Will the X100 OVF/EVF inspire other brands to create rangefinders?

[cam]

Originally Posted by Carlos M

They sure are!

I was not alone in leaving them the link to that "mega-thread" on Fuji's comments page.

then, again, may i say they need me as beta-tester?

[wgerrard]

Originally Posted by Arjay

I have no idea what patents Fuji has filed lately. But if the X100 is a success, I'm sure that other manufacturers will try to come up with similar cameras. This industry lives of me-too'ism.

Very true. Sadly, the first thing the industry would do is copy is the retro look, wrapping it around a point and shoot.

[Frankie]

Leica inherited the interchangeable-lens rangefinder camera market after other major manufacturers abandoned it decades ago. They didn't have to do much to refine the RF itself, nor did they update the pre-M3 styling elements...they were the only game in town.

Then Konica offered a challenge, also Contax...and CV and Zeiss even made M-mount lenses after the 50-year mount patent expired.

Epson/CV slapped Leica in the face via the R-D1, forcing Leica's hand in digital offerings.

Soon after, EVIL emerged, and now O/EVF in the X100.

So, Leica has now tested the water by replacing the available light frameline illuminator by a LED powered in the M9/T. The timing was independent of the X100 announcement...but rather lame by comparison. In truth, that LED frameline illuminator is not all that novel, similar illuminator ideas was used by others decades ago...even in a home-made device by a RFF member.

The next RF/VF in this genre cannot be just more of the same 50 year-old...er, classic...design.

Whether others, notably the rumoured Nikon EVIL development would be one-up on the X100 is of course unknown. Opinions abound, even in RFF that the end of [d]SLR is near...especially if the next-generation Epson-made EVF panel is finer than 800 x 600 x RGB.

The final nail in the old RF coffin, IMO, will be some form of well-received focusing aid project-able onto the X100 OVF. The easiest will be a patch [partial/centre view] of the EVF.

[Note: the OVF and EVF are offset from each other by ~50mm, collectively introducing x/y parallax. Unless the principal axes of the optical and electronic VF's are set to converge at some point, perhaps at hyper-focal distance, the two "optical bundles" will always be non-coincidental...un-observable at infinity but more pronounced at close focal distances.

This is not a drawback but rather exploitable via real-time re-sampling of the partial EVF display into x-parallax only, just like a standard RF split-image view. In photogrammetry, that re-sampling is called a stereo-mate, tried-and-true for almost 3 decades.

That was the origin of my statement elsewhere that a "parallax-wedge" focusing aid is "easy to do" and was implemented by many for stereo displaying the Leica (not Solms) ADS-40, 50 and 80 imagery...years ago.]

[buzzardkid]

Thanks Frankie, for those technical details you provide! I'm happy to read my idea is feasable in the X100!

I'm thrilled with the prospect of possibly having an actual RF in the X100.

Lets hope Fujifilm thought about this or in the future will provide it in a firmware update.

[buzzardkid]

Come to think of it, the benefits for both manufacturers and photographers can be huge a d I'd be stunned if this would not catch on in the market:

The RF will never go out of whack since it consists of an OVF and a sensor only
Production will be a lot less costly than the current, traditional RF
Remember those yellow or purple RF patches on 1960's cameras? They could be set in the menu
The RF focusing would be a nice addition to the retro style that Fujifilm have chosen

[Frankie]

I had posted the benefits of the O/EVF, including no needs for adjustments, plus self-illumination, dataset displays etc. etc....in the mega-thread long ago. The technical points got lost in the excitements and many posters rather argued about JPEG v. RAW; or whether the X100 is "professional" or not...

The X100 VF optical diagram, particularly the [likely cemented] prisms immediately reminds me of typical set up in photogrammetric instruments...complicated enough even without adjustment problems. [Since you are located in the Netherlands, you must have heard or known of ITC in Enschede, once the mecca of photogrammetry.]



In photogrammetry, an image is first conceptualized as "a bundle" of light rays gathered through the perspective centre of a lens...as if the lens is a pin-hole... The science has a century of developments behind it.

[Many fundamental breakthroughs in the analogue era were actually made by Otto von Gruber of Zeiss, while Wild-Heerbrugg [renamed Leica in 1992 by its owner who also long owned E. Leitz Co.] is a more successful instrument builder until digital photogrammetry wiped out its mechanical product line...sounds ominous to Solms?]

In digital photogrammetry [based on analytical geometry first applied by a Canadian...in 1957], image tip/tilt [from being perfectly vertical or down-looking] can be re-sampled into normal or reverted from normal into having tip/tilt [think vertical and horizontal rotation in conventional cameras], given imaging distance [flying height]...as if a prism is virtually there. An example well-known enough in RFF is keystone correction for architecture photography in Photoshop.

The focusing ring [also a focal distance encoder or the focal distance LUT dataset display will not be possible] or AF can supply the imaging distance, which is then used to re-sample and re-injecting parallax...wholly unnecessary if AF is used to begin with but useful as a manual focusing aid for RF aficionados.

In this "parallax wedge" application, the OVF is deemed "normal" while the EVF is treated as if tilted. The y-parallax neutralized but x-parallax injected EVF image is then superimposed onto the OVF. The baseline is the principal axes offset of the independent O/E VF optical trains.

Re-sampling the whole or partial image is only 12Mp of work, at most...thus real-time, in a science long overcame image files sizes in the hundreds of megabytes.

[semilog]

One more piece of news.

A newly-posted field report at Luminous Landscape says that the Panasonic GH2 has contrast-detect AF speed on par with current mid-range DSLRs. It's almost a given that the X100 will not be as good, but this does indicate that the camera that many of us want is technically possible — if not now, then soon.

[PKR]

Originally Posted by semilog

Silly Rabbit. I'm sure that Leica can find a way to make it much more costly.

"Lady GAGA World Tour Edition"?

[schaki]

Kodak have become slack by late. But at least them have the sensor technology to pull something out of their hat, hopefully something better / more useful than a rabbit
The question are however them feel the motivation to try or just let it pass.

Epson seems to have pulled out altogether but still support their R-D1 of course.

Casio, not very likely? But who knows.

Sony? Why not make a digital Hexar AF with FF ccd? But I guess Sony is too deeply into their Nex to care about it.

[douglasf13]

Leica just needs to go with Sony for the next M camera sensor. Joakim, who works in the industry, has quite a bit to say about the Kodak sensor, and it isn't good. If Leica tapped Sony for a 24x36 sensor without an AA filter, the camera would be amazing. Read Joakim's Leica sensor info here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/893332/8#8504636