IkarusJohn Posted December 17, 2015 Share #81 Posted December 17, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I want a clip-on EVF. No you don't. You think you do, but you really don't. At some point, you're going to have to go into Ffordes or whoever your local Leica dealer is, and try the SL. Yes, it's bigger than your M (but better balanced with the larger M lenses in my hands anyway), and a bit heavier, but it really is a fabulous piece of kit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 17, 2015 Posted December 17, 2015 Hi IkarusJohn, Take a look here What's Special About An M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
LocalHero1953 Posted December 17, 2015 Share #82 Posted December 17, 2015 There will be many times when, walking out the door, you want a classy small camera that takes marvellous pictures, and isn't intrusive - you'll pick up your M(240). Yep, that's my M240 + APO-Summicron 50 in a Fogg Flute bag, ready for any occasion, dinner party, town or country.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted December 17, 2015 Share #83 Posted December 17, 2015 No you don't. You think you do, but you really don't. At some point, you're going to have to go into Ffordes or whoever your local Leica dealer is, and try the SL. Yes, it's bigger than your M (but better balanced with the larger M lenses in my hands anyway), and a bit heavier, but it really is a fabulous piece of kit. Funny meeting you here again, Mephistopheles Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Orme Posted December 17, 2015 Share #84 Posted December 17, 2015 Coming to the M-240 from both an EVF only Fuji XE-2 & the hybrid OVF/EVF X-Pro1, I have to say that it was the imperfect OVF & EVF both that made me realize that I really didn't like using the Fuji EVF & wasn't very satisfied with their OVF's limitations. The first time I looked through the large & bright viewfinder on my M I knew I was not going to be happy without it. And the rangefinder focusing was the icing on the cake for me, taking me back to my beginnings in photography. I haven't ever used an EVF on the Leica Q or SL, which I understand are greatly improved over what I was used to. But I suspect that there will always be a problem with the limitations on dynamic range viewing in any EVF, & that alone is enough reason for me to say not for me. The M is about as perfect a camera as I could have ever hoped for & the sensor size & function is more than adequate as well. Very simple, very functional & I am very happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share #85 Posted December 17, 2015 I really do want a detachable EVF though. The appeal to me of the SL resides entirely in its AF capabilities. And I don't know how important that is to me Not very I think, given that I've been perfectly happy without it since I sold my Nikon D3 & 700 and AF OIS lenses a good number of years ago. What else is there? Compatibiity doesn't matter since my M lenses are better than my R lenses for over 99% of my photography. I'm struggling to think of anything else that decent detachable EVF wouldn't give me. One day when I need AF I'll consider the SL of course, which in sure is a lovely thing in its own right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted December 17, 2015 Share #86 Posted December 17, 2015 "To attempt to answer my own question, I suppose it must have been image quality. But for a dedicated M user, it may well also be size, and the whole viewfinder experience, among other things. Some of the photos in the SL Photos thread certainly are beautiful and impressive and probably do prove that M-quality photography is finally available in a DSL format." Sorry I cannot agree with that. The results from an SL are really not that sharp as those from an M Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 17, 2015 Share #87 Posted December 17, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) "To attempt to answer my own question, I suppose it must have been image quality. But for a dedicated M user, it may well also be size, and the whole viewfinder experience, among other things. Some of the photos in the SL Photos thread certainly are beautiful and impressive and probably do prove that M-quality photography is finally available in a DSL format." Sorry I cannot agree with that. The results from an SL are really not that sharp as those from an M Really? I can't say that matches my experience, but then I have no particular expertise in pixel peeping. For resolution with either camera, focusing is my biggest limitation; not the resolution of the sensor or the lpmm performance of the lenses ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted December 17, 2015 Share #88 Posted December 17, 2015 I want an attachable EVF too - it just needs to be better, something like the SL. I like that you can shoot on different angles, that it works similarly to a waist level finder and I like you can take it off entirely and just use the optical finder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 17, 2015 Share #89 Posted December 17, 2015 I want a detachable EVF as well. I have nothing against EVILs but the offer is becoming wider there whilst there is only one rangefinder with TTL capabilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 17, 2015 Share #90 Posted December 17, 2015 I prefer the clip on as well. If, the current EVF was like the EVF I used in the SL, it would be perfect for me. I am looking forward to the new M with the possibility of better sensor(the color from the SL seems sublime), faster processor and possibly smaller. But, I have to say I am content with my current M240 and in no rush to trade it in and plunk down cash on something newer. Rick240 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 17, 2015 Share #91 Posted December 17, 2015 I have no doubt you'll all get it, don't worry. Steve Huff seems to think the next M will be completely different - revolutionary different. Be careful what you wish for ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 17, 2015 Share #92 Posted December 17, 2015 http://leicarumors.com/2015/10/14/leicas-patents-for-optoelectronic-rangefinder.aspx/ Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted December 17, 2015 Share #93 Posted December 17, 2015 Similar sorts of debates to EVF vs OVF were held as digital IQ started to challenge film. Now, I guess >99% of people could not tell a digital image from a film one. At some time in the future, it will also be impossible to tell, visually, an EVF from an OVF. For some, including myself, they are now close enough that it makes little difference in practice. I suspect a future EVF will also offer the equivalent of the out of frame view - its just a matter of technology. Never say never. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 17, 2015 Share #94 Posted December 17, 2015 I have no doubt you'll all get it, don't worry. Steve Huff seems to think the M will be completely different - revolutionary different. Be careful what you wish for ... John, as you know I tried the SL Nov 13th before all the hoopla and reported that the EVF was amazing as was the camera. I had no trouble for most subjects focusing M lenses on the SL. I even liked the Q for manual focus. My hope is for a smaller lighter M with upgraded sensor and processor. I know the clip on EVF will have to be better. That's all I need. Revolutionary different? I'd have to wait and see what that brings. A lens coupled EVF of some sort... that would be as good or better than the SL could interest me. I'd have to see, so to speak. But, then of course we are traversing the line between the M and the SL... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted December 17, 2015 Share #95 Posted December 17, 2015 I prefer the clip on as well. If, the current EVF was like the EVF I used in the SL, it would be perfect for me. I am looking forward to the new M with the possibility of better sensor(the color from the SL seems sublime), faster processor and possibly smaller. But, I have to say I am content with my current M240 and in no rush to trade it in and plunk down cash on something newer. Rick240 Highlight mine... I prefer the clip on as well if in-body EVF destroys the current form factor. If the EVF can be incorporated in the same form factor then what is there not to like? For off center focus check, you can simply look through EVF and use TTL view to check focus. No need to start LV and look at the LCD from arms length. I do want to say that clip on EVF has one advantage due to tiltable eye piece. I have used it in some occasion, mainly macro but also with long lens (really long lens like 400 Telyt) where I supported my camera lens on my knees (sitting down) and looked down on EVF. I am not a tripod user. Whatever it is (clip on or not), it better be a SL like EVF in next M otherwise I don't see much of an incentive to upgrade. The sensor quality is adequate (well, more than adequate) for my 99.9 % usage. Little bit more high ISO and DR is always welcome but not at the depreciating cost of M digital body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 17, 2015 Share #96 Posted December 17, 2015 John, as you know I tried the SL Nov 13th before all the hoopla and reported that the EVF was amazing as was the camera. I had no trouble for most subjects focusing M lenses on the SL. I even liked the Q for manual focus. My hope is for a smaller lighter M with upgraded sensor and processor. I know the clip on EVF will have to be better. That's all I need. Revolutionary different? I'd have to wait and see what that brings. A lens coupled EVF of some sort... that would be as good or better than the SL could interest me. I'd have to see, so to speak. But, then of course we are traversing the line between the M and the SL... No idea. I like the form factor of the M, and if they departed from that it could be a step too far for many. That optoelectronic thingy referred to in the patent means nothing to me - what does it do? and why would it make the already excellent rangefinder any better? Every time we have this speculation about the next M, things get weird - better sensor (probably), better EVF (almost certainly), from there, you set the ISO (or not), focus, set the aperture and the camera does the rest. The lenses are, and always will be manual for aperture and focusing, surely? And the mount is unlikely to change. What is there to be revolutionary about that won't spoil the camera? Speak to the dead? Whatever happens, my M cameras will keep working just fine and hopefully Leica will fix them till long after I'm dead. Steve will keep me informed after that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted December 17, 2015 Share #97 Posted December 17, 2015 Mama don't take my clip on away Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepcat Posted December 18, 2015 Share #98 Posted December 18, 2015 An EVF or LV is essential if using extension tubes for macro work. The disadvantages of LV for me is that I have to wear specs to see the image clearly enough, and in bright sunlight it is difficult to see any image. The EVF, with its variable diopter, affords one a perfect image for focussing. Actually, neither are essential. the Visoflex has been around for probably seventy years and works quite nicely. Similar sorts of debates to EVF vs OVF were held as digital IQ started to challenge film. Now, I guess >99% of people could not tell a digital image from a film one. At some time in the future, it will also be impossible to tell, visually, an EVF from an OVF. For some, including myself, they are now close enough that it makes little difference in practice. I suspect a future EVF will also offer the equivalent of the out of frame view - its just a matter of technology. Never say never. There's no doubt that EVFs are getting much better. The EVF on my X-T1 is actually quite usable... which is the first I've seen that I could say that about. I still don't like it, but it's usable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted December 18, 2015 Share #99 Posted December 18, 2015 Out of frame EVF view has always been present - it's just a matter of cropping in post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 18, 2015 Share #100 Posted December 18, 2015 Similar sorts of debates to EVF vs OVF were held as digital IQ started to challenge film. Now, I guess >99% of people could not tell a digital image from a film one. At some time in the future, it will also be impossible to tell, visually, an EVF from an OVF. For some, including myself, they are now close enough that it makes little difference in practice. I suspect a future EVF will also offer the equivalent of the out of frame view - its just a matter of technology. Never say never. Whilst you make sense. An eve will always give an interpretation of a scene. I shoot a lot into the light and don't want interpretations. Horses for courses again. Its a decision I base on how things work effectively for me. Wanting an EVF might be fun but will it improve my images - I very much doubt it. Nobody seems to have invented a 6 wheel motorbike, which is pretty much the same as fitting an EVF onto a rangefinder. The concept of the basic camera changes and its a hybrid not a rangefinder. We've been here before though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.