Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
manolo

New Visoflex for M9

Recommended Posts

no,no, what I am saying is that if you take the M mount off, you have all the space you need from the shutter curtain to the R mount.

 

but don't ask me, ask your dealer.

So you remove the screws on the mount of your M, somehow fix the mirrorbox to your camera and then there is a system to project the image from a mirror that is hidden inside the camera throat onto some kind of matte screen where you can miraculously see it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never underestimate engineers.

 

There was a prototype beam splitter (not moving mirror) based reflex housing, called T-flex, that was shown and sold in limited numbers in the 60's. T-flex in four versions ,directly mounted T-mount and H-mount lenses on Leica S and M bodies. The lenses focused to infinity because of the index of refraction (virtually a longer optical path) of the beam splitter. Camcraft (Norm Goldberg) also sold Visoflex's modified with a beam splitter. An extension tube was needed to restore infinity when Visoflex lenses were mounted.

 

Further, Leica held a patent for a Visoflex with an automatic diaphragm.

 

I would love a reflex housing that would allow R lenses to work at infinity.

 

I currently use a JPL Pellicle Visoflex III on my M8. It's not a DSLR with autofocus and auto diaphragm, but it works for my needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you remove the screws on the mount of your M, somehow fix the mirrorbox to your camera and then there is a system to project the image from a mirror that is hidden inside the camera throat onto some kind of matte screen where you can miraculously see it?

 

no, there is an M adapter for M lenses [m mount on the back and on the front (with 6bit coding also on both sides)].

 

And an R ad. (that goes to the top of the camera) with a mb & vf.

 

I guess:cool:

Edited by manolo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BigSplash
I was told that the R lens solution from Leica is a viewfinder-mirrorbox for the new M9 and that is why there is no R10 (ff). With this combination there was no need for a new R body and this way they could put all the energy into just two systems: M & S

 

Manolo I am told that noone wants this in any case and it is technically impossible to implement. The way to go is apparently to buy a DSLR from Canon and buy an adapter for the "R" lenses. It is also the case that noone who owns a Leica "M" has any ineterest in Macro or Telephoto lenses and certainly would never want a zoom lens.

 

I actually disagree people do want macro and telephoto. I also think "R" lens owners want a future but this is a small market. That said I must say the arguments against a mirror housing look convincing even if cosmetically a new Viso looked modern and less clunky than the original.

 

I think Leica will in fact introduce a Linux GF1 or similar approach based on LiveView and an EVF. The argument is that this technology is becoming adequate to frame macro and telephoto subjects, with AF lenses handling the focussing challenge.

 

If Leica can actually invent such a thing, albeit in partnership with Panasonic or whoever I think we may be looking at a revolution within photography.....imagine a M sized range finder camera which is excellent at what it does complimented by a high tech gadget that opens up the chance to do macro and Telphoto......brilliant.

 

Hope I do not get tons of hate mail about Visoflexes now! I would welcome comment on the EVF LiveView type approach as this is what one could imagine after listening to what was said at Solms visit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank, it's LUMIX, not LINUX....

 

It could be a new open source range from Panasonic - inside the box you find a camera, a list of APIs and a Java compiler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manolo I am told that noone wants this in any case and it is technically impossible to implement. The way to go is apparently to buy a DSLR from Canon and buy an adapter for the "R" lenses. It is also the case that noone who owns a Leica "M" has any ineterest in Macro or Telephoto lenses and certainly would never want a zoom lens.

 

I actually disagree people do want macro and telephoto. I also think "R" lens owners want a future but this is a small market. That said I must say the arguments against a mirror housing look convincing even if cosmetically a new Viso looked modern and less clunky than the original.

 

I think Leica will in fact introduce a Linux GF1 or similar approach based on LiveView and an EVF. The argument is that this technology is becoming adequate to frame macro and telephoto subjects, with AF lenses handling the focussing challenge.

 

If Leica can actually invent such a thing, albeit in partnership with Panasonic or whoever I think we may be looking at a revolution within photography.....imagine a M sized range finder camera which is excellent at what it does complimented by a high tech gadget that opens up the chance to do macro and Telphoto......brilliant.

 

Hope I do not get tons of hate mail about Visoflexes now! I would welcome comment on the EVF LiveView type approach as this is what one could imagine after listening to what was said at Solms visit.

 

Frank, there is no substitute for direct view through a lens (so there is no substitute for R lenses) and Leica had a chance to use them on an M camera and took it.

 

To have both M & R on one camera was too tempting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It could be a new open source range from Panasonic - inside the box you find a camera, a list of APIs and a Java compiler.

 

no, it is just the new "open format" for all manual focus lenses made for 35mm in the last century and in the future.

 

that M-R-X format, that is.

Edited by manolo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reality check:

 

The total thickness of anything that will mount R lenses and allow infinity focus can be no more than 47mm - image surface to lens mount surface.

 

The M image-surface to lens-mount distance is 27-point-something mm

 

That leaves about 19-20mm for any adapter to fit R lenses to an M body. That is not enough room for even a pellicle (non-moving) mirror, which to cover a 24 x 36mm image area must be 33mm in smallest dimension (24mm x sqrt-2 because it is sloped 45 degrees)

 

It is barely enough room for a pellicle mirror on the cropped M8, which needs 18mm of thickness. It is not enough for a swinging SLR-type mirror on the M8 (requires 25mm)

 

IF a Leica M ever has live-view, it would be possible to use a regular R-to-M adapter, and add a slide-on EVF (like the Panny GF-1). The M9 won't have live view. End of story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reality check:

 

The total thickness of anything that will mount R lenses and allow infinity focus can be no more than 47mm - image surface to lens mount surface.

 

The M image-surface to lens-mount distance is 27-point-something mm

 

That leaves about 19-20mm for any adapter to fit R lenses to an M body. That is not enough room for even a pellicle (non-moving) mirror, which to cover a 24 x 36mm image area must be 33mm in smallest dimension (24mm x sqrt-2 because it is sloped 45 degrees)

 

It is barely enough room for a pellicle mirror on the cropped M8, which needs 18mm of thickness. It is not enough for a swinging SLR-type mirror on the M8 (requires 25mm)

 

IF a Leica M ever has live-view, it would be possible to use a regular R-to-M adapter, and add a slide-on EVF (like the Panny GF-1). The M9 won't have live view. End of story.

 

Spinning mirror like a PEN F?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

IF a Leica M ever has live-view, it would be possible to use a regular R-to-M adapter, and add a slide-on EVF (like the Panny GF-1). The M9 won't have live view. End of story.

 

The M9 has many problems to solve first. The angle of incidence of the light and the IR filtering are very serious problems, and adding live view to the cake may be too much. But live view is even more important for the future of M cameras than for any kind of reflex cameras, less limited in the type of lenses they can use...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The M9 has many problems to solve first. The angle of incidence of the light and the IR filtering are very serious problems, and adding live view to the cake may be too much. But live view is even more important for the future of M cameras than for any kind of reflex cameras, less limited in the type of lenses they can use...

 

I totally agree, but still, it will never be a replacement for optical mechanics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I get your idea.

 

But - the R-system is dead, from Leica's perspective. The mortal remains (remaining stock) have been sold to some dealer or other. Leica earns not a penny from any R system sales from now on. There is no reason to invest anything substantial in supporting a lens line they no longer earn profits from.

 

There is especially no reason to slice-n-dice the M body, adding complexity and more areas needing weather-sealing, and more linkages in the RF mechanism, each an opportunity for misalignment every time the owner swaps systems.

 

Live view - at some point - is a far more elegant (minimalist) solution. Leica already partners with the most sophisticated of the convergence manufacturers (Panasonic) with the best live-view solution currently available.

 

I don't, personally, need a live-view M, but I may very well pick up a couple of now-cheap R teles for use with a GH-1 Panasonic, for stills AND video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is especially no reason to slice-n-dice the M body, adding complexity and more areas needing weather-sealing, and more linkages in the RF mechanism, each an opportunity for misalignment every time the owner swaps systems.

 

I guess a camera both for reflex & rangefinders was interesting at the end.

 

and for the weather-sealing: It is just another M mount; if they solved the first, they just do it on the second.

Edited by manolo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are very close to design an R10 here. Unforunately, there will be no R10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You guys are very close to design an R10 here. Unforunately, there will be no R10.

 

because there is an M-R adapter:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no,no, what I am saying is that if you take the M mount off, you have all the space you need from the shutter curtain to the R mount.

 

but don't ask me, ask your dealer.

 

I thought this one out a couple of years ago. It seemed like a neat idea, but in the end it looked easier and cheaper to develop an M-body and an R-body that used the same sensor, shutter and electronics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...