Will M-240 EVF change M lens ecosystem?

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Having recently purchased a 5D3 I can tell you the AF is superb and the 70-200/2.8 lens is terrific even with the 1.4x. I fear the M will behave like our M9's, not the best setup for fast action.

[Einst_Stein]

You mentioned the 35/70 f4 too, that's what I'm correcting you on.

 

Better solutions? How about a Canon 5d? Optical viewfinder (better than a laggy EVF) and SLR form factor. I'm not convinced as to how well an M & EVF will work with tele/zoom R lenses for sport or action shots.

 

When I sais that, I meant both 35-70mm/f2.8 and 35-70mm/f4 would be more desirable than trl-elmar 28-35-50mm, ... my personal view.

 

I'm with you that M+R+EVF is not as attractive to me as 5DII+L or R lenses. It is because I don't like EVF. Any EVF, including Sony's translucent DSLR and M43's stuffs.

[Paul J]

Lens eco system? As in fungus inside the lens?

 

[Jager]

Making lenses fast is hard. Making lenses small is hard. Making a lens that is both fast and small is really hard.

 

As soon as you tell your optical engineer "f2.8 is our new baseline for 'fast,' rather than f1.4" you've eased his task considerably. When you add, "oh yeah, feel free to make it five inches long and three inches in diameter," you've eased his task immeasurably.

 

All of which is to say the supreme, unassailable advantage of the M lies in its superb optics in a diminutive size, married to an ergonomically simple camera body. That's its ethos. I predict that the new M will not change that.

 

The EVF and new-found ability to use SLR glass is interesting - certainly for those with a closet-full of R glass. But my guess is that such use will never rise to more than a very small niche, an occasional curiosity, within the M community.

 

Most of us have DSLR systems, anyway, for when we want to use a big honking zoom lens or telephoto.

[Einst_Stein]

Making lenses fast is hard. Making lenses small is hard. Making a lens that is both fast and small is really hard.

 

As soon as you tell your optical engineer "f2.8 is our new baseline for 'fast,' rather than f1.4" you've eased his task considerably. When you add, "oh yeah, feel free to make it five inches long and three inches in diameter," you've eased his task immeasurably.

 

All of which is to say the supreme, unassailable advantage of the M lies in its superb optics in a diminutive size, married to an ergonomically simple camera body. That's its ethos. I predict that the new M will not change that.

 

The EVF and new-found ability to use SLR glass is interesting - certainly for those with a closet-full of R glass. But my guess is that such use will never rise to more than a very small niche, an occasional curiosity, within the M community.

 

Most of us have DSLR systems, anyway, for when we want to use a big honking zoom lens or telephoto.

 

Leica would not make M just for people to use the old lenses. The adaptability to unlock the lens from the M frame line system should be a long term consideration for the future. Now the question is what's that future about.

 

A wider range of focal length has to be part of that, particularly for tele lenses and zoom. No matter how superb the prime is to the zoom, it's a large market opportunity that Leica has been absented. If ever the tele and zoom commonly taking the place in Leica's lens bag, I doubt the importance of the size will last long, ...unless magically Leica can offer the tiny and amazing tele & zoom like what it does on primes.