Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I don't really want to get into this debate as I don't really know what I am talking about, but does the lens of the camera move outwards when you turn it on, and could this be why in the diagrammatic view it is almost touching the sensor? Gerry Gerry Walden LRPS www.gwpics.com - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Frank Dernie Sent: 14 December 2003 09:27 To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica Digilux 2, again So much for all the bullsh*t about angle of incidence at the sensor then eh! If the last element is almost touching the sensor the angle of incidence will be very large unless, I suppose, the periphery of the lens element is not used but then why would it be there? Frank On Sunday, December 14, 2003, at 08:16 am, Eric Welch wrote: > A MUCH shorter focal length. And have you seen the diagram of the > internals of the Digilux2? The last element is almost touching the > sensor. With longer focal lengths, and a shutter in the way, you have > your answer. > > On Dec 13, 2003, at 9:56 AM, eric wrote: > >> The body and lens dimensions look so very M rangefinder. >> So again - Why can't they design a digital M body? >> I know it has been discussed at length about angles of incidence and >> sensors >> not up to the task - but what is so different about the digilux 2 that >> precludes designing a body to accept M lenses? > Eric > Carlsbad, CA > > 'Never ask a man what computer he uses. If it's a Mac, he'll tell you. > If it's not, why embarrass him?'" - Tom Clancey > > -- > 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