rsolomon Posted November 6, 2015 Share #1 Posted November 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) insight on the following as it relates to the 135 APO EV-2 : Has anyone heard of plans to upgrade the EV-2 ? I do know the Oly version., is the EV-2 good enough with the issues of delay and blackout 1.4 Magnifier : is the 1.4 enough ? The new "variable" finder from MSP ? any experiences to share does anyone dare shoot the 135 without a finder (other that hyper-focus) Thanks Rich Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 6, 2015 Posted November 6, 2015 Hi rsolomon, Take a look here Has anyone heard of plans to upgrade the EV-2 ? are these helpful tools ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Mornnb Posted November 6, 2015 Share #2 Posted November 6, 2015 The M240 doesn't have the CPU power to support a better EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrödinger's cat Posted November 6, 2015 Share #3 Posted November 6, 2015 insight on the following as it relates to the 135 APO EV-2 : Has anyone heard of plans to upgrade the EV-2 ? I do know the Oly version., is the EV-2 good enough with the issues of delay and blackout 1.4 Magnifier : is the 1.4 enough ? The new "variable" finder from MSP ? any experiences to share does anyone dare shoot the 135 without a finder (other that hyper-focus) Thanks Rich This has been an area of concern for some time and there is no indication at all that it is technically possible to fit an updated EVF. I occasionally use the EVF with the 135, but most of the stuff I photograph is in bright sunlight and doesn't move. I use a 135 with the rangefinder, but I suspect you will find that your success rate is significantly lower than with shorter lenses. You may also find that the rangefinder/lens calibration requires adjustment. I have a 135 at DAG for this issue right now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 6, 2015 Share #4 Posted November 6, 2015 1.25x is enough at normal viewing distance, provided the lens is well calibrated, but if you're used to pixel peep a lot better use an EVF. The EV-2 is good enough for static subjects. Better choose the Olympus VF-2 though, it is less expensive and identical to the Leica's. Got mine for EUR 60 on e**y. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MT0227 Posted November 6, 2015 Share #5 Posted November 6, 2015 I just picked up a used one at B&H to go with my 21SEM; looks brand new. I have 90 days to use (Holiday Period); so far it's quite helpful maximizing focus toward the front of the focal plane. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 7, 2015 Share #6 Posted November 7, 2015 insight on the following as it relates to the 135 APO EV-2 : Has anyone heard of plans to upgrade the EV-2 ? I do know the Oly version., is the EV-2 good enough with the issues of delay and blackout 1.4 Magnifier : is the 1.4 enough ? The new "variable" finder from MSP ? any experiences to share does anyone dare shoot the 135 without a finder (other that hyper-focus) Thanks Rich Actually I find the Summicron 90 more demanding. I personally dislike magnifiers, the accuracy obtained by a well-calibrated system ensures well-focused shots all the time in my hands. Obviously the EVF makes life very easy. On a side note: I shot the 135 with a 2x Kenko extender, thus making it a 270 lens, and still managed to focus, albeit with difficulty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
serdor Posted November 7, 2015 Share #7 Posted November 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I took the EVF2 Olympus to use with Nokton 50 1.1 .I'm excited , now i 'll use with the Color Skopar 25 .Taking landscape , reportage and street do not feel the necessity of an update. Bye Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffry Abt Posted November 7, 2015 Share #8 Posted November 7, 2015 The M240 doesn't have the CPU power to support a better EVF.How do you know this? In my view this is the one thing the M is missing-a first class EVF. ... maybe a bit higher ISO. But I would settle for an upgraded EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted November 7, 2015 Share #9 Posted November 7, 2015 I would more readily believe that Epson, or whoever makes them, wanted too much money for the runtime library for their updated EVF than was economically viable for Leica given that only a fraction of those sold would be replaced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 7, 2015 Share #10 Posted November 7, 2015 The body cannot feed any EVF at more than 30 fps AFAIK. Too slow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 7, 2015 Share #11 Posted November 7, 2015 How do you know this? In my view this is the one thing the M is missing-a first class EVF. ... maybe a bit higher ISO. But I would settle for an upgraded EVF. Michael has repeatedly noted, on various threads, e.g., http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/233452-will-there-be-a-new-evf/?p=2664456 Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ricoh Posted November 7, 2015 Share #12 Posted November 7, 2015 Just picked up a used VF-2 for the odd occasion, but checking on the 240 I'm a bit disappointed with the system implementation, viz black out and delays in image update when recomposing. By contrast I use a VF-4 on a PEN, and that's miles better, no delays in image transmission, it follows every move. And the PEN is a cheap 'toy' by comparison with the Leica, or should be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belle123 Posted November 7, 2015 Share #13 Posted November 7, 2015 I have read more than once the M240 can't support a higher resolution EVF from reliable sources. Well, that is something to put on our wish list for the next M which I am betting is in the works. I like the EVF on the M but finding often relying too much on it. Like to get back to just using the RF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 7, 2015 Share #14 Posted November 7, 2015 Performance of the EVF is all a matter of what the manufacturer's intents were and how they were implemented. The M is primarily intended to be an optical RF camera, the EVF is a plus for certain specific uses, that's all. Olympus prioritizes and implements the EVF differently. They updated firmware on older models for compatibility wi the VF-4, but the update on older models does not improve resolution or frame rate; it just makes the VF-4 compatible. Getting a full sensor readout from a sensor 4x larger poses its challenges. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted November 8, 2015 Share #15 Posted November 8, 2015 I have 2 M240's and 3 EVF2's (Olympus), so I have a spare in case one of them craps out. Picked them all up used for less than one new Leica branded one. At some point I suspect the Oly will become hard to find. (Of course by then it's possible Leica will have come out with a new M and new EVF and loyal fans abandonding the M240 will flood the market with used EVF's ) The resolution doesn't bother me, nor does the refresh rate. Given the between-shot lag I don't really use the EVF for fast action shooting. Nor do I need it. My 135/4's (T-E, Elmar, and adapted LTM Hektor) focus perfectly well with the rangefinder. If the lens and rangefinder are properly calibrated it seems to work fine. I may be wrong but my surmisal is the lag time is mainly due to the mechanical FP shutter having to close, open/close, and open again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted November 8, 2015 Share #16 Posted November 8, 2015 I may be wrong but my surmisal is the lag time is mainly due to the mechanical FP shutter having to close, open/close, and open again. Yes this is the main problem that remains even after turning off Review etc. But I think we either like the benefits or dislike the downsides, a classic case of is the glass half empty or half full? Like you it doesn't bother me, with a 135mm lens I can see the scene with my eyes to check if the light is right, so despite low resolution the EVF is very useful for composition and fine focusing, I don't need to see detail to know it's going to be there. That said if more people weren't afraid to use a tripod (especially with long lenses) then the cameras Live View LCD makes an excellent tool rather than just something to review the image or change menu settings. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernie.lcf Posted November 8, 2015 Share #17 Posted November 8, 2015 Olympus prioritizes and implements the EVF differently. They updated firmware on older models for compatibility wi the VF-4, but the update on older models does not improve resolution or frame rate; it just makes the VF-4 compatible. I think this is the most important and overlooked fact. The little connector has been introduced by Olympus with the E-P2 together with the VF-2 viewfinder (that Leica sells as EVF-2). It has stayed with Olympus until recently. The latest cameras, the E-M10 and E-M5 Mark II do not have this connector anymore and will not take the accessories. Over time, Olympus has introduced two additional viewfinders the VF-3 and VF-4 that all plug in to the same connector and that have inspired many questions by Leica shooters who were hoping to upgrade their viewfinder. The VF-3 is not so interesting because it is lower spec than the VF-2 and basically just improves handling. The VF-4, however, is significantly improved. Neither works with the Leica bodies. And... like ramarren said correctly: they only work soso with older Olympus bodies. The older camera will not use the refresh rate or resolution of the VF-4, but drive it like a VF-2. Reasons: the older cameras do not have the processing power to drive the VF-4 at full resolutions and refresh rate. Consequently the ability to use the Olympus VF-4 on older Olympus bodies is misleading. The viewfinder upgrader requires changes in the camera and in the viewfinder. Most probably hardware based changes unless the designer had anticipated this. I am speculating now, but my personal expectation would be for Leica to use the Visoflex 020 (or a higher spec model matching the SL) on future M bodies. This introduces a different connector that is hidden in the flash shoe. Much more elegant than the rather clumsy EVF-2 connector. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted November 8, 2015 Share #18 Posted November 8, 2015 Would a wirelessly connected viewfinder introduce too much lag? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted November 8, 2015 Share #19 Posted November 8, 2015 That, and it would consume too much power. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted November 8, 2015 Share #20 Posted November 8, 2015 The body cannot feed any EVF at more than 30 fps AFAIK. Too slow. It also would struggle to support more than the 920,000 pixels in the VF2. Which as it happens is the exact same resolution as the camera's LCD. Not to worry I'm sure the next M will support a 4MP EVF like the Leica SL does. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.