None of which being full frame, therefore there is no wide/ultra-wide solution (and all other lenses have at least 1.6x crop factor :\ ) if you want to use your Contax G lenses other than having them converted to M mount by JapanExposures.
Damn, well that seals it. If they were developing a market-changing camera (especially in secret) they would surely have revealed it to Rick before any kind of press release to spur investors and raist stock value etc.
thrice wrote:
Here is a simple drawing to explain it. Backlit CMOS goes SOME way toward solving the inherent problem, but is not yet produced (for whatever reason) in larger sizes.
Obviously these are worst case scenarios and some light does get through but the light that does is usually more refracted wavelengths like blue and purple and overall the vignetting is very objectionable and not correctable. This is part of the reason why the NEX has problems with non-retrofocus ultra-wides.
Nice illustration. So they need to move the amps and circuitry underneath each photosite instead of having it on top in order to solve the problem. Of course I have no clue as to how possible something like that is. The explosion in popularity of mirrorless cameras that have short lens registers will require a better sensor solution than what exists now at some point and I would bet it's being worked on by Sony and others right now.
"Since rangefinders have no groundglass to illustrate what is happening in the rest of the field, most rangefinder users are doing manually the exact same thing that single-point AF is. Sorry, guys, but if you're a slave to the RF, you can be replaced by contrast-detect or phase-detect autofocus"
Or ideally IR focusing if I might add.
Personally I love rangefinders for the lenses, the form factor, the viewfinders, the ergonomics and the sound, but RF focusing leaves me cold to be honest. The Contax G was awesome but it needed a better AF system. The Hexar AF is perfect but it doesnt change lenses. The x100 is good but no lenses and not FF.
Round and round they go, but they never get it 100% right......Show more →
my point was i don't like rangefinder focusing and taking away my control over it makes it 10x worse.
thrice wrote:
Obviously these are worst case scenarios and some light does get through but the light that does is usually more refracted wavelengths like blue and purple and overall the vignetting is very objectionable and not correctable. This is part of the reason why the NEX has problems with non-retrofocus ultra-wides.
Doesn't the leica m9/m8 have the same problem but the camera software adjusts for the problem?
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
Doesn't the leica m9/m8 have the same problem but the camera software adjusts for the problem?
With regard to colour shift it has a problem with extreme incident angles, to my knowledge the two uncorrectable lenses are the 21mm ZM C-Biogon and 16mm G-Hologon (after conversion)... maybe a particular 21 Super-Angulon as well?
The illumination falloff is identical (or at least extremely close) to film though. At least in my experience and also according to Stephen Daniel the M product manager at Leica. The falloff that does occur is due to inherent laws of optics and very wide lenses.
thrice wrote:
Ah my bad, it's practically full frame then.
With regard to colour shift it has a problem with extreme incident angles, to my knowledge the two uncorrectable lenses are the 21mm ZM C-Biogon and 16mm G-Hologon (after conversion)... maybe a particular 21 Super-Angulon as well?
The illumination falloff is identical (or at least extremely close) to film though. At least in my experience and also according to Stephen Daniel the M product manager at Leica. The falloff that does occur is due to inherent laws of optics and very wide lenses.
I thought the 6 bit coding on the Leica lenses as well as the option to enter which lens your using for non leica lenses automagically took care of most of the issues with vignetting and color via software. The sensor does not by itself react just like film, even the special one used in the Leica M9. Use an uncoded decently wide angle lens or dont' input a focal length and I think you will end up with a decent amount of vignetting and color issues with a few more lenses than those above. It has been a long time since I read Sean Reids review of the M9 but I do know this was the case with the M8 and I would expect the M9 would be even more so given it's FF. Perhaps others could chime in.
And if that helps to get us a digital Ikon, I´m in!
I got the same answer from Zeiss as Rick on that very same question. But if we all send 10000 questions about a digital Ikon to Zeiss, perhaps including us eating Canon stuff, it might help get us a... Dikon?
