Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/01/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
I may be utterly wrong, but here is a couple of personal reflections on
which I would like to get your feedback.
First, assuming that digital continues its growth on the high-end photo
market, what is the future of digital SLR bodies? Using a high resolution
LCD it is possible to make a "virtual" SLR where the mirror and screen are
suppressed and replaced with this LCD. Digitally zooming (on demand) the
centre of this LCD will provide an adequate substitute to the classical
SLR (manual) focusing device (microprisms etc.). I am confident that
engineers will soon be able to design a TTL autofocus system not needing a
focusing screen.
Second, the only difference between a digital RF and a digital SLR will
then be the presence or not, of an optical finder with a mechanical
rangefinder. There will be 3 types of bodies:
-pure RF
-pure LCD ("virtual SLR")
-combined RF + (detachable?) LCD
Third, once the oblique rays issue is solved, all bodies will have access
to non-retrofocus wide-angle lenses, which was formerly the privilege of
rangefinder cameras, thanks to the suppression of the mirror. This is good
news for M-mount weitwinkel owners.
Four, all future cameras will look much more like present RFs than like
present SLRs. It is not feasible to add an optical rangefinder to a
NikonF6 or a Leica R9, but it will be easy to add a LCD to a digital M and
then to suppress the M's optical finder for budget (well, Leica budget)
bodies.
Five, concerning anti-shake bodies (as opposed to antishake lenses), which
are the existing camera systems where at all times the body knows the
focal length AND the focusing distance? The Leica M system. A very tiny
mod. of the lenses would allow the M bodies to know the focal length
without ambiguity (e.g. 28 or 90?). If some hard work on an existing SLR
allowed to transmit focusing information to the body, then we would be
halfway to turning a F6 into a RF! In other terms, the future is in RF and
not in SLR bodies. Does this explain the recent move of Nikon towards RFs?
Last reflection, the idea of an antishake body is excellent, as unlike an
antishake lens, it should require no inertia sensor or mobile mechanical
component: motion can be detected and processed on the image sensor itself
(probably not on an old-fashined CCD but it can be done on a CMOS sensor
which is fast enough and can integrate some computing power _behind each_
pixel sensor, that can be used to integrate light not always from the same
pixel, but from the adequate neighbouring pixels according to the
direction and amplitude of motion detected).
Any comments?
Jean
"I dreamt a lightweight digital RF that can use all my M glass and becomes
instantly a digital AF SLR on telephoto and macro use, Leica can make it"
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Jean Louchet COMPLEX Project INRIA Rocquencourt
BP105 78153 Le Chesnay cedex, France
Jean.Louchet<at>inria.fr http://fractales.inria.fr/~louchet
mobile: +33 6 7347 7707
------------------------------------------------------------