Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hey guys! Do you know what the problem is? It's theory, you are also thinking too much about stuff you have no control over and if you discard all this kind of thinking and just look through the rangefinder without the major technical thought process you'll take very fine photographs and enjoy the camera to a greater extent! However please be my guest at all this hyper jargon, as I do find it interesting. Unfortunately being a person of lesser intelligence I can never understand what yer talking about quite simply because I'm just a photographer who takes pictures without thought, but enjoyment of the captured moment! ;-) ;-) ;-) cheers, Dr. ted. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Geoff Hopkinson" <hopsternew at gmail.com> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 9:15 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] Some technical speculations re: rangefinder > Herb I would add that the M framing of course is only a guide and the > instruction books show approximate error (in frameline widths) at > minimum/maximum distance > > > > Cheers, > Geoff > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman > > > > On 22 July 2012 13:23, Herbert Kanner <kanner at acm.org> wrote: > >> Wow! That was something I was not aware of and had me going for a while. >> Then I started thinking about it like the physicist I once was. I said, >> ok, >> when you get closer, the lens has to move away from the sensor/film. Now >> think about a pinhole, which could be thought of as an highly stopped >> down >> lens. As the pinhole moves away from the film/sensor, the angle subtended >> by same becomes smaller. So the frame lines in the viewfinder should get >> closer to each other, making a smaller rectangle. >> >> Good to be forced to think once in a while. >> >> Herb >> >> >> >> Thanks Herb. I am aware of that. I am referring to the size of the >>> framelines. As you get closer, the coverage should get smaller. >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Herbert Kanner <kanner at acm.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Richard, >>> > >>> > We already have parallax adjustment based on focusing distance on all >>> M? >>> > cameras. Hold your camera very steady and watch the frame lines as >>> you >>> > focus from minimum distance to infinity. If it isn't visible on those >>> 28mm >>> > lines, shift the control to 35mm or longer or put in a longer lens. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > >>> > Herb >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Speculating on an ideal optical rangefinder system (i.e. something >>> that >>> >> retains the Leica M DNA and yet improves on the 1950 state of the >>> art >>> M3), >>> >> what if a rangefinder has the following features: >>> >> >>> >> - LED projected framelines. This removes the clutter, solves the >>> >> visibility >>> >> issue, and >>> >> >>> >> - changeable rangefinder magnification - what if the rangefinder has >>> 0.58x >>> >> to 1.2x mag builtin (may be in 4 steps: 0.58x, 0.72x, 0.9x and 1.2x >>> or >>> >> something similar)? This would allow more precise focusing from the >>> wide >>> >> to >>> >> tele. This will leverage the existing frame line trigger and 6 bit >>> coding >>> >> system of course so this would be automatic >>> >> >>> >> - parallax adjustment based on focusing distance >>> >> >>> >> We know LED framelines can be done. The M9 Titanium has it. >>> >> >>> >> The XPan has 2 magnifications: one for the 45mm lens and one for the >>> 90mm >>> >> lens. I have no idea how difficult it is to insert multiple mag >>> piece >>> as >>> >> needed. Anyone knows? >>> >> >>> >> The cam position should also give good indication of the focusing >>> distance >>> >> too, along with the lens info, so #3 is technically feasible too. >>> >> >>> >> Chances are Leica nor anyone else would really spend the resource to >>> >> develop something like these, since a CMOS/Liveview is so much >>> "simpler," >>> >> but would it be nice to have such a system? >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> // richard >>> <http://www.richardmanphoto.****com<http://www.**richardmanphoto.com<http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >>> > >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> ______________________________****_________________ >>> >> Leica Users Group. >>> >> See >>> http://leica-users.org/****mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug> >>> <http://**leica-users.org/mailman/**listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>>for >>> >>> more information >>> >> >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Herbert Kanner >>> > kanner at acm.org >>> > 650-326-8204 >>> > >>> > Question authority and the authorities will question you. >>> > >>> > >>> > ______________________________****_________________ >>> > Leica Users Group. >>> > See >>> http://leica-users.org/****mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug> >>> <http://**leica-users.org/mailman/**listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>>for >>> >>> more information >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> // richard >>> <http://www.richardmanphoto.**com<http://www.richardmanphoto.com> >>> > >>> >>> ______________________________**_________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See >>> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for >>> >>> more information >>> >> >> -- >> Herbert Kanner >> kanner at acm.org >> 650-326-8204 >> >> Question authority and the authorities will question you. >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See >> http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for >> >> more information >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information