[LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- From: Steve Barbour <kididdoc@xxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:36:33 -0700
On Aug 28, 2007, at 3:11 PM, David Young wrote:
At 28/08/2007, you wrote:
Xavier,
to be quite honest I would like an R7 sized Leica DSLR too :-) ,
the R8/9 may be wonderfully ergonomic, but I don't like the size,
particularly not when a DMR is stuck on the back. I personally
think that the R10D will be something of a retro-design in this
respect - let's look forward to the R7 digital upgrade!
Best from Hannover
Douglas
Douglas, Xavier:
I think you'll see an R10
I'll believe it when I see it David....
(is this based on anything beyond half baked promises, innuendos, and
speculation ?)
Steve
that is similar in size to the R8/9. There are several reasons for
this...
1) the finder/mirror box is already designed. Only small mods would
be needed to adapt the finder for AF, if they put it in.... and I
think they will have to. This means they don't have to reinvent the
wheel, thus lowering costs and speeding development. Although the
body casting would be different, internally, to fit the very
different "bits", the outside (layout, knobs, covering etc)., is,
again, almost done - except for the back.
2) the R4 though 7 cameras were really nice to use (I owned several
of them!), but their finders were not as bright as the R8 & R9.
Why? Because the prisms were smaller, and (for optical reasons I
don't understand) a larger prism will always deliver a brighter
finder image. Unfortunately, this also means a larger, heavier
body. However, there is a large demand for a finder of at least
the R8/9 quality (I know Doug would like an SL quality finder, but
I don't think that will happen), and the Japanese are improving
their finders in their 'pro' models. Leica will need to compete.
3) It's easier to design the electronics/motorized shutter cocking,
etc, into a larger space. A smaller model, if desired, can always
come later. (They gotta have something for the R11!)
However, I will be very surprised if it is any larger than the R9 -
**without** a winder/dmr etc. attached.
Of course, I could be completely wrong, too.
---
David Young,
Logan Lake, CANADA
Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/
Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt
Stock Photography at: http://tinyurl.com/2amll4
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
- Follow-Ups:
- [LRflex] Was D40, Now R10 speculation & Rochester.
- From: David Young
- References:
- [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- From: Bille Xavier F.
- [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- From: Douglas Sharp
- [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- From: David Young
Other related posts:
- » [LRflex] 40 D on the way
- » [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- » [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- » [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- » [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
At 28/08/2007, you wrote:
Xavier,to be quite honest I would like an R7 sized Leica DSLR too :-) , the R8/9 may be wonderfully ergonomic, but I don't like the size, particularly not when a DMR is stuck on the back. I personally think that the R10D will be something of a retro-design in this respect - let's look forward to the R7 digital upgrade!Best from Hannover Douglas
Douglas, Xavier: I think you'll see an R10
1) the finder/mirror box is already designed. Only small mods would be needed to adapt the finder for AF, if they put it in.... and I think they will have to. This means they don't have to reinvent the wheel, thus lowering costs and speeding development. Although the body casting would be different, internally, to fit the very different "bits", the outside (layout, knobs, covering etc)., is, again, almost done - except for the back.
2) the R4 though 7 cameras were really nice to use (I owned several of them!), but their finders were not as bright as the R8 & R9. Why? Because the prisms were smaller, and (for optical reasons I don't understand) a larger prism will always deliver a brighter finder image. Unfortunately, this also means a larger, heavier body. However, there is a large demand for a finder of at least the R8/9 quality (I know Doug would like an SL quality finder, but I don't think that will happen), and the Japanese are improving their finders in their 'pro' models. Leica will need to compete.
3) It's easier to design the electronics/motorized shutter cocking, etc, into a larger space. A smaller model, if desired, can always come later. (They gotta have something for the R11!)
However, I will be very surprised if it is any larger than the R9 - **without** a winder/dmr etc. attached.
Of course, I could be completely wrong, too. --- David Young, Logan Lake, CANADA Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/ Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt Stock Photography at: http://tinyurl.com/2amll4 ------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm Archives are at: http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
- [LRflex] Was D40, Now R10 speculation & Rochester.
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- From: Bille Xavier F.
- [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- From: Douglas Sharp
- [LRflex] Re: 40 D on the way
- From: David Young