Jump to content

Struggling a bit using the M(240) EVF


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is more exact than an SLR. It shows 100% of the sensor output. Most SLRs have a 95% coverage.

 

Suitably vague statement. "Most" DSLR's includes an aweful lot of cheap entry level DSLR's making your statement true.

 

I would prefer;

 

"Most 'pro' DSLR's have 100% coverage. Making it no more exact. However the black out is measured in milliseconds, which is an advantage."

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Suitably vague statement. "Most" DSLR's includes an aweful lot of cheap entry level DSLR's making your statement true.

 

I would prefer;

 

"Most 'pro' DSLR's have 100% coverage. Making it no more exact. However the black out is measured in milliseconds, which is an advantage."

That is true. I did not think this the place to write a discourse about the variations in SLR viewfinders.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am assuming that is one of the downsides of using it? How big of an issue the delay when you are actually using it?

 

What are the benefits of the new EVF-4 model that everyone is hoping they make available for Leica soon? What does it do that the 2 does not?

 

Read back through this thread and it is all set out.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once I had experienced the VF-4 on an OMD camera I can't bring myself to go back using the VF-2 instead. My 2 cents.

 

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!

 

Here is a comparison of the internal VF-2 with the external VF-4.

Just notice the difference in size and corresponding higher resolution. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS
Once I had experienced the VF-4 on an OMD camera I can't bring myself to go back using the VF-2 instead. My 2 cents.

 

[ATTACH]395591[/ATTACH]

 

Here is a comparison of the internal VF-2 with the external VF-4.

Just notice the difference in size and corresponding higher resolution. :)

Whats an OMD pal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Live view and video are not IMHO what Leica photography is about. To me at least I have zero interest in a Leica M that has these "Me too" additions.

 

Not saying that video and live view don'y have a place in modern photography but PLEASE NOT on a rangefinder Leica.

 

Why ruin a great camera with fluff :mad:

 

I don't like the video part, but the EVF (LV) is merely an electronic version of the Visoflex, which has a long history with Leica (Leitz).

 

Even if I never took a pic using LV, I welcome its addition as a convenient and sound way to determine if there is a lens and/or RF focus calibration issue, which mainly became evident in the world of the digital M.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Why ruin a great camera with fluff :mad:

 

1) It does not affect the operation of the rangefinder in the least. In 50+ years of using Leica rangefinders, the M240 is equal best to the M3.

 

2) The fluff as you put it, enables people to use zoom and longer lenses without the clunky Visoflex which was our only previous option and then only with a limited range of often less than wonderful lenses. I have not used my Visoflex III a single time since getting the M240 and EVF.

 

3) It enables people to take digital photographs at full frame with their collection of SLR manual focus lenses R and others.

 

I don't know why people are so afraid of the EVF. It is all upside with no downside. Don't like it - don't use it.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Live view and video are not IMHO what Leica photography is about. To me at least I have zero interest in a Leica M that has these "Me too" additions.

 

Not saying that video and live view don't have a place in modern photography but PLEASE NOT on a rangefinder Leica.

 

Why ruin a great camera with fluff :mad:

I'm utterly uninterested in the "Leica" part of the statement. There is no Leica photography. There is good and there is bad photography. We all strive for the first and use the tools that are optimal for us to get there. In my case Leica happens to make those tools. And the M is the most useful and versatile tool for me yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this discussion for me there is only one answer: Should everybody use the tool he likes - M3, M240 w/o EVF ...

I like the EVF on my M especially with my 21mm and 135mm, but there are some points I don't like:

- You need a 2nd accu because the LV needs a lot of power;

- Switching between LV, EVF etc. Is relativ slow. Leica wants to improve this with the next firmware update,

- the +/- correction iat the EVF s not fixable.

- it is hard work to keep your sensor clean if you use LV very often.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In this discussion for me there is only one answer: Should everybody use the tool he likes - M3, M240 w/o EVF ...

I like the EVF on my M especially with my 21mm and 135mm, but there are some points I don't like:

 

- You need a 2nd accu because the LV needs a lot of power;

I wouldn't leave the house without a second battery - with any battery-dependent camera.

- Switching between LV, EVF etc. Is relativ slow. Leica wants to improve this with the next firmware update,

Do they? This is news to me.

- the +/- correction iat the EVF s not fixable.

Agree. Next thing I'll do is find a little rubber band to put into the gap.

- it is hard work to keep your sensor clean if you use LV very often.

:confused: What has the one to do with the other???
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another good feature of the EVF is that you can use polarizing filters much more easily. I know you can in theory use the 12 o'clock rule but this is an approximation at best and with a dull sky or seascape, exactly when you want to use a pol filter, can be totally wrong. Interestingly it is noticeable how much better this works with the VF-4 on my EP-5, where you pick up the optimum orientation on the first roll backwards and forwards of the filter. With the VF-2 on the same EP-5, it takes two or three rolls before you are sure you have the optimum point.I just hope we get at some point, the FW that will let us use the VF-4 on the M.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with the firmware is a info from Solms to my question regarding this point.

You are right with a second accu but if you use the LV very often it looks like you need a 3rd one.

To get a dirt sensor is much easier if thevshutter is open a long time for LV and not only for the real shots. I see this effect - maybee other users have a cleaner equipement ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really can't understand what all the fuss is about and have to agree with Wilson .......

 

the EVF fulfils 3 functions on the M ...... all admirably:

 

- as a viewfinder for sub 28mm lenses

 

- as a substitute for a visoflex to utilise other Leica lenses

 

- as a focussing aid for lenses 135mm and over

 

that is what I feel Leica intended... no more and no less.....

 

apart from a slot in the back and a few menu options you would never know it existed when it comes to traditional rangefinder use.

 

I have no problems at all with the resolution and ergonomics in real world usage...... focus peaking works fine for those lenses for which it was intended

 

There will ALWAYS be something out there which is 'better' in some way or other , but wanting it is more driven by GAS than necessity .....:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...