AlanJW Posted June 11, 2015 Share #41 Posted June 11, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) And now imagine the "New M" presented fall 2015 - in two versions: an M-Q with EVF and an M-P with optical rangefinder, both with M-bayonet for any lense which suits the M. Would anybody have problems with such a proposal? Not only would I not have a problem, I would l think this is a brilliant way for Leica to stay true to its roots and move ahead at the same time. But the EVF would have to be a spectacularly good one. I also do not have a problem if Leica did a switchable viewfinder, between OVF and EVF, the way Fuji did, but in Leica style. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 Hi AlanJW, Take a look here Is the new Q the future M-E. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
-Lss- Posted June 11, 2015 Share #42 Posted June 11, 2015 Using M lenses on other bodies is sometimes very frustrating. Addressing this requires more than sensor technology optimization. You need a quick and precise focusing method that rivals the rangefinder. The Leica Q does not offer such advance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxo Posted June 11, 2015 Share #43 Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) I had the same idea that the Q might be a test, if M photographers would go with a EVF. Stefan Daniel today explained that this is not going to happen: The optical rangefinder and the resulting experience for the M-photographer will remain the keystone of the M-system. ..... That's bad news to me. If there is no M with build in EVF, and thats the message, isn't it?, I'm going to switch the company after nearly 40 years of experience with Leica, starting with the R3 and M-P, till today with many lenses, Focomat, slide projectors, binoculers etc. What I need is to see what I will get, not always, but often and I need to know what I get before(!) I press the buttom. I hate the wart on the top of the camera (WVF on M240), even so it is of historic quality,... for an extraordiniary price tag, but this doesn't make it. I was hoping for an M with buildt in EVF at the end of the year, well: announced, not delivered. But this is denied by Daniel, if I get you right. Sorry to say bye bye Martin Edited June 11, 2015 by saxo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted June 11, 2015 Share #44 Posted June 11, 2015 Addressing this requires more than sensor technology optimization. You need a quick and precise focusing method that rivals the rangefinder. The Leica Q does not offer such advance. I think it does. I tried manual focus with the Q and this was very easy to do. It offers both focus enlargement and focus peaking. It seems that especially focus peaking has been greatly improved, it pretty much always showed a single clear focus position. This is pretty fast, and in contrast to the rangefinder always precise. Best regards, Peter 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted June 11, 2015 Share #45 Posted June 11, 2015 That's bad news to me. If there is no M with build in EVF, and thats the message, isn't it?, I'm going to switch the company after nearly 40 years of experience with Leica, starting with the R3 and M-P, till today with many lenses, Focomat, slide projectors, binoculers etc. What I need is to see what I will get, not always, but often and I need to know what I get before(!) I press the buttom. I hate the wart on the top of the camera (WVF on M240), even so it is of historic quality,... for an extraordiniary price tag, but this doesn't make it. I was hoping for an M with buildt in EVF at the end of the year, well: announced, not delivered. But this is denied by Daniel, if I get you right. Sorry to say bye bye Martin I would wait a bit for a final verdict... as long as they can't deliver a Q with a M mount of course they won't talk about one . But even if they are not decided yet, enough success of the Q and perhaps less demand for an updated M might give them a nudge in the right direction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted June 11, 2015 Share #46 Posted June 11, 2015 Well, we all know what the next M-E will look like, don’t we? It will most likely be the M (Typ 240) with some subtle change in design to differentiate it from the existing M (Typ 240). 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 11, 2015 Share #47 Posted June 11, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) It may be brilliant but will never happen. Leica has the M line for FF interchangeable lens, Q for FF fixed lens, X is APSC-C fixed lens and T isAPS-C interchangeable lens. The Panaleicas bring up the rest And all including the S are autofocus except the M.So a full frame AF interchangeable lens system makes sense. The market for a fixed 28mm lens FF camera is so much more limited than an interchangeable lens FF system. So I can't see why Leica would be willing to produce such a limited use camera and not plan to make a FF AF system.It seems obvious. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted June 11, 2015 Share #48 Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) I'm puzzled why so many say they would never give up the OVF/RF. I understand it with the qualifier "until EVFs can match it", but that is rarely mentioned. And how good does an EVF have to get before the bulk of an OVF/RF and its need for precision manufacturing/calibration become, on balance, unacceptable? Recent EVFs (especially those Leica use for the M and T) have had real problems : - low resolution, lag. - blackout while shooting. - lack of vision of the whole scene (applies to 28mm and wider on the M as well, while above 135mm you see only the scene, not the image!). The latest EVFs, and it sounds like the Q is up there with or above the latest, appear to be overcoming the first two issues. For the last one, I'll practice keeping my left eye open . I suspect there will be plenty who will accept a trade-off between an EVF that is close to OVF performance, and the bulk of a opto-mechanical RF. Edit: I wonder how much of the very short EVF blackout that Jono Slack mentions is attributable to the leaf shutter. Much less mechanical stuff to sort out before the sensor is exposed again to the scene. Edited June 11, 2015 by LocalHero1953 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted June 11, 2015 Share #49 Posted June 11, 2015 I agree 100% with PaulI give up all OVF/RF at once for a good last generation EVF 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 11, 2015 Share #50 Posted June 11, 2015 As useful as they can be EVFs will always be TTL devices and will remain inferior to a good rangefinder as long as they will blow highlights and blacken shadows in contrasty scenes as they still do currently. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted June 11, 2015 Share #51 Posted June 11, 2015 As useful as they can be EVFs will always be TTL devices and will remain inferior to a good rangefinder as long as they will blow highlights and blacken shadows in contrasty scenes as they still do currently. But if they do that, the picture you are going to take will have blown highlights or black shadows... As much as I like the view through and optical viewfinder, I prefer to have a preview of exposure and blown parts of the picture. Peter 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share #52 Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) look the next Edited June 11, 2015 by Vip 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share #53 Posted June 11, 2015 But all ideas has to come back to simple realities: Many customer are choosing mirrorless camera from other brand such Fuji and Sony For other industries is so important that produces"original adapter" for M lenses Mirrorless market with EVF is growing fast Leica at the presentation of the new Wetzlar facilities announce that is aiming to have much larger % of market than now M is beatiful but all upcoming special series shows that does not sell as wished A new model can enlarge and probably educate more customer to M sistem A Q with interchangeable M lens does not mean kill M only add new product that can make economy of Leica more strong Attract different customer that now buy Fuji, Sony.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 11, 2015 Share #54 Posted June 11, 2015 But if they do that, the picture you are going to take will have blown highlights or black shadows... Sorry Peter but blown highlights and darkened shadows i got have nothing to do with the way the pictures are rendered. It is a weakness of the EVFs themselves and that of the Q is not free from it according to Sean Reid at least as i have no experience with the Q. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted June 11, 2015 Share #55 Posted June 11, 2015 EVFs are not perfect. But I am shooting with the OMD E-M1 for almost two years now and I am very happy with the EVF. Does it perfectly render the image preview? No, but it is close enough, that with a little experience you can determine from the EVF image, whether your picture is going to be well exposed. An optical viewfinder gives no hint at all of this. Peter Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 11, 2015 Share #56 Posted June 11, 2015 Yes and i'm happy with my Fuji X-E2 as well but i tend to avoid too contrasty subjects and in MF mode, the EVF cannot focus as fast as a good RF even if it does quite well as an inferior device i must say. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim0266 Posted June 11, 2015 Share #57 Posted June 11, 2015 I'm happy to see the early reviews are enthusiastic for the Q. I'm for anything that makes Leica profitable and keeps them making M bodies with an optical viewfinder. For me it all boils down to viewing through the rangefinder. That's the Leica M experience, not the lenses or the sensors. What's the difference between viewing through a DSLR or the EVF of the Q or a Sony A7 series body? They all have us viewing through this closed box. I've always felt the tunnel to be constricting while the rangefinder way of seeing is liberating. For the next round I would be happy to see an M-E2 that's essentially a 240 stripped of video mode and live view, using the LED framelines and better shutter, bigger buffer and battery. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share #58 Posted June 11, 2015 I'm happy to see the early reviews are enthusiastic for the Q. I'm for anything that makes Leica profitable and keeps them making M bodies with an optical viewfinder. For me it all boils down to viewing through the rangefinder. That's the Leica M experience, not the lenses or the sensors. What's the difference between viewing through a DSLR or the EVF of the Q or a Sony A7 series body? They all have us viewing through this closed box. I've always felt the tunnel to be constricting while the rangefinder way of seeing is liberating. For the next round I would be happy to see an M-E2 that's essentially a 240 stripped of video mode and live view, using the LED framelines and better shutter, bigger buffer and battery. Fully agree 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxo Posted June 11, 2015 Share #59 Posted June 11, 2015 ... This is pretty fast, and in contrast to the rangefinder always precise. Best regards, Peter You nailed it! One of my lenses is again at Leica customer service because of bad focus. The lens works perfect with e.g. a Panasonic with EVF, no problem, but already with a M7 I get backfocus, and even worse on a M9. And there is no help by a 1.4 magnifier, it's the limit of the mechanical range-finder. I'm tired of this problem, and I like tele-photo. True, with wide-angle lenses there is no problem. But wide-angle lenses are not all of the game, there a telephoto lenses too. The current M, with it's EVF on the top, is no adequate solution. Leica has done a very very good job with the Q. I'm looking forward to get my hands on. But what I need is a M with build in(!) EVF. I believe I'm not the only one. Martin Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxo Posted June 11, 2015 Share #60 Posted June 11, 2015 Well, we all know what the next M-E will look like, don’t we? It will most likely be the M (Typ 240) with some subtle change in design to differentiate it from the existing M (Typ 240). I'm talking rather of the next M instead of M-E, hence I'm in the wrong thread you may think, but it is closest to my concern. I'm very seriously thinking of switching to Sony/Zeiss, just because I need to have one camera where I can see what I get before I press the bottom und especially to get the focus right. I've tested the EVF against the RF. With tele-photo lenses, already starting at the fast 1,4/50mm, I prefer EVF. This maybe my single personal problem, but I believe others have made the same experience. And now Stefan Daniel mentioned that there is no way of a M like the Q. Under these circumstances, waiting seems a waist of time to me. Martin Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.