Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/10/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] now discussing Leica digital sensors
From: photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil Forrest)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:32:45 -0400
References: <20111012172805.22df08d2@linux-pfy5.site> <684B427F-1D19-4025-815F-4AFADEB49724@frozenlight.eu> <1640419608271aff8c1a838ea1a5347a@mail.gmail.com> <CAE3QcF401R27awFAomGDcgAniLPOt6Ftf4BVF0TVdjqr+ga5Ng@mail.gmail.com> <CABmfTOVYrwO5pieH07M95QQXHKBfdd2LL98pYnc7UZ8NjjQv=g@mail.gmail.com> <CAE3QcF7qeX2MqyZHvWs5LSyxvua3VY78zH_Hzh8ChD9hQw=C5w@mail.gmail.com> <CABmfTOXGJZAJLodMWW=1vDgVeq4eG7u3i3O4utfWt+P+y51vkg@mail.gmail.com>

It's derailed

Phil Forrest


On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:38:03 +1030
Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe: "impossible" just wasn't the right word for leica to use, even
> in the early 2000s.
> 
> Marty
> 
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Geoff Hopkinson
> <hopsternew at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe some semantics? Having talked a little with the senior
> > engineers there and beta tested their firmware I can confirm that
> > there is a LOT happening to produce the results you see.
> > Respect what the camera produces from even lenses designed 50 year
> > before the camera was thought of ;-)
> >
> > Cheers
> > Geoff
> >
> > *Lighting- eyes- action*
> >
> >
> >
> > On 13 October 2011 23:05, Marty Deveney <benedenia at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The microlenses and software corrections were established
> >> technologies when Leica were saying it was impossible to make a
> >> digital M - they just hadn't put the two ideas together in their
> >> heads. ?They also thought they could hang in with film and would
> >> be okay, but they were wrong. ?It was the same when Ernst Leitz
> >> said that the rangefinder would prevail over the SLR. ?Many, many
> >> other companies have done it and not survived - Leica have been
> >> fortunate, luckily for us.
> >>
> >> It's a long way from "nearly impossible".
> >>
> >> Marty
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Geoff Hopkinson
> >> <hopsternew at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi Jim. I don't want to derail the thread you are in.
> >> > But let me tell you that was and is nearly true.
> >> > There is a LOT done in the camera with every file from the M9
> >> > even in the raw files. There is a BIG lot done on anything from
> >> > wide lenses. Only the idea of different angles on micro-lenses
> >> > towards the edges made this possible at all and it is still at
> >> > the ragged edge.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers
> >> > Geoff
> >> >
> >> > *Lighting- eyes- action*
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 13 October 2011 22:51, Jim Shulman <jshulman at judgecrater.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have so many memories of Sal, one of which was his lengthy
> >> >> explanation (delivered from top brass at Leica) on why there
> >> >> could never be a
> >> digital
> >> >> M. ?Evidently the physics of the camera made a digital version
> >> >> utterly impossible.
> >> >>
> >> >> J
> >> >>


Replies: Reply from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] now discussing Leica digital sensors)
In reply to: Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil Forrest) ([Leica] Culmination of Sal DiMarco research)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Culmination of Sal DiMarco research)
Message from jshulman at judgecrater.com (Jim Shulman) ([Leica] Culmination of Sal DiMarco research)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Culmination of Sal DiMarco research)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] Culmination of Sal DiMarco research)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Culmination of Sal DiMarco research)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] Culmination of Sal DiMarco research)