it, and a lot of hobbyists loving it. Stick a couple 32 gig cards in the duel slot, and leave it swimming in the bottom of the camera bag until required.

 

Empty it once a month (or once a year depending on shooting habits), and have great fun discovering what's been taken with it.

[farnz]

... I'm also pretty sure that if Leica developed a 'mechanical' digital M (no screen, no jpegs, no AE, cards would have to be formatted in a computer etc, mechanical shutter and winder to power the camera as suggested many times on the forum), it would be a true success. ...

You could call it the Leica Luddite.

 

How could you change ISO? After all, even in a MP you can use films with different speeds.

 

Pete.

[AlanG]

It should not be too difficult, instead of a mirror a flip-up smallish sensor, EVF and there you are. Maybe not full liveview, but if the flip-up is fast enough... camera release through the USB port of course. Make the register correct for R lenses (thus the smallish sensor....), an aperture-closing thingamejig and make the shutter delay just slow enough for AE to kick in . No need for an R10...

 

I think you are joking as you surely know better.

[KM-25]

Yes please, Daniel, could you pass it over? Would you care for a chilled beer to wash it down with? Here you go ...

 

When does the second act start?

 

Pete.

 

I just finished a bowl of leftover chili, so the second act starts right about......Now!

 

( This thread is hilarious at times...)

Edited April 15, 2009 by KM-25

[Guest John66]

You could call it the Leica Luddite.

 

How could you change ISO? After all, even in a MP you can use films with different speeds.

 

Pete.

 

ISO adjustment on the back plate, just like on the MP

[plasticman]

Following the retro logic...

 

This is the fundamental misunderstanding again - or rather mis-characterisation: much easier to knock down a straw man than argue against the real point I guess.

 

I'm not interested in retro - if that was the case I wouldn't be using the M8, at all.

 

What I'm interested in is the simplicity, the immediacy, the directness, of the rangefinder and minimal camera experience.

 

Of course if you want to call this "retro" then it's so easy to make it sound Luddite and backward-looking. But for me, simplicity and immediacy are forward-looking strengths. In fact, I see more and more more electronics that we use in our everyday lives tending in this direction: the iPhone is simpler and more intuitive to use than an older Nokia or Ericsson cellphone. This is not retro or nostalgic - Apple have realised that simplicity and directness are virtues.

[jaapv]

I think you are joking as you surely know better.

 

I'm 100% sure it will never be built - but it would be possible ( oh - I left something out, a flip-down optic to compensate for the sensor angle and size...) My point is, everything can be postulated - but it is usually not very realistic, even if it might be technically possible.

[carstenw]

If you wish to use an M8 and take the same picture from the same spot as you would with an M7, you will need to use a shorter lens. This will give you a different look as it will have greater depth of field at the same aperture. In the case of the Noctilux, there isn't even a shorter lens that has its same speed and comparable field of view.

 

If you choose the appropriate aperture (1.33x) you should be able to get the same look, barring lens signature differences. The point about the Noctilux is correct, of course.

[AlanG]

If you choose the appropriate aperture (1.33x) you should be able to get the same look, barring lens signature differences. The point about the Noctilux is correct, of course.

 

Yes one can often compensate for differences...if you are not working at maximum aperture... which is an important selling point of the lenses. How many people bought new wider lenses because of this crop factor? If you like the look of a 35mm lens at 1.4 on full frame, then what? Same if you like the look of a 24 at 1.4 on FF. The new fast w/a lenses are svelt and inexpensive I suppose.

 

But as I said, nobody would have accepted a 1.3 crop film Leica. And that compromised some of the effort in lens designs and somewhat reduced functionality. Whereas live view greatly expands functionality. So people draw the line wherever they want and accommodate what Leica provides. Since when is it logical to want less versatility from a camera?

 

As for Jaap's electronic Visoflex??? I thought he was joking. It's way more complicated and less useful than simply having live view in the first place. So would you rather have another expensive bulky thing to carry and mount? A kludge at that. One that will only work with some lenses. Even if we could imagine some kind of way it could work. And I can't.

 

We're close to the point where nearly every camera (except MF) has live view and sensor or lens stabilization. These are not esoteric features but pretty much are now considered standard. But these are unnecessary on a Leica? And one of the Leaf MF backs has a tethered b/w live view. I think it is harder to make live view for larger sensors due to heat. They'd do it if they could. MF users wouldn't be posing any objections. By the time Leica finally offers it, few will complain.

Edited April 15, 2009 by AlanG

[plasticman]

We're close to the point where nearly every camera (except MF) has live view and sensor or lens stabilization. But this is unnecessary on a Leica?

 

Oh brother - I give up.

Evidently some people get the idea of a rangefinder camera, and some just don't... and apparently never will.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[AlanG]

Oh brother - I give up.

Evidently some people get the idea of a rangefinder camera, and some just don't... and apparently never will.

 

Plasticman. Your posts are quite emotional and represent your own perspective. But I fail to see any logic in them.

 

The "idea" of an SLR camera did not include live view until recently. At one time, the Leica was not only a rangefinder camera. It also was a view camera via the Focaslide and an SLR via the Visoflex. The "idea" of the Leica was not to be a rangefinder camera. It was to be a versatile photographic system. Some of the models didn't even have rangefinders.

 

What you have in the present Leica M system is near a historical low point of system versatility.

 

Just consider that perhaps not everyone wants to use a Leica in as limited a way as you do. And by giving it more versatility they might sell more of them.

Edited April 15, 2009 by AlanG