M 11 will be around in less than 4 years. The speculations and facts.

[dkmoore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You have to consider that the M – and that includes a hypothetical M11 – is a manual focus camera. There are some really good electronic viewfinders out there and Leica has built some of the best, but the real question is this: Can Leica develop an electronic viewfinder that supports fast and accurate manual focusing, rivalling a rangefinder? Only if the answer is ‘yes’ would a non-rangefinder M be an option.

 

(And btw, no more curved sensor nonsense please. Curved sensors do have their advantages and there are application areas where the can excel, but this isn’t one of those.)

 

If the built in EVF had frame lines that lit up green when the subject was in focus that would be enough for me to accept replacing the OVF. It doesn't always have to be super complicated. Not that your saying that. 

[dkmoore]

But they were all optical viewfinders - the base concept hadn't changed but its implementation had.

 

An EVF is a completely different concept altogether and whilst it might potentially mimick an OVF (which seems pointless when an OVF is quite viable as it is) it could also totally change its operation. And either way it still does not solve the data transfer problem which is the M's Achillies' Heel for updating it digitally.

 

 

The bigger Achilles heel is rangefinder and lens alignment. That is the ONLY reason I would prefer an EVF over the already excellent OVF of any Leica M.

[Advertisement]

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

[pico]

The bigger Achilles heel is rangefinder and lens alignment. That is the ONLY reason I would prefer an EVF over the already excellent OVF of any Leica M.

 

Why not have both?

[pgk]

My neighbor reminded me of a dividing line between best-tech and visceral joy: His wife hates Porsche manual shift. He loves it because it keeps her from driving it.

 

There is a correlation between Leica M users and the whiners for more automation.

 

Well pico, you shoot Large Format .....    .

[roelv1]

 Optical viewfinders of all types are obsolete. 

 

Until so far there is nothing better than an OVF. In some situations an EVF can have some advantages, like in dark situations, but overall an OVF wins. Nothing can compare the DR of the human eye. Sean Reid has written several times that in contrasty situations an EVF gives difficulties in seeing what is in the shadows and he is right. I never understood why some are saying that focussing wide angle lenses with an OVF is hard to do. It's very easy. The view of an OVF also is more natural. It would be a very bad decision if Leica would drop the OVF. http://www.roelvisser.nl

[pgk]

Despite all the posts here and in other threads it appears that there is still a fundamental misunderstanding about digital M cameras so I will try once more.

 

The lack of lens to camera data transfer means that adjustments for lens performance may well not be as subtle as those offered by other systems in the future. The heady mix of optical refinement and calculated software adjustment will undoubtedly produce lenses which will outcompete Leica M lenses in terms of their imaging technical precision. Which means that one of the core selling points of the Leica M - its beautiful optics - will (on paper at least) be uncompetitive. (They will remain optical jewels, capable of stunning, results but not as good as those from hybrid optical/software corrected lenses).

 

Which leaves the concept. Add in an EVF as many other manufacturers will also do in similar sized cameras (and at least as well if not better in some cases) and its clear that an EVF Leica M may well become outclassed because it can compete, with similarly specified cameras, with neither its viewfinder, nor its optics.

 

So retaining an OVF, whilst old fashioned, still provides a different user experience with a camera which can be tailored to work within its limitations exceedingly well. BUT they are limitations and the M dRF will be a niche product. It will though be one with a rich and marketable history, and as such can maintain Leica's 'prestige' as a camera manufacturer and be used to promote Leica's other products.

 

Water the M down by trying to incorporate features which its downsides will compromise and you will have a lame duck. I have no problem with an M mount EVF camera as such but I fail to see where it will sit in the marketplace, nor do I see what it can offer that the SL/CL do not offer already. I think that such a camera would be a niche within a niche and I would suspect that the economics of building it would be iffy.

[duoenboge]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I suspect the M10 have been the last M we see. Or maybe the last for a long period of time.

So I hope Sony will toughen up his sensors to work well with the M lenses.

[UliWer]

@ pgk:

 

Sorry, I don't understand your logic:  an electronic viewfinder in a Leica-M-body is bad, because lenses cannot be corrected like in other cameras?  

 

The electronic viewfinder gets it's data from the sensor, which gets it's light through the lens. Even if the sensor does not "know" which f-stop and which focussing position was used with the lens, it will "see" the results - and any electronic manipulation one may think of can be based on these results - the viewfinder does not intervene. 

 

Anyone who wants to apply electronic lens correction can do so without regards to the viewfinder.  So if one time lenses which are electronically corrected will outperform lenses which are only optically corrected, the lensmaker may be able to react in the same way with an M with electronic viewfinder as with a traditional one .

 

The well known fact, that mechanical calibration between lens and camera as well as some inherent faults like focus shift are the weak spots of the optical viewfinder makes the difference - in favour of the electronic device. 

 

I can only understand your position as a demand that people should not have any choice. If I had I had the choice now I'd stick to the optical finder. Other users may think different.  

Edited July 11, 2018 by UliWer

[Guest]

Until so far there is nothing better than an OVF. In some situations an EVF can have some advantages, like in dark situations, but overall an OVF wins. Nothing can compare the DR of the human eye. Sean Reid has written several times that in contrasty situations an EVF gives difficulties in seeing what is in the shadows and he is right. I never understood why some are saying that focussing wide angle lenses with an OVF is hard to do. It's very easy. The view of an OVF also is more natural. It would be a very bad decision if Leica would drop the OVF. http://www.roelvisser.nl

 

 

For me it is simple. If Leica drops the OVF in favour of an EVF in whatever flavour or combination then after nearly five decades of personal and professional use of the marque the M10 will be the last new M I will buy.................

[jaapv]

I suspect the M10 have been the last M we see. Or maybe the last for a long period of time.

So I hope Sony will toughen up his sensors to work well with the M lenses.

Sony wants to sell their own lenses. Why should they go out of their way to accomodate Leica lenses? Totally uninteresting to them. I bet that Sony sells more cameras in a year than Leica sells lenses in a decade.

[UliWer]

...the M10 will be the last new M I will buy.................

 

I hope the M10 has been the last M I ever bought - because it lasts as I long I am able to use it. 

[jonatdonuts]

A perfect example of a haughty statement, which is unfortunately quite common in this forum.

 

And people whose salary is $24,000.00 per year have as much business with a Leica camera as they have with a Rolex or a Ferrari.

[pgk]

@ pgk:

 

Sorry, I don't understand your logic:  an electronic viewfinder in a Leica-M-body is bad, because lenses cannot be corrected like in other cameras?  

 

The logic is that once the M camera system ceases to be a mechanical rangefinder system and adopts an EVF it will compete directly with other EVF cameras which will be at an advantage over it because they offer fully integrated camera/lens systems. The mechanical rangefinder makes the M unique. Changing this will simply change it from a unique system to just another EVF system, and as such there will be little special about it other than that it is hobbled by a lack of camera/lens integration, which is not a positive thing. Best kept as an unique RF/OVF system.

[jaapv]

Paul is right. On would not be adapting the M to an EVF, one would be creating an EVIL system using the M mount. That would cripple the system through lack of lens-electronics integration.

[jonoslack]

I suspect the M10 have been the last M we see. Or maybe the last for a long period of time.

So I hope Sony will toughen up his sensors to work well with the M lenses.

 

 

I'm absolutely certain that the M10 will not be the last M we see

 

I'm equally certain that Sony will not make their sensors work well with M lenses

Because:

1. The problem with M lenses is that they don't work well with thick cover glass over the sensor

2. The advantage of thicker cover glass is a) easier for filtration you don't see the dust on the sensor so easily in images

3. Sony lenses are all designed with the thicker cover glass in mind

4. Why would Sony spend money encouraging people to buy someone else's lenses?

[jonoslack]

Paul is right. On would not be adapting the M to an EVF, one would be creating an EVIL system using the M mount. That would cripple the system through lack of lens-electronics integration.

Exactly Jaap

producing an EVF camera with an M mount would be crazy (and I'm certain it won't happen). . . . . . an L mount camera is more likely, but erm. . . we already have those!

 

So what the request boils down to is a smaller SL (isn't it?)

[duoenboge]

4. Why would Sony spend money encouraging people to buy someone else's lenses?

to make me happy.

[ELAN]

So what the request boils down to is a smaller SL (isn't it?)

 

Yes, exactly, a smaller SL that looks and feels like an M  

 

But I probably won't buy one, I love the OVF.

[pgk]

Yes, exactly, a smaller SL that looks and feels like an M

 

This would be a much more interesting idea and especially if future developments allow Leica to produce much smaller 'M-like' lenses for it. Now an M shaped body with full body/lens electronically integrated small, neat lenses built to Leica's M lens standards might not be cheap but I'm sure it would be attractive to many whilst still leaving the OVF M camera as a niche legacy product to maintain Leica's traditional system.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[evikne]

I would certainly consider a small, M-like Leica system with AF and the world's largest and best EVF in the future. But until then, I stick to my M10.