Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Dennis, I wasn't arguing for or against sprockets. In terms of what might be more desirable in the future, lets head sprocketless and increase the available film size for a 'Super 35mm' format. Retaining the same ration one could envisage a 30x45mm neg size, increasing the negative area by over 50%! Of course new lens ranges, enlargers, scanners and cameras would have to be built but that's what the industry thrives on, new products! Jem - -----Original Message----- From: Dennis Painter [SMTP:dpainter@bigfoot.com] Sent: 12 September 2000 04:59 To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] HEXAR RF vs. M5 vs. M6 So why do sprokets have to drive the film? they could just measure the movement. They would need a sensor to indicate one frame. A microswitch would suffice. Would it be better than their ir sensor? would either be better than an even more mechanical method? I don't know and doubt anyone on this list does know save Tom. Dennis Jem Kime wrote: > > Dante, > I see what you mean, having revisited the brochure. > Having no sprockets to drive the film, the motorised collecting spool needs > to be told when to stop rotating. > I suppose it's a moot point whether the optical/electronic route for the > Konica will be of greater longevity than the mechanical route perpetuated > by Leica. From the last 30 years of camera electronics one might be tempted > to argue in favour of the tried and trusted formula, though where would we > be without innovation? > > Jem > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dante A Stella [SMTP:dante@umich.edu] > > It has a tiny sensor that counts the number of sprocket holes going by > (instead of that double-toothed spool found in most cameras), so as the > takeup > spool gets more full, it doesn't have an effect on spacing. I don't know > how > constant the spacing is with superwideangles - but the film rails do look > relatively low, so I imagine it would be ok. > > Dante > > Jem Kime wrote: > > > Dante, > > Can you illuminate me on this point please? Do you mean the Konica > advances > > the film precisely so as to present a constant width between each > negative > > irrespective of focal length used or other factors? > > Jem > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dante A Stella [SMTP:dante@umich.edu] > > > > ...the Hexar RF does its frame spacing optically - so there are far fewer > > parts to replace. > > > > Dante Stella > > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~dante > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Dante Stella > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~dante