xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
It is sort of the digital version of the Foca camera but with an M mount.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I agree. It seems anytime Leica announces something new, the hate brigade comes out. Every time someone else announces something new, the hate brigade says "why bother with that, just buy a used Leica!"
It's perplexing.
G
Huss
Mentor
Alright, those are terrible.
Only the first two are full Rez, or close to at about 11mp. And at base ISO of 320 they are super noisy.
The rest of the images are much smaller, and after seeing the first two, I can see why.
Perhaps things will improve with the production models but this does not look good.
Tim Gray
Well-known
It’s kinda funny to me to see people on this site compare this and other oddball cameras to the generic “best bang for your buck” digital camera. We shoot oddball, expensive, outdated cameras because of “irrational” “we like it more” reasons. If it was all about the best bang for your buck, we’d all be shooting Canon Rebels or Sony A7’s or whatever (all great cameras!).
It’s a bit of an oddball camera. Looks neat. Hopefully they can get enough traction to follow up with more models.
It’s a bit of an oddball camera. Looks neat. Hopefully they can get enough traction to follow up with more models.
farlymac
PF McFarland
Well, yeah, I knew that, it's why I used 1.5 in the first place. But one manufacturers APS-C is not the same as another and so the crop factor can vary. But if all I get is a 28mm frame line when I mount a 28mm lens, is it showing me a true representation of the field of view?
PF
Pixii framelines are electronic, shown one at a time for a clear view, and manually chosen in the app
while the RF is mechanical, the frameline of your choice is via the software
and yes, you choose a 35mm frameline and you get the field of view of a 35mm lens on the sensor.
R33fly
Newbie
I can't wait to see how this thing turns out, as it does look interesting. They're calling it a "software camera", I wonder how far the software will be able to be stretched. Has those LED lit framelines, too, so I would like to see some user configurable custom framelines like the Fuji X-Pros do. Either way, it probably won't replace my R-D1, but it's still pretty interesting~
farlymac
PF McFarland
Godfrey
somewhat colored
LOL! A 35mm lens is still a 35mm lens, regardless of what format you put behind it because the focal length is an attribute of the lens formula. On a 16x24mm (APS-C) format sensor, a 35mm focal length lens nets the field of view of an ~50mm lens on a 24x36mm format sensor, that's all.
Why does this question come up every two weeks still? It's been almost 20 years since the first APS-C format digital sensor cameras that took 35mm film camera lenses was produced. Of course the Pixii would have frame lines that were selected according to the focal length of the lens they correspond to, not the "equivalent focal length" for the field of view. Anything else would be absurd for a new camera using the lenses it was designed to be used with.
G
AAlfano
Well-known
I looked at the manual on the website and it appears the 28mm and 40mm framelines are lines w/o corners and the 35mm and 50mm framelines just show the corners like the 75mm framelines on a Leica. Is this correct? How are they for visibility and framing accuracy?
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Seems like immense potential in much of the concept of the Pixii, even if a fair bit I wouldn't use (not excited to be tied to a smartphone). But, the reality of the "specs" are too limiting for me to consider, then, now, or in the future. And I'm not making any comparisons to any other camera here.
Having said that, imagine if the capabilities were "upgraded/updated". I think the sensor is where most of the deficiency lies, so this little package with a FF 18 to 24-ish MP sensor with a base ISO around 100, etc. etc. would make my ears perk up. Is that feasible? I don't know.
Regardless, its hard to deny that there's just not that many digital rangefinder cameras with M mount to be found...
Having said that, imagine if the capabilities were "upgraded/updated". I think the sensor is where most of the deficiency lies, so this little package with a FF 18 to 24-ish MP sensor with a base ISO around 100, etc. etc. would make my ears perk up. Is that feasible? I don't know.
Regardless, its hard to deny that there's just not that many digital rangefinder cameras with M mount to be found...
Huss
Mentor
I wish my XP3 physically looked as good as the Pixii.
The only thing I don't like about its styling is the raised vf surround which I would prefer if it was less bulging, just a rectangle with rounded corners the way it is on the rest of the camera.
farlymac
PF McFarland
LOL! A 35mm lens is still a 35mm lens, regardless of what format you put behind it because the focal length is an attribute of the lens formula. On a 16x24mm (APS-C) format sensor, a 35mm focal length lens nets the field of view of an ~50mm lens on a 24x36mm format sensor, that's all.
Why does this question come up every two weeks still? It's been almost 20 years since the first APS-C format digital sensor cameras that took 35mm film camera lenses was produced. Of course the Pixii would have frame lines that were selected according to the focal length of the lens they correspond to, not the "equivalent focal length" for the field of view. Anything else would be absurd for a new camera using the lenses it was designed to be used with.
G
What, you think I don't understand crop factors? I know all about them after shooting with an APS-C camera for years. What I'm driving at is Pixii should have frame lines that correlate with APS-C lenses, not regular 135 primes, with the progression being 18 (27), 24 (36), 35 (52.5), and 50 (75). Not 28 (42), 35 (52.5), 40 (60), and 50 (75).
PF
hhmm. what APS-C Leica M lenses would those be, exactly ?
jarski
Mentor
I find this odd design decision if its the case. iirc, when mounting 28mm lens to M8, it brings up equivalent (~35mm) frame lines, not actual full frame 28mm lines
shawn
Mentor
I find this odd design decision if its the case. iirc, when mounting 28mm lens to M8, it brings up equivalent (~35mm) frame lines, not actual full frame 28mm lines
The selection of the frame lines is based on the actual focal length of the lens you are mounting. Mount a 35mm set it to 35mm The franelines shown are for the coverage of the lens on the cameras sensor. It is the same as the M8 or RD1.
Shawn
jarski
Mentor
farlymac
PF McFarland
Super-Elmar-M 18mm f3.8, Zeiss ZM 18mm f4, Summilux-M 24mm f1.4, Elmarit-M 24mm f2.8, and the Elmar-M 24mm f3.8.
They don't call them APS-C, but they'll do for a stand-in. And a numerous amount of 35mm and 50mm lenses for the other two. Unfortunately Voigtlander doesn't cover the 18mm and 24mm focal lengths.
PF
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I don't know what you understand. There are no "APS-C M-mount lenses" ... M-mount lenses are designed for M-mount cameras, all but three have been FF cameras, and one of the alternative-format M-mount cameras had an EVF which obviates all this frame line business entirely. M mount lenses have largely been designed with 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, and 135 mm focal lengths corresponding to the frame lines included in the M4-P and later M series cameras.
The fact that a couple of lenses exist in focal lengths popular on APS-C cameras does not define them as APS-C lenses, since they cover FF format. They are wider alternatives for M-mount camera beyond the standard M viewfinder's capabilities to display frame lines.
The Pixii is a body designed to be used with existing M-mount lenses, since Pixii is not also creating a set of lenses for it. The frame line selector is set to the focal length of the lens you're fitting. The frame lines show you the correct field of view for those lenses on the Pixii sensor in the Pixii viewfinder.
What's so difficult about that?
It might have been nice if they included a 24mm setting due to the popularity of the FoV that focal length provides on APS-C, but they probably found it difficult to do that, so they leave 24mm and shorter focal lengths for an accessory finder. I bet there are a lot more potential M-mount users who own a 28mm lens than a 24mm or shorter focal length lens.
This entire argument about frame lines and focal lengths simply reinforces the limitations of a mechanically coupled, mechano-optical rangefinder/viewfinder design. EVFs and other TTL designs are far more flexible about being able to present a useful viewfinder regardless of the focal length of the lens fitted, which is why RF cameras largely became obsolete when SLRs were able to be produced at popular prices.
G
jankap
Established
Not to speak of mirrorless ones with an EVF.