EVF for the M

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just imagine how small the M would be without the rangefinder. It could be as small as the Leica II if it was integrated properly. 

 

 

Yes, it could be as small as the SL. Oh hang on a minute...

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

This conversation reminds me of what used to be discussed in Porsche forums before the Boxster came out. Back then, the only cars Porsche made were the 911 and the front engined 92* variants. At the time, the 92* variants had lost market share and Porsche was in danger of going under. 

 

I argued that they should make a mid engined Porsche, since the only mid engined Porsche they brought to market before that point was the crappy 914. Oh yes, and make it watercooled so they could relocate the radiators and increase engine power. 

 

Porsche conservatives shouted me down. Many were completely opposed to the idea of anything but a rear engined air cooled Porsche and cited the failure of the watercooled front engined Porsches as an example of what will happen if they deviated from what made a Porsche, a Porsche. Meaning - it had to be air cooled, and rear engined. I was asked in rather impolite terms why I own a Porsche in the first place, if I don't like air cooled, rear engined cars. In fact the same accusation came up - if I don't subscribe to the true philosophy of Porsche, then by definition I must be a poseur. 

 

No doubt the release of the 996-series 911 (watercooled, rear engined) and the 986 Boxster (watercooled, mid engined) saved Porsche and allowed them to grow to where they are now. But till today, there is a schism among Porsche fans - those who like "modern" Porsches, and a stubborn bunch of purists who insist that new Porsches are for the nouveau riche and pimps, and not true enthusiasts, like them. 

 

I see the same thing with rangefinders. It's stubbornly clinging on to old technology for nostalgia's sake. Insisting that anybody who does not believe the same is not a purist and not worthy of owning an M. The market has already relegated Leica to an also-ran in the very market it helped to invent, to the extent that it very nearly went under because they were foolish enough to think that digital would be a passing phase!

 

Well, the next stage in their evolution would be to integrate the EVF. If they were nervous about doing so, they could offer an EVF only version of the M alongside the rangefinder version. Provided the advantages of the EVF was passed on - more compact design, lighter, and a suitably high res and fast refresh EVF in the first place. Many people who have bought into the SL did so because they want to use M lenses with the EVF. Offer them a lighter, more compact alternative, and they will return in droves. 

Is the Boxster a 911? Not really, they didn't change the 911 concept and kept on developing it. Why do you use this analogy to try and make Leica change the M concept?

[Paul J]

I like the Porsche 928.

[Keith_W]

Porsche had reached the limits of what was possible with air cooled engines. They had to move to watercooled. And you may not realize it, but the behaviour of people on this thread so far mimics my experience on that Porsche forum all those years ago. Been called a poseur - check. Not a true enthusiast for disliking its most distinctive feature - check. "Go buy an SL if you want an EVF" is the same as "go buy a 928 if you want watercooled" - check. 

 

Rangefinders cater to a niche market. It's the same as an air cooled engined. I can only think of disadvantages. For example, it is nearly impossible to focus on a single blade of grass, when you look through the viewfinder and see hundreds of blades of grass and you don't know which images to align. With the EVF, it's a cinch. Another example, in a backlit subject I can barely see the eyes which I want to focus on. I end up having to focus on the silhouette, since that's what I can see. Result, I miss focus. With the EVF, it's a cinch. 

 

Leica can always make and sell an EVF only M body side by side with the rangefinder version. Just don't make it an ugly brick like the SL, then sit back and watch the sales. And BTW, if they made the SL M-sized I would buy one. Then you can forget I ever asked for an EVF only M, because I would have one. 

 

ianman, I didn't say I hate rangefinders. I put up with it. Mostly, I put up with it when i'm too lazy to pull out the Visioflex and mount it. I have said earlier in this thread (post #36) that the M makes a case for itself, despite me counting the rangefinder as a strike against it. 

[lct]

[...] Leica can always make and sell an EVF only M body side by side with the rangefinder version. [...]

 

It won't be an M then. M = rangefinder. 

[ianman]

Just don't make it an ugly brick like the SL, then sit back and watch the sales. And BTW, if they made the SL M-sized I would buy one. Then you can forget I ever asked for an EVF only M, because I would have one. 

So stop banging on about how bad their RF is and how they should spend on irrelevant R&D and just ask them to make the SL a tad smaller... I'm sure you'll find a lot of support from SL users.

[MRJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is an odd conversation.

 

Firstly, it's a rangefinder.

 

Secondly, it has an EVF already.

 

Next!

 

Next? split the M line, continue with the M10 line. Add an MX derivative line where as the only change you swap out the rangefinder and move into this space the EVF.- Done. Peace. 

[Paul J]

Next? split the M line, continue with the M10 line. Add an MX derivative line where as the only change you swap out the rangefinder and move into this space the EVF.- Done. Peace. 

 

 

I do agree. I need and want another M line that has higher pixels, movies and most of all - tethering.

 

The M has a decent EVF already. Personally I would prefer it removable like that. I'm not sure the M is ever going to be EVF only. Never say never though of course.

[Eoin]

You know what .... not so long ago a M was available in film only.

Then they introduced a digital version and a whole new market opened up to them.

 

You can still buy both digital and film SKUs today, that is an advancement in it's self.

 

However the Messsucher (rangefinder) did not significantly change during the transition to digital

and for a very good reason, it is the single most unique ocular that presents a view to the photographer.

Love it or hate it, it is the (M)esssucher in Leica M system.

 

I for one am fed up to my back teeth listening to the verbal diarrhoea of those who profess to want to improve my beloved M with modern technology.

I've seen it done in SLR where the optical prism was replaced by LCD and I've hated every generation that has been released and supposedly improved upon.

 

And then I'm accused of being a luddite because I don't embrace the modern and demand more, give me a break!.

Your photography must be at such an advanced level that the M is incapable of meeting your needs, in this case who cares, you made the wrong choice!.

Or your life is so empty and your photography is so unfulfilling that you simply wish for modern technology to provide the solution .... good luck with that.

 

It's all about light, exposure, content and connection with the subject. if you're mussing over the equipment .... gear is more important than the art of photography.

[Mr.Q]

So wait, I drive a 964 C2 with a stick shift and shoot with a M10. What does that make me?

[Eoin]

So wait, I drive a 964 C2 with a stick shift and shoot with a M10. What does that make me?

 

A man with excellent taste

[Martin B]

Even I would love to see a better sensor in a modern M, I would prefer to keep the OVF rangefinder as it is. I know well from using my Sony A7R the pros and cons of an EVF, and being fast AND accurate with manual handheld focusing is not one of them. I focus faster (with the same lens) on any of my Leica M rangefinder cameras than with my A7R - the latter has nice features like focus peaking and magnification, but the first only works at less wide open aperture, and the magnification tool takes a few clicks back and forward to focus precisely. Other advantage of the OVF in an M: you can see outside the frame lines which has been helpful a lot for my photography - the EVF only gives you 100% of the composed frame since it sees what hits the FF sensor. 

[jaapv]

Porsche had reached the limits of what was possible with air cooled engines. They had to move to watercooled. And you may not realize it, but the behaviour of people on this thread so far mimics my experience on that Porsche forum all those years ago. Been called a poseur - check. Not a true enthusiast for disliking its most distinctive feature - check. "Go buy an SL if you want an EVF" is the same as "go buy a 928 if you want watercooled" - check. 

 

Rangefinders cater to a niche market. It's the same as an air cooled engined. I can only think of disadvantages. For example, it is nearly impossible to focus on a single blade of grass, when you look through the viewfinder and see hundreds of blades of grass and you don't know which images to align. With the EVF, it's a cinch. Another example, in a backlit subject I can barely see the eyes which I want to focus on. I end up having to focus on the silhouette, since that's what I can see. Result, I miss focus. With the EVF, it's a cinch. 

 

Leica can always make and sell an EVF only M body side by side with the rangefinder version. Just don't make it an ugly brick like the SL, then sit back and watch the sales. And BTW, if they made the SL M-sized I would buy one. Then you can forget I ever asked for an EVF only M, because I would have one. 

 

ianman, I didn't say I hate rangefinders. I put up with it. Mostly, I put up with it when i'm too lazy to pull out the Visioflex and mount it. I have said earlier in this thread (post #36) that the M makes a case for itself, despite me counting the rangefinder as a strike against it. 

Reading your post I can only conclude that you do not fit into the target customer group of a Leia M. No problem - you share this with over 99% of the population.

[fsprow]

The answer to this question lies in ones images stored on the computer.  Assuming you are using a variety of cameras, examine your files and see which camera does the best job for certain subjects.  In my case, the M's (both digital and film) do the job best for 28-90mm lenses in an easily carried package. That includes AF cameras, as I find (after practice) the M's to easily focus except for fast moving sports.

 

Your experience may differ !  Your images will tell you.

[ianman]

I don't have an M10 but am I wrong in thinking that even though Leica dared to not include video there is still LiveView on the screen... with focus peaking. Surely this would help for both examples Keith mentions.  I suppose it's not good enough because it doesn't rotate!

[Martin B]

Porsche had reached the limits of what was possible with air cooled engines. They had to move to watercooled. And you may not realize it, but the behaviour of people on this thread so far mimics my experience on that Porsche forum all those years ago. Been called a poseur - check. Not a true enthusiast for disliking its most distinctive feature - check. "Go buy an SL if you want an EVF" is the same as "go buy a 928 if you want watercooled" - check. 

 

Rangefinders cater to a niche market. It's the same as an air cooled engined. I can only think of disadvantages. For example, it is nearly impossible to focus on a single blade of grass, when you look through the viewfinder and see hundreds of blades of grass and you don't know which images to align. With the EVF, it's a cinch. Another example, in a backlit subject I can barely see the eyes which I want to focus on. I end up having to focus on the silhouette, since that's what I can see. Result, I miss focus. With the EVF, it's a cinch. 

 

Leica can always make and sell an EVF only M body side by side with the rangefinder version. Just don't make it an ugly brick like the SL, then sit back and watch the sales. And BTW, if they made the SL M-sized I would buy one. Then you can forget I ever asked for an EVF only M, because I would have one. 

 

ianman, I didn't say I hate rangefinders. I put up with it. Mostly, I put up with it when i'm too lazy to pull out the Visioflex and mount it. I have said earlier in this thread (post #36) that the M makes a case for itself, despite me counting the rangefinder as a strike against it. 

 

I agree with this post even - as I stated above - I would also prefer OVF in the rangefinder itself. This said, I am having the experience using EVF, too. There are situations where EVF is advantageous and others where OVF comes in play. I also want to comment on the first paragraph in your above post - I am really getting annoyed by the attitude presented especially in the digital forum parts here by some. There seems to be a defensiveness to protect the current status quo and attempt to shut down any kind of discussion when people question the status quo. I wonder why. My impression is that many arguing against newer technology - higher MP sensors or like this thread EVF - never touched or used an alternative camera itself which provides these. If they run out of technical reasoning, always the reply comes "oh, you are not a real M user, you need to go the SL route". Why not simply admitting that user preferences are different - that there is no right or wrong? Like you said above, it would be great if the same camera is offered in different "trim" versions to choose for preference. Sony showed how well this works in the A7 generation - even their market penetration is bigger than Leica's. But this doesn't exclude Leica to consider this as option, too.

[M11 for me]

I am new with Leica and the M. I intentionally bought the rangefinder and it works so well and its great to carry it around. And it happens that I shoot with the lid on the lens. Please Leica, be aware that the M is not a Porsche and we are in 2018. Maybe I would accept a watercooled sensor.

[UliWer]

It won't be an M then. M = rangefinder.

 

Sorry, but the german translation for rangefinder is „Entfernungsmesser“ („distance meter“). The screwmount Leicas already had one, or at least you could attach one, and were not named „M“. M stands for „Messsucher“: „measuring finder“ i.e. a viewfinder with integrated rangefinder.

 

With an electronic viewfinder you can measure the range of sharpness as well (in some cases better, in some worse). So from the definition I do not see any reason not to call an electronic viewfinder a „measuring finder“ or a „Messsucher“. (Btw: the M1 and the different versions of the MD had no „Messsucher“ - this did not prevent the gnomes at Wetzlar to call them „M“.)

Edited February 27, 2018 by UliWer

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[schattenundlicht]

Sorry, but the german translation for rangefinder is „Entfernungsmesser“ („distance meter“). The screwmount Leicas already had one, or at least you could attach one, and were not named „M“. M stands for „Messsucher“: „measuring finder“ i.e. a viewfinder with integrated rangefinder. [...]

 

This is one of the few instances where the English language, indeed, is at a loss of words. In general, English encompasses roughly 3x the number of distinct words in comparison to German and thus, very often, gives more precise technical terms.

 

However, „rangefinder“, as Uli rightly points out, has to double up for „Entfernungsmesser“ and „Messsucher“:

<<<<

Main Entry: range finder

Function: noun

Date: 1872

1 : an instrument used in gunnery to determine the distance of a target

2 : a surveying instrument (as a transit) for determining quickly the distances, bearings, and elevations of distant objects

3 : a usually built-in adjustable optical device for focusing a camera that automatically indicates the correct focus (as when two parts of a split image are brought together)

>>>>

[Merriam Webster Dictionary]

 

If, however, you broaden the definition too much (i.e. extend it to possible EVF implementations), you could as well ‚retrofit‘ the term to SLR prisms or split circles

 

As long as it is so clear and bright as on my M10, M7(MP finder) and even on my M3, I will happily stay with the optical Messsucher and use my other cameras in situations I might find it lacking.

 

Kind regards

 

Mathias

 

Edit: only for iPhone typos

Edited February 27, 2018 by schattenundlicht

[lct]

[...] Messsucher“: „measuring finder“ i.e. a viewfinder with integrated rangefinder. [...]

 

I could not say it better.