WOA - that Pana L1 looks good!!!!

nickleback · Feb 27, 2006

arachnophilia said:
if there's an override with the electrical contacts, why have the
mechanical one at all on the other lenses? and one that is actually
used by the camera?

Backwards compatibility. Nikon went through a series of changes to get to where they are today, which makes for a slightly complicated lens/body compatibility chart:

http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/other/compatibility.html

Canon and Olympus have no need for such a chart, as for both when they went AF they made a whole new mount whose coupling is completely electronic. No wacky mechanical/electrical hybrids.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

Erik Magnuson · Feb 27, 2006

arachnophilia said:
well, most of the nikon ones for a start.

I'll have to remember this next time someone lauds Nikon ergonomics.

arachnophilia said:
just that it's not an improvement on the old controls,

Depends on which "old controls" we're talking about. The nested dials implementation was very difficult to read (particularly in bad light) and was harder to set precisely.

arachnophilia said:
and hardly and argument better and more ergonomic
design.

It can and will be done better (the D200 seems an improvement.) But now that the dial does not have to physically couple to the meter, the camera designers have options not limited by tradition.

arachnophilia said:
i was just mentioning that your claim was impossible.

Not impossible. Several newer cameras make this rather easy.

--
Erik

nickleback · Feb 27, 2006

arachnophilia said:
arachnophilia said:

All new mounts that have not worried about backward compatibility
have gone electronic.

Click to expand...

yes, they have. why? maybe it's simpler to build the af and
exposure controls as one unified chip-contact system?

Electronic contacts are less expensive and offer greater flexibility for placement.

arachnophilia said:
arachnophilia said:

Not really on a modern DSLR that can commonly go 500-1000 shots
before needing a battery change.

Click to expand...

one of my film slr's goes 5-10 years before needing a battery
change (and it takes watch batteries). my other other film slr
doesn't take batteries at all.

I think something needed to be changed ever 24 or 36 shots on your film cameras.

arachnophilia said:
arachnophilia said:

arachnophilia said:

the focus and zoom appear to be mechanical.

Click to expand...

Manual focus/zoom are the rule with most DSLRS, so I'm again unsure
of your point here.

Click to expand...

not manual, MECHANICAL. there is a difference.

There are focus-by-wire and zoom-by-wire lenses, but that isn't the norm in DSLR lenses. For example, some of the original Canon EF L lenses had electronic manual focusing. The last remaining Canon EF lens that does this has just been replaced (85mm f/1.2).

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

arachnophilia · Feb 27, 2006

nickleback said:
Electronic contacts are less expensive and offer greater
flexibility for placement.

chips and circuitry are less expensive than plastic tabs? wow.

nickleback said:
I think something needed to be changed ever 24 or 36 shots on your
film cameras.

yeah, and it wasn't my compact flash card.

nickleback said:
There are focus-by-wire and zoom-by-wire lenses, but that isn't the
norm in DSLR lenses. For example, some of the original Canon EF L
lenses had electronic manual focusing. The last remaining Canon EF
lens that does this has just been replaced (85mm f/1.2).

like i said, these are probably mechanical. because in some instances, it really does just work better.

Erik Magnuson · Feb 27, 2006

arachnophilia said:
yes, they have. why? maybe it's simpler to build the af and
exposure controls as one unified chip-contact system?

Don't forget 1/3 stop controls.

arachnophilia said:
one of my film slr's goes 5-10 years before needing a battery
change (and it takes watch batteries). my other other film slr
doesn't take batteries at all.

Good luck getting that on the Panasonic DSLR you are raving about.

arachnophilia said:
well, let me know if your dslr is still working 20 years from now.

My oldest Canon EF lens is from 1992. 14 years and still works great. BTW, it's all electronically operated. Some of my older mechanical lenses need repair: the lube in the focusing helical has decayed and the iris sticks.

arachnophilia said:
not manual, MECHANICAL. there is a difference.

OK, "mechanical" manual focus and "mechanical" zoom are standard on almost every current DSLR lens. So what's the difference you are trying to find here again?

arachnophilia said:
even my (physically) longest lens is not much longer than the width
of my hand.

So at best it's only ergonomic for a subset of lenses?

arachnophilia said:
or the focus ring,

In which case it's not on the aperture ring.

arachnophilia said:
or the zoom ring,

In which case it's not on the aperture ring.

arachnophilia said:
i tend to use a wide or
normal lens, and the controls are all right were i need them.

Right. For a subset of lenses for a subset of users, it's in a useful place. So after all of this, you're just back to "I like it"?

--
Erik

arachnophilia · Feb 27, 2006

sure, but that little connection is still on the d50 and d200. and on the d70, it has to triggered for the camera to function.

backwards compatibility would mean that it wouldn't need to be there, because the newer lenses would work fine, but the lenses would need the tab to work on slightly older cameras. this is a neccessary function on the actual camera body, and one that's in use.

if it's that the older lenses (non-g) don't have the contacts -- why didn't they? either way, you have to justify the presence of a mechanical link.

arachnophilia · Feb 27, 2006

Member said:
I'll have to remember this next time someone lauds Nikon ergonomics.

that's generally not what they're talking about. but i don't really find the newer nikons all that ergonomic. maybe it's just me.

Member said:
Depends on which "old controls" we're talking about. The nested
dials implementation was very difficult to read (particularly in
bad light) and was harder to set precisely.

.... they usually have click stops, and are white on black? i've never, ever had a problem, and i've use my camera in some crazy, poorly lit situations.

Member said:
It can and will be done better (the D200 seems an improvement.) But
now that the dial does not have to physically couple to the meter,
the camera designers have options not limited by tradition.

i have yet to try a d200.

but honestly, what's wrong with tradition?

Member said:
Not impossible. Several newer cameras make this rather easy.

which ones, and how?

Paul H46473 · Feb 27, 2006

Roland Karlsson said:
Ooops .... what a nice looking thing! It looks classic and it even
has a shutter dial. Kudos Panasonic!

I think the camera looks slightly cheesy, like a mock-up, not a production model. The lens looks pretty good, though.

Roland Karlsson said:
Soooooo ... hmmmm ... is 4/3 going to take off now? I mean am I in
the wrong boat?

You're mixing metaphors. You might be on the wrong plane-- boats don't "take off". Or you might have asked if Four Thirds was leaving the dock now.

In the latter case, no one knows what boat you're on, so it's hard to say.

arachnophilia · Feb 27, 2006

Member said:
Don't forget 1/3 stop controls.

this panny appears to have 1/3rd stop controls on shutter speed. do you need both?

and most older (mechanical) lenses have half-stops on the f-stop ring.

Member said:
Member said:

one of my film slr's goes 5-10 years before needing a battery
change (and it takes watch batteries). my other other film slr
doesn't take batteries at all.

Click to expand...

Good luck getting that on the Panasonic DSLR you are raving about.

yes, well, we'd all like digital cameras that run on hopes and dreams. but wouldn't less battery usage be better than more battery usage?

Member said:
My oldest Canon EF lens is from 1992. 14 years and still works
great. BTW, it's all electronically operated. Some of my older
mechanical lenses need repair: the lube in the focusing helical has
decayed and the iris sticks.

of course you realize that those mechanical parts are also found in your electronic lenses?

Member said:
Member said:

not manual, MECHANICAL. there is a difference.

Click to expand...

OK, "mechanical" manual focus and "mechanical" zoom are standard on
almost every current DSLR lens. So what's the difference you are
trying to find here again?

i wasn't. i was just pointing out that not ALL of the controls are electronic, or at least probably. i don't really know.

Member said:
So at best it's only ergonomic for a subset of lenses?

how practical are three foot long lenses for day-to-day use anyways? i think your subset is the other way around here. most lenses are not that big.

Member said:
Member said:

i tend to use a wide or
normal lens, and the controls are all right were i need them.

Click to expand...

Right. For a subset of lenses for a subset of users, it's in a
useful place. So after all of this, you're just back to "I like
it"?

isn't that the basic argument? we're really arguing preferences here. i like it one way, you like it a different way. let's try to keep that in perspective.

and seriously, i think the subset is the group using the paparazzi lenses.

Roland Karlsson · Feb 27, 2006

nickleback said:
There's a reason for the classic position of the shutter dial on
top and aperture on the lens barrel, and it isn't ergonomics.
These positions were mandated by direct mechanical linkage between
the dial/ring and the thing it is controlling.

Maybe ... but those positions work rather well for me.

nickleback said:
But with electronic linkage you can put the controls anywhere,
including where they are most easily accessed. See the 2-dial
control layout of many DSLRs, including the Oly E1.

But you lack the feedback you get when looking at the camera, e.g. when positioned on a tripod, or when taking it up.

nickleback said:
Panasonic/Leica chose fashion over function.

Fashion and function

Roland

Roland Karlsson · Feb 27, 2006

Paul H said:
Paul H46473 said:

Soooooo ... hmmmm ... is 4/3 going to take off now? I mean am I in
the wrong boat?

Click to expand...

You're mixing metaphors. You might be on the wrong plane-- boats
don't "take off". Or you might have asked if Four Thirds was
leaving the dock now.

In the latter case, no one knows what boat you're on, so it's hard
to say.

I am on the Pentax boat - and it sure fly ....

Roland

Anastigmat · Feb 27, 2006

krusadr said:
Do you think so? It's obvious that this 4/3 endorsement by Leica is
a last-ditch desperation move.

No, just hedging one's bet. One more way to make money selling lenses.

krusadr said:
Show me a single Leica user who thinks otherwise.

Crop factor sensors were used as a stop gap while fabrication
economics were refined for FF sensors. Canon has overcome that
hurdle. Now the next challenge is shifting the large file sizes of
high-res FF sensors. Probably Canon's new Digic processor will
hande 25MP files with good FPS.

heck they probably have Digic 4 working with 30MP at 10FSP in
testing.

Soon(ish) the $1500 dSLR will have a FF sensor. The only cameras
with cropped sensors will be the sub $500 market.

Not really. Nikon can still charge a lot for its 1.5x camera because of its name. People still pay big bucks for Nikon cameras regardless of sensor size. Just look at the D2X. 1.5x and $5,000!

krusadr said:
If you don't believe me, consider this. The 5D is a non-pro spec
body with a FF sensor. With the rebates it is currently available
for under $3000. That camera has 12 MP and digic2 but a future
model with 22mp and digic 3 won't cost more to produce. And boy
will that model ever sell. The price will fall below $2000.

Yes it will, the question is when?

krusadr said:
Photographers will be able to crop that cameras shots in PP and
achieve the same reach as the crop-factor cameras.

Which part of my post do you think is wrong? It's the march of
progress and it's coming very, very soon. My prediction is probably
a new 1 series, 22 MP, 8.5 fps FF at the $5000 to $6000 price point
within 9 months and a lower-spec 5D type body with the same sensor
and 4fps at $3000 price point. Within 12 months those prices will
have dropped to $4000 and $2200 respectively.

I am not holding my breath. 5D sales are strong at current prices. So don't look for big price drops soon.

krusadr said:
Actually I think we at the point where we will be held back by
Canon's model release roadmap strategies in their monopoly position
rather than any technological or economic holdbacks. Come on Nikon

time to get into FF. perhaps Sony will suprise us with a FF dSLR

debut.

Sony will be cautious. It will concentrate first on low end models.

krusadr said:
Either way 4/3 s will have to compete at the low end which means no
pro features and bad noise as they try and cram more pixels in.

I agree. 4/3 is at a disadvantage because of the small sensor. It is never going to be able to compete with the likes of Canon's full frame and whatever other brands that could bring out a full frame camera.

Anastigmat · Feb 27, 2006

Here is the Leica M digital body

http://www.leica-camera.com/imperia/md/content/pdf/lfi/4.pdf

Looks like the Panasonic is sharing a body shell with the Leica Digital M body. The question is of course whether the Panasonic will have black chrome finish (Leica practice) or black enamel (Japanese practice). Black chrome lasts a lot longer but is more expensive.

There is one way to get a mirror that does not need to swing up. Use a pellicle or semi-transparent fixed mirror.

http://www.cameraquest.com/f1high.htm

mapleaf said:
Mapleaf

Roland Karlsson said:

Ooops .... what a nice looking thing! It looks classic and it even
has a shutter dial. Kudos Panasonic!

Soooooo ... hmmmm ... is 4/3 going to take off now? I mean am I in
the wrong boat?

Roland

Click to expand...

mapleaf · Feb 27, 2006

Well, 35mm full frame and 4/3 belongs to totally different leagues. With the right pricing 4/3 can take the gap left by the 2/3 prosumers. For the same lens "reach", it is much smaller. With OIS, it looks like an excellent package. If it is price right, it will be a hit for people upgrading from compact digicam.

Mapleaf

krusadr said:
raizans said:

ah, but is it as quiet as a leica m, like the oly e-1?

things are looking good for 4/3 today. =)

Click to expand...

Do you think so? It's obvious that this 4/3 endorsement by Leica is
a last-ditch desperation move.

Show me a single Leica user who thinks otherwise.

Crop factor sensors were used as a stop gap while fabrication
economics were refined for FF sensors. Canon has overcome that
hurdle. Now the next challenge is shifting the large file sizes of
high-res FF sensors. Probably Canon's new Digic processor will
hande 25MP files with good FPS.

heck they probably have Digic 4 working with 30MP at 10FSP in
testing.

Soon(ish) the $1500 dSLR will have a FF sensor. The only cameras
with cropped sensors will be the sub $500 market.

If you don't believe me, consider this. The 5D is a non-pro spec
body with a FF sensor. With the rebates it is currently available
for under $3000. That camera has 12 MP and digic2 but a future
model with 22mp and digic 3 won't cost more to produce. And boy
will that model ever sell. The price will fall below $2000.

Photographers will be able to crop that cameras shots in PP and
achieve the same reach as the crop-factor cameras.

Which part of my post do you think is wrong? It's the march of
progress and it's coming very, very soon. My prediction is probably
a new 1 series, 22 MP, 8.5 fps FF at the $5000 to $6000 price point
within 9 months and a lower-spec 5D type body with the same sensor
and 4fps at $3000 price point. Within 12 months those prices will
have dropped to $4000 and $2200 respectively.

Actually I think we at the point where we will be held back by
Canon's model release roadmap strategies in their monopoly position
rather than any technological or economic holdbacks. Come on Nikon

time to get into FF. perhaps Sony will suprise us with a FF dSLR

debut.

Either way 4/3 s will have to compete at the low end which means no
pro features and bad noise as they try and cram more pixels in.

--
'Silence! What is all this insolence? You will find yourself in
gladiator school vewy quickly with wotten behaviour like that.'

seiko4pulsar · Feb 27, 2006

I don't think so.

Sharing the body means: no M-mount no rangefinder. Without those two, it will never be a digital 'M'.

--

'Art is a collaboration between God and the artist, and the less the artist does the better' - Andre Gide

drwho9437 · Feb 27, 2006

Why doesn't anyone understand semiconductors.. Why do you say CMOS? The reason Canon uses CMOS isn't because CMOS is better than CCD, but because it is cheaper. Canon's CMOS sensors are low noise, etc because Canon did a good job in research, not because CMOS is inherently better than CCDs (in fact probably the oppisite).

Also in responce to another poster. Crop isn't a stop gap, FF will never be that cheap. Computers get cheaper mostly because you can but more in a smaller die area. With cameras you are stuck with a certain area. This means only wafer size increases are going to make things cheaper. Right now we are at 30 cm (or 12 inch), before we had 8 inch, 6 inch, 4 inch, 2 inch, that's it folks, wafer size increases are rare. FF will be expencive for a while. The best thing that could happen for FF is if someone makes a stepper with a larger area. I'm told Canon does FF in two exposures, yeild would go up if it were done in one, though I'm sure it pretty optimized already.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbryce/

Anastigmat · Feb 27, 2006

seiko4pulsar said:
I don't think so.
Sharing the body means: no M-mount no rangefinder. Without those
two, it will never be a digital 'M'.

The two camera bodies share the same metal outer shell. That is all I am saying. Just look at the wheel on the back of the camera. Same position. The viewfinder windows are also in the same position. I won't be surprised if they share the same shutter and some internal electronic components. Much cheaper that way than to make each camera unique.

krusadr · Feb 27, 2006

mapleaf said:
Well, 35mm full frame and 4/3 belongs to totally different leagues.
With the right pricing 4/3 can take the gap left by the 2/3
prosumers. For the same lens "reach", it is much smaller. With OIS,
it looks like an excellent package. If it is price right, it will
be a hit for people upgrading from compact digicam.

Mapleaf

Agreed. So answer me this. Where's the synergy between Oly and Leica? Oly already make nice lenses for 4/3 that are priced way too high for the budget market segment. Where does that leave an oportunity for Leica?

--

'Silence! What is all this insolence? You will find yourself in gladiator school vewy quickly with wotten behaviour like that.'

DougJGreen · Feb 27, 2006

Well, Leica can put red dots on them and sell them for even more.

mrfitz · Feb 27, 2006

Its a rebadge E-330 in a nice case...with a big price tag!

big swing!

WOA - that Pana L1 looks good!!!!

Forum Pro

Erik Magnuson

Guest

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Erik Magnuson

Guest

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts