Jump to content

Stef63

Members
  • Posts

    358
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Stef63

  • Birthday 01/25/1963

Profile Information

  • Member Title
    Benutzer
  • Gender
    Male / Männlich
  • Country
    België/Belgique

Converted

  • Your Leica Products / Deine Leica Produkte
    M11, M10M, SL2, too much lenses

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not sure about this. I posted a visual comparison here. The new Visoflex 2 feels to me more integrated than an “afterthought” on an M body like the 020. More specific, with the latest new M10x firmware the Visoflex 2 experience is closer to the experience I get on an M11 than the 020 on an M10x body. Disclaimer: I’m a spectacle user and when photographing with glasses I cannot see the the whole frame trough the 020. With the new type 2 Visoflex I can see the whole frame which is on top of that brighter, sharper and more close to what you get through the rangefinder. Yes the 2 is size wise a little bit wider than the 020, but overall I would not call it “slimmer”
  2. This is what David Farkas says : “Given the perfect blacks of the OLED display, there is no visible or distracting unused area so it's perfectly usable and might be worth the overall increase in image quality.” That is exactly my experience. And when wearing spectacles a smaller image is a lesser issue than a larger one through the same “view hole” https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2022/05/leica-adds-visoflex-2-compatibility-to-all-m10-generation-cameras-with-firmware-updates/
  3. No not at all. It is not limited to a new exterior only when used on an M10x body. I have both and the new one is close to the experience you get when mounted on an M11. I must say that my experience is based on using both EVFs with glasses. I cannot see the whole frame through the 020 model, but perfectly through the new Visoflex 2. Also the image through the new one is cleaner, brighter and sharper, and as I said close to what I get on the M11. For my type of use it is a significant upgrade.
  4. Leica made a choice for the m11 battery to include the cover for the sd card housing. If they opted for the sl2 / q2 battery they would have needed to find a location for the sd card and a separate cover/door for it. I do not see an elegant solution for it without a baseplate or side door which would ruin the clean lines of the M11 . To me the current solution with a different battery for the m11 than for the sl2/q2 seems more beneficial than the same battery solution across platforms. fyi : I do have both a SL2 and M11 and it does not bother me to have 2 types of batteries.
  5. True. I was indeed only referring to the L to R to make my point that when you want to make things of the past compatible with things of today you should not have to resort to alter and permanently make a CAM lens incompatible with legacy R bodies, to be able to make it work on an adapter and modern SL. That was what Leica suggested me : remove one of the CAMs of all my non ROM R lenses to make it work on a very recently introduced “adapter”. A simple switch on the outside of that already utterly expensive L to R adapter labelled “CAM - ROM” and which in CAM mode cuts the internal electronics would be a smart and cheap solution to make almost all R lenses introduced after 1976 to work on an SL. A statement they make on their website, which is in reality only partially true. Sorry for hijacking this thread.
  6. Hi Peter, You referred to my post regarding the “strange” behaviour of a L to R adapter. Drawing the conclusion that it is unsafe to mix CAM and ROM equipment is a far stretch from what I was trying to explain. Also you state that in order to be safe we must follow “the rules”, they are however not clear to me at the moment. Leica never said a ROM lens designed after 1976 would damage anything. Leica only told me in a support related message the design of the L to R adapter can cause a “short circuit” resulting at f 5.6 that a SL2 believes that a unrecognised lens is mounted. A short circuit is something that also occurs when you flip a wall switch to turn on the light. This not necessarily damages the light bulb (or the camera in this case ) Now I am with you that the whole ROM and CAM compatibility still is an issue, even in 2022. As it seems that Leica - although they are aware of it - introduce new equipment to the market like the L to R adapter that still does not handle this thing of the past very well.
  7. Leica APO Telyt R 280 f/4 + 2.0x + 1.4x, that makes 560 mm at f/11. You will need light and only MF but still excellent on an SL2. Hard to find AND still expensive, but will hold value while offering a lot of fun. Without the converters you will experience one of the best lenses Leica ever made.
  8. I do not think there is an in depth coordination between the team developing the Fotos app and the team developing the M11 firmware or firmware for other Leicas. If one team adds a feature in a normal development cycle, you also should modify the test scripts on ALL platforms that includes this new feature or could be impacted. Then you perform a regression test on ALL platforms to ensure all is still running well, then an acceptance test on ALL platforms, and then you release it on ALL impacted platforms. A new feature in the M11 firmware 1.3.0.0 is Highlight Weighted metering. You probably guessed it already : in the new released Fotos 3.1.1 you still only find the 3 older metering settings. This is certainly not a bug, this is an oversight that demonstrates the lack of coordination between the teams developing software.
  9. Indeed. Apo-Telyt-R 3.4/180 of course ! But if the purpose is to always or most of the time use a x2 extender then there are better options (albeit more expensive). F6.8 minimum on a non-IBIS and not so brilliant in high ISO camera needs a lot of light or indeed like you said a tripod or monopod.
  10. I'm wearing multifocal glasses since over a year. Mostly for reading and arm length distances. Far sight is still ok. Now, multifocal lenses should be used MOST or better ALL the time because your brain needs to adapt. And from experience, that can take some time. When using the rangefinder OVF in combination with say a 28 mm and my glasses, I cannot see the whole frame. With the old style EVF I have the same issue. So up until now I was used to taking pictures without my glasses. However, with the M11 and when using wider than 35 mm, longer than 75 mm or the Noctilux for example, I can keep my glasses on and still see the whole frame through the new EVF. Also for 35 to 75 mm I now keep my glasses on and use the OVF. All this is a night and day difference in usability for me. The increased resolution, stabilization and faster throughput makes using the new Visoflex also better experience. So to answer your question : Yes, for me personal there is a LARGE benefit. For non-glass wearers, that difference might be not as large. But it is certainly a better experience.
  11. Here are some new shots, including a front view.
  12. The rectangular viewing hole is roughly 16 mm on the horizontal side on the newer one, where the old one is approximately 12 mm. So yes, it is substantially bigger. It comes close to the size of the SL2.
  13. Hi all, thank you for the nice responses and it seems my initial post helped people to make their decision or raised an interest in the new Visoflex. I promise I’ll try to find some time over the weekend for some more comparison shots (also from the front like @nicci78 requested).
  14. My bank account sincerely hopes 1h and 2h… ☺️
×
×
  • Create New...