PDA

View Full Version : New digital rangefinder


Dwight
11-28-2003, 19:56
I understand that some European camera stores are already accepting orders of the new Leica/Panasonic for delivery in January. I haven't seen this camera on any US dealer's web site. Does anyone know where I can order this camera? I hear that the Leica version is twice as expensive as the all-black Panasonic. (900 Euros for Panasonic, 1800 for Leica.) I'll be getting the Panasonic.

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_440.html

Rich Silfver
11-28-2003, 21:00
I don't think this is a 'digital rangefinder'.

Apart from the LCD screen on the back it looks like a digital viewfinder and nothing rangefinderish about it.

It's pretty though.

Dwight
11-29-2003, 05:11
Your probably right. On the other hand, why are the Contax G1 and G2 considered to be rangefinders?

bmattock
11-29-2003, 07:01
Originally posted by Dwight
Your probably right. On the other hand, why are the Contax G1 and G2 considered to be rangefinders?

That's a very good point. I have never used a G1 or G2, but I understand that they do use a 'rangefinder' type system to auto-focus, even if the user doesn't see it happening and there is no rangefinder patch (coincident image thingie). The digital cameras, as I understand it, either use active or passive auto-focus, which largely uses contrast (I could be very wrong here) to judge when a subject is in focus. Thus, it does not 'range find' as it does not properly know how far away the subject is - nor does it care. It just knows that highest contrast means 'in focus'.

I have often wondered when some enterprising soul is going to offer an ultra-miniature digital sensor / kit that can be dropped into the back of many classic rangefinders. If you removed the pressure plate on the back, you'd have maybe a 1/4 inch to play with, and the place where the film went could hold batteries, electronics, etc. I dunno. Might be fun.

But you're right in the sense that the 'line' where rangefinders end is a bit blurry (pun intended).

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

Doug
11-29-2003, 22:25
Hicks and Schultz, in their recent book "Rangefinder" make a point of including "Direct View" cameras, but still making a clear distinction. Which is that Direct View as a category actually includes rangefinders as a sub-category but also includes cameras with non-focusing viewfinders. They go on to use the "Direct View" term when "rangefinder" isn't descriptive.

I agree, Bill, that it could be tricky to draw the line. Maybe "rangefinder" should include any device that measures subject distance without ground-glass focusing? And without reflex TTL viewing?

The drop-in digital module has been considered. An attractive idea for sure, but may not be feasible. Yet? Here's a link: http://www.siliconfilm.com/

bmattock
11-29-2003, 22:48
Originally posted by Doug
Hicks and Schultz, in their recent book "Rangefinder" make a point of including "Direct View" cameras, but still making a clear distinction. Which is that Direct View as a category actually includes rangefinders as a sub-category but also includes cameras with non-focusing viewfinders. They go on to use the "Direct View" term when "rangefinder" isn't descriptive.

I agree, Bill, that it could be tricky to draw the line. Maybe "rangefinder" should include any device that measures subject distance without ground-glass focusing? And without reflex TTL viewing?

The drop-in digital module has been considered. An attractive idea for sure, but may not be feasible. Yet? Here's a link: http://www.siliconfilm.com/

That's a pretty cool link, thanks! I agree, the technology is not quite there yet (or maybe the interest is what's lacking). Maybe someday..sigh.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

back alley
11-30-2003, 06:38
that digital insert looks very cool.
one for my mamiya 6 would be even more great - for me anyway!!

joe