Stopping down would be a problem if ambient light was low and you were using flash. And yes a LCD on the back would be good for composition but unless it had a zoom mode it would be useless for manual focusing ( but if the RF was quality then that wouldnt be needed).
This got me thinking. Do any of the current DSLRs have a multi scan mode with low light conditions so you could put the camera on a tripod and get better noise performance or is a simple long exposure time good enuff to do the job? JCO > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:44 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace (inc stuff > on Pentax digital) > > > Or they could put a digital viewfinder on it. The nice thing about this > would be that you could ALWAYS have DOF preview engaged, and not have a > dark image to try and see properly. > > I think with digital, using a rangefinder would be less of a problem > anyway as you could always verify stuff on the LCD if you wanted. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 02 September 2002 10:36 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace > > (inc stuff on Pentax digital) > > > > > > but arent all high end digital cameras > > SLRS? I dont think it would be possible > > to make a SLR which could take the leica M > > lenses do to short flange to sensor distance. > > Maybe they could develop the world's first > > digital rangefinder? > > JCO > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Rob Brigham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 5:19 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Michael Reichmann's take on current marketplace > > (inc stuff on > > > Pentax digital) > > > > > > > > > From "http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/get-it.shtml"; > > > > > > Manufacturers. Don't get me started! Well, maybe a little. > > > > > > The saying goes that "The Internet changes everything", and to some > > > extent it's true. But try telling that to some of the large > > Japanese > > > manufacturers. Epson is a good example. They release products in > > > Europe ahead of North America and then when reviews appear > > online and > > > questions start to be asked their U.S. office plays dumb. > > New printer. > > > What new printer? > > > > > > They then ship essentially the same product but with quite > > different > > > accessories, and a different product number. Most memorable is the > > > fiasco of not including the Gray Balancer that ships with > > the European > > > Photo Stylus 2100 with the North American 2200 model. Back > > before the > > > Internet (say, prior to 1995) no one would be the wiser. An > > American > > > might buy a UK photo magazine months later, read about the > > difference, > > > shrug and think that these were two different products. Not > > anymore, > > > and Epson just doesn't get it. > > > > > > Not to pick only on that estimable printer manufacturer. We all owe > > > them a debt of gratitude for their advances in photographic inkjet > > > printing technology. There are other examples. Mamiya is > > one already > > > mentioned, for assuming that consumers still can't figure > > out the huge > > > price differential being charged for the same product in different > > > countries. Click. Ahh, so that's what the price is in the U.K. > > > > > > Pentax is another, but for different reasons. They make two > > excellent > > > medium format cameras, the 645 Nii and the 67ii. There is a huge > > > installed base of lenses, especially for the 67, which has > > been around > > > for some 30 years. But almost alone among medium format makers they > > > are being sidelined by digital. Most medium format makers > > have models > > > with interchangeable backs. This means that digital backs > > can be used, > > > and they increasingly are by professionals. The economics of > > > professional photography demand this, if nothing else. > > > > > > But the Pentax 67 can't take any backs, and the ones on the > > Pentax 645 > > > are inserts, not full backs. Unless Pentax addresses this situation > > > soon they will be marginalized in the medium format arena as > > > photographers increasingly move to digital. There may be > > nothing they > > > can do with the 67 format, but certainly they can bring out a body > > > that accepts digital backs and that uses the array of autofocus and > > > prior lenses for their 645 system. If they don't, and soon, > > legions of > > > photographers with investments in Pentax MF systems will start to > > > abandon them. > > > > > > Then there's Leica. Dear old Leica, maker of arguably some of the > > > finest (and needless to say, most expensive) 35mm > > photographic lenses > > > ever made. There's no way that they have the financial > > wherewithal to > > > develop a digital camera that can utilize them themselves. But, > > > they've recently partnered with Matsushita (Panasonic), and Leica > > > branded lenses are showing up on Panasonic digicams, and Leica is > > > OEMing these under their own brand. > > > > > > Matsushita also makes advanced imaging chips. In fact the > > chip in one > > > of the major high-end DSLRs from another major camera > > manufacturer is > > > from them. So, how about taking Panasonic's chip technology and > > > manufacturing capabilities and marrying these with a some high-end > > > Leica glass? That would put Leica back on the map and would > > give them > > > something worthwhile to do other than produce green lizard-skin > > > covered M6's for the Japanese collector market. > > > > > > > >
