On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

Started Jul 12, 2019 | Discussions
Shawn67 Senior Member • Posts: 2,284
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

xpatUSA wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "rangefinder lens" that is being discussed in this thread?

Thanks all for your responses - mostly a little over my head, sadly..

So, amongst all that detailed information, I've deduced that a "rangefinder lens" is not a lens capable of measuring range (duh) but simply one designed for a mirror-less camera i.e. "rangefinder camera" or even "rangefinder style" camera ... if I understand correctly.

Basically, when talking about adapted lenses a RF lens is typically a Leica Thread Mount (LTM) or M mount lenses but could also be a Contax RF/Nikon S mount lens. LTM lenses go back to about 1932 when Leica standardized their flange focal length. When Leica moved to a bayonet mount (M mount in the 1950s) they specifically built it with a 1mm shorter flange focal length so LTM lens could use a simple adapter to use them on M mount cameras and still retain full rangefinder focusing.

There are *many* great lenses available in these formats. I really enjoy the small size and optics of them. It also gives the huge benefit of not tying a person into a single system as these lenses can be adapted to almost any mirrorless system very easily. Hence, the interest in if Sigma is going to tune their sensors for these types of lenses.On the Leica I get the normal rangefinder focusing. On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Shawn

mike earussi Veteran Member • Posts: 8,822
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

Shawn67 wrote:

mike earussi wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Excellent illustrations, Shawn.

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "rangefinder lens" that is being discussed in this thread?

They're not a retrofocus design as there is no mirror in the way that has to be designed around. This is especially advantageous for wide angle lenses resulting higher IQ in the corners. In Leica M vs Leica R the wide angle lenses for the M were of much higher quality in the corners because of this.

There are retrofocus RF lenses too though. For example, both my LTM mount Kobalux 21mm f2.8 and M Mount Konica M-Hexanon 21/35 Dual are retrofocus lenses. I am sure there are others too.

Shawn

I'm not familiar with those lenses, just Leica, but retrofocus designs add to the complexity of the lens and usually result in a lower IQ.

 mike earussi's gear list:mike earussi's gear list
Sigma SD1 Merrill Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Sigma APO Macro 180mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG Macro Art +1 more
Shawn67 Senior Member • Posts: 2,284
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

mike earussi Veteran Member • Posts: 8,822
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

xpatUSA wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "rangefinder lens" that is being discussed in this thread?

Thanks all for your responses - mostly a little over my head, sadly..

So, amongst all that detailed information, I've deduced that a "rangefinder lens" is not a lens capable of measuring range (duh) but simply one designed for a mirror-less camera i.e. "rangefinder camera" or even "rangefinder style" camera ... if I understand correctly.

There's a gap in my knowledge in these matters ... my first serious hobby camera was a Nikon D50 DSLR and "rangefinders" were beyond my ken and beyond my wallet.

Designing around a mirror is a challenge, but it only affects wide angle lenses. Any lens beyond 50mm doesn't require compensation for the mirror because their focal length is longer than the depth of the mirror box.

 mike earussi's gear list:mike earussi's gear list
Sigma SD1 Merrill Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Sigma APO Macro 180mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG Macro Art +1 more
Shawn67 Senior Member • Posts: 2,284
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

mike earussi wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

mike earussi wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Excellent illustrations, Shawn.

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "rangefinder lens" that is being discussed in this thread?

They're not a retrofocus design as there is no mirror in the way that has to be designed around. This is especially advantageous for wide angle lenses resulting higher IQ in the corners. In Leica M vs Leica R the wide angle lenses for the M were of much higher quality in the corners because of this.

There are retrofocus RF lenses too though. For example, both my LTM mount Kobalux 21mm f2.8 and M Mount Konica M-Hexanon 21/35 Dual are retrofocus lenses. I am sure there are others too.

Shawn

I'm not familiar with those lenses, just Leica, but retrofocus designs add to the complexity of the lens and usually result in a lower IQ.

When talking film, maybe.

With digital it is a more complex equation. Both those retrofocus wide angle lenses have dramatically higher IQ than the same focal length non-retrofocus lens. When you get out of wide angle lenses it is less of an issue too.

Shawn

saltydogstudios
OP saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,218
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

D Cox wrote:

saltydogstudios wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Excellent illustrations, Shawn.

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "rangefinder lens" that is being discussed in this thread?

Not sure what you're asking so I'll answer the question I think you're asking.

SLR lenses are more telecentric than Rangefinder lenses, especially wide angle lenses.

Why? Because SLR lenses are further away from the sensor.

The Leica M has a 27.8mm flange focal distance.

The Canon EF - 44mm.

That means for Leica, a 28mm lens could have the focal distance contained within the lens itself. A 28mm Canon lens is 44mm plus away from the sensor, so additional tricks must be used to bend the light rays back towards the sensor.

Additionally, Leica - having no mirrorbox or anything in the way - made their really wide angle lenses (21mm for example) protrude into the camera, so that the 21mm could still be contained within the lens itself.

This lent itself to an extremely steep angle of incidence on the film - which was fine for film, but not so good for digital - because sensors are far from flat.

It's easier to think of this as a pinhole camera - if the pinhole is 28mm away from the sensor, then it's a 28mm focal length - imagine the angle of light coming from a pinhole to the sensor.

Since an SLR cannot have a "pinhole" 28mm away, the light is necessarily more telecentric when it hits the sensor.

Sony cameras are particularly bad for this because of the thick filter stack, which "smears" details in the corner when light comes in at a sharp angle. There is actually an aftermarket mod for a thinner filter stack from Kolari Vision known as the Kolari Mod, which makes the Sony sensor more like the Leica - but with an associated color shift (that I believe is also why Leica cameras can have issues with "ruddy" skin tones).

For rangefinder lens users, especially wide angle lenses, Leica cameras are actually qualitatively better than Sony for two specific reasons.

1. The "edge" smearing (and sony's highly reflective sensor bouncing light back into the vintage lenses not designed to handle that)

2. The lack of an AA filter makes it even sharper (for 24mp). The 24mp Leica sensor is better in the corners with Leica lens than a 42mp Sony.

Re: reflective sensors see this interview with a Zeiss representative - around 18 minutes into the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cnEnRADDLo

"What is usually more dangerous and more visible is the sensor, who is the worst guy in the system, it can [reflect] 10 times more than that of a coated glass surface."

Again - all of this is why I'm wondering how hard Foveon's engineers are working to produce a sensor that behaves nicely with rangefinder lenses.

And whether or not the fp is "tuned" for rangefinder lenses.

Lenses that Sigma designs for mirrorless cameras will be "rangefinder" lenses, so they must be thinking about it.

I wonder if the sensor in the dp0Q has different microprisms from those in the other Quattro cameras ?

I think the lens was designed to be more telecentric... and yes, I'm sure they tuned the microlenses to the lens as well.

-- hide signature --

"Wait let me comb my hair and put on a tie."
It Gets Nerdy: https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry
Sometimes I take photos: https://www.instagram.com/sodiumstudio/

 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
saltydogstudios
OP saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,218
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

xpatUSA wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

Pardon my ignorance but what is a "rangefinder lens" that is being discussed in this thread?

Thanks all for your responses - mostly a little over my head, sadly..

So, amongst all that detailed information, I've deduced that a "rangefinder lens" is not a lens capable of measuring range (duh) but simply one designed for a mirror-less camera i.e. "rangefinder camera" or even "rangefinder style" camera ... if I understand correctly.

There's a gap in my knowledge in these matters ... my first serious hobby camera was a Nikon D50 DSLR and "rangefinders" were beyond my ken and beyond my wallet.

They're designed for rangefinder cameras, that do have a mechanism for "finding the range".

Namely an offset (by several inches) second viewfinder window. This 2nd image is projected into the main viewfinder as a small "patch" in the center of the scene.

It's worth noting that unlike an SLR you are not viewing through the lens - you are viewing through a viewfinder so there will be parallax error.

When you focus the lens, it couples with some mechanism that shifts the patch left or right in your view (moves a mirror or something) and once it aligns with your view from the main viewfinder, you're in focus.

This "focus through a mechanical feedback mechanism" is part of the reason Leica cameras have a reputation for exceptional craftsmanship as all of these elements must be precisely aligned.

notice the "frame lines" that indicate what the framing of the lens might be... Notice there's more than one set of frame lines - because when you change the focal length of the lens, the viewfinder doesn't change.

My blog post "what is a normal lens" is a thought experiment that may help with understanding the focal length angle of incidence thing.

https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry/what-is-a-normal-lens-35mm-50mm-43mm-compared-to-the-human-eye-cf7e43cc3366

-- hide signature --

"Wait let me comb my hair and put on a tie."
It Gets Nerdy: https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry
Sometimes I take photos: https://www.instagram.com/sodiumstudio/

 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
saltydogstudios
OP saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,218
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

Shawn67 wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

Blacked out the Sony logo, like a true Leicaphile.

-- hide signature --

"Wait let me comb my hair and put on a tie."
It Gets Nerdy: https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry
Sometimes I take photos: https://www.instagram.com/sodiumstudio/

 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 18,266
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

D Cox wrote:

I wonder if the sensor in the dp0Q has different microprisms from those in the other Quattro cameras ?

Long ago, I wondered similarly re: the compact Merrills vs. the DSLR. But such information became scant following Sigma's takeover of Foveon. Of course, nothing to with my DP2M giving a nice green vignette when opened in RawDigger ...

There were indeed two models of the "F13" sensor specifically to do with micro-lens angles outward from center. AVC even used the term "DP13", IIRC.

-- hide signature --

SPP - computational photography roolz ..

Ted

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Sigma SD9 Sigma SD15 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 +14 more
saltydogstudios
OP saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,218
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

Shawn67 wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

How do you like that AF adapter? I actually prefer manual focus but sometimes you want it to be more precise than you can get with focus peaking & faster than you can get with digital zoom.

Is it precise enough to focus on an eye? I'm thinking specifically of my wide aperture primes. 50mm f/1.2 (Voigtlander), 90mm f/2.0 (Summicron).

-- hide signature --

"Wait let me comb my hair and put on a tie."
It Gets Nerdy: https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry
Sometimes I take photos: https://www.instagram.com/sodiumstudio/

 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
Shawn67 Senior Member • Posts: 2,284
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.
1

saltydogstudios wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

Blacked out the Sony logo, like a true Leicaphile.

Guilty...

Shawn

Shawn67 Senior Member • Posts: 2,284
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

saltydogstudios wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

How do you like that AF adapter? I actually prefer manual focus but sometimes you want it to be more precise than you can get with focus peaking & faster than you can get with digital zoom.

Is it precise enough to focus on an eye? I'm thinking specifically of my wide aperture primes. 50mm f/1.2 (Voigtlander), 90mm f/2.0 (Summicron).

I prefer MF too most of the time. The adapter works fine and is quite precise if you use the center focus point. I think it could do an eye just fine but you would likely have to use the center focus point itself. I don't think eye detect works through it.

With lenses above 50mm you have to slightly pre-focus as the rack doesn't have enough range to focus completely. In operation it is a little odd to use but mostly just when changing lenses. You can't set the focal length on camera like you do with adapted lenses, you have to set it through the adapter. You do that by taking a picture at a specific aperture (set on camera) and the adapter knows what focal length that corresponds to. That is adjustable using an app too.

When you are normally shooting with the adapter you have to set the camera aperture to f2. If you accidentally change it from there you will end up overexposing as the camera will meter assuming the lens will stop down when you take the shot and of course the adapter has no control over that. Your actual shooting aperture is adjusted on lens of course.

The adapter is nice to allow closer focus. But more often than not I just use the VM-E adapter which gives closer focus too.

Shawn

saltydogstudios
OP saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,218
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

Shawn67 wrote:

saltydogstudios wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

How do you like that AF adapter? I actually prefer manual focus but sometimes you want it to be more precise than you can get with focus peaking & faster than you can get with digital zoom.

Is it precise enough to focus on an eye? I'm thinking specifically of my wide aperture primes. 50mm f/1.2 (Voigtlander), 90mm f/2.0 (Summicron).

I prefer MF too most of the time. The adapter works fine and is quite precise if you use the center focus point. I think it could do an eye just fine but you would likely have to use the center focus point itself. I don't think eye detect works through it.

With lenses above 50mm you have to slightly pre-focus as the rack doesn't have enough range to focus completely. In operation it is a little odd to use but mostly just when changing lenses. You can't set the focal length on camera like you do with adapted lenses, you have to set it through the adapter. You do that by taking a picture at a specific aperture (set on camera) and the adapter knows what focal length that corresponds to. That is adjustable using an app too.

When you are normally shooting with the adapter you have to set the camera aperture to f2. If you accidentally change it from there you will end up overexposing as the camera will meter assuming the lens will stop down when you take the shot and of course the adapter has no control over that. Your actual shooting aperture is adjusted on lens of course.

The adapter is nice to allow closer focus. But more often than not I just use the VM-E adapter which gives closer focus too.

Shawn

Sounds complicated.

I prefer avoiding complicated.

FWIW I'm pretty good at focusing, but it's really situation dependent when it comes to "nailing" focus.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bycm36xpK8j/

Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8 on Sony A7. In this case it was really easy because you can just watch the focal plane move with the focus peaking - like you can on the street, just watching it move as you change focus.

But other situations are harder than this, and you could argue that this was front-focused (more on her eyelashes than her eyeballs).

-- hide signature --

"Wait let me comb my hair and put on a tie."
It Gets Nerdy: https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry
Sometimes I take photos: https://www.instagram.com/sodiumstudio/

 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
Shawn67 Senior Member • Posts: 2,284
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

saltydogstudios wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

saltydogstudios wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

How do you like that AF adapter? I actually prefer manual focus but sometimes you want it to be more precise than you can get with focus peaking & faster than you can get with digital zoom.

Is it precise enough to focus on an eye? I'm thinking specifically of my wide aperture primes. 50mm f/1.2 (Voigtlander), 90mm f/2.0 (Summicron).

I prefer MF too most of the time. The adapter works fine and is quite precise if you use the center focus point. I think it could do an eye just fine but you would likely have to use the center focus point itself. I don't think eye detect works through it.

With lenses above 50mm you have to slightly pre-focus as the rack doesn't have enough range to focus completely. In operation it is a little odd to use but mostly just when changing lenses. You can't set the focal length on camera like you do with adapted lenses, you have to set it through the adapter. You do that by taking a picture at a specific aperture (set on camera) and the adapter knows what focal length that corresponds to. That is adjustable using an app too.

When you are normally shooting with the adapter you have to set the camera aperture to f2. If you accidentally change it from there you will end up overexposing as the camera will meter assuming the lens will stop down when you take the shot and of course the adapter has no control over that. Your actual shooting aperture is adjusted on lens of course.

The adapter is nice to allow closer focus. But more often than not I just use the VM-E adapter which gives closer focus too.

Shawn

Sounds complicated.

I prefer avoiding complicated.

FWIW I'm pretty good at focusing, but it's really situation dependent when it comes to "nailing" focus.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bycm36xpK8j/

Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8 on Sony A7. In this case it was really easy because you can just watch the focal plane move with the focus peaking - like you can on the street, just watching it move as you change focus.

But other situations are harder than this, and you could argue that this was front-focused (more on her eyelashes than her eyeballs).

It is a little complicated but if you stick with one lens not a big deal. It is really only needed for IBIS. If you have an A7 it isn't really needed, though the adapter is supposed to not work very well on those cameras. Really needs a series II or later to focus well.

BTW, I find peaking to be quite improved with IBIS. I think the lack of sensor motion helps the camera determine  and keep contrast edges a bit better.

Shawn

saltydogstudios
OP saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,218
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

Shawn67 wrote:

saltydogstudios wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

saltydogstudios wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

Shawn67 wrote:

On the Sony I can even have autofocus, if desired.

Sony with the 1953 Leica Summicron that was shown in the FP video.

And that lens autofocusing....

https://www.flickr.com/gp/39387871@N06/rxj9a2

Shawn

How do you like that AF adapter? I actually prefer manual focus but sometimes you want it to be more precise than you can get with focus peaking & faster than you can get with digital zoom.

Is it precise enough to focus on an eye? I'm thinking specifically of my wide aperture primes. 50mm f/1.2 (Voigtlander), 90mm f/2.0 (Summicron).

I prefer MF too most of the time. The adapter works fine and is quite precise if you use the center focus point. I think it could do an eye just fine but you would likely have to use the center focus point itself. I don't think eye detect works through it.

With lenses above 50mm you have to slightly pre-focus as the rack doesn't have enough range to focus completely. In operation it is a little odd to use but mostly just when changing lenses. You can't set the focal length on camera like you do with adapted lenses, you have to set it through the adapter. You do that by taking a picture at a specific aperture (set on camera) and the adapter knows what focal length that corresponds to. That is adjustable using an app too.

When you are normally shooting with the adapter you have to set the camera aperture to f2. If you accidentally change it from there you will end up overexposing as the camera will meter assuming the lens will stop down when you take the shot and of course the adapter has no control over that. Your actual shooting aperture is adjusted on lens of course.

The adapter is nice to allow closer focus. But more often than not I just use the VM-E adapter which gives closer focus too.

Shawn

Sounds complicated.

I prefer avoiding complicated.

FWIW I'm pretty good at focusing, but it's really situation dependent when it comes to "nailing" focus.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bycm36xpK8j/

Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8 on Sony A7. In this case it was really easy because you can just watch the focal plane move with the focus peaking - like you can on the street, just watching it move as you change focus.

But other situations are harder than this, and you could argue that this was front-focused (more on her eyelashes than her eyeballs).

It is a little complicated but if you stick with one lens not a big deal. It is really only needed for IBIS. If you have an A7 it isn't really needed, though the adapter is supposed to not work very well on those cameras. Really needs a series II or later to focus well.

BTW, I find peaking to be quite improved with IBIS. I think the lack of sensor motion helps the camera determine and keep contrast edges a bit better.

Shawn

Yes, I bought a Sony lens and it wouldn't focus on the A7. I think the computer wasn't powerful enough and/or the sensor lacked PDAF or something.

Interesting point about IBIS helping with focusing. I don't shoot much longer than 100mm. My longest lens is a 135 f/2, I'm sure it would help with that.

I'm waiting for 2020 or 2021 to buy another mirrorless - waiting to see what everyone has up their sleeves before I upgrade.

-- hide signature --

"Wait let me comb my hair and put on a tie."
It Gets Nerdy: https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry
Sometimes I take photos: https://www.instagram.com/sodiumstudio/

 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
xpatUSA
xpatUSA Forum Pro • Posts: 18,266
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

saltydogstudios wrote:

<> So yes it still has microlenses (of course, I thin all sensors do?) ...

Not all sensors, sorry.

-- hide signature --

Ted

 xpatUSA's gear list:xpatUSA's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Sigma SD9 Sigma SD15 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 +14 more
saltydogstudios
OP saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,218
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.

xpatUSA wrote:

saltydogstudios wrote:

<> So yes it still has microlenses (of course, I thin all sensors do?) ...

Not all sensors, sorry.

Fair enough - i was correcting my previous statement about a specific sensor, but I over-corrected.

-- hide signature --

"Wait let me comb my hair and put on a tie."
It Gets Nerdy: https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry
Sometimes I take photos: https://www.instagram.com/sodiumstudio/

 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
drDaveH New Member • Posts: 3
Re: On the fp Sensor & vintage lenses.
2

A small clarification:  the harpsichord was not a loud keyboard instrument, it was actually rather quiet and considered a chamber instrument.  The volume level for each key could not be altered by the force of the keyboard press, because pressing the keyboard plucked a string, regardless.  Piano keys basically "bang" the string, so you can hit the string softly with a soft keyboard touch or bang it hard.  That made the piano far more versatile in expressing a range of musical emphasis or "color".

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads