Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/11/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]This indeed is the holy grail of all the M users - a simple, full frame, digital M body. Heck, just put a tweaked A7r sensor with better microlens for M lens in the lower cost ZM body and call it a day. On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Scott Gregory <scottgregory at mac.com> wrote: > Mark I hope that happens for you. M glass sitting around not being used is > such a waste!! > > Scott > > > On Nov 8, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> > > wrote: > > > > It turned out that layer of Microlenses was par for the course in sensor > > design for many and most cameras way before even the M8.. The one's for > the > > Leica Ms were perhaps angled a bit more inward than the others but the > > technology was there in the past and present. > > It strikes me that other than the non micro 4/3's spec most present > camera > > systems have a wide in their systems that have a rear element which > comes a > > bit closer to the plane of focus. So its likely the edges of their micro > > lens sensor layer have their angle turned in a bit. That's why the whole > > layer is there. > > I think there is hope for users such as myself looking for a simple not > > super high end flat box (mirrorless) full frame camera for their/ my M > > glass. > > The idea being the bodies would not cost seven grand. > > For sure the ideal M glass enabling solution would be a new M. but I > think a > > full frame mirrorless could get me out shooting with my M glass again > with > > results better not worse than what I'd been getting with my Nikon system. > > And with a shooting solution which could take over my workflo. In other > > words the camera I grab on the way out the door every day. > > > > > >> On 11/7/13 10:14 AM, "Frank Filippone" <red735i at verizon.net> wrote: > >> > >> Bob Adler has stated that the dynamic range of the M far exceeds ( 2 > stops?) > >> the M9, and closely approaches his Phase 1 MF back. > >> > >> But back to the main discussion..... If the camera is applying > corrections > >> to the image, rather than a computer, aren't the same issues at play? > To > >> theory, yes. In practice, the microlenses take away part of the > problem.... > >> As Adler's shot of the Caf? shows, even at 21mm, there is some > vignetting > >> left, even on a M body. > >> > >> The sensor in the M9 ( and M8 and M) all have (M lens) tuned > microlenses to > >> help with the vignetting...... You will not get these in a non-Leica > camera > >> body. > >> Of course, the amount of need of vignetting correction is dependent on > your > >> lenses... if you shoot a lot of 21mm, then it is handy that the > microlenses > >> are there. If you shoot at a minimum of 35mm, not so important..... > and at > >> 50mm and longer, not important. > >> > >> Personally, I do not find the vignetting issue a game killer. You can > >> correct it. You can live with it, and for 150 years, it was not only > >> uncorrectable, but desirable as part of the physical picture "frame". > And > >> again, it depends on your scene..... sometimes having the corners a bit > >> darker is a real annoyance..... sometimes it makes not an iota of > difference > >> and adds to the ambience of the scene. > >> > >> The A7r is the camera Leica should be concerned with.... You may not > call it > >> a RF camera, but it represents the best of the RF camera genre..... > Small, > >> full featured, high resolution sensor (36MP), stealthy (? Not so sure > yet, > >> but the M9 is no Rollei TLR either in the noisy department), has real > >> advantages in focus when in darkened lighting, reliable from the > standpoint > >> of small number of mechanical parts to go out of calibration, and best > of > >> all, it looks through the lens, and can use Leica (M or R) glass. If > the > >> focus peaking is good (jury is still out), it is a killer solution to > the M > >> and many DSLR cameras. > >> > >> Leica, if you are listening: The M Type 240 is going to have its lunch > >> eaten because of this camera and others that will follow it. > >> > >> Go make an EVF only M camera. The competition is changing the > market...... > >> > >> Frank Filippone > >> Red735i at verizon.net > >> > >> > >> If you needed to increase the exposure in the main part of the field by > say > >> two stops for every exposure and apply a colour correction you would > >> appreciate that the correction comes at a cost of dynamic range, tonal > depth > >> and noise performance for example. It's happening in the corners for > every > >> frame with wides on the M9. Does it matter in practice??? yeah no maybe > >> depends ;-) > >> > >> In the case of the M9, I can comment that the amount of correction with > >> wider lenses is quite significant to achieve the desired result at all. > I > >> was a firmware tester for the system. > >> > >> The M is another discussion. I just recovered a few poor exposures that > were > >> two stops or more under (albeit minimum ISO) with excellent > >> results...remarkable. > >> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/153233601 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Leica Users Group. > >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Mark William Rabiner > > Photographer > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> // http://facebook.com/richardmanphoto