Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Rick Dykstra wrote: > > I hope the digital module has the same shape as the motor drive - then > I'll be able to use my Really Right Stuff camera plate! Excellent gear > that, from RRS. Last year I treated myself to RRS plates for R8, R6.2 > and M6, to go with an RRS B16 vertical format clamp, for use on an Arca > Swiss B2 ball head, on a Gitzo carbon fibre tripod. This stuff is just > the ticket, if you need/want a tripod that is. > > The digi back? Great, but kind of expensive. One good thing about the > news is that I'll not hesitate any longer before buying a consumer > digital camera. Perhaps a Digilux. > > Rick. > I think it's too expensive to make a dent into anything. Even if it was a whole camera it would be too expensive. Just too darn expensive! The fact that it's just a BACK makes it WAAAAAAY too darn expensive. I bet they don't sell thirty of them in a year! They've got to think of a way to have it cost a couple grand or less. Sure it's a bigger chip and on a classy body and shooting the best glass. And we have so many people swayed away by the manual focusing. I think the announcement that this is coming out will stop hundreds of people from selling their R system and getting an N or C system. When they announce they need another year they'll loose have of those people. I hope that really doesn't happen. By the way the camera store guy today told me the 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor-- NEW! is going to be cheap cheap cheap as not expected. He says the reason is the smaller image circle. Made it easier on them. $900 OR LES!! I was guessing it was going to be over $2000! A 12-24 an 18-36 to you! Pixelface! I went 20 years with my widest lens being a 24 and only once did it fall not short enought. . 17 - 35 becomes a 24 - 50. And it fills the frame on that analog silver stuff (film). A 24-50 would be a strange way to shoot but does make a certain sense. It's a wide angle zoom and as such should not go over 50. Or hit 50 if you ask me (see later)*. And it's not an ultrawide zoom which I cant see who would need that let alone everyone. People who shoot inside Volkwagens with a few dozen clowns stuffing themselves in... posing for a group shot. Then you have another lens that was 50-150 in the digital realm in the film realm would be a 35 to 105. Or if it was me doing the whole thing: a 24 to 49. A 50 asph f2.1 and a slow compact pancake or collaspable 50. Then a 51 to 150. or 180... These are non variable apertures 2.8's of course. We cant have that groundglass be all murky! Perhaps without aperture rings to keep the cost down and the weight down. Low desperation glass (ED) Internal focusing and focusing from the back. Silent wave I don't go there. Eye of newt. They great grey pebble finish that you used to see on microscopes and medical equipment in the 50's and 50's and maybe before And the CRC thing which makes it so the lens works just a well near as it does far. Otherwise known as the galumphing elements. And the image circle would have to cover 24x36 - I'm nostalgic. * and have much too much Neopan in the fridge. "Morpheus, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship." Just in case anyone is worried I'll ruin it say that most of the above I've written a joke. But some of it i started to like at the end of it. It is true the 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX is going to be under a grand usa money. DX means digital. One, two! One, two! And through and through The vorpal blade went snicker-snack! He left it dead, and with its head He went galumphing back. - - Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking-Glass" Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabinergroup.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html