Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]BD Then the lens to sensor distance would be greater than that of an M camera, and you could not focus to infinity. What you would need to do this would be a retrofocus lens, or an intermediate lens element placed between the prime lens and the Leica M body which could increase the lens-to-focal plane distance, without increasing the actual focal length of the prime lens. Jerry bdcolen wrote: > There is one thing I don't get in all this - If the rear lens element > must be further from the digital sensor than it must be from the film > plane of the Leica M, and if what we're talking about is creating the > same sort of Digoflex for the M that Leica is creating for the R, why > can't this Digoflex simply consist of a bottom and back unit similar to > that being created for the R, with the sensor mounted at the correct > distance from the lens rear element? > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Frank > Farmer > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 11:58 AM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: Re: [Leica] R8/R9 Digital Back announced > > I think it goes something like this: Film can react to light coming > from many different angles. That is why the rear elements of M lenses > can be so close to the film plane. However, the current batch of > digital sensor technology requires the light to hit the sensor at pretty > much a 90 degree angle (or much closer to it than film requires). > Because the shape of a M body puts the lens so close to the would-be > digital sensor, the sensor is not able to capture the desired image > because the light is hitting it at an obtuse angle whereas film is able > to capture the image because it can deal with that circumstance. At > least, that is how I understand it. Who knows whether sensor > techonology will 'catch up' with film in that regard so that a sensor > could be placed in a M type body. Maybe it will happen. Right now, it > is impossible. > > Frank > > -------Original Message------- > From: Jim McIntyre <mcintyre@ca.inter.net> > Sent: 06/26/03 09:12 PM > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] R8/R9 Digital Back announced > > > > > Ok, I'd like some clarification. The consensus seems to be the M > > lenses are > not suited to fit a digital body because of physics, angle of incidence > or whatever. > > Now I realize that some of this will be buried in the archive, but I'm > lazy...I'd rather someone tell me again. ;-) > > If the M camera can mount an M lense, and focus on the film plane, then > it seems logical that that same film plane can be a digital sensor. Am I > in deep space on this? > > Kit, are you being coy or do you know something? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kit McChesney | acmefoto" <kitmc@acmefoto.com> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > > > > Not necessarily. --K > > > > At 1:58 PM -0400 6/26/03, Emanuel Lowi wrote: > > >While the idea of an adapted M for digital is a no-go, what I'd like > > >to > see is a > > >digital body with dimensions/size/weight very similar to an M with > Leicavit, that can > > >mount M lenses on the front. > > > > > >For me, the shape/size/weight of the M has as more to do with its > virtues > as a > > >shooting tool than do the specifics of its shutter type, > > >advance/rewind > mechanism and > > >(omigosh) focussing system. > > > > > >Emanuel Lowi > > >Montreal > > > > Unfortunately, it's the lenses that are the main problem. > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html