[LRflex] Re: Neil's RF vs Digicam Comments
- From: Bob Palmieri <rpalmier@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 10:11:08 -0500
Neil -
Thanks once again for further specifying your take on this issue. As
is often the case, the more precise we are about the details the more
we find that we really don't disagree at all 'bout the big picture.
Good to know that the EVF manual focus thing has some merit on the
Lumix.
Also, I was a bit glib in assuming that digicam=small sensor. It's
just been that way so far, and a digi-RF would potentially give the
designer more room for a nicer patch of real estate.
And my position on this has a lot to do with feeling that digicams were
born of either film point & shoots or "still video cameras," neither of
which threatens the M's function in the firmament. You've reminded me
that there are some other embodiments out there.
Bob Palmieri
On Sep 1, 2005, at 7:23 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> From: Bob Palmieri <rpalmier@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: [LRflex] Re: Neil's RF vs Digicam Comments
>>
>> Neil -
>>
>> (Apologies for the detour into rangefinder discussions..)
>>
>> Do you currently own (and shoot with on a regular basis) an M??
>>
> No... I've been a "hard-core" SLR shooter, since the '60s. ;-)
>
>> All of the tradeoffs that I find are related to the designers'
>> prioritization of teeny size and automation. These are precisely the
>> areas in which a digital rangefinder can offer some relief.
>>
>> In the low-light conditions which I encounter frequently, the digicams
>> I've used don't focus where I want them to. In fact, they usually hunt
>> around and then lock on infinity.
>>
> I agree that autofocus can fail (not only in low-light conditions),
> but in
> that regard it seems that you are building more of a case for manual
> focus
> cameras than for a rangefinder per se. Interestingly, unlike my Nikon
> digicam, I found the manual focusing methods of the Lumix FZ10/20 to be
> quite workable, and even easier in low-light than an SLR because of the
> EVF.
>
>> I haven't tried the 28-70 you mentioned, but can definitely believe
>> it's quite good in the areas of flare and distortion (distortion
>> should largely be correctible by software-based pixel re-mapping with
>> probably minor image quality loss anyway). Are you referring to a
>> nice
> big
>> reflex lens? If so, this is a different ball game.
>>
> I was referring to the Vario-Elmar-R 28-70. My only fleeting urges of
> temptation for a prime in that range is for a faster lens. The zoom on
> my
> Nikon is also a good performer, though it's no match for the
> Vario-Elmar-R.
>
>> And for my uses,
>> 21mm (or equivalent field of view) is my standard wide. I haven't
>> seen that on a digicam.
>>
> Wide angle limitations are largely the result of small sensor size. I
> don't think that there would be much of a problem producing a camera
> with
> a lense equivalent to a 21mm if there was enough of a market to warrant
> it, as such lenses are available for dSLRs.
>
>> Unacceptable low light performance is not really a design choice.
>> It's another byproduct of the teeny little sensors.
>>
> Using teeny little sensors is the design choice I was referring to.
> ;-)
>
>> In short, the designers of the digicams have done their jobs quite
>> well. Small size and automatic features sell cameras to the masses.
>> The potential market for a digital M is basically those folks who
>> currently (or 'till recently) use film-based M's on a regular basis.
>> Which is just not really all that big (or young) of a group.
>>
> I agree with you about the potential market for a digital M, from both
> the
> perspective of who might be attracted to such a product and how
> relatively
> few those purchasers are likely to be.
>
> Regards,
>
> Neil
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
> Archives are at:
> www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
