jonathan_houser Posted August 16, 2005 Share Posted August 16, 2005 What is the issue with adding a digital back to an existing M? Is it the horizontal cloth curtain? They did it with the DMR why not add a back to an M? Please enlighten me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__jon__ Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Archives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemeng Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 The following topic in the FAQ I maintain may be of help:<p> <a href="http://www.nemeng.com/leica/004f.shtml">http://www.nemeng.com/leica/004f.shtml</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland_larson Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Zeiss adopted a Distagon configuration instead of a Hologon for their latest 15mm in the recent Zeiss Ikon line up; an indication of a future digital route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymond_tai Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Roland, I thought the Distagon design was so the len would not block the meter cell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene_e._mccluney Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Leica has stated that the future Digital "M" mount camera will have a vertical travel metal focal plane shutter. So, don't expect this future camera to exactly resemble the current "M" body. The R9 also has a vertical metal focal plane shutter. As it is now produced, the DMR is quite a big add on piece of gear. I would expect the Digital "M" to also be bigger, perhaps taller and a bit thicker than current "M" bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene_e._mccluney Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I hope you folks aren't expecting the future Digital "M" body to look exactly like a current M7, or MP. I seriously doubt that it will have the same profile. It will be a "M" because it will accept "M" mount lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben z Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 " What is the issue with adding a digital back to an existing M? Is it the horizontal cloth curtain? They did it with the DMR why not add a back to an M?" That's a question that's come across my mind also, and none of the so-called technical explanations thus far offered by anyone has answered it to my satisfaction. Digital backs can function on view cameras for gosh sakes, not to mention the Hasselblad 500 series, so the argument that the M camera has no electronic contacts to "talk" to the back sounds like bull to me. In fact the M6/M7/MP _do_ have electronic contacts, for transmitting the ISO to the meter, which is more than the Hasselblads have. There's a removable back door on the M, and space inside where the film casette normally goes that some of the digital guts could fit up into. On the M4-2 and newer, there's the pin from the shutter release that triggers the motor drive so it could trigger the CCD to capture. What _would_ be difficult issues to solve are the cropping of the framelines in the viewfinder (no easy way I can think of short of replacing the entire mask set), and the additional bulk such a back would involve. What I think would be a neat thing for Leica to do is design a "digital upgrade" which one could send them an M body and have them remove the film takeup spool, fit the digital electronics into the two body cavities, replace the back door with a digital one with an LCD, and change the frame mask set to correspond to the crop factor. Maybe the baseplate would have to be as thick as the current Motordrive-M. Imagine being able to pick the Leica of your choice to become digital. The same technology would let them offer digital as an a-la-carte option with new MP or M7 bodies as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland_larson Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Raymond, yes, by moving the rear of the lens away from the film/imaging plane, a Distagon won't block the metering cell like a Hologon will do, and that also facilitates a less oblique angle of incident light, which is desirable for today's sensor arrays, and is very well explained in Andrew's works. Distagon is intrinsically more complex and costy than a Hologon. I believe Zeiss isn't doing this just for metering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I don't see any reason why a digital M won't look like a current M. The RD-1 doesn't look much different than a Bessa R2. The problem is the oblique ray issue and the sensors' capability to deal with it. That is going to be solved. No two ways about it. And when it is, you'll be clipping a digital back to your M2, M3, M4, M6, or M7, perhaps right over the current film viewing hatch, that happens to pop off. And it'll be a commercial success. Everybody who has a film Leica will want one. Or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johns1 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Why don't we start a rumor? To wit: what will the Epson RD-2 look like and when will it appear? See, isn't this fun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzdavid Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Check out http://www.kbcamera.com/mdigital.htm . Not sure of the date of this, but some interesting comments from Leica. I think an M module would be great, simply because the digital part of the camera will become obsoescent long before the mechanical part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now