Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/04/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Leica T
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:42:18 -0700
References: <6719076.1398394428055.JavaMail.root@elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

No, and the digital M's all have a bit of that already. Only if you have a 
shorter register and a wider mount, optical possibilities are increased, 
body plus lens thickness can be decreased and you can make a digital body 
that can use manual and autofocus lenses equally well. Or you could have a 
body designed primarily for autofocus use, and you could have a body 
designed for optical rangefinder use and they could use the same lenses. 
Aperture control could be on the body, or the lenses for full frame use.


On 2014-04-24, at 7:53 PM, Doug Herr <wildlightphoto at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Henning Wulff wrote:
> 
>>>> 
> Yes, Leica has had a few areas to struggle over in becoming a digital 
> camera manufacturer. One of them was the thickness of the camera. I think 
> most film M camera users would like a digital M the thickness of an M4, 
> but that won't happen with the sensor, filter pack and display screen 
> adding to the thickness.
> <<<
> 
> Is there anything wrong with a digital body the same thickness as the M4 
> with the lens mount protruding to provide the mount register distance?
> 
> Doug Herr
> Birdman of Sacramento
> http://www.wildlightphoto.com
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 


Henning Wulff
henningw at archiphoto.com






Replies: Reply from leicaphong at gmail.com (Phong) ([Leica] Leica T)
In reply to: Message from wildlightphoto at earthlink.net (Doug Herr) ([Leica] Leica T)