If you have ever use a Leica rangefinder film camera. you will understandCare to elaborate?
Or try focusing a tilt-shift or an 1:1 macro with a ragefinder.
Upvote
0
If you have ever use a Leica rangefinder film camera. you will understandCare to elaborate?
Or try focusing a tilt-shift or an 1:1 macro with a ragefinder.
Have you ever used a TS-E 17?If you have ever use a Leica rangefinder film camera. you will understand
So a 49mm lens will focus better than a 50mm lens?It is a fact. If you have ever use a Leica rangefinder film camera. you will understand
This link explain show the rangefinder focusing system worksSo a 49mm lens will focus better than a 50mm lens?
I have used rangefinders. Doesn’t help me understand the relationship between focal lengths less than 50mm and focus as compared to SLR.
Hello, HerculesHave you ever used a TS-E 17?
This link explain show the rangefinder focusing system works
https://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-M-Ty...r-camera-page-42-Focusing-the-Leica-M240.html
I do not post any threshold. I just quote an example. A good film rangefinder is guaranteed to be accurate to 135 f4. The same system will be very accurate for 50mm or shorter. In fact I have used the system down to 50 f0.95 and still accurateI know how they work. I'm hung up on the threshold you gave.
Up to which magnification?I do not post any threshold. I just quote an example. A good film rangefinder is guaranteed to be accurate to 135 f4.
Within depth of field of the lens openningUp to which magnification?
Up to which magnification?Within depth of field of the lens openning
Pleased read up on depth of field before asking any question. Also read up on rangefinder camera. I have already answer all you concern. I can spend my time on something better. I do not want to waste anymore timeUp to which magnification?
Please you read up on depth of field (and how it relates to magnification in particular) before posting garbage.Pleased read up on depth of field before asking any question.
You are the one that has been posting wrong information and garbage.you start out with film range finder. Then changing the argument to something else . And keep changing subject of discussion . If you know so much about depth of field, you should not even ask about magnification. Speaking of garbage, there is no live view in Leica film camera. They do have a complicated ground glass viewing system and Visoflex for extreme close up or long telephoto.Please you read up on depth of field (and how it relates to magnification in particular) before posting garbage.
Also please think why Leica insists on using Live View mode with macro adapter.
So, I just cannot tell you about the relation between depth of field and magnification?You are the one that has been posting wrong information and garbage.you start out with film range finder. Then changing the argument to something else . And keep changing subject of discussion . If you know so much about depth of field, you should not even ask about magnification. Speaking of garbage, there is no live view in Leica film camera. They do have a complicated ground glass viewing system and Visoflex for extreme close up or long telephoto.
You just cannot tell the summer insect about snow.
I was there when we went from rangefinders to DSLR's. The really big driver was being able to see your composition and not having to deal with parallax. It opened the door for camera owners to have multiple lenses and still get great compositions. Rangefinders were very quickly moved to the back burner.
I see mirrorless the same way. Being able to see even more accurately exactly what you are photographing is a big driver, and the fast and accurate autofocus is equally or even bigger.
The change will not be as fast because its not such a huge difference, but it will happen for sure. The technology is difficult, but expect to see some of the issues solved soon. Canon already has a patent that should eliminate the freezing of the viewfinder as a image is saved, we may even see that in the pro level cameras coming up.
You cannot tell me , because you do not know. So far you have not explain anything to me. You just keep on posting unrelated questionSo, I just cannot tell you about the relation between depth of field and magnification?
Its not a assumption, a DSLR has a built in error with autofocus. It can be adjusted to autofocus accurately at specific distances or with specific lenses, but a ordinary consumer DSLR like a SL-3 can't be adjusted to match lenses at all. A mirrorless focuses with consistent accuracy at all distances with virtually all brands of lenses. This is a huge advantage for most DSLR users who do not have the minimal adjustments in a high end model.
If you don't believe in WYSIWYG, you are denying the basic reason why SLR's pushed rangefinders out of the market in the late 1950's. Nothing wrong with rangefinders if you learn to compensate for attached lens and the distance, it just makes using the camera easier to have TTL viewing.
SHOW ME IF YOU CAN. Otherwise, shut upSo, I just cannot tell you about the relation between depth of field and magnification?
You cannot tell me , because you do not know. So far you have not explain anything to me. You just keep on posting unrelated question