marknorton Posted June 30, 2009 Share #81 Posted June 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not sure where you get the 250 MHz figure for the G1 from or what relevance it has - maybe someone is saying, 10Mp, 25 frames a second, 250 MHz bit rate, though I doubt things are workings that fast in the G1. An A/D conversion every 4 nS is a tough challenge in a $400 device. The EVF lag is due to the need to capture the image using the sensor and read out at least part of the captured image (full image, but reduced pixel count) to feed to the EVF. The lower the light, the lower the capture rate and the greater the image lag. Also, I think you'll find the M8 release delay is 10 - 12 milliseconds, not 100 - 120 microseconds. It does compare with the (say) 37mS release delay of a Nikon D3 though both times are much shorter than the time it takes for your brain to engage gear and order your finger to press the shutter release. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 30, 2009 Posted June 30, 2009 Hi marknorton, Take a look here Death of the R - How do you really feel?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanG Posted June 30, 2009 Share #82 Posted June 30, 2009 You can forget about using this type of camera for anything that requires split second timing like street photography, reportage or documentary work. Part of what makes the M system so special is that the shutter delay is about .10 - .12 millisecond. The picture is taken nearly instantaneous. You can freeze people in mid air. I think it won't be long before an EVF camera is shooting constantly to the buffer... once you press the shutter release part way down. Then by pressing completely, the camera can go "back in time" to the buffer and save the image with absolutely no lag time. Some other cameras had this mode a few years ago but were not very high resolution. Perhaps it will save a burst of 10 frames over a second of time and then you can later choose exactly the frame you want for the best expression or action stopping effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted June 30, 2009 Share #83 Posted June 30, 2009 Not sure where you get the 250 MHz figure for the G1 from or what relevance it has - maybe someone is saying, 10Mp, 25 frames a second, 250 MHz bit rate, though I doubt things are workings that fast in the G1. An A/D conversion every 4 nS is a tough challenge in a $400 device. The EVF lag is due to the need to capture the image using the sensor and read out at least part of the captured image (full image, but reduced pixel count) to feed to the EVF. The lower the light, the lower the capture rate and the greater the image lag.. I got the 250mhz figure from an article. I can try to find it. But the point is that there are a lot of drawbacks and some real deal beakers to an EVF. I really don't see why some many people are all excited about the technology, because there are too many compromises. I'm actually a little amazed that people, who are willing to pay top dollar for the best performance, are so eager to replace the best viewfinder technologies available, with something that is so inferior and often used as a cost cutting measure in consumer goods. People here are dropping 10 times the normal cost for a 50mm lens to extract that last 10% of performance over the competition, but are falling over themselves to toss the best viewfinders in the business in exchange for what basically is the viewfinder from a camcorder. Also, I think you'll find the M8 release delay is 10 - 12 milliseconds, not 100 - 120 microseconds. It does compare with the (say) 37mS release delay of a Nikon D3 though both times are much shorter than the time it takes for your brain to engage gear and order your finger to press the shutter release. 10 - 12 milliseconds is the figure I meant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted June 30, 2009 Share #84 Posted June 30, 2009 I think it won't be long before an EVF camera is shooting constantly to the buffer... once you press the shutter release part way down. Then by pressing completely, the camera can go "back in time" to the buffer and save the image with absolutely no lag time. Some other cameras had this mode a few years ago but were not very high resolution. Perhaps it will save a burst of 10 frames over a second of time and then you can later choose exactly the frame you want for the best expression or action stopping effect. If the camera is constantly capturing, then battery life will be miserable. Some audio recorders use this technique. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhoersch Posted June 30, 2009 Share #85 Posted June 30, 2009 I really don't see why some many people are all excited about the technology, because there are too many compromises. I'm actually a little amazed that people, who are willing to pay top dollar for the best performance, are so eager to replace the best viewfinder technologies available, with something that is so inferior and often used as a cost cutting measure in consumer goods. People here are dropping 10 times the normal cost for a 50mm lens to extract that last 10% of performance over the competition, but are falling over themselves to toss the best viewfinders in the business in exchange for what basically is the viewfinder from a camcorder. Exactly! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 30, 2009 Share #86 Posted June 30, 2009 If the camera is constantly capturing, then battery life will be miserable. Some audio recorders use this technique. It will just be on when you press the button part way. And probably only active when set to an "action" mode. In any case, once the sensor and EVF are on, I can't see how sending the data to a buffer would use up so much power. Basically this would just be similar to a short burst of super hi-def video. Besides, batteries are small and cheap. (Especially compared to film and I used to carry a lot of that.) In any case, technology will allow all of this and more to happen for sure. Whereas a mechanical camera will always have some lag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgcd Posted June 30, 2009 Share #87 Posted June 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) It will just be on when you press the button part way. And probably only active when set to an "action" mode. In any case, once the sensor and EVF are on, I can't see how sending the data to a buffer would use up so much power. Basically this would just be similar to a short burst of super hi-def video. Besides, batteries are small and cheap. (Especially compared to film and I used to carry a lot of that.) In any case, technology will allow all of this and more to happen for sure. Whereas a mechanical camera will always have some lag. No worries, we'll get all that AND a real optical viewfinder. EVF is for the birds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 30, 2009 Share #88 Posted June 30, 2009 No worries, we'll get all that AND a real optical viewfinder. EVF is for the birds. I think an optical viewfinder would be a good idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 30, 2009 Share #89 Posted June 30, 2009 I thought that you thought Live View was all anyone could need, Alan? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 30, 2009 Share #90 Posted June 30, 2009 I thought that you thought Live View was all anyone could need, Alan? Consider Leica already sells digital cameras that don't have an optical viewfinder and should have one. You may recall that I made several posts suggesting a Leica M type camera with an optical viewfinder and an optional clip on EVF. Live view would always be available on the LCD in case you need more precision. I think an optical viewfinder is the primary way a Leica could distinguish itself. (Although the future EVF replacement for the R may work well if the designers hit all the right notes.) A 20 megapixel+ full frame camera similar in design to the new M4/3rds Olympus or Canon G10, about the size of an M8 or smaller, with a good zoom optical viewfinder that matches a reasonably compact 24-70 zoom (maybe f4,) some small f2 primes, AF with focus point confirmation in the viewfinder, sensor based IS, top notch high ISO performance, and a clip on EVF would sort of be the holy grail of what I'd like get from Leica today. Why not? It is all possible with 2 year old technology. This would be a modern update of the essence of Leica photography. At some point the EVFs may become good enough that an optical finder won't add much benefit. But it is hard to say when this will be. In the case of SLRs, an EVF simplifies the design and makes it more compact. Whereas viewfinder cameras are already fairly compact. They just could use live view and an optional EVF to give them more potential. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgcd Posted June 30, 2009 Share #91 Posted June 30, 2009 At some point the EVFs may become good enough that an optical finder won't add much benefit. That day will never happen considering that optical viewfinders actually work at the speed of light... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 30, 2009 Share #92 Posted June 30, 2009 ....I think an optical viewfinder is the primary way a Leica could distinguish itself.... Happy to see that good sense has not completely deserted this good forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted July 1, 2009 Share #93 Posted July 1, 2009 I certainly would not want to see an EVF on a Leica M, in fact, I'm all for a new updated design of the M viewfinder/rangefinder. It's a key product differentiator. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harrisfoto Posted July 2, 2009 Share #94 Posted July 2, 2009 Going back to the original question that started this thread -- When I read the comment that Leica would not be producing any more digital R cameras, I was somewhat put off. However, the more I reflected on it, the less perturbed I became. In 2003, I started to acquire as much of the R line as I could. This was motivated by the fact that I did not like the DSLR Fuji S2 results, I wanted manual focus lenses, not auto focus. I waited for the Leica digital back and got a DMR, in part because it was a collaboration between Imacon and Leica. I recently attended a National Press Photographer's meeting in Las Vegas. Both Canon and Nikon were there with tables full of their latest equipment. Almost all of the press photogs are using one or the other, because of the pressures of production. Canon is now providing video as well as still content. However, the more I reflected on it, I am very glad that I now have 2 R6's, an R3, and an R8 w/ DMR. plus a fine set of lenses. I am not displeased with Leica. The reality is that most photographers, particularly press, are shooting for web content, (both stills and video) not high quality prints. The majority of the photo market does not want high quality and never did. Even more so now. There is not enough market to justify both types of systems -- M & R. Most likely the DSLR will die out soon, and be replaced by an electronic view finder. The new beast will provide both still and video content. This will be as much a movie camera market as a still photography market. The M line will continue to provide the lens quality and range of capture media, including both film and digital for those who want. As for me, I am pleased that I can stop chasing the technology and go take some photographs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbaron Posted July 2, 2009 Share #95 Posted July 2, 2009 I feel fine, thanks for asking! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickgrafixstop Posted July 2, 2009 Share #96 Posted July 2, 2009 It was great news....an R10 would have been two to three years behind the nikon/canon digital announcement cycle, significantly more expensive and and only marginally, if at all, better image quality. Now I can continue with film - at least until Kodak and Fuji give up on that also - have the images scanned at a higher resolution that any digital sensor Leica was likely to use and "soldier on." I can use an adapter if I wish on either Canon and Nikon and since it's been 'orphaned", the R-9 resale value of the camera and it's lenses should fall to reasonable levels. Now if only Leica would pick up a little cash - lord knows they'll need it to keep developing the "S" for the few who will use it - by selling the mount geography to an innovative company with cash - like Cosina, Sigma or Samsung - we may be able to find a better solution than the Germans would ever dream of at a price we can afford. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhoersch Posted July 2, 2009 Share #97 Posted July 2, 2009 Obviously, that's what the typical Leica user has been dreaming of for years: a Samsung camera with Leica glass... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted July 2, 2009 Author Share #98 Posted July 2, 2009 Obviously, that's what the typical Leica user has been dreaming of for years: a Samsung camera with Leica glass... ........we may be able to find a better solution than the Germans would ever dream of at a price we can afford. Don't hold your breath I'm afraid. Leica's top models - M, R and now S - are expensive and likely to remain so, a fact that the modern Leica owner needs to grasp sooner rather than later. If you seek affordability in the Leica range look to the compacts or buy used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 2, 2009 Share #99 Posted July 2, 2009 Itthat also - have the images scanned at a higher resolution that any digital sensor Leica was likely to use and "soldier on." I can use an . Dream on - that will only produce grain aliasing. Much as I like film, the alleged higher resolution of film only exists in numbers and not in reality for quite a number of reasons. To get the most resolution from film -and that is quite a lot, reason why it is not strange to prefer film imo, one must cut out all digital stuf like scanning. Not that resolution is very important -over a certain level which both film and digital reach easily- for the quality of the final print. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted July 2, 2009 Share #100 Posted July 2, 2009 It will just be on when you press the button part way. And probably only active when set to an "action" mode. In any case, once the sensor and EVF are on, I can't see how sending the data to a buffer would use up so much power. Basically this would just be similar to a short burst of super hi-def video. Besides, batteries are small and cheap. (Especially compared to film and I used to carry a lot of that.) In any case, technology will allow all of this and more to happen for sure. Whereas a mechanical camera will always have some lag. In that case, why not just shoot video and extract the images you want? Are we still talking about still photography here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.