Bill Livingston Posted August 7, 2017 Share #961 Posted August 7, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Because i have to press a button or a dial to bring up the magnified image, the same way as you do with your SL i guess. Really? All I do is turn the focus ring on my M lens and the EVF automatically brings up the enlarged image on my M240P... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 7, 2017 Posted August 7, 2017 Hi Bill Livingston, Take a look here M10? - Sorry, no!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted August 7, 2017 Share #962 Posted August 7, 2017 Really? All I do is turn the focus ring on my M lens and the EVF automatically brings up the enlarged image on my M240P... But not on the SL, nor any other mirrorless camera Bill, that's what i was trying to say... If you like that feature you won't have in on an M w/o rangefinder if it has not an M mount as expected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 7, 2017 Share #963 Posted August 7, 2017 Now you are just trying to wind us all up Jaap...! We don’t need anything other than an M mount in an EVF M camera... the add on EVF works perfectly well with all M lenses and gives image magnification, so a proper EVF, built into the M camera instead of an RF (on the M EVF) version is all we need. No autofocus, no nothing... no need to change the mount and no need to cater for autofocus. And all those who loath the idea, can just buy the OVF version of the M camera. No one needs to be upset! (I would end up with both, and I’m sure quite a few others on here would too...). And for those who STILL object to two versions on the M camera..? With one of them considered pretty close to being the devil incarnate? Think of it as retribution for voting us out of the EU... The problem with an EVF camera will be that it would (almost) certainly drop the rangefinder coupling. Then the lens would have no way of activating a magnification feature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozytripper Posted August 7, 2017 Share #964 Posted August 7, 2017 No problem but having both is (or would be) great though. I like much my Sony & Fuji bodies but they take too much time to focus sometimes. Only way to reduce the gap between RF and mirrorless cameras is auto image magnification IMHO. I mean with M lenses of course. AF is another story. Take too much time to focus? Isn't it a much often quoted cliche for Rangefinder benefit? "it forces me to slow down and make me think"? Also quote " i need to press a button to magnify the image" - must be something wrong with your Fuji because my Fuji magnifies the image automatically when I do manual focus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted August 7, 2017 Share #965 Posted August 7, 2017 But not on the SL, nor any other mirrorless camera Bill, that's what i was trying to say... If you like that feature you won't have in on an M w/o rangefinder if it has not an M mount as expected. I understand that... but I would want an M mount on the M EVF camera... why change it to anything else? There is no need for AF or anything and we have had years of not having things like aperture info transmitted... so why keep adding features we could do without when really all we want is an M camera with an EVF for the same quality or better than the SL? The whole point is to keep the camera as simple and as close to the M aesthetic as possible... and that means an M mount. Not an SL Mount, not an S Mount, not a T mount... a simple M mount... so the camera looks indistinguishable from the OVF M and works just like the current M with the add on EVF, without the ‘add on’. Everything else is better to do with a different camera... I think people keep throwing that spanner in the works because, actually, it’s pretty hard to argue against... and there are a LOT of potential customers, old and new, for an EVF M As many of us have said, it’s not as if we are arguing for an end to the OVF M... far from it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 7, 2017 Share #966 Posted August 7, 2017 With M lenses Ozy... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted August 7, 2017 Share #967 Posted August 7, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) The problem with an EVF camera will be that it would (almost) certainly drop the rangefinder coupling. Then the lens would have no way of activating a magnification feature.Why would you do that??? If the concept was clearly to offer exactly the same process as a current OVF M, but with a built in EVF, the coupling would still be needed. I’m surprised you would object Jaap... you could go back to using an M for all your photography and keep your OVF M240 for video! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 7, 2017 Share #968 Posted August 7, 2017 I understand that... but I would want an M mount on the M EVF camera... why change it to anything else? [...] Because an M mount on a mirrorless camera would kill the M? Just a tongue i cheek question Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted August 7, 2017 Share #969 Posted August 7, 2017 Because an M mount on a mirrorless camera would kill the M? Just a tongue i cheek question I understand that was a tongue in cheek question LCT! But there are MANY on here that object to this for precisely that reason... My point is that it would EXTEND the life of the M camera... and maybe you would have new customers buying the EVF version who then later add an OVF version and try a true rangefinder for the first time... I see this as a win/win... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 7, 2017 Share #970 Posted August 7, 2017 Why would you do that??? If the concept was clearly to offer exactly the same process as a current OVF M, but with a built in EVF, the coupling would still be needed. I’m surprised you would object Jaap... you could go back to using an M for all your photography and keep your OVF M240 for video! That is not the case. An EVF reads the data off the sensor and displays them in the viewfinder. There is no need for an eleborate mechanical linkage to the lens. The M has a motion sensor on the mechanical system to activate the magnification. One would not need that any more. The only possibility would be some kind of motion sensor on the helicoid. Quite an engineering challenge. I don't object - I would like an EVF-M (or maybe T?) but I am pointing out the drawback that it would most likely need a button-activated magnification. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 7, 2017 Share #971 Posted August 7, 2017 That is not the case. An EVF reads the data off the sensor and displays them in the viewfinder. There is no need for an eleborate mechanical linkage to the lens. The M has a motion sensor on the mechanical system to activate the magnification. One would not need that any more. [...] One i don't know but Bill and truly yours would need that apparently... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted August 7, 2017 Share #972 Posted August 7, 2017 That is not the case. An EVF reads the data off the sensor and displays them in the viewfinder. There is no need for an eleborate mechanical linkage to the lens. The M has a motion sensor on the mechanical system to activate the magnification. One would not need that any more. The only possibility would be some kind of motion sensor on the helicoid. Quite an engineering challenge. I don't object - I would like an EVF-M (or maybe T?) but I am pointing out the drawback that it would most likely need a button-activated magnification. I’m confused here Jaap... on a previous post you said that you would need the coupling in order to trigger the magnification... now you are saying it has a motion sensor? Which is it? Obviously the EVF reads directly off the sensor, but surely the lens needs to tell the camera that it is being focussed in order to activate the magnification, you first said you need the coupling to do that... now you are saying it doesn’t? But then confuse me more by saying you would need a motion sensor on the helicoid? Wouldn’t that mean you would need a whole new range of M lenses? I honestly think it is far simpler than that. I understood the camera was ‘told’ to magnify in the add on EVF, mechanically, by the simple action of turning the focussing ring. So why do anything different? If I have misunderstood all of your post, please tell me. We are just moving the EVF from a carbuncle on top of the camera to inside the camera, where the OVF currently is... That’s why it essential that there are two M versions... an EVF and an OVF... both using the same M lenses and both operating in exactly the same way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 7, 2017 Share #973 Posted August 7, 2017 Hence the obligation for RF and TTL lovers to have two cameras... Thanks no thanks i want one doing both but it's just me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozytripper Posted August 7, 2017 Share #974 Posted August 7, 2017 I can Totally Totally live with a button activated magnification Would slow me down more and make me think more about my photography "I don't object - I would like an EVF-M (or maybe T?) but I am pointing out the drawback that it would most likely need a button-activated magnification." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted August 7, 2017 Share #975 Posted August 7, 2017 Honestly folks, the EVF in the SL is so good, you will nail your focus without magnification 80-90% of the time. And hitting the magnify button on the SL is so easy given its placement that it becomes very instinctual and fluid in the overall workflow of image capture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted August 7, 2017 Share #976 Posted August 7, 2017 Take too much time to focus? Isn't it a much often quoted cliche for Rangefinder benefit? "it forces me to slow down and make me think"? Also quote " i need to press a button to magnify the image" - must be something wrong with your Fuji because my Fuji magnifies the image automatically when I do manual focus I have always objected to the idea that RF cameras "force you to slow down". They do no such thing. Perhaps when you're not yet fully familiar with them they slow you down a bit, but the same goes for everything that like most instruments that you have to learn, including mirrorless and DSLR cameras and F1cars that are the among the slowest vehicles on the planet if you don't know how to drive them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozytripper Posted August 7, 2017 Share #977 Posted August 7, 2017 I have always objected to the idea that RF cameras "force you to slow down". They do no such thing. Perhaps when you're not yet fully familiar with them they slow you down a bit, but the same goes for everything that like most instruments that you have to learn, including mirrorless and DSLR cameras and F1cars that are the among the slowest vehicles on the planet if you don't know how to drive them. Peter, I fully agree with you. I was being a little sarcastic. I always believe that a photographer should "see the final" picture before even putting the camera to the eye. Same with using zooms. See the picture then zoom to what one saw. Not put the camera to the eye then zoom in an out to see what looks right. Cameras are just tools to help us get our images and not to restrict what we can do with it. Another favourite cliche is "it is discreet and no one notices you taking their photo". I recently saw a M review by an asian looking reviewer who sounds like an englishman (probably born in the UK or lived there for a while) who started the video with exactly this cliche. Then in every one of his shots his subject are staring daggers at him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke_Miller Posted August 7, 2017 Share #978 Posted August 7, 2017 Another favourite cliche is "it is discreet and no one notices you taking their photo". I recently saw a M review by an asian looking reviewer who sounds like an englishman (probably born in the UK or lived there for a while) who started the video with exactly this cliche. Then in every one of his shots his subject are staring daggers at him I wouldn't say no one notices me with my Leica, but many fewer do than when I'm shooting with my Nikon D4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 7, 2017 Share #979 Posted August 7, 2017 oh boy, is it just me or is it that everyone is now asking to complicate a camera system that has thrived on it's basic simplicity pretty much ever since it's conception? Well maybe not "everyone", but certainly quite a few in this thread it seems. I wasn't meaning to buy an M10 as soon as I did, I was content with being on a long waiting list in the US, ( and I still am over there, perhaps for the second one later as I'm still +50 away from getting that call ! ), but when I learned of an available one at a dealership in SW France a few weeks ago I snapped it up and I'm very happy to have done so. The M10 is a refinement of the M, refined because Leica has tried to shed buttons, distractions and functions to bring the camera closer to where it was a number of generations ago to be one of the best still-photographic tools that one can hope to use. To complicate the viewing system by making it semi electronic in any way would be like putting tits on a bull. What Leica did instead was to make improvements to the OVF both mechanically and optically and I for one appreciate that even though personally I would wish for a .58 finder rather than the one that's on the camera right now because I primarily use WA glass on my M's......Maybe sometime in the future with an Ala-Carte M10 that may be possible. If I want any sort of EVF in a camera there's other good choices out there, the SL for some if you want to stay in the Leica Universe, or systems from Panasonic or Sony that seem to have made the EVF work very well, I know jaapv likes his GX8 and I can understand why, but more electronic "stuff" in the M's OVF? For me, no thank you. Sure there's some features with the M10 that I'd still shed, one being the ISO dial another being the frame-line lever selection lever. I'd also like for it to have a battery access port in the base too like the Q has had for years now without problems. I don't need WiFi or GPS either but they are invisible and if I ignore them they are not distraction. What I do appreciate is the better feeling in the hand that M10 has for me over the M240's, ( that I still have and will keep ), and the fact that Leica really has thought this camera out very well. It doesn't hurt either that the imaging out of the camera, especially at high ISO's is quite superb. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted August 7, 2017 Share #980 Posted August 7, 2017 I think you have missed the point Peter...although I will accept there are a fair few posts to read back in order to see exactly what many of us would like to see from Leica in the near future. But in summary, NO-ONE is suggesting we add ANYTHING to a Leica M. So your M10 and future M cameras would continue to be a refined, pure RF camera, just as you have so eloquently argued for. What we are suggesting is a second M body with an EVF in place of the optical rangefinder and keep to the tradition and aesthetic of the Leica M. As has been said many times, this is not an ‘instead of’, it’s an ‘as well as’. Given that this idea/option would have absolutely NO bearing on your choice of camera, nor would it affect future iterations of the OVF pure rangefinder/OVF version of the M camera, why would you possibly object? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.