lct Posted August 7, 2015 Share #281 Posted August 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) [...] for YOU...this amount of blackout is acceptable...I have no quarrel with that. But it DOES exist and is the argument for a rangefinder style viewfinder [...] Nothing personal of course but if it is an argument in favour of M cameras it is a rather poor one with all due respect. When i say that i can use the X-E2 like an M camera in single shot mode (besides the RF of course) i speak with 30+ years of experience behind me and i let you imagine how EVFs will perform in a couple of years or sooner. When i shoot with my X-E2 and M lenses, the problem is not any lag but the lack of rangefinder and the necessity to bring up manually a magnification window to nail focus. This will be less of a problem with a (decently fast) M camera in EVF mode which will bring up such window automatically but more generally, having to resort to excuses like that to justify a great camera like the Leica M sounds rather sad if you ask me. Suffice it to say that the Leica is a rangefinder and the Fuji a TTL camera. As long as the M will remain what it is i.e. the best rangefinder ever made, it will make us RF lovers happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 7, 2015 Posted August 7, 2015 Hi lct, Take a look here NEW M.. This year.. This Fall.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted August 7, 2015 Share #282 Posted August 7, 2015 I really don't understand these latest comments... LCT said that there was "no significant lag in single shot mode, with M lenses at least" and "In CONTINUOUS mode (3 or 7 fps), the view freezes for less than half a second". Lets look at that more carefully... If we are talking about 'the decisive moment' then we are talking about taking a shot and being very aware indeed of all the elements in the picture at that moment of the shutter firing... This is where a rangefinder camera has an advantage in there is no loss of picture at that moment... Now look at the comment from LCT again... he is saying that on his Fuji there is NO SIGNIFICANT LAG when using the camera the way we would use an M... therefore the idea of any loss of live view when the shot is being taken is clearly not much of an issue... at least not in the case of the Fuji. Surely we are suggesting that a revised Leica should be able to at least equal this? The half second delay that Jaapv and rpavich are calling an issue with is on continuous mode... and frankly, if you are firing on continuous mode anyway, you are not really looking for a 'decisive moment' shot are you... you are just hoping for the elements to come together in one of the frames... the complete antithesis of what you are suggesting is the ideal... Seems to me that people just like picking up on comments that support their previously held prejudice and ignore any comment that might disprove them... Not an issue, but blackouts are b*****y annoying in the long run. A freeze is a lot better, but if you are photographing a Lion, a half- or whole second lag will allow it to cover quite a bit of ground in your direction without you noticing.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpavich Posted August 7, 2015 Share #283 Posted August 7, 2015 Nothing personal of course but if it is an argument in favour of M cameras it is a rather poor one with all due respect. Lol...then Leica folks have been using a very lame argument to justify the M's for 50 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ai_Print Posted August 7, 2015 Share #284 Posted August 7, 2015 Reading this is like watching a shoe salesman try to put Shaquille O' Neal into a woman's size 8 pump that says "One size fits all". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 7, 2015 Share #285 Posted August 7, 2015 [...] then Leica folks have been using a very lame argument to justify the M's for 50 years. Did they? I have always used RFs and SLRs since the seventies and i have never experienced a significant lag (or freeze) with my Nikons, Canons and Leica Rs either... Was not the same with my (optical) Visoflexes though. They were much worse than modern EVFs from this standpoint, you can trust me... or not... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpavich Posted August 7, 2015 Share #286 Posted August 7, 2015 Did they?They most certainly have. Any conversation about why a rangefinder is superior to an SLR or other camera touts this as a main reason. c'mon...you must be kidding me if you are saying that you haven't read this at least 100 times on various reviews and different sites and discussion forums...I've only been shooting for a few years and I've read it AT LEAST 20 to 50 times if I've read it once. I took 20 seconds and found the following quotes: Rangefinder camera viewfinders never black-out As SLR mirrors flip up to take a picture, their viewfinders go black at the most important instant: the instant at which an image is recorded forever. Rangefinder camera viewfinders never black out, so you always know the subject's expression as it's recorded, especially with flash. When making long exposures, you can see through the viewfinder the whole time. Rangefinder cameras have no shutter lag With a rangefinder, press the button, and it goes. You've captured the peak of the moment, forever. With an SLR, the mirror has to get out of the way before the shutter can open. By the time the SLR mirror gets out of the way, your decisive moment is gone. Is there any wonder that the masters, Salgado (Leica), Ansel Adams (Contax) and Cartier-Bresson (Leica) shoot or shot only rangefinder 35mm cameras, not SLRs? And No viewfinder black out when taking a photo Almost zero shutter lag and There's no blackout of the viewfinder view at the moment of exposure. I could list it as a main reason for rangefinders superiority dozens and dozens of times just from one google search but you get the idea. Just google "rangefinder no blackout" and count the hits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted August 7, 2015 Share #287 Posted August 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) There must be a reason why the rangefinder as we know it has survived unchanged since 1954. I don't believe for a second that Leica went completely nuts so suddenly. If the hybrid viewfinder body is true, it is doomed to fail, just like the M5. An AF parallel system that takes M lenses via adapter is a very reasonable and long awaited idea. Despite the enthusiasm of some forum members, messing with the M viewfinder is a death sentence. Judging from the market reaction to the A7RII, you can see that a Leica version will be a guaranteed success. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 7, 2015 Share #288 Posted August 7, 2015 [...] Just google "rangefinder no blackout" and count the hits. OK you won. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 7, 2015 Share #289 Posted August 7, 2015 Lol...then Leica folks have been using a very lame argument to justify the M's for 50 years. They didn't. They just bought an R system when they needed it, at least if they were more than a little photograph-savvy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndreasAM Posted August 7, 2015 Share #290 Posted August 7, 2015 In this forum I encountered, over the years, a lot of complaints about the limitations of the mechanical RF. Especially having to use an extra OVF on the hotshoe or a (until now) limited EVF on top of the camera, for those M-lenses, that don't have framelines to fit, or are just hard to focus because the very shallow DOF. Wouldn't it be nice if Leica finds a way to solve this limitation and integrate this in the M, without compromising the experience of an traditional rangefinder, How many times haven't I read in this forum that in this electronic age, the longivity of the mechanical RF and the handcrafted production methods in the M, stemming from the film age, don't befit a digital M anymore. The lifecycle of the M-camera is getting shorter and shorter because of the limited durability of sensor and electronics and the development of them is going faster and faster. And doesn't everyone wants the latest and the greatest. You don't buy a digital M for a lifetime anymore. Wouldn't it be nice if Leica can adapt to this, so that an investment in the future digital M is more suitable for the lifecycle of say three to four years, one is using it? How ever much I like to have the ultimate handcrafted M, with heft and durable materials,with the most modern electronics, I much more prefer a development by Leica, where they can bring all the qualities of an existing M, and keep improving it, into a camera which is produced in a more economical way, with state of the art electronics and production methods, every 2 to 3 years and thus ensuring a future for the company and safeguarding the existence of the RangeFinder camera. For this to succeed they have to start producing new modern camera's now with ( if they are ready, electronic) Rangefinders and EVF's for the new generations of users and not wait until the last dinosaurs, who want to stick to an classical RangeFinder, are dead. And isn't it possible that, also for the dinosaurs, the first, but possibly the second or third generation of an future electronic M might be quite or even very satisfactory to work with? And when Leica has succeeded establishing a future for years to come, I am certain that they will still produce a beautiful film- and digital M, with an all mechanical RangeFinder and state of the art sensor, because then they can. And of course there will be still some folks who want to buy it, like a beautiful old car. They "drive" differently, not fast or safe, but oh so smoothly and they sure remind you of those beautiful old days, when everything was better. I might be one of them, surely Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted August 7, 2015 Share #291 Posted August 7, 2015 There is no doubt in my mind that a mirrorless/EVF or hybrid/OVF M-camera will be a success given it seems there's a large number of people who prefer it over the rangefinder for one or another of a host of reasons. But those people are mainly already loyal Leica users. The only Leica in recent decades that has sustained the company and found significant acceptance among a new generation of photographers has been the M-series, and at least from the sound bites, the hook has been the finder system, which is unique in the market, and is always the trump card played whenever anyone attempts to compare it to some other brand. A mirrorless/EVF M body won't have that advantage. It will have lost its safe little niche within which to hide from direct comparisons of performance, features and reliability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted August 7, 2015 Share #292 Posted August 7, 2015 You don't buy a digital M for a lifetime anymore. Wouldn't be nice if Leica can adapt to this, so that an investment in the future digital M is more suitable for the lifecycle of say three to four years, one is using it? The only way that would work for me is if they cut the cost 60-70%, which they are unlikely to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndreasAM Posted August 7, 2015 Share #293 Posted August 7, 2015 The only way that would work for me is if they cut the cost 60-70%, which they are unlikely to do. Well I think if they want to keep the current price level, even in a future model, they have to be more efficient and modernise the M-camera to cut costs or improve and enlarge the production volume. One way or the other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted August 7, 2015 Share #294 Posted August 7, 2015 No defence, explanation. In any case, Leica did intend to have the camera upgradable to the next generation EVF. However, when testing, it turned out not to be possible. Feel free to develop a conspiration theory. I personally think the processor was not up to it. Given the nature of the camera, I feel it is no big deal; the camera is a rangefinder camera, the EVF is just an auxiliary system to make it usable in situations where an RF fails. It is certainly not meant to turn it into a top class EVIL camera -which it doesn't. For the intended purpose the EVF2 is works well, for the rest, well purses and sow's ears come to mind. It would have been nice if Leica had offered a Q-level EVF for the M, I agree. We might not have liked the price, though... Now, now, Jaap. No one mentioned conspiracies. That's very naughty of you, putting words in my mouth that were never there. Careful, or you'll get moderated ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted August 7, 2015 Share #295 Posted August 7, 2015 Two things annoy me about the M rangefinder - parallax and multiple or missing frame lines and immutability of the focus patch position. And I have a question - why isn't focusing accuracy affected by temperature? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted August 7, 2015 Share #296 Posted August 7, 2015 Reading this is like watching a shoe salesman try to put Shaquille O' Neal into a woman's size 8 pump that says "One size fits all". I have no idea who Shaquille O'Neal is, nor what size pump she actually uses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndreasAM Posted August 7, 2015 Share #297 Posted August 7, 2015 The only Leica in recent decades that has sustained the company and found significant acceptance among a new generation of photographers has been the M-series, and at least from the sound bites, the hook has been the finder system, which is unique in the market, and is always the trump card played whenever anyone attempts to compare it to some other brand. An accomplished electronic RF Leica M will be, if introduced before the other companies do, still unique in the market and will give Leica security in keeping the position they have now and, dare I say it, even improve it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted August 7, 2015 Share #298 Posted August 7, 2015 I guess the M camera is Leica's mainstay because it is its main system camera, and it's profitable. Leica buyers don't really have a choice (in full frame). The risk is a full frame system camera to compete with the Sonys (as an example) will need to match the numbers comparisons (or be sufficiently different not to compete) and justify its price to be profitable. The T is an interesting example - it was properly different from anything else. I didn't mind the APS-C sensor (though I'd have preferred full frame). What killed it for me was the EVF black out. Setting up a shot and losing your viewfinder didn't matter on a Hasselblad, but the T was for taking quick pictures (for me, anyway). So I used the zoom and long M lenses, wanting to use it like a small dSLR. There was the world of difference between the blink of a mirror on a Nikon F5 and the total darkness of the T through the EVF. Hopeless for what I wanted, despite the very high quality image through the EVF. Shame, I really liked that camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likealot Posted August 7, 2015 Share #299 Posted August 7, 2015 The only way that would work for me is if they cut the cost 60-70%, which they are unlikely to do. The only way that could possibly happen is if Leica moved production facilities to China or some other low wage country. But then they would lose the "Made in Germany" appeal. And judging by some responses to the fact that some parts of recent cameras have been Made in Japan I would dread to think what a Made in China badge would do to Leica. It is quite clear how successful an M camera is. Two of the most liked features being RF and small size. So: Bringing out an M with AF would affect its size feature. Ditching RF would be suicide. Bringing out a Q with interchangeable lenses would most likely kill the M (in the long run anyway). The logical option is to bring out a Q with different length fixed lenses. But even that choice is limited to probably (35mm and 50mm?). Another logical option would be to refresh the M on a 3 year cycle drip feeding enough new features to keep people interested. (a bit like iPhone) But then again how many features are there left to drip feed forever? So I think Leica have got themselves in a pickle. A victim of their own success as they say. They need to get back to the drawing board and start thinking seriously about the way forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likealot Posted August 7, 2015 Share #300 Posted August 7, 2015 You don't buy a digital M for a lifetime anymore. Very true. About 10 years seems more like it (15 at a push). Well even if you don't give in to this modern attitude of "I want the latest and greatest and I want it now" I dont think Leica would be supporting a digital M after 20 years. I have no idea who Shaquille O'Neal is, nor what size pump she actually uses. :lol: Peter, she is a beautiful model who refuses to drive cars and uses a bicycle at all times (and an M3 ). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.