Confused about switch from Canon 5D-S

[David Dennis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the best advice is Earleygallery's, except that the author of this posting already said he isn't anywhere near Leica stores .

 

If your interest is macro photography, I invite you to check out the Q Macro thread, which has some really cool macro shots (including my own, of course).  I found the wide lens much more effective for macro photography than I'd thought it would be, largely because the camera can be handled easily, without the clumsiness typical of DSLRs.  Small and light really has a place in the world of macro, much to my surprise.  I've taken some of my best butterfly pictures yet with the Q, and I have the Nikon D5 with the 70-180 Nikkor lens I bought just for butterfly photography.

 

If you want to test-drive a M without owning one, try switching your lens to manual focus mode and see how well you do when you use it all the time. That's not going to be perfect, because a rangefinder is easier to focus manually once you get the hang of it, but you will at least have a general idea of how comfortable you are with full-time manual focus.

 

Still, it's tough not to recommend the Leica Q as the best solution for you.  You can get your feet wet without spending an extraordinary amount of money, it's undeniably small and light, and you will get great results for it.  If you are hung up on more megapixels, you might want to check out the 42 megapixel Sony RX1R II.  People who use it say it's not nearly as good a camera as the Q in terms of handling, but it will give you the larger images you desire.  Reviews that compare them are pretty even, largely depending on what you think your needs are.  The Leica Q will be faster in shooting, the RX1 will give you higher resolution shots.

 

I have the Q and are absolutely delighted with it.  I recommend it without reservation.  Based on my own testing, and having my own problems with fading eyesight, I think you would prefer it to the M.  I tried the M and found it cool but awkward to focus.  However, I didn't give it much of a chance and my opinion might have changed if I'd had more time with it.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jmahto]

Hello All,

 

This is my first post on the forum. I have few questions which may have been asked and replied to earlier but bear with me.

 

I have been photographing for last almost 35 years. I am not a professional .Photography is my hobby. The Leica products that I own are couple of Trinovid binoculars which are inspite of heavy use for last twenty years are as good as new.

 

Currently I have  a Canon 5D-S and Canon 35mm 1.4 ii plus a 100mm macro lens. With the 50 MP resolution of the Canon 5D-S,the outfit is brilliant. I have no complaints.

 

Lately ,due to my increased job commitments, many times I am leaving the DSLR back home and the DSLR is taken only on the longer trips few times a year and there too I am finding it rather tiresome to carry it around. I need a smaller and more lighter outfit and having known about Leica quality for decades,I was contemplating making a switch. I have few questions and I will be grateful if the experts out there guide me. I know these decisions are subjective   but I would like to know your opinion so that it will help me to decide as I am fairly confused right now.

 

Will it be better if I keep the existing Canon outfit,to be used sparingly, and complement it with a Leica Q?

 

In the alternative, sell the Canon outfit and buy a Leica M240 with 35mm or 50 mm lens? 

 

If I take the second option,will the quality of image of M240 with Summilux 35 be comparable to the Canon outfit that I have? M240 will be more compact I sure ,but I am scared that I am not selling away a high resolution camera like the Canon 5D-S  and the quality of M240 may not match it at all.Most of the switch stories so far I have read are about 5d Mark III,which is 24MP. To put a rider, its not that a non-professional like me must have a 50MP camera. 

 

i am extremely tempted to switch over to Leica M240 entirely,but for the above concern about the picture quality .I could add Leica Q to the existing outfit, but it means additional expense. 

 

I use the camera for landscapes, abstract,portraits,street and travel photography.

 

Since in India it is not possible to rent a Leica to try it out ,please advice. Thank you in advance.

 

N.Shah 

First of all welcome to the forum. Now to your questions.

 

Highlight mine...

Q: Will it be better if I keep the existing Canon outfit,to be used sparingly, and complement it with a Leica Q?

Ans: Keeping DSLR while dipping toes in Leica world is a very sensible choice since DSLRs are more versatile and it will not be clear in the beginning whether you can give up your Canon fully. Have overlap and then decide later. Q will give you a feel of what to expect from a 24mp sensor with a Leica quality lens in case you move to M240. Since your preferred FOV is not 28mm, I have doubts on how much you will like it. It certainly is way cheaper option than M240+lens and loved by reviewers/users.

 

Q: In the alternative, sell the Canon outfit and buy a Leica M240 with 35mm or 50 mm lens? 

Ans: This is a big jump and as others have pointed out, full time MF using RF focusing is a different world. Since you can't have a test ride, it is better to overlap. If you do want to try out M240 then try with familiar FL (35 in your case). Do resist the urge to get 35 lux and get cron. This way you will have a really compact setup with same performance (losing just a stop) at a cheaper cost. Then you can do your own comparison with your 5Ds+35 1.4L.

 

I should add that I have used original 35 1.4L as my primary lens for a long time and although I loved it, I was never wowed by it (85 1.2L is/was my fav). Now I have sold all my Canon lenses and I have no experience of 35 1.4L II on 5Ds. You can do your own comparison about sharpness and other qualities of sensor based on your need.

 

Q: If I take the second option,will the quality of image of M240 with Summilux 35 be comparable to the Canon outfit that I have? M240 will be more compact I sure ,but I am scared that I am not selling away a high resolution camera like the Canon 5D-S  and the quality of M240 may not match it at all.Most of the switch stories so far I have read are about 5d Mark III,which is 24MP. To put a rider, its not that a non-professional like me must have a 50MP camera. 

Ans: (see cron vs lux comment in previous response). What parameters do you consider for being "comparable"? 35 lux FLE is one of the best lens created. Period. 35crons are equally sharp but even smaller and cheaper. Canon has improved 35 1.4L II as well and I am sure it is sharp enough. Therefore I doubt you will see much practical difference in simple sharpness comparison. Bokeh etc. is different matter and your taste will decide which is better.

 

Also note that focus accuracy matters more than just mp numbers. You only know what is the focus hit rate for your 5Ds and 35L combo. I can tell you that focus hit rate will vastly improve with M240 as your RF focusing skill improves. This is the beauty of RF focusing compared to AF in DSLRs. You are in control.

 

Bottom line is that If you don't need 50mp and get used to RF focusing in M240 then you will have equally (or better) performing setup at very compact form factor.

[Nshah]

 I wanted to write earlier but since such detailed responses were coming in that I was tempted to wait for one more reply!

 

From all the messages I can see that,firstly, almost all have said positive things about the Leica Q. Secondly,the main concern regarding the switch from Dslr to Leica M is the rangefinder experience and the manual focusing.

 

Sorry,I should have  written a bit more about my experience. I can describe myself as an advanced amateur.I took my first photo in the year 1980. Most of my  grounding was with manual focus cameras. I slowly graduated from likes of box cameras,Russian Zenith, to the current set up. I  use manual focus film cameras,whenever possible. I have access to a Hasselblad X-Pan and still shoot rolls on it. In fact since I am contemplating a Leica M,I have started handling the X-pan often and using the rangefinder and clicking (without film,only for focus). So generally I have an idea what I am getting into if I switch to a manual focus rangefinder, and what I will lose.

 

I am now more than 50 years old. Lately I have been reflecting a lot on my photography. Routine is getting more complicated. Life has become fast paced in the metropolis.Additional responsibilities are piling up.Strangely, for me, a competent fast autofoucs DSLR,with various lenses ready for all situations ,is in fact adding to the stress. I now do photography as a  creative release and escape from the fast pace of life. Therefore the idea of slowing down in photography is hugely appealing to me. 

 

It may sound odd that when I use  5Ds and take a photo which comes out great, I say Wow to the camera than to myself. I feel that the camera has done all the work. With that ,I somehow feel my need for a creative release remains unfulfilled.  From what I have read,a Leica Rangefinder involves you in the process. I get the same feeling when I use an X-pan and other manual focus camera,and develop my own rolls. I need a digital medium though. I use my friend's Fujifilm X100s and love the manual focus  on it with focus peaking and magnification.

 

Leica Q is tempting, but that would mean I will have to continue with the Dslr setup and a fixed 28 mm may be bit restrictive. It would also mean an additional expense. My Dslr set up is new and I sell it now ,it will finance purchase of a Leica M. If I postpone the decision then the Dslr value will go down. Lens if bought separately can be sold anytime or used on any future camera. 

 

My main worry was whether I get same quality from a Leica M setup as I saw on canon 5Ds 50 Mp.But as it has been pointed out more megapixel does not necessarily mean better picture quality. 

 

I think I will go for the Leica M 240 setup. I somehow have a feeling that I will enjoy the process of photography with it. As pointed out, I can always sell a Leica without much loss and get another camera if I change my mind later.

 

What is the forums opinion about a Voigtlander 50 1.5 Aspherical VM Lens or a Zeiss sonnar 50 1.5.. Pardon me if  this question is asked and answered before,but this is asked in the context of someone who is getting into M system for the first time.  

 

 

N.Shah

[edwardkaraa]

The 50 Sonnar is a very special lens with a design from 1929 that renders beautifully but suffers from focus shift. Therefore it's not recommended as a starter lens. The 50 planar is a much better option. The VM is a great lens as well but I would still choose the planar for the T* coatings and general Zeiss characteristics.

[jmahto]

I wanted to add that learning RF focusing is very easy for someone interested in photography. I have given my camera to enthusiastic friends and they have been surprised how simple RF focusing is. However, if someone has weak eyes then it may become challenging. Something to keep in mind before jumping to M240.

 

And if you are convinced of the switch then go ahead and welcome to the club. You will enjoy the journey.

[jaapv]

 I wanted to write earlier but since such detailed responses were coming in that I was tempted to wait for one more reply!

 

From all the messages I can see that,firstly, almost all have said positive things about the Leica Q. Secondly,the main concern regarding the switch from Dslr to Leica M is the rangefinder experience and the manual focusing.

 

Sorry,I should have  written a bit more about my experience. I can describe myself as an advanced amateur.I took my first photo in the year 1980. Most of my  grounding was with manual focus cameras. I slowly graduated from likes of box cameras,Russian Zenith, to the current set up. I  use manual focus film cameras,whenever possible. I have access to a Hasselblad X-Pan and still shoot rolls on it. In fact since I am contemplating a Leica M,I have started handling the X-pan often and using the rangefinder and clicking (without film,only for focus). So generally I have an idea what I am getting into if I switch to a manual focus rangefinder, and what I will lose.

 

I am now more than 50 years old. Lately I have been reflecting a lot on my photography. Routine is getting more complicated. Life has become fast paced in the metropolis.Additional responsibilities are piling up.Strangely, for me, a competent fast autofoucs DSLR,with various lenses ready for all situations ,is in fact adding to the stress. I now do photography as a  creative release and escape from the fast pace of life. Therefore the idea of slowing down in photography is hugely appealing to me. 

 

It may sound odd that when I use  5Ds and take a photo which comes out great, I say Wow to the camera than to myself. I feel that the camera has done all the work. With that ,I somehow feel my need for a creative release remains unfulfilled.  From what I have read,a Leica Rangefinder involves you in the process. I get the same feeling when I use an X-pan and other manual focus camera,and develop my own rolls. I need a digital medium though. I use my friend's Fujifilm X100s and love the manual focus  on it with focus peaking and magnification.

 

Leica Q is tempting, but that would mean I will have to continue with the Dslr setup and a fixed 28 mm may be bit restrictive. It would also mean an additional expense. My Dslr set up is new and I sell it now ,it will finance purchase of a Leica M. If I postpone the decision then the Dslr value will go down. Lens if bought separately can be sold anytime or used on any future camera. 

 

My main worry was whether I get same quality from a Leica M setup as I saw on canon 5Ds 50 Mp.But as it has been pointed out more megapixel does not necessarily mean better picture quality. 

 

I think I will go for the Leica M 240 setup. I somehow have a feeling that I will enjoy the process of photography with it. As pointed out, I can always sell a Leica without much loss and get another camera if I change my mind later.

 

What is the forums opinion about a Voigtlander 50 1.5 Aspherical VM Lens or a Zeiss sonnar 50 1.5.. Pardon me if  this question is asked and answered before,but this is asked in the context of someone who is getting into M system for the first time.  

 

 

N.Shah

Once again, don't get hung up on lens speed. The faster lens is not necessarily the better lens by any means. You are entering a system that has the advantage that there are no bad lenses on the market. You pick a lens by your need, not by finding out which one is "better".

 

In general, you can buy any Leica lens and be assured that it is "best in its class", Leica designs for the best possible quality in the smallest possible package. That can drive the price very high, especially with fast and/or specialty lenses.

 

Any Zeiss lens will be nearly as good as its Leica counterpart, sometimes better, for less money, but will, generally, be  larger and/or render differently.

 

Voigtländer lenses are the "relatively cheap but still very good"  variant, with some unique designs in their lineup. There can be some sample variation, though.

 

If you want to get into the Leica M system without the price going stratospheric, look at the Leica Summarit line and the Zeiss non-specialized lenses, like the Planars and Biogons.  

But if you want a focal length that you will only be using occasionally, there is nothing wrong with one of the Voigtländers.

 

Leica offers  Summarits as starter lenses. very compact, optically and mechanically excellent (don't believe some of the nonsense on the internet about them being "inferior; they are not) at a reasonable - for Leica_ pricepoint.

 

For those that want a compact, fastish lens, there are the Summicron and Elmar type lenses. You can buy each and everyone of them with confidence.

 

Should you be interested in shallow-DOF photography, there are the Summiluxes. Superior wide open, they will match the performance of the slower lenses stopped down, or get very close.

 

Then there are the specialty lenses, like the wideangle Summiluxes, Noctilux, Apo lenses, etc. I would not recommend spending huge amounts of cash in that direction when getting set up in the M system.

 

However, the used market offers many opportunities of saving money without compromising on quality, in fact  sometimes of getting a lens that has no modern equivalent.

Any used Summicron 50 lens will be superb, for instance, and I cannot think of any 90 mm  lens that Leica ever built over the last eighty years that is not able to produce images that are excellent today, and that is just scratching the surface.

However, without specialist knowledge of all the vintage lenses, best stick with post - 1970 lenses in general.

 

Check out our Lens Forum. There are weeks in reading there, even if you skip the (occasional ) geekery.

[jmahto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am not sure about used market in India. It may affect the lens choice.

[tom0511]

 I wanted to write earlier but since such detailed responses were coming in that I was tempted to wait for one more reply!

 

From all the messages I can see that,firstly, almost all have said positive things about the Leica Q. Secondly,the main concern regarding the switch from Dslr to Leica M is the rangefinder experience and the manual focusing.

 

Sorry,I should have  written a bit more about my experience. I can describe myself as an advanced amateur.I took my first photo in the year 1980. Most of my  grounding was with manual focus cameras. I slowly graduated from likes of box cameras,Russian Zenith, to the current set up. I  use manual focus film cameras,whenever possible. I have access to a Hasselblad X-Pan and still shoot rolls on it. In fact since I am contemplating a Leica M,I have started handling the X-pan often and using the rangefinder and clicking (without film,only for focus). So generally I have an idea what I am getting into if I switch to a manual focus rangefinder, and what I will lose.

 

I am now more than 50 years old. Lately I have been reflecting a lot on my photography. Routine is getting more complicated. Life has become fast paced in the metropolis.Additional responsibilities are piling up.Strangely, for me, a competent fast autofoucs DSLR,with various lenses ready for all situations ,is in fact adding to the stress. I now do photography as a  creative release and escape from the fast pace of life. Therefore the idea of slowing down in photography is hugely appealing to me. 

 

It may sound odd that when I use  5Ds and take a photo which comes out great, I say Wow to the camera than to myself. I feel that the camera has done all the work. With that ,I somehow feel my need for a creative release remains unfulfilled.  From what I have read,a Leica Rangefinder involves you in the process. I get the same feeling when I use an X-pan and other manual focus camera,and develop my own rolls. I need a digital medium though. I use my friend's Fujifilm X100s and love the manual focus  on it with focus peaking and magnification.

 

Leica Q is tempting, but that would mean I will have to continue with the Dslr setup and a fixed 28 mm may be bit restrictive. It would also mean an additional expense. My Dslr set up is new and I sell it now ,it will finance purchase of a Leica M. If I postpone the decision then the Dslr value will go down. Lens if bought separately can be sold anytime or used on any future camera. 

 

My main worry was whether I get same quality from a Leica M setup as I saw on canon 5Ds 50 Mp.But as it has been pointed out more megapixel does not necessarily mean better picture quality. 

 

I think I will go for the Leica M 240 setup. I somehow have a feeling that I will enjoy the process of photography with it. As pointed out, I can always sell a Leica without much loss and get another camera if I change my mind later.

 

What is the forums opinion about a Voigtlander 50 1.5 Aspherical VM Lens or a Zeiss sonnar 50 1.5.. Pardon me if  this question is asked and answered before,but this is asked in the context of someone who is getting into M system for the first time.  

 

 

N.Shah

 

This sounds a lot like weight is not the main issue but more your wish for more simplicity and direct control when taking an image.

To me it also sounds like the M is right for you. I would however, if you can afford it, keep the 5ds for some time. There might be subjects/occasions where you wish for your Canon as well.

[jaapv]

I am not sure about used market in India. It may affect the lens choice.

DHL delivers in India as well  Certainly in Malaysia...

[bocaburger]

...one buys a Leica M for the rangefinder concept. Any other motivation is likely to end in a disappointment.

 

+1.  I've been a Leica shooter for decades, always owned an SLR system of one brand or another concurrently.   At the moment I have the original Canon 5D.  No desire to upgrade as long as it's still working.  The IQ is fine for the lenses I own (sold my L glass ages ago) and size of prints I make, and the file size is manageable.   At one time size, weight and silence were motivations for me using the Leica, but the M240 is significantly noisier than the film bodies, and larger than all but the M5.  And the digital M's are huge by comparison to the current crop of highly-capable mirrorless cameras.   Now the remaning motivation is the optomechanical rangefinder/viewfinder.   DSLRs still have that pesky blackout, and I'm still not a convert to EVF's.  I feel like there's a certain disconnect.  As far as the Q goes, I see no direct comparison.  It's a fixed-lens camera in the genre of the Yaschicas and Canonets of yore, which I always found limiting.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

If you like using the XPan then I think you'll be very happy with an M. Some advantages of a type 240 compared to your Canon would be:

 

* Smaller and somewhat lighter, especially the lenses.

* Better dynamic range

* Optional EVF for live view shooting.

* More *organic* shooting experience.

 

Disadvantages:

 

* AF

* lens options (although the M with an EVF adapts lenses quite well.

* TTL flash and off camera TTL flash is much better on the Canon.

* resolution for very large prints.

 

To replace your 35mm and 100mm lenses, I'd seriously consider the current Zeiss 35mm 1.4. Possibly the best 35mm available and half the cost of the Leica FLE. The New Voigtlander 35mm 1.7 is also wonderful. Although maybe a couple of points behind the FLE and Zeiss it's still better than most 35mm lenses and renders beautifully. For the 100mm it'll be a 90mm that replaces it. They're all good. The APO Summicron if you want that super sharp modern look but even the Summarit is a stellar lens. The 90mm Macro M is absolutely tiny and very sharp if you can justify its cost.

 

In regard to 50mm lenses the 50mm Summicron APO is Otus quality. Truly stunning. In fast 50's most will tell you the Summilux is the best but I have it and the Voigtlander 1.5M and I prefer the Voigtlander.

 

If you don't need the EVF then you might consider the 262. Lighter than the 240 because it uses more aluminium and less brass.

 

Gordon

[FeralCoton]

I wanted to write earlier but since such detailed responses were coming in that I was tempted to wait for one more reply!

From all the messages I can see that,firstly, almost all have said positive things about the Leica Q. Secondly,the main concern regarding the switch from Dslr to Leica M is the rangefinder experience and the manual focusing.

Sorry,I should have written a bit more about my experience. I can describe myself as an advanced amateur.I took my first photo in the year 1980. Most of my grounding was with manual focus cameras. I slowly graduated from likes of box cameras,Russian Zenith, to the current set up. I use manual focus film cameras,whenever possible. I have access to a Hasselblad X-Pan and still shoot rolls on it. In fact since I am contemplating a Leica M,I have started handling the X-pan often and using the rangefinder and clicking (without film,only for focus). So generally I have an idea what I am getting into if I switch to a manual focus rangefinder, and what I will lose.

I am now more than 50 years old. Lately I have been reflecting a lot on my photography. Routine is getting more complicated. Life has become fast paced in the metropolis.Additional responsibilities are piling up.Strangely, for me, a competent fast autofoucs DSLR,with various lenses ready for all situations ,is in fact adding to the stress. I now do photography as a creative release and escape from the fast pace of life. Therefore the idea of slowing down in photography is hugely appealing to me.

It may sound odd that when I use 5Ds and take a photo which comes out great, I say Wow to the camera than to myself. I feel that the camera has done all the work. With that ,I somehow feel my need for a creative release remains unfulfilled. From what I have read,a Leica Rangefinder involves you in the process. I get the same feeling when I use an X-pan and other manual focus camera,and develop my own rolls. I need a digital medium though. I use my friend's Fujifilm X100s and love the manual focus on it with focus peaking and magnification.

Leica Q is tempting, but that would mean I will have to continue with the Dslr setup and a fixed 28 mm may be bit restrictive. It would also mean an additional expense. My Dslr set up is new and I sell it now ,it will finance purchase of a Leica M. If I postpone the decision then the Dslr value will go down. Lens if bought separately can be sold anytime or used on any future camera.

My main worry was whether I get same quality from a Leica M setup as I saw on canon 5Ds 50 Mp.But as it has been pointed out more megapixel does not necessarily mean better picture quality.

I think I will go for the Leica M 240 setup. I somehow have a feeling that I will enjoy the process of photography with it. As pointed out, I can always sell a Leica without much loss and get another camera if I change my mind later.

What is the forums opinion about a Voigtlander 50 1.5 Aspherical VM Lens or a Zeiss sonnar 50 1.5.. Pardon me if this question is asked and answered before,but this is asked in the context of someone who is getting into M system for the first time.

 

N.Shah

As a psychiatrist, I agree with your comments about the pace of life and a super rapid dslr can contribute to that feeling. It was big reason I switched to the M 240. It is calming.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lm_user]

The common error. Resolution numbers do NOT correlate with image quality... Having said that, one buys a Leica M for the rangefinder concept. Any other motivation is likely to end in a disappointment. My advice in your case: get an XPro 2.

Why not recommend a Leica T?

[ECohen]

As a psychiatrist, I agree with your comments about the pace of life and a super rapid dslr can contribute to that feeling. It was big reason I switched to the M 240. It is calming.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

+1 to the M being calming compared to the DSLR

 

I do keep a DSLR for the times I want auto focus and long lenses or zooms

but I never carry it....When I'm carrying a camera its the M and a lens or two.

[jaapv]

Why not recommend a Leica T?

At least the XPro pretends to be a rangefinder

[zlatkob]

As pointed out, I can always sell a Leica without much loss and get another camera if I change my mind later.

 

 

You can expect the M240 to lose about 15% in value each year in the first few years, whether you use it or not.  But that's part of the cost of ownership.

[Nshah]

Thank you all for your responses. As a newcomer to Leica,I am full of questions ,but I will first go through the earlier posts on the forum and find out if my queries have already been discussed, If not I will have to bother you again  .

 

N.Shah

[Mute-on]

N.Shah,

 

You have received much well considered advice from many who have the practical experience to back up their comments.

 

I would like to add two comments.

 

Firstly, a DSLR is a completely different shooting experience and is often used for a different purpose as a camera system compared with a Leica M, or indeed Q. You may well find you have a place for both in your photographic and personal lifestyle. It is not necessarily one or the other, though you may well end up preferring one.

 

Secondly, whilst many will proffer alternatives that are cheaper or arguably better value, if you are going to go with Leica, go all Leica - body and lens(es). A Leica body deserves a Leica lens IMHO. If you want to know whether the Leica IQ compares favourably with your Canon DSLR, use the Leica glass.

 

Enjoy your photographic journey!

 

Cheers

 

J

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[David Dennis]

 I wanted to write earlier but since such detailed responses were coming in that I was tempted to wait for one more reply!

(etc, lots of great stuff)

 

 

I'm impressed by how carefully you've thought this out.  With this new information, I'm certain the new M would make you happy.

 

I echo the thoughts that you might not want to replace your Canon right away, especially if you've been using telephoto lenses, since they are essentially not compatible with the way a rangefinder works.

 

At least here in the USA there is a sale going on with a Leica M with a 50mm lens for US$5,995.  Might be a good way to start without breaking the bank.  Check to se if there's anything comparable in your country.  Note that the bundled camera has a LCD for image review but will not let you shoot video or use live view.  http://leicastoremiami.com/collections/leica-m-system-m-system-camera/products/leica-m-typ-262-bundle-with-summarit-m-50mm-f-2-4-sf-40-system-case-m