viramati Posted February 7, 2014 Share #181 Posted February 7, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well I'm am not normally a Leica basher, far from it, but primary system or not and in a £5000 camera I would at least expect not to have the lag. I do actually suspect that this could be down to the maestro processor not the EVF and as I said I would be happy to remain with the current EVF2 as i find it's resolution to be fine for what I do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 Hi viramati, Take a look here Will Leica update to the VF-4 EVF?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted February 7, 2014 Share #182 Posted February 7, 2014 We can agree there - no or minimal lag would certainly make life a lot easier. In general I do not equate price to functionality. I know a lot of expensive products that have limitations that “lesser” equivalents don’t have. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 7, 2014 Author Share #183 Posted February 7, 2014 On the XV with the same EVF you get a 1.5 to 2 sec review of the just taken shot, even if auto review is turned off. John, I think there is something screwy on preview on the M240 as well. I just tried setting my preview to "Release button pressed" and got no preview at all, so I returned it to my usual 3 seconds, which does work. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 7, 2014 Share #184 Posted February 7, 2014 That is weird. It is exactly the way I have been using it all along. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 7, 2014 Share #185 Posted February 7, 2014 I wonder what the camera would have cost if Leica would have designed and implemented a dedicated removable lag-free EVF instead of using an off-the-shelf system. An EVF is just a display, so it cannot be the cause of the lag. That should be easy to verify on an Oly camera. I also doubt the lag is caused by the Maestro chip, as it is used in many old cameras that don't have the same issue. The usual suspect is poorly written firmware. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeTexas Posted February 7, 2014 Share #186 Posted February 7, 2014 In regards to black out times being different from camera to camera and card to card, not all photos have the same amount of data. A photo that is mostly black or mostly white will be processed and recorded to the card much faster than a photo that is full of detail and color. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 7, 2014 Share #187 Posted February 7, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) In regards to black out times being different from camera to camera and card to card, not all photos have the same amount of data. A photo that is mostly black or mostly white will be processed and recorded to the card much faster than a photo that is full of detail and color. Indeed, but flushing the buffer to flash can be done in parallel with other tasks, such as displaying live view on the EVF and exposing/processing the next shots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted February 7, 2014 Share #188 Posted February 7, 2014 An EVF is just a display, so it cannot be the cause of the lag.That should be easy to verify on an Oly camera. I also doubt the lag is caused by the Maestro chip, as it is used in many old cameras that don't have the same issue. The usual suspect is poorly written firmware. Interesting. If so it could be solved. the only other camera I had that suffered from this in the same way was the Ricoh GXR with M module Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
parigby Posted February 7, 2014 Share #189 Posted February 7, 2014 From a minority view point, l'm just kind of glad that there is now an EVF attached to the M. I'm at the stage where my eyesight is not what it once was, and without the EVF time was running out for me focus wise. Without an EVF attached to an M, l would sooner, rather than later, have been selling all my glorious Leica glass. With the EVF, and l am happy to forgive the imperfections, l am able to continue shooting through that glass. Perfection it might not be, but for me this something is way, way better than nothing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted February 7, 2014 Share #190 Posted February 7, 2014 I would welcome a VF4 update. The EVF for me adds considerably to the M(240) (1) with wide angles like the WATE it is a better, faster and more accurate viewfinder than an external viewfinder. Framing is better even if you still use the RF to focus. (2) for macro work it is better than a Visoflex and better than the optical viewfinder with lenses like the 90mm macro Elmar (3) for telephoto work with the 135mm APO f/3.4, I find it vastly better for both framing and focus (4) it allows use of R lenses like my 35-70 Vario Elmar f/4 (which also has macro capability) (5) in tricky lighting, I use the EVF with manual and a half shutter press to see how the scene looks on the fly and quickly adjust speed or aperture to taste. Using the OVF would require much more chimping. (6) it allows use of a polarizer. You can see effects directly with less fiddling. The VF4 is superior to the VF2. I still have a VF4 left over from a short Olympus experiment. It also locks while the VF2 does not. I would very much welcome a firmware upgrade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted February 8, 2014 Share #191 Posted February 8, 2014 I would welcome a VF4 update. The EVF for me adds considerably to the M(240)(1) with wide angles like the WATE it is a better, faster and more accurate viewfinder than an external viewfinder. Framing is better even if you still use the RF to focus. (2) for macro work it is better than a Visoflex and better than the optical viewfinder with lenses like the 90mm macro Elmar (3) for telephoto work with the 135mm APO f/3.4, I find it vastly better for both framing and focus (4) it allows use of R lenses like my 35-70 Vario Elmar f/4 (which also has macro capability) (5) in tricky lighting, I use the EVF with manual and a half shutter press to see how the scene looks on the fly and quickly adjust speed or aperture to taste. Using the OVF would require much more chimping. (6) it allows use of a polarizer. You can see effects directly with less fiddling. The VF4 is superior to the VF2. I still have a VF4 left over from a short Olympus experiment. It also locks while the VF2 does not. I would very much welcome a firmware upgrade. Very well articulated. I couldn't agree more. Its got to the point where I find it an exception to revert to the OVF -- feels like "legacy mode". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted February 8, 2014 Share #192 Posted February 8, 2014 Very well articulated. I couldn't agree more. Its got to the point where I find it an exception to revert to the OVF -- feels like "legacy mode". Then you inherently have the wrong camera to begin with? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 9, 2014 Share #193 Posted February 9, 2014 Well, to start with he paid a lot of money for a feature he didn’t want. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted February 11, 2014 Share #194 Posted February 11, 2014 Then you inherently have the wrong camera to begin with? I wanted a full-frame EVF camera that worked with my Leica-M lenses. Are you suggesting that the M240 was not the right choice? Coming from an M9 I had expected to use the OVF more, but to me the EVF is such a useful advancement that it has become my default mode of use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted February 11, 2014 Share #195 Posted February 11, 2014 Well, to start with he paid a lot of money for a feature he didn’t want. The "feature" I wanted was an EVF, on camera that worked with my Leica-M lenses. Movie-mode was free. So was the OVF/rangefinder. As is often advised here, I just ignore the features that are superfluous to my requirements. In the case of the OVF, I sometimes use it in the cases where I'm not using an R or Viso lens, the WATE or a 135, and am not concerned with precise framing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted February 11, 2014 Share #196 Posted February 11, 2014 The "feature" I wanted was an EVF, on camera that worked with my Leica-M lenses. Movie-mode was free. So was the OVF/rangefinder. As is often advised here, I just ignore the features that are superfluous to my requirements. In the case of the OVF, I sometimes use it in the cases where I'm not using an R or Viso lens, the WATE or a 135, and am not concerned with precise framing. Yeah, I guess I can understand this. You have a bunch of Leica lenses (many of us do too) and would like to shoot EVF with R and Viso lenses as well as 28-90mm RF lenses. I would have to agree that there is no other FF camera that would address these requirements at a level that would allow you to use your M lenses with a sensor that would optimize the RF lenses. You just want to ignore the superfluous features (OVF and Movie mode...), like the rest of us ignore the EVF. Except, you want to be able ignore the OVF and try to utilize the EVF. Except, Leica didn't excel in the implementation of the EVF, and you are pointing this out. And we(me) are dogging you for wanting an EVF that works. I guess I get that. Actually, I am partially in agreement. I would have liked to use the EVF option more. But, it was so poorly implemented on my 240 that I just had to ignore it as a superfluous feature for RF lenses. It is useable for wide and R lenses (barely). I still have to view the 240 as primarily a OVF RF camera, but I do agree with you that the EVF could have been implemented much better (understatement) and provided a "alternative" way to shoot all of these classic RF Leica lenses, when I want to shoot that way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 11, 2014 Share #197 Posted February 11, 2014 ... the EVF could have been implemented much better (understatement) and provided a "alternative" way to shoot all of these classic RF Leica lenses, when I want to shoot that way. +1 but glad to have this little thing in my bag instead of a Visoflex though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted February 11, 2014 Share #198 Posted February 11, 2014 +1 but glad to have this little thing in my bag instead of a Visoflex though. True, but your Visoflex won't freeze up your camera in the middle of shooting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 11, 2014 Share #199 Posted February 11, 2014 True, but your Visoflex won't freeze up your camera in the middle of shooting. Never experienced freezes so far but i'm an RF guy so i don't use LV/EVF that much. I must be the kind of customer Leica were targeting i guess. Younger or more modern photogs like you will have to wait for the next M or FF EVIL i'm afraid unless the long expected M240's firmware update do miracles. Hope springs eternal... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted February 11, 2014 Share #200 Posted February 11, 2014 True, but your Visoflex won't freeze up your camera in the middle of shooting. I dont understand all the EVF bashing...if you don't use it thats your choice. For me its invaluable option that adds tremendous value to my Leica M. I use the RF 90% of the time, but to have the option to slide on the EVF and use it for a macro shot, or even in conditions where its very difficult to focus with Noctilux is priceless to me. I also vote for an improved option. The VF-4 would be nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.