The M10 or a new camera line? [Merged]

[Jerry_R]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is interesting what you write about slow manual focusing. I am not going to negate it at all. Absolutely not.

 

But would like to point, that there are many, many G1 users (and other u43 cameras) using legacy lenses witn manual focus and they are happy. It works quicker and more precisely than with any dSLR.

 

Maybe it is a question of some period for getting used to?

How many years you use rangefinder?

How many days were you focusing with EVF?

(GF1 <> EVF. Best EVF is in G1, GH1, G2, and one added to E-P2).

 

If someone needs quick reaction - then you can:

- usu only central point (forget additional buttons or LCD pressing)

- do not use magnification at all

(observing whole picture works today for many too!)

 

And for some people - it will be still too slow. Fact. But then - use rangefinder, use M.

 

And for many people - speed will be acceptable, even if slower than M9.

EVIL FF is not to replace rangefinders. I am for new line, as wrote already.

[stunsworth]

Maybe it is a question of some period for getting used to?

How many years you use rangefinder?

How many days were you focusing with EVF?

(GF1 <> EVF. Best EVF is in G1, GH1, G2, and one added to E-P2).

 

If someone needs quick reaction - then you can:

- usu only central point (forget additional buttons or LCD pressing)

 

That's why I said it may be my problem. But even for someone experienced in using an EVF, I just can't see how focussing - especially wide open - would come anywhere near to the speed of using an M.

 

Not sure about the last point I've quoted, are you referring to the AF point? If so the GF-1 at least doesn't support focus confirmation with M lenses.

[Jerry_R]

Not sure about the last point I've quoted, are you referring to the AF point? If so the GF-1 at least doesn't support focus confirmation with M lenses.

Steve,

what I mean is: if you want the quickest possible manual focusing - and you want to magnify center of screen (this is what I named central point) - you only press one button (it starts magnification of center of screen).

 

When you want to magnify not center part of screen, you just need to click more times arrows (left, right, top, bottom) - to show which part of frame you want to magnify, than one more click for accepting selected point.

 

(if you know before taking picture, wich part of screen you want to focus - you can select that point for magnifying earlier, in advance too).

 

And the quickest option is resigning from magnifying, then you only focus by rotating ring on lens, observing whole frame. In some scenes, closer distance, maximum wide opened lens - it works. For further subjects - magnification is recommended.

[lct]

...And for some people - it will be still too slow. Fact. But then - use rangefinder, use M...

This is indeed the very topic of this thread. M10 or new camera line. With my very little experience of the G1, i would say that for people used to focusing with rangefinders, the M10 can in no way be an EVIL in the current state of technology. Way too slow for us. And even if focusing were quicker with future EVFs, true M lovers should not care at all as a rangefinder is in no way a small camera with a VF on the left. It is essentially, hence necessarily, a camera with a built-in rangefinder. Now as a CMOS and CCD user, i don't see significant IQ difference between those sensors so implementing an optional EVF to complement the necessary rangefinder does not look like a real problem to me. But i'm no techie at all so i'll let more competent voices give their advice on this point.

[bill]

I have an LC-1 with an EVIL. I fully appreciate that technology has improved since then, and keeps getting better. I also have a D-Lux 4 with a SBOOI viewfinder permanently attached and in use for 80% of my photos taken with that camera. I have Olympus DSLRs and an EP-1. I also have and regularly use two Barnacks, with separate range- and viewfinders. I use them often because I enjoy doing so.

 

So - I have used - or am using, most if not all permutations in discussion here.

 

There are some key points that make the M direct vision rangefinder both unique and superlative for me.

 

1. Using an SLR is like looking down a tunnel. Using a rangefinder is like looking through a window. I much prefer looking through a window. I want to see my subject with the minimum of anything - mirrors, circuitry - between me and it.

 

2. With a rangefinder, the only lag is effectively between my brain and my finger. I see what is happening now, not milliseconds ago.

 

3. With a rangefinder, I can see what is happening outside the frame. I can anticipate and act accordingly.

 

4. With a rangefinder I see what is happening during my shot, not before/after

 

5. With a rangefinder I have a more enjoyable photographic experience

 

That last is totally subjective, but fundamental. I like knobs not buttons, mf not af and direct vision not a mini monitor. I like to make my own decisions, choices - and mistakes. No amount of technological advance is going to make me prefer a tiny tv screen over two panes of glass between me and my subject.

 

Neither do I want "invasive surgery" to my M that gives it the ability to use an EVIL like the EP-2. That will add cost and complexity and little else. As I have said before, by all means have a "dark side" equivalent to the M line - an "EVIL twin" if you will, running in parallel - but don't fix what isn't broken, please.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Jerry_R]

One more comment. Many say that focusing Rangefinder is quicker than Evil.

 

Few days ago, I had many cases, when focusing & composing G1 was much more quicker than M9 - without the need of cropping in postprocessing (due to paralax).

I was making some close ups, photos of leaves on the ground, and lying tree.

 

I am afraid, that you evaluate focusing speed - from perspective of pictures you take.

That is fine. But pls do not forget - that such EVIL camera could be used more efficiently than Rangefinder - in some areas when now - people have to use other types\brands of camera.

[bill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I absolutely take your point, Jerry. It's "horses for courses", which is why, earlier this week, I used my Olympus DSLR with 50mm Macro lens in preference to any M, LTM or R system.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[rosuna]

As I have said before, by all means have a "dark side" equivalent to the M line - an "EVIL twin" if you will, running in parallel - but don't fix what isn't broken, please.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Well, nobody ask for a replacement of the classical M rangefinder cameras by an EVIL camera. The EVIL camera may be profitable for Leica (or not) and may be technically doable (or not), but it has nothing to do with M cameras. The only connection is the possible sharing of core technologies across all Leica lines, and the possibility of some synergies between the M system (or the extinct R system) and any possible new 24x36 based system.

[Chrishayton]

Id never want an electric viewfinder camera. I love the rangefinder experience.

 

What I would like is liveview on the next M. The only reason being is it allows you to use telephoto lenses.

[AlanG]

Id never want an electric viewfinder camera. I love the rangefinder experience.

 

What I would like is liveview on the next M. The only reason being is it allows you to use telephoto lenses.

 

I can't predict the future, but it would be logical for Leica to make a new AF 24x36 EVIL system in order to be able to market to a larger audience. If they do this it would also be logical to use the same electronics and any other possible components (such as the shutter) in the M. This would give economies of scale. There would be no reason to duplicate more than is necessary.

 

And this would lead to having live view in an M unless there was some reason that the same sensor (probably with different microlenses) couldn't be used in both.

 

On the other hand, if Leica contracts out for a new system, all bets are off and they might not share anything.

[ho_co]

I have an LC-1 with an EVIL. ...

Just curious--what EVIL camera do you have? LC-1 has electronic viewfinder but no interchangeable lens.

[bill]

Just curious--what EVIL camera do you have? LC-1 has electronic viewfinder but no interchangeable lens.

 

Yes Howard, I got ahead of myself. The LC-1 has the EV bit, but not IL. Given that it's the EV bit that we are discussing here, I think it's relevant.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[andybarton]

Meanwhile - Panasonic G2 - is coming to market in a month. You can touch any place on LCD (or select in EVF using buttons) - then it automatically magnifies the screen, you can quickly and precisely focus and - shoot.

 

.

 

 

But can you actually see the screen in sunshine?

[bill]

You don't need to. Just dink it with your nose, like one of those drinking birds, and you can randomly take photos whenever you hold it in front of your face.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[andybarton]

 

4. With a rangefinder I see what is happening during my shot, not before/after

 

 

Viewfinder blackout is, for the most part, something taht actually makes no difference, though, is it? Let's face it, if you are using an SLR and a shutter speed of 1/125th or above, the blackout is a mere flicker in the viewfinder. Only for longer exposures does it really make a differerence.

 

That's my experience, anyway

[jsrockit]

Id never want an electric viewfinder camera. I love the rangefinder experience.

 

What I would like is liveview on the next M. The only reason being is it allows you to use telephoto lenses.

 

You have to admit that liveview and an EVF are better alternatives than a DSLR though no?

[Jerry_R]

But can you actually see the screen in sunshine?

Yep, last year I was making photos on a beach, middle of the sunny day. I used tilted LCD, as I was making some pictures from ground level, some from above head level.

 

There is even amplified brightness mode, but I didn't had to use it.

[andybarton]

You have to admit that liveview and an EVF are better alternatives than a DSLR though no?

 

I wouldn't.

[farnz]

You have to admit that liveview and an EVF are better alternatives than a DSLR though no?

Do you mean a better alternative than a DSLR with Live View? Nope.

 

Pete.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[bill]

You have to admit that liveview and an EVF are better alternatives than a DSLR though no?

 

Never in a million years. Did you not read what I wrote? I have a DSLR with live-view and I never, ever use it.

 

Regards,

 

Bill