M Rangefinder vs EVF Focus Accuracy?

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Congratulations on a correctly working great M!

I hope mine will work equally well if and when I finally get it!

Thanks.

[digitalfx]

I find both equally accurate. But I still keep the EVF on the camera most of the time as there are many situations where its very difficult to accurately focus with the rangefinder and because I have the EVF attached, I simply push LV and focus with EVF. Its the best of both worlds and imo is a perfect compliment to the M system. Those who refuse to ever use the EVF just because its "anti M" are really missing out.

[CheshireCat]

[Continuing the discussion here from another thread].

 

It is evident that few people know what a good EVF is.

I just took this screenshot from my camera (latest Magic Lantern firmware), and added descriptions in red color for your convenience.

This is 6 year old camera hardware.

Welcome to the 21st century

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[tookaphotoof]

A lot of info in a small viewfinder, unless it's actually the lcd screen on the back of your camera?

Anyways, I find the evf on the M only to be useful when I have time to focus. On the street I prefer the rangefinder anytime. It's also pretty annoying the evf blacks out for so long when you're used to the rangefinder.

[Rick]

CC - This is a joke, right? I would never want to look through a viewfinder like the one you posted and deal with all of that information (junk) in order to just take a picture.

 

Exposure can be done in your head, focus with Leica RF is fast and the most accurate way to focus standard length lenses. And, I have no interest chasing a magnification spot all around the EVF.

 

All of these EVF aids seem to be for the techno-tinkerer that doesn't seem to understand how simple photography really is. This stuff is techno Kool Aid. Which, by the way is fine if that is your bag.

 

If, Leica ever dropped the RF for an EVF like you just posted I'd dump all of my Leica gear in a New York second.

[Paul J]

Word. My carefully considered opinion is that EVF's are shit.

 

Perhaps they have their uses but they are not for me.

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Would those members keen on discussing the habits of other members please resort to using PMs or something?

[lct]

Rangefinders have always been my favorite cameras and will remain so for a long time most probably but a good EVF like my Fuji X-E2's is more accurate to focus at all apertures thanks to image magnification. Takes longer to focus wide and standard lenses though and the EVF is useless when the scene is too contrasty.

[CheshireCat]

Word. My carefully considered opinion is that EVF's are shit.

 

The one for the M certainly is, along with most others.

Have you ever used Magic Lantern ?

[CheshireCat]

I would never want to look through a viewfinder like the one you posted and deal with all of that information (junk) in order to just take a picture.

 

Surprisingly (for a Leica user) all aids and features can be extensively configured and disabled if you don't need/like them.

 

Exposure can be done in your head

 

You wish. You cannot maximize the dynamic range in your head.

 

focus with Leica RF is fast and the most accurate way to focus standard length lenses. And, I have no interest chasing a magnification spot all around the EVF.

 

At least you restricted the scope to standard-length lenses. This is some progress

But still this is false. Try focusing the Noctilux f/1 at f/5.6 on a subject 3 meters away. Try focusing at macro distances. Try focus&recompose with a lens having non-planar focus field. And in any case, critical focus is impossible due to mechanical tolerances.

But you probably meant "the RF is good enough for what the average Leica photographer shoots", if so I agree.

 

All of these EVF aids seem to be for the techno-tinkerer that doesn't seem to understand how simple photography really is. This stuff is techno Kool Aid.

 

These aids are mainly designed for video. As simple as this art is, aids are used more by pros than amateurs, because they have no time/shots to waste.

Aids are good and maximize keepers.

 

If, Leica ever dropped the RF for an EVF like you just posted I'd dump all of my Leica gear in a New York second.

 

You know you won't . You would keep your last remaining RF dinosaur well protected, doing your best to delay extinction, because you love it. I'll do the same.

This will happen in a few years, when all of us - including you - will be using next generation EVF, sporting all kinds of aids (or none, if you turn them off). Good technology can be essentialized to taste.

 

The big deja-vu is film vs digital, this is exactly the same. Amazing how there is always someone fighting against progress. No problem. You guys are always welcome to jump onboard when the matter is obvious to anyone.

[lct]

Déjà vu is rangefinders vs reflex cameras and EVFs won't change anything to that. The best EVF in the world can only give what it has.

[CheshireCat]

Déjà vu is rangefinders vs reflex cameras and EVFs won't change anything to that. The best EVF in the world can only give what it has.

 

Reflex cameras are still with us just for one reasons: fast AF.

No one will ever want a reflex as soon as sensor AF technology will be as fast.

 

The best EVF in the world is the next one, and there's a lot to improve when mechanical stuff is out of the equation.

[erl]

Coming a bit out of left field, the best and fastest focusing system, in an 'all round sense' is (IMO) the Leica R8/9 VF. I am a graet exponent of 'M' RF's and use them voraciously, but I still find my R8 faster and more accurate, with my 80/1.4 Lux. I am not compatible with with auto-focus. Maybe the fault is with me, but as a control freak, I like to make the decisions, not any complex and variable AF.

[hamey]

Coming a bit out of left field, the best and fastest focusing system, in an 'all round sense' is (IMO) the Leica R8/9 VF. I am a graet exponent of 'M' RF's and use them voraciously, but I still find my R8 faster and more accurate, with my 80/1.4 Lux. I am not compatible with with auto-focus. Maybe the fault is with me, but as a control freak, I like to make the decisions, not any complex and variable AF.

 

Same here Erl.

 

I have the Leica M 240 and the EVF, comparing their viewfinders to

my SL or the R8/9 is laughable.

 

Ken

[tookaphotoof]

CC, can you tell me from which evf your screenshot is?

[adan]

Personally, I think that EVF is godawful.

 

But so what? A viewfinder is just a tool. The only thing that matters about it - is the pictures it helps the photographer produce.

 

Nobody cares about the beauty or the ugliness of the tools a fine woodworker uses - they care about the beauty of his woodworking.

 

So don't show me your viewfinder, CC - show me your photography. Show me how your EVF helped you create. That's all that counts.

[lct]

Reflex cameras are still with us just for one reasons: fast AF. No one will ever want a reflex as soon as sensor AF technology will be as fast...

An EVIL is nothing but a new kind of reflex camera and an EVF is nothing but a new kind of Visoflex finder. None will allow us to compose and focus outside the lens. Miracles of technology can do nothing against that.

[Steve Ash]

I love the RF. The only time I miss a shot is when I try to be extra precise. If I just relax it works perfect. Steve

[menos I M6]

[Continuing the discussion here from another thread].

 

It is evident that few people know what a good EVF is.

I just took this screenshot from my camera (latest Magic Lantern firmware), and added descriptions in red color for your convenience.

This is 6 year old camera hardware.

Welcome to the 21st century

 

Personally, as others have commented in a similar fashion, I would rather not use such a finder.

Apart from the two main issues I have with any EVF to market today I really applaud the possibility of third party/ open source developing and programming of electronic devices and I truly understand your fascination underlying here.

I am sure that the modifications you present here are showing a significant improvement over the actual old hardware and the initial manufacturers specs of the EVF.

 

Unfortunately this improvement of the old electronic camera would not solve my main issues with EVF systems, being the looking at an electronic screen very close to my eye instead of looking through an optical device with clarity in real time and focussing manually by having to judge focus based on sharpness - be it magnified or not (I have this exact same issue with SLRs by the way).

 

I think we are still at the very least several decades from solving the technical challenges of implementing an EVF device, resembling the performance of an optical finder in providing clarity and most importantly no involved eye strain - just test this after a century of development of screen technology: sit yourself to the very best of 2014 computer monitors and work without pause. How long will you sit looking at that monitor before your eyes start to feel tired?

 

This is the very reason why I do not want to use a camera without optical finder.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[k-hawinkler]

Personally, I think that EVF is godawful.

 

But so what? A viewfinder is just a tool. The only thing that matters about it - is the pictures it helps the photographer produce.

 

Nobody cares about the beauty or the ugliness of the tools a fine woodworker uses - they care about the beauty of his woodworking.

 

So don't show me your viewfinder, CC - show me your photography. Show me how your EVF helped you create. That's all that counts.

 

 

Somehow, to me you don't come across as a woodworker.

Of course, in the end only the images matter.

However, while in the process of taking images or woodworking the tools really matter to me.

I consider the optical rangefinder and electronic viewfinder as complementary tools, each offering something the other doesn't have, at least not yet.