[Leica] M9 - the end of the line for Leica?

[rclompus at mac.com (Richard Clompus)]

Larry, a brilliant synopsis of the eye and neural processing that we  
all have built-in and take for granted every day.  No doubt the next  
generation lenses will include software fixes in their self-contained  
firmware. And for those still using the old fashioned "optical only"  
lenses, Photoshop Plug-Ins will offer much improved processing to  
further correct lens aberrations.  What intrigues me the most is the  
MIT camera that can change the focus of an image after it has been  
captured.  In many respects, we are living in the infancy period of  
digital imaging. Makes you want to live to be 300 just to experience  
the new technology.

Richard

Richard Clompus, OD
Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Lawrence Zeitlin <lrzeitlin at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> Perhaps Dante Stella is correct in his assertion that the M9 may be  
> the end
> of the M line for Leica. Indeed it may be the end of the line for  
> digital
> cameras that emulate film cameras. As photographers who grew up  
> using film
> age and leave the active camera market, camera design may turn in a
> different direction. We have already seen it happen in video  
> cameras. Modern
> camcorders have ilittle resemblance, either in form or function, to  
> the the
> old Bell and Howell or Bolex. Here are some thoughts on camera  
> evolution,
> probably brought on by too much single malt scotch while wearing my  
> Tilly
> hat. Perhaps we sometimes forget that it is the image, not the lens  
> or the
> camera, that is all important. If you are not interested in  
> photographic
> technology, read no further. Just go out and take pictures.
>
> The future of digital cameras, even for Leica should the firm  
> survive, is
> software minimization of optical defects. Why not? This is nature's  
> way. The
> human eye, for example, has a primitive optical system, basically an  
> F3.5,
> 25mm FL non-achromat doublet. The sharp image circle is about 3 mm  
> in the
> center of the fovea giving a field of view of 3 degrees in a single
> fixation. The retina's "film speed" in daylight is roughly  
> equivalent to ISO
> 800 with a central resolving power, under perfect conditions, of
> approximately 68 l/mm. Looked at objectively, the raw image quality  
> is about
> the same as a Box Brownie. All those lovely, crisp, wide angle  
> images you
> perceive are constructed by software processing in the brain.
>
> Here is a partial list of what goes on. The projected image is  
> encoded,
> focus is corrected, edges of objects are enhanced, colors are  
> assigned to
> various portions of the image depending on which cells in the retina  
> are
> activated, small image portions are stitched together as a function of
> eyeball position to form a whole percept, and an illusion of depth is
> created by the disparity of images from each eyeball. A pseudo image  
> is
> created for blank spots (blind spot) in the retina. In addition,  
> geometric
> shapes are corrected so that they accord with experience. Objects  
> viewed at
> a distance are made to appear larger. Colors constancy is maintained  
> despite
> changes in the viewing light. And the same image enhancement  
> techniques
> could be applied to tomorrow's digital cameras.
>
> Microcomputer technology has reached the point where lens defects  
> can be
> corrected in software better than in glass. The defects that are  
> most easily
> fixed are those of geometric representation. Pincushioning and barrel
> distortion corrections are almost trivial. Intensity fall off at the  
> edge of
> a wide angle image can be dealt with fairly easily provided sufficient
> information exists to let the software boost or subdue a portion of  
> the
> image. Coma, astigmatism, and field curvature are harder to fix but  
> all have
> been done in special purpose packages. Most difficult, at least with a
> planar sensor are color refractive aberrations.
>
> The fact that most geometric aberrations can be corrected in  
> software frees
> up lens designers. They can concentrate on creating faster multifocal
> lenses, or superior performance lenses with fewer elements. This is  
> not a
> new idea. Image defects have been corrected by other means for  
> decades.
> Extreme wide angle lenses (Hypergon, etc.) often used a variable  
> density
> filter, darker in the center than the edges, to equalize image density
> across the frame. Some cameras, both cheap and very expensive, used  
> curved
> film planes to compensate for curvature of field. The Kodak Brownie,  
> the
> Minox, and large astronomical telescopes all used this trick. Even  
> Leica
> uses offset micro lenses to change the angle of light rays at the  
> edge of
> the field.
>
> So here is what I envision for a future generation of digital  
> cameras.  At
> the final stage of manufacture, a lens, fitted to its camera body, is
> focused on a diagnostic target. The image from the camera's sensor is
> compared with a theoretically perfect image of the target.  
> Pincushioning,
> barrel distortion, and image fall off are measured, corrected and the
> correction factors logged. If the lens is of variable focus design,
> corrections are logged for each focal length. Areas of poorer  
> resolution are
> determined and local sharpening is employed to provide uniform  
> apparent
> quality over the field of view. A lookup table with all the  
> corrections is
> burned on a microchip and incorporated into the lens mount.
>
> When the lens is mounted to the camera, the camera's microcomputer  
> notes the
> corrections necessary to get a perfect image with that particular  
> lens and
> adjusts its image processing to suit. In addition, dead pixels in  
> the sensor
> are mapped (hopefully very few) and a fill in algorithm is used to  
> provide a
> seamless image. Each lens that can be fitted to the camera carries  
> its own
> lookup table for a "perfect image."
>
> Will it be costly? Maybe at first, but the magic of electronics is  
> an ever
> decreasing price curve. Once lens data chips and adaptive camera
> microcomputers are mass produced, and automatic lens calibration  
> systems are
> developed, the cost will almost certainly be lower than conventional  
> cameras
> of equivalent performance. Faster microcomputers will make the new  
> digital
> cameras as responsive as the old film cameras. After all, it is much  
> cheaper
> to make a digital chip than a precision lens element. Did I mention  
> that I
> bought a half dozen full function scientific digital calculators for  
> $1 each
> at the Dollar store?
>
> Nature doesn't depend on perfect optics to provide a perfect image.  
> Why
> should Leica?
>
> Of course all this may never come to pass. Both the Mayans and  
> Hollywood
> predict that the world will come to an end in 2012. My ordinary  
> Leica will
> be good enough to take pictures of the last few minutes. Maybe alien  
> space
> travelers will see them.
>
> Larry Z
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information