Feedback

Erik Says:

Niiiiiiiice!

Anthony Says:

Feedback on the lot (treating the camera as if it’s real):

40mm f2 would be great. 1.7 if it doesn’t compromise size. A built-in iris lenscap like the Ricoh GX200 would be cool.

AF (or at least a focus confirmation LED) would be a nice addition especially for narrow DOF — with manual override.

What kind of battery? AA or proprietary?

In addition to wire release, an IR port for remote release would be useful.

52 mm filter thread is good!

Have you thought about materials/finish? Especially if you’re considering the grip, the ’stickiness’ will affect how important the grip is.

Any strap lugs? Tripod mount? Dioptre correction?

To keep the lines of the camera sleek, I’d like the shutter dial on the back of the camera, where the right thumb naturally falls. The speeds could still be printed on the top of the dial and visible, but the dial itself wouldn’t need to protrude beyond the top of the shell.

I am assuming no continuous shooting or self-timer controls outside of the menu. I’d even prefer there to be no flash hot-shoe, especially if the optical viewfinder is built in. With a 1.7 lens and usable high ISO flash wouldn’t be needed most of the time. Again, contributes to the clean look of the camera.

For styling generally, that new Olympus M4/3 prototype looks amazing — although it lacks on the manual control front.

What kind of shutter speed and aperture range and ISO are you thinking? 1/1000, 1/4000? f16, f22? ISO 1600, or shooting for ISO 3200? Zero noise reduction would be preferred.

How do you plan the on/off switch? I’m a fan of ‘around the shutter button’ personally.

In terms of sensor, a dedicated B&W sensor would be unrealistic but awesome.

Cool concept — good luck.

admin Says:

Thanks a lot for very useful feedback, Anthony.

I have considered adding IR-autofocus, like the Hexar AF has, but I think it can be difficult as I don’t want to compromise on the manual focusing abilities. If it’s possible tw combine the two without compromising, I’ll sure do it.

I’m also considering adding an IR-port, but I want to keep the electronics to a minimum, in order to get the camera as sustainable as possible, and of course keep the price down.

I’m planning a magnesium/aluminium alloy for the body, and vulcanite or leather for the grip. It’s important that the surface has a god grip itself, and also I want it to age with grace – whic leather does.

As for strap lugs – I think I want them vertically placed on one side, like on the Leica CL, to make the camera bounce less when you’re carrying it around your neck. There will be a tripod mount, aligned to the lens axis. I haven’t thought of a dioptre correction, do you think it will be necessary? Ideally I want the camera to be comfortable to use with glasses, so there might not be such a nedd for one.

I also consider an “embedded” shutter dial, I will have to see how it fits in with the totality.

Personally, I don’t see much of a need for a flash shoe either, but I think the lack of one would scare many people away. It’s good to have the option to use a flash … I think.

Thes Olympus prototype is nice, but I’m looking for a more low-key look, all black and discrete, but still (I hope) beautiful in a subtle way.

I’m thinking about using a leaf shutter, which today can get extremely high shutter speeds, so at least 1/8000. That’s one of the advantages of using a fixed lens. Also, I want the shutter sound to be a soft and subtle “snap”.

“Around the shutter button”-preference noted. I haven’t decided on that yet.

A B&W-sensor would indeed be awsome, but even if this is just a concept, I have to keep it believable in terms of sale potential.

Thanks again for the feedback, it’s of great help.

Ash Says:

Hi,

You would be better off with a interchangeable lens mount (one already with lenses out there - ltm, m, etc). The VF window looks like it’s on the wrong side. It needs to be for the photographer’s right eye, not left - as this is how all RF cameras have been. Left or central VF windows are unpopular. It would also mean the focusing mechanism is backwards as your images suggest.

If it’s a fixed lens: A fast normal/wide lens is better than a normal/tele (so the lens in an area more like 35-55mm than 50-70mm).

admin Says:

Thanks for the feedback, Ash.

If I were to actually design a camera for sale, I think I would go for an interchangable lens mount. But as it’s just a concept, I think the fixed lens states the no-nonsense value which is maybe the most important part of this project. Also, it keeps the price down, and allows for a quiter leaf shutter. And there won’t be any sensor dust.

As to the placement of the vf: you’re of course absolutely right, it’s just a late night mistake on my part. The rendring is of a 3d-model I hastily put together last night, just to give an impression of the aesthetics I’m looking at. I’ll fix it in the next 3d-model.

victoriapio Says:

I will limit myself to lenses:
In a perfect world you would have a sharp, fast zoom to cover diagonal angles from say 75 degrees (28mm focal length) to say a 38 degree for a 75mm aov). Naturally the optical laws kick in and the cost skyrockets (as in Leica WATE or TRI ELMAR, which are not only expensive but slow)
But my suggestion is to:
1) have one fixed lens model with a “normal” diagonal of 47 degrees equivilant to a 50mm on 35mm film;
2) then have a body only model available with an m-mount flange. (You would sell many more of this model than any fixed lens model in my opinion.)
3. Have single framelines on the fixed mount model(naturally).
4. On the m mount model, have MANUAL control (ala RD1s) of the single framelines from available from 28-75.
5. I think you would sell many more m-mount bodies than fixed lens mounts. No doubt the cost would be higher because of shutter, ect.
6. This is a bold step, study the M8 carefully.
7. I would also design a hump, button or some form on the back (near the top) to help grip the body during fast action.
8. Best of luck.

O.C.

Andrea Says:

Your project is really interesting. I would add my 2 cents: consider an old leica LTM body, as you did in the black picture on the top of the page. Just add a collapsible lens (a la Elmar).
That’s it. The rest is fine.
Your ideas are superb: dial for controlling the camera, no menus, total control…I would definetely buy it. Drop the interchangeable lenses stuff…one lens is enough. We are talking of a kind of cheap camera, isn’it?

admin Says:

O.C: Thanks for your feedback. I agree with your points, and if this was a commercial project I would definitely go for a body-only model too. But since this is just a concept, I’m afraid having two models will just confuse people to what I wanna say with the concept – that sometimes in photography less is more.

Andrea:
Thanks a lot for your feedback, I’m really glad you like the concept. We’re talking KIND OF a cheap camera, which means below the $1K mark. Which means it will be a lot cheaper than cameras like the leica m8 or the epson RD-1, and cheaper than most dslr’s with decent optics. To consider is also the lesser need for acessories and add-ons in this sort of photography (which in my opinion is the main reason why manufacturers don’t make these kind of cameras – they make most of their money on add-ons.)

Juan Luis Says:

I like very much the concept… I don’t see the need of an M mount camera, of curse I would like to have one but, IMHO, you will face with the problem of the crop factor… It’s not so easy to have a working RF camera with full frame sensor so you’ll need to crop, I raher prefer a fixed lens camera, ideally with various focal lenghts, let’s say 28/35 or 40 and 50mm equivalent, you will buy the one that suits your needs at a nice price, in addition you avoid the sensor dust.

admin Says:

Thanks, Juan.
It would be nice with a series of cameras with different focal lengths, but in this project I’ll think I’ll stick with the one. And it seems like it’s going to be a 42mm equiv.

Volker Says:

It looks great! I would prefer a 40mm f2 (just like my CLE). Fixed lens is fine! Would be great if the lens could retract into the body (like a minilux). An aparture ring and aparture priority would be a good feature. Also a leaf shutter would be nice and quite!

admin Says:

Thanks a lot, Volker. Because of the complexity of the lens (7 elements) I won’t be able to retract it into the body. Also, the camera body itsef will be pretty jammed with components. There will be an aperture ring and a nice’n quiet leaf shutter.

gene Says:

oooh, a leaf shutter!!!

Thea Says:

Hehe, jeg heter da ikke Brekke.. Dette ser veldig bra ut. Siden jeg ikke er ram på alt det tekniske, skulle jeg like å se kameraet i en kontekst. Type: Hvordan er “fotoopplevelsen”? Hvordan er kameraet å bære med seg? osv.
Gir det mening?

admin Says:

Det er sant, aner ikke hvor jeg fikk Brekke fra. Skal fikse det. Det gir veldig mening, jeg har bare ikke kommet så langt som til å visualisere det enda, for jeg tenkte å gjøre det ved å ta bilder av noen som “bruker” modellen. Men modellen fins jo ikke enda. Kanskje jeg burde få opp dampen litt …

Marit Says:

Hjemmesiden fikk mye mer sjel med et foto øverst!
Liker veldig godt kameraet ditt, liker 50-talls looken.

(ps: den nye logoen sitter som et skudd, en enkel logo passer godt til kameraet.. )

Mye skryt, men du fortjener det

Bra jobba Henrik

admin Says:

Takk!

lars Says:

Dette ble veldig veldig bra. Jeg hadde kjøpt kameraet, for å si det sånn.

Synes dog hjemmesiden mistet ALL sjel med foto øverst.

Erling Smemo Says:

Er dette et “prosjektkamera”, eller er det et kamera som kan komme til å bli produsert?

Det likner litt på et gammelt Leica-kamera som pappa hadde en gang, dengang filmkamera, men med utrolig god optikk…

admin Says:

Hei Erling,

det er bare et konsept, dessverre.

Chris Says:

How about full frame? If the lens is that good, why not go the whole hog. Full frame more pixels? Especially as how fast things are moving in the sensor world.
I like the big shutter speed dial on the top. CLE ish?
If you dont use fixed lens, could you use an already established rangefinder mount?
if not 38-45mm is in the ideal sort of Range.
Yashica Electros came with anything from 35 to 45mm. Optional tele & wide screw on adaptors?

admin Says:

Chris,
thanks for your feedback.
A bigger sensor would make a bigger camera, and a bigger lens. Even though I would love to have it full frame, the compactness is more important in this particular concept.

Jipps Says:

I would buy this in a flash. I currently use the following cameras:

Leica M8
Leica MP
Canon 7sII
Leica D-Lux 4
GRD
Minolta Hi-matic 7s

It’s no exaggeration to say that the camera you’ve envisioned here would be (subject to lens quality) the perfect blend of them all. Crop factor is the only limitation is can see…