[LRflex] Re: Was: NOW: Numbers. - NOW R Lens Production
- From: Richard Ward <ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:17:44 -0700 (PDT)
Howdy R.,
please believe me when I say that my comment re: AF "accuracy" was NOT a
condemnation of Autofocus. I love AF, Use AF, Rely on AF in many situations.
But
part and parcel with embracing AF's Wonderfulness is accepting the foibles of
Autofocus Cameras and Lenses, as well. There is an inherent lack of
repeatability in the focusing drive trains of AF lenses - it is not a fatal
flaw
by any means, but it is there unless lens aperture or inherent depth of field
(ie: wide focal lengths) is present to cover it up. I cite your positive
experience with a Fifty, a Thirty Five, A Twenty Eight, A Twenty Four, A
Twenty,
and a Standard 24-85 Zoom (presumably f2.8 - which ain't all that wide except
by
zoom standards).
Maybe I should have substituted 'precision' for accuracy in making my humorous
comment?
I am not a luddite by any means. I do find great pleasure in using Manual Focus
R Lenses on my EOS 20D, but it is done in conscious awareness of the 'loss' of
the benefits a good AF Fifty and Good AF Ninety would give me.
Given my druthers, I would have an EOS 50L as a part of my kit, an 85L too for
that matter! But alongside my Summicron Fifty and Elmarit Ninety because of
what
they do well, too - not as a rejection of autofocus. BTW both those EOS L
lenses
have terrible reputations for inaccuracy of autofocus!
It just occurred to me that Maybe my advocating Leica going with a Camera based
focus mechanism and 'manual focus' lenses gives the wrong impression. I think
Leica should do so because it's easier to design/build an 'expense justifying'
user experience with lenses without focus motors in them! Manual Focus Lenses
are right in Leica's wheelhouse for both design experience and reputation - why
not leverage both for a camera to round out the 5 thousand dollar gap between
the x1 and a M9 in their product line? I think a 3-4k body and a few lenses
ranging between 1 to 2k would sell like wild fire.
They could then slap a mount adapter mechanism with real aperture control on
it,
call it the R option and add more than a few k in unit volume. Further,
authorize fotodiox or somebody to sell/design/make 'real aperture' mount
adapters for nik/fd/pk/m42/exacta/contax etc etc etc and pocket the license
fees
and the profits of selling even more camera bodies to those people wanting to
use those old lenses 'properly'. Probably even sell em a leica lens or two in
the bargain.
I see almost no chance on god's green earth that Leica dives into making a dSLR
with a 35mm sized sensor. Maybe in the years/decades ahead - who knows, but an
S2 is almost the same size as an R8 with grip. With a huge sensor, it's got a
huge leg up on it's competitors, but if they put an M9 sized sensor in it then
it's nose to nose with Nik/Can Pro dSLRs which will slice and dice em on price,
features, and lens selection. Which will be the Predators and Which will be the
Poo?
Richard in Michigan
:-)
________________________________
[---Insert Irony Here---]
________________________________
________________________________
From: Robert Meier <robertmeier@xxxxxxxxx>
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, September 29, 2010 8:48:41 PM
Subject: [LRflex] Re: Was: NOW: Numbers. - NOW R Lens Production
R in Michigan,
You haven't had good results with autofocus? What cameras and
lenses have you tried? I have gotten much more precise and accurate
focus with a Nikon F6 and a variety of lenses, 50/1.4, 35/2, 28/2.8,
24/2.8, 20/2.8 and 24~85mm. I have gotten sharper pictures with the
180/3.4 Apo-Telyt and the R8 than I have with any other lens for any
camera, but for shooting indoors with normal and wideangle lenses,
the F6 beats the R8 most of the time.
R in Minnesota
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
