tom0511 Posted May 15, 2014 Share #261 Posted May 15, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Still I much prefer a camera which includes a excellent optical viewfinder and a medicore EVF over a camera with a very good EVF but no OVF. Of course I also would like very much to have a improved EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 15, 2014 Posted May 15, 2014 Hi tom0511, Take a look here Will Leica update to the VF-4 EVF?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
-ph- Posted May 15, 2014 Share #262 Posted May 15, 2014 Still I much prefer a camera which includes a excellent optical viewfinder and a medicore EVF over a camera with a very good EVF but no OVF. Of course I also would like very much to have a improved EVF. Considering my experiences with the Olympus EVF and the problems to get a sharp picture with one of my lenses on the M9, I am not so sure of that any more... Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted May 15, 2014 Share #263 Posted May 15, 2014 Considering my experiences with the Olympus EVF and the problems to get a sharp picture with one of my lenses on the M9, I am not so sure of that any more... Peter Which lens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted May 16, 2014 Share #264 Posted May 16, 2014 Considering my experiences with the Olympus EVF and the problems to get a sharp picture with one of my lenses on the M9, I am not so sure of that any more... Peter Maybe your lens needs calibration? I also use some EVF cams including the EM1...I use face detection most times and get quite some images where the focus is either slightly in front or back or sometimes even focused in the background, even though the DOF is usually larger than that when I shoot with the Leica. I also hate the viewfinder delay. When I shoot EVF I never feel confident if I did get the moment or not. I always feel to have to check afterwards. These are the reasons why for me OVF do work better. IMO Rangefinder works very well for 35 and 50mm, 75 and 90 is ok but not great, and 135mm difficult to use. So it also depends on the focal lengths one is using. Lately I have used the EVF on the M for 21mm and for 135mm, everything else I use the rangefinder/OVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tompoes Posted May 16, 2014 Share #265 Posted May 16, 2014 Maybe your lens needs calibration? I also use some EVF cams including the EM1...I use face detection most times and get quite some images where the focus is either slightly in front or back or sometimes even focused in the background, even though the DOF is usually larger than that when I shoot with the Leica. I also hate the viewfinder delay. When I shoot EVF I never feel confident if I did get the moment or not. I always feel to have to check afterwards. These are the reasons why for me OVF do work better. IMO Rangefinder works very well for 35 and 50mm, 75 and 90 is ok but not great, and 135mm difficult to use. So it also depends on the focal lengths one is using. Lately I have used the EVF on the M for 21mm and for 135mm, everything else I use the rangefinder/OVF. Even for the 21 mm you do not need the EVF. Focus with the OVF and frame with the Live View. Presently considering to buy the EVF but cannot see the logic for it. I am using 21, 28,35,50 and 75 mm. I do not have a problem with the 75mm as the OVF on the M 240 is very accurate. Only reason i see is the use of EVF at an angle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 16, 2014 Share #266 Posted May 16, 2014 Macro? Long lenses? Very low light? Focus shift? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 16, 2014 Share #267 Posted May 16, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Jaap, you're post beat me to it. and my 4.0-5.6/28-90 Vario-Elmar-R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kape06111 Posted May 16, 2014 Share #268 Posted May 16, 2014 I think for Makro Photography the Evf is very handy. For the rest I prefer the ovf of my M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tompoes Posted May 16, 2014 Share #269 Posted May 16, 2014 Macro? Long lenses? Very low light? Focus shift? Thanks but macro and long lenses are not my thing. Live view can be used in low light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 16, 2014 Share #270 Posted May 16, 2014 Thanks but macro and long lenses are not my thing. Live view can be used in low light. I don’t like stinky poo focusing… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 16, 2014 Share #271 Posted May 16, 2014 ..I also use some EVF cams including the EM1...I use face detection most times and get quite some images where the focus is either slightly in front or back or sometimes even focused in the background, even though the DOF is usually larger than that when I shoot with the Leica.I also hate the viewfinder delay... Judging by my little Fuji X-E2, current EVFs have no significant delay and focus magnification allows to focus quickly and accurately most manual lenses including wides (21, 24 & 28mm in my limited experience) at incredibly slow apertures like f/8 or f/11. I don't know how they work with such wide Dofs but they work, at least mine does you can trust me... I still prefer rangefinders personally but criticising EVFs will become harder and harder with modern cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tompoes Posted May 16, 2014 Share #272 Posted May 16, 2014 Judging by my little Fuji X-E2, current EVFs have no significant delay and focus magnification allows to focus quickly and accurately most manual lenses including wides (21, 24 & 28mm in my limited experience) at incredibly slow apertures like f/8 or f/11. I don't know how thew work with such wide Dofs but they work, at least mine does you can trust me... I still prefer rangefinders personally but criticising EVFs will become harder and harder with modern cameras. Indeed, that is the general opinion but i have tried the XT1 and the EM1 EVF's but for me they cannot replace the OVF. Despite the progress in EVF technology i simply dislike them. Hence my reluctance to buy an EVF for the M 240. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted May 16, 2014 Share #273 Posted May 16, 2014 Maybe your lens needs calibration? The thing is, I have equal reason to blame it to the lens, the camera or myself. And that is the infuriating thing, due to the nature of rangefinder focussing, I have probably to send in the lens, the camera and possibly all other lenses I own, in the hope to get a system which works together. These are the moments where one can get a bit grumpy about rangefinders and a bit appreciative about EVFs which allow you to focus via the sensor itself. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted May 16, 2014 Share #274 Posted May 16, 2014 Still I much prefer a camera which includes a excellent optical viewfinder and a medicore EVF over a camera with a very good EVF but no OVF. Of course I also would like very much to have a improved EVF. I prefer always EVF I dont see any interest today to have an OVF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted May 16, 2014 Share #275 Posted May 16, 2014 I prefer always EVF I dont see any interest today to have an OVF I've seen you write this lots of times on this forum now, I simply cannot understand this, I hate looking at a screen I do it too much for my profession already. Of course opinions opinions. I prefer a optical viewfinder! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted May 17, 2014 Share #276 Posted May 17, 2014 I prefer always EVF I dont see any interest today to have an OVF But, you own an M? Strange, that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted May 17, 2014 Share #277 Posted May 17, 2014 But, you own an M? Strange, that. a M240 with EVF and I never use the RF, I had before a M9 but not for the RF I only want a small 24x36 system, my next one will maybe not Leica Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2014 Share #278 Posted May 17, 2014 If you prefer Electronic Viewfinders, the M system appears to be the wrong system for you. There is of course the T now, but a camera with an integrated viewfinder should be preferable. The brand is rather irrelevant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted May 17, 2014 Share #279 Posted May 17, 2014 If you prefer Electronic Viewfinders, the M system appears to be the wrong system for you. There is of course the T now, but a camera with an integrated viewfinder should be preferable. The brand is rather irrelevant. It's very nice to care about me but I know exactly my needsThe T has a small sensor an dit is not a complete system ans when I bought the M9 it was the only system compact (lenses + body) Now things are changing and I certainly sell all my Leica gear Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 17, 2014 Share #280 Posted May 17, 2014 I had a bad experience doing that. I sold most when Leica did not go digital, moving into a Canon 10 D plus lenses. It cost me quite a bit buying Leica back a few years later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.