jaapv Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1061 Posted January 8, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) 5 days to what Neil? Pre-order cancellation Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2017 Posted January 8, 2017 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Leica M 10. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1062 Posted January 8, 2017 5 days to what Neil?News on the new Q....... I mean M Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1063 Posted January 8, 2017 I don't think so. It may not be the best EVF out there nowadays and certainly does not compare to the SL or even T, but it does the job. The only functional niggle is the lack of off-centre magnification.C'mon, what about blackout? Agree, it works but but just. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1064 Posted January 8, 2017 It's clearly a grey Sunday morning and we have a moment with time on our hands (there's that article I need to finish, but Hey - this is more fun)... Jono - what you say about the new Oly is interesting. If I went in that direction it would take me back to the first professional kit I had (an OM1), something I'd quite like. The OM4 was a wonderful thing... My problem at the moment is the sunk costs that my Canon kit represents. For the small use I get from it these days I'm not sure if it's worth switching systems. If I DID make that decision, an OMD based system would, indeed, be very attractive. Problem at the moment is that shifting £4 or £5K into a new system doesn't feel like a priority... However - what you've said does support my earlier comment - if you're doing professional work you're likely to need more than one system. OK, Jane Bown spent most of her career using an OM1 (usually with a 50mm Zuiko lens - see https://www.theguardian.com/gnmeducationcentre/jane-bown-camera-teaching-resource-gnm-archive). Unfortunately for me, I don't spend most of my time doing commissioned portraits for the Observer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1065 Posted January 8, 2017 Coming from the Visoflex III I am more than happy that the blackout comes after the shot . I have set the camera to "freeze" instead of blackout BTW. Much better. The point is to use the optical viewfinder as much as possible and to accept that the EVF is just a handy accessory. Don't regard the M240 as an EVIL replacement. That way lieth disappointment. C'mon, what about blackout? Agree, it works but but just. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1066 Posted January 8, 2017 Coming from the Visoflex III I am more than happy that the blackout comes after the shot . I have set the camera to "freeze" instead of blackout BTW. Much better. The point is to use the optical viewfinder as much as possible and to accept that the EVF is just a handy accessory. Don't regard the M240 as an EVIL replacement. That way lieth disappointment. I am using EVF2 in conjunction with OVF exactly as you describe and that is where i find EVF most useful, works well for framing and focusing extreme wide (Elmarit 19mm), focusing and shooting telephoto handheld on dynamic subject I find difficult to do. Funny you mentioned Visoflex 3, it crossed my mind and I find it easier to work with than EVF2 - must be optical aspect of it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1067 Posted January 8, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Works perfectly? One of us must be living in parallel universe. Mine does what it is supposed to do, on this side of the world Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1068 Posted January 8, 2017 C'mon, what about blackout? Agree, it works but but just. it works perfectly since the last firmware, I can shoot always in focus with my 135, I don't say that it couldn't be better Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1069 Posted January 8, 2017 it works perfectly since the last firmware, I can shoot always in focus with my 135, I don't say that it couldn't be betterI accept "not saying couldn't be better" and "works perfectly" are two different things. It is what it is, slow refresh rate and long blackout EVF with passable picture quality designed prior to 2012 launch which is ancient history in this technology segment. Hope for future EVF for M cameras is at least as good as SL in terms of blackout and refresh rate, anything sluggish want be much of improvement on current model, let's wait and see. Anyone waxing lyrical about technical virtues of the current EVF2 is clearly a brand fanboy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1070 Posted January 8, 2017 [...] Anyone waxing lyrical about technical virtues of the current EVF2 is clearly a brand fanboy. Or someone having never used a modern EVF. The combo M240 + EVF2 (or Oly VF2) is simply outdated compared to current mirrorless cameras. Was yet mediocre in 2013, four years later an upgrade is more than due. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1071 Posted January 8, 2017 Hmm - well, I'd have said that until recently - but I've been trying out the new Olympus OMD E-M1 mark ii, the f2.8 triumvirate (9-18, 12-40, 40-150) plus the 300f4 (and the 12-200 f4 as an all rounder) are all flawless optically - at all apertures and all focal lengths, not something you can say for the dSLR zooms. Of course, the smaller sensor means larger depth of field - but for most of these purposes that's an advantage rather than otherwise, and the light gathering power is the same. It's only 20mp . . but then so are the professional dSLR cameras. With phase detect the AF is now lighting fast, with much less lag than a dSLR - and the insane image stablisation is wonderful if you have a static subject (e.g. 2 second exposure at 200mm equivalent), Virtually silent automatic shutter - silent electronic shutter, 60 fps if you want it, total weather sealing, dSLR quality tracking and 4k video which really works - and with the image stabilisation on the 12-100 it really looks like steady cam - even when handheld. It's a cracking kit if your primary intent is to 'get that image'. The whole lot will fit into a small bag. Olympus's service in the UK is second to none - I had a body picked up by DHL, fixed within 4 days and returned by DHL with no charge. Me? I'd rather shoot with an M any day (just like you would Chris) - but I can't imagine ever going back to flapping mirrors again! All the best Jono Around 2011 or 2012 I posted on another forum that I gave the DSLR another 10 years of life before it became irrelevant for most normal uses, including most professional uses. I stick by that (and sometimes wonder if it will be less). The prediction was based on the bizarre opto-mechanical hoopla involved in making an SLR work. You would never choose to use it unless there was no alternative. Now there clearly is an alternative not just on the horizon but approaching rapidly. The days of the flappy thing directly in the line of sight of the sensor are coming to an end.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1072 Posted January 8, 2017 Anyone waxing lyrical about technical virtues of the current EVF2 is clearly a brand fanboy. Well, I'm not going to wax lyrical about it then . You would never choose to use it unless there was no alternative. Now there clearly is an alternative not just on the horizon but approaching rapidly. The days of the flappy thing directly in the line of sight of the sensor are coming to an end.. Obviously, the RF is going to dominate once more. (Did that sound fanboyish?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1073 Posted January 8, 2017 Obviously, the RF is going to dominate once more. (Did that sound fanboyish?). More opto-mechanical hoopla! Edit: but less obviously obsolescent than the SLR mechanism. The alternative (with the same functionality) is not so obvious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1074 Posted January 8, 2017 I accept "not saying couldn't be better" and "works perfectly" are two different things. Perfect means that you get exactly what you want (a photo in focus) Better means build quality, refresh, pixels ... Yes they are 2 different things I am not a brand fanboy , my EVF is from Olympus , same than the Leica one but half price Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1075 Posted January 8, 2017 Perfect means that you get exactly what you want (a photo in focus) Better means build quality, refresh, pixels ... Yes they are 2 different things I am not a brand fanboy , my EVF is from Olympus , same than the Leica one but half price Yes, static object and static camera works perfectly, made some good pictures using EVF2 under these conditions. Make one or the other dynamic and usability of EVF2 is no more especially with longer lens where focus and viewfinder feedback are critical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1076 Posted January 8, 2017 If I'm shooting landscapes at a 'fixed' f-stop on my Canons, I focus then switch the lens to MF so effectively locking the focus. Works fine as long as I remember to switch AF back on after (easy to not do on w/as). I never think in such terms on the M because its intuitive to check focus every time. I had used Canon for 5 years before I switched to M. My approach was back button focusing. That way I could leave it to AF but focus only when I want rather than every time the shutter is touched. The problem of above approach (and switching to MF as you described) is that one tiny touch on the focusing ring and your focus is off. Doing manual focus on a lens designed to AF is not optimal experience. Disclaimer: No experience with SL and it's AF lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1077 Posted January 8, 2017 I have a theory that the "right" number MP for an EVF to be "good" user experience is a ratio of the camera's MP count. The SL has a 4.41 MP EVF paired with a with 24 MP sensor, so a ratio of 4.41 MP / 24 MP = 18.37%. Basically the EVF is relaying 18.37% of what the sensor is seeing. My math is a bit wonky because the EVFs are counting "dots" and not MP, but I think the concepts holds true. With the A7rII and the ratio isn't so nice. 2.36 MP / 42 MP = 5.6%. EEK...!... I'm very skeptical of the X1D - that's 2.36 MP / 50 MP = 4.7%. There aren't many X1D user reports yet, but a couple people have written it's about the same at the A7rII. My guess is that the magic ratio is 25%. So a 24 MP would have a 6 MP EVF or thereabouts. I know there are other considerations such as the EVF's DR, its refresh rate, how auto-gain is handled, etc. I think the SL's EVF optical magnification is about the most I can handle - any more and I would have a hard time seeing corners & edges. A noticed the new Panny GH5 has the 3.68 MP EVF, so that should be a nice user experience (3.68 / 20 = 18.4%). I don't understand this. But I am very non-technical in my approach to photography. When Fuji upgraded the XT1 to the XT2, they took it from 16mp to 24mp but kept the same 2.36m dot EVF, and as far as I'm aware not a single person has ever complained that the viewfinder became any less easy or effective to use in any respect. I certainly can't sense any difference whatsoever in using similar viewfinders with different sensors. I'm probably just not understanding what you're referring to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1078 Posted January 8, 2017 I don't understand this. But I am very non-technical in my approach to photography. When Fuji upgraded the XT1 to the XT2, they took it from 16mp to 24mp but kept the same 2.36m dot EVF, and as far as I'm aware not a single person has ever complained that the viewfinder became any less easy or effective to use in any respect. I certainly can't sense any difference whatsoever in using similar viewfinders with different sensors. I'm probably just not understanding what you're referring to. I quite agree Peter I don't really see the need for more pixels in an EVF just because the sensor has more resolution (unless it's to zoom in further). But 4mp seems like a pretty good spot. . . . but I think what really matters with an EVF is not so much the resolution - as the size, the brightness and the contrast - Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1079 Posted January 8, 2017 The problem of above approach (and switching to MF as you described) is that one tiny touch on the focusing ring and your focus is off. The very first year that the London Marathon was run I was a student in London. I and my fellow photography students were asked to help out with the photo contract shooting ALL participants as they ran past - we were all given 2 x Canon A1s with 100mm lenses which had the focus taped up. We marked to point of focus on the road in chalk and simply hit the shutter button when we judged the runner was on the 'mark'. Worked incredibly well (I had a film 'loader' behind me who had the job of loading/unloading cameras - very exciting). If I remember correctly I shot around 140 rolls of film ..... Sometimes the simplest approach works surprisingly well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted January 8, 2017 Share #1080 Posted January 8, 2017 The very first year that the London Marathon was run I was a student in London. I and my fellow photography students were asked to help out with the photo contract shooting ALL participants as they ran past - we were all given 2 x Canon A1s with 100mm lenses which had the focus taped up. We marked to point of focus on the road in chalk and simply hit the shutter button when we judged the runner was on the 'mark'. Worked incredibly well (I had a film 'loader' behind me who had the job of loading/unloading cameras - very exciting). If I remember correctly I shot around 140 rolls of film ..... Sometimes the simplest approach works surprisingly well. I always prefer an M to an AF camera for marathons and the like for similar reasons. It means there are some shots you know you won't be able to get so you stop worrying about this and concentrate on timing and perfecting the shots you can get. A bit of forethought and preparation is better than any AF system I've yet experienced. I know there are some applications where AF is essential, but I'd wager they are fewer than we're encouraged to believe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.