Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/04/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have to say that I'm amused by the fact that on the one hand, people talking about wanting a camera that works like an M, doesn't have all the digifoldarol, etc. etc., and on the other someone's asking for a histogram superimposed on the viewfinder - talking about digifoldarol and not destroying the entire idea of that bright, clear, uncluttered viewfinder....:-) -----Original Message----- From: lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug-bounces+bdcolen=earthlink.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Adam Bridge Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 1:55 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] Pt Three of Digilux 2 posted On 4/12/04 <pklein@2alpha.net (Peter Klein)> thoughtfully wrote: > >I've thought for years that an LCD matrix projecting framelines into a >Leica M viewfinder was a viable way to go. The correct distance >field-of-view and focal length could easily by determined by the focus >cam and the lens mount. What problem with the current system does this solve? There are no "infinite" zoom lenses for the M that would mandate such a system. It's a camera for primes. While I'd love a 35-90 f2.0 zoom I have a feeling that it would weigh more than the camera at and not be as good as any of the current f2.0 primes. Now for a digital M I'd like to be able to superimpose the histogram on the viewfinder and once you've done that then computing the framelines would make sense and probably just fall out of the design. Of course I'd want to be able to turn that off in a trivial fashion. Adam _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information