andybarton Posted April 6, 2011 Share #81 Posted April 6, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) If there is any more shouting in this thread, people will be asked to take some time out I have already asked people to treat each other with respect. Thank you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 Hi andybarton, Take a look here Viewfinder options, so many, which to choose and why?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanG Posted April 6, 2011 Share #82 Posted April 6, 2011 If there is any more shouting in this thread, people will be asked to take some time out I have already asked people to treat each other with respect. Thank you. Sorry for that. Yes Diogenis, I agree 100% with everything you wrote. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted April 6, 2011 Share #83 Posted April 6, 2011 The EVF fills needs rather similar to the SLR. I'd think an extra body for M lenses without the RF but with an EVF might be the better proposition. Do you think there is much chance of this happening vs. simply adding these features to a rangefinder model? It seems to me that live view adds much more usefulness to a rangefinder camera than to a DSLR that already has through the lens viewing. Why would a person want to bother with two bodies, when one could easily do the job that both aim to do? Use the OVF for lenses from 28 to 90 or so and use the EVF for wider and longer lenses, close-ups, and for tilt shift lenses or other effects that are easiest to accomplish via through the lens viewing. It might be possible to use quite a large variety of lenses on such a camera. I wonder if this thought ever occurred to anyone at Leica in the past? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted April 6, 2011 Share #84 Posted April 6, 2011 Do you think there is much chance of this happening vs. simply adding these features to a rangefinder model? It seems to me that live view adds much more usefulness to a rangefinder camera than on a DSLR that already has through the lens viewing. Why would a person want to bother with two bodies, when one could do the job that both aim to do? Yes, I think so. For one, the job would be - engineering-wise - more than "simply adding features to a rangefinder model". Then, I already said that I thought the demand for an "enhanced" RF plus live view camera on the modest side. Thirdly, a lean mirrorless bare bones camera supporting M and/or R lenses and a tethered EVF would be an altogether different beast. Fourth, Leica already made noises about mirrorless electronic cameras. Photographers carrying several bodies isn't news, exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted April 6, 2011 Share #85 Posted April 6, 2011 Why would a person want to bother with two bodies, when one could do the job that both aim to do? Why would a person want to bother with a tool kit when a Swiss Army knife could do the job that both aim to do? Why would a person want to bother with a symphony orchestra when a harmonica could do the job that both aim to do? Why would... Jack of all trades... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 6, 2011 Share #86 Posted April 6, 2011 We've discussed this matter many times already. Good clip-on EVFs will be considered natural in a few years i bet but a CMOS sensor is mandatory for that and conventional CMOS are not good at capturing when the light hits the sensor at a not-so-perpendicular angle. The last Sony's EXMOR will do it perhaps but it does not exist in full frame format so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted April 6, 2011 Share #87 Posted April 6, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why would a person want to bother with a tool kit when a Swiss Army knife could do the job that both aim to do? Why would a person want to bother with a symphony orchestra when a harmonica could do the job that both aim to do? Why would... Jack of all trades... I love your analogies - right on the money again I see. Following this line of reasoning maybe they should make another model with an optical viewfinder that is optimized for 75-135mm lenses. And yet another for 18-28mm lenses. The M already is making quite a few compromises in order to simulate the view of its lenses. An EVF would help optimize the view for some lenses in some applications not degrade it. So what would be different about a dedicated live view Leica that would justify its existence vs. adding the same features to an M? I could see it if they were going to make an entirely new AF system. And maybe that will be an option if they can't get a chip suitable for live view for the M. But that is not what we are talking about is it? Otherwise, I can't see them going down the road of two electronic bodies that use the same lenses but have very different electronics and sensors inside simply to avoid adding this feature to the M in the first place. I'd like to see how they explain to people that if they want both a rangefinder and live view, they need to buy and carry two different cameras. Weren't you one of those who wanted things to be simple? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 6, 2011 Share #88 Posted April 6, 2011 Following this line of reasoning maybe they should make another model with an optical viewfinder that is optimized for 75-135mm lenses. And yet another for 18-28mm lenses. . Actually, that is exactly what Leica did when they introduced the 0.85 viewfinder.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted April 6, 2011 Share #89 Posted April 6, 2011 ...two examples of which I own. A fine example of specialisation. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted April 6, 2011 Share #90 Posted April 6, 2011 We've discussed this matter many times already. Good clip-on EVFs will be considered natural in a few years i bet but a CMOS sensor is mandatory for that and conventional CMOS are not good at capturing when the light hits the sensor at a not-so-perpendicular angle. The last Sony's EXMOR will do it perhaps but it does not exist in full frame format so far. So if a suitable sensor becomes available, and for the sake of discussion, let's say it works better than the current one, you'd be OK with perhaps an extra setting on the power switch to turn on live view in the M? And a clip on EVF would be OK too? (Perhaps the camera can accept upgraded version as they improve over time.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted April 6, 2011 Share #91 Posted April 6, 2011 Actually, that is exactly what Leica did when they introduced the 0.85 viewfinder.... You are joking, right? And you carry three bodies now? How well does that work for you? So with the live view body that will make 4 you'll need to carry. That is so much more convenient than pressing a button to turn on live view or having a clip-on EVF. I guess if Leica can sell everyone four bodies it will work out quite well for them. Again, which body shows the field of view of an 18mm lens and which model shows the view of only the 75-135mm lenses? Where did keeping it simple go? Maybe it is time for us all to work on our private lists of advantages and disadvantages for a while. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cernobila Posted April 6, 2011 Author Share #92 Posted April 6, 2011 Actually, that is exactly what Leica did when they introduced the 0.85 viewfinder.... I did not realise that Leica has made so many viewfinders, I forgot the number mentioned in this thread......so, with the 1.00 you can shoot with both eyes open, while with some of the others you are better of using only one eye or you might get a headache, this sounds a little complicated and cumbersome. I know that the viewfinder has to match the range of lenses available for that model. So does this mean that each body you pick up may have a different field of vision and different set of information in it........not sure I would like that, I like to see what the sensor sees with the same info each time, regardless of what lens I use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted April 6, 2011 Share #93 Posted April 6, 2011 Well, you're in luck. They only make one viewfinder on the M9. It's a 0.68x magnification. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 6, 2011 Share #94 Posted April 6, 2011 How well does that work for you? So with the live view body that will make 4 you'll need to carry.I doubt it. I personally regard live view as particularly useless on a rangefinder - I would not spend one Euro on it. Yes- it is very useful to have a long lens on one body and a short one on another, with dedicated viewfinders. A bit of a pity it is not on offer (yet?) for the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted April 6, 2011 Share #95 Posted April 6, 2011 Leica Ms don't just have viewfinders, they have range/viewfinders. For me at least, rangefinder focusing is the most precise way of focusing. Adding LV to Leica M may be useful for composing, sometimes, but focusing using an LCD would be ghastly -- I can't even see them in bright light as it is! I'd like to see the rangefinder kept as bright and clear as possible. Here's another thought: For those cameras that accept M lenses, like the Panasonic G series and such, but which don't have rangefinder focusing, would an alternative for manual focusing be to mount an accessory rangefinder in the accessory shoe (non coupled, obviously)? As with the earliest Leicas. Sort of a 1920s/30s accessory for a 2010s camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 6, 2011 Share #96 Posted April 6, 2011 So if a suitable sensor becomes available, and for the sake of discussion, let's say it works better than the current one, you'd be OK with perhaps an extra setting on the power switch to turn on live view in the M? And a clip on EVF would be OK too?... Yes why not if live view and EVF are optional provided the new cam (specially OVF & RF) can be used the same way as it does today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cernobila Posted April 6, 2011 Author Share #97 Posted April 6, 2011 Well, you're in luck. They only make one viewfinder on the M9. It's a 0.68x magnification. Thank you for that.......this would make it little hard for both eyes open viewing. I remember when I was using my M3 with an Elmar f4 90mm lens. It was at the end of winter on a mountain side, I found this fast flowing creek in a thick forest, had to use a tripod because of the low light conditions. I could only use the centre part of the viewfinder, took a little time to line up. I had little idea what the picture was going to look like at the time.....no perspective or depth of field information to check out.....so I hoped for the best.....I got lucky, printed on heavy Agfa Portriga paper (warm tones) the picture came out better than expected.......this was more luck than anything else due to little real information in the viewfinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted April 7, 2011 Share #98 Posted April 7, 2011 Leica Ms don't just have viewfinders, they have range/viewfinders. For me at least, rangefinder focusing is the most precise way of focusing. Adding LV to Leica M may be useful for composing, sometimes, but focusing using an LCD would be ghastly -- I can't even see them in bright light as it is! I'd like to see the rangefinder kept as bright and clear as possible. This is one reason I often use live view. I have seen nothing more precise than magnified live view focusing. (10X in this case.) And it makes it possible to tilt a lens and accurately judge the focus plane and fall-off. I find the 5DII's LCD usable in bright light. For critical work, I use a finder over the LCD. (Zacuto Z-finder.) And of course a clip on EVF would have no viewing issues under bright light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted April 7, 2011 Share #99 Posted April 7, 2011 This is one reason I often use live view. I have seen nothing more precise than magnified live view focusing. (10X in this case.) And it makes it possible to tilt a lens and accurately judge the focus plane and fall-off. I find the 5DII's LCD usable in bright light. For critical work, I use a finder over the LCD. (Zacuto Z-finder.) And of course a clip on EVF would have no viewing issues under bright light. But you can have better accuracy just by using manual M9 focus, only without the x10 tremor+the Zakuto Radar (reminds me of old ship radars that bridge officers were using to view radars lol) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted April 7, 2011 Share #100 Posted April 7, 2011 Alan, there is an old saying within Engineering cycles: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Google the term, it describes exactly how you feel, and why Leica will never implement one EVF on it's M line. For a product that gets better over the years, some 50 years it's first release. Personally, I don't even feel Leica will ever make an EVF for it's camera's due to the obvious limitations of technology. What we might see some day, would be the same optical finder with it's unsurpassed optical qualities, coupled with some sort of projected information on it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.