Jump to content

EVF for the M


klytz

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

+1! Well said! I believe part of the protective behavior expressed by many is related to the investment they made into an existing M series camera - and worries that a successor would have much better technology in it making their current model much less valuable than the otherwise expected depreciation. Slower innovation helps in this case to keep prices up. 

 

 

Why is it so hard for some people to appreciate other people's points of view?

 

It's not all irrational, or just to do with protecting one's investment. If that were my concern I'd sell all my Leica gear and use the money completely differently, and outside of photography altogether.

 

What I really like about the M10 is its unique ability to offer all the virtues of a rangefinder (which, believe it or not, is sometimes the best way of looking at the world that's available in a camera, for some of us anyway)  with the ability to slip on a perfectly usable (and tilt-able) EVF whenever I want to. No other camera that I know of can do that. I have a Fuji X Pro 2 which comes closest, and it's a superb camera, just as good as many that cost 3X as much in my opinion. But the M10 has a better viewfinder. 

 

For some people the viewfinder, the thing that connects or disconnects them from the world they're interested in observing, is the most important part of a camera. Why is it so hard for people to understand that people can have very sincere and rational yet different preferences?

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

+1! Well said! I believe part of the protective behavior expressed by many is related to the investment they made into an existing M series camera - and worries that a successor would have much better technology in it making their current model much less valuable than the otherwise expected depreciation. Slower innovation helps in this case to keep prices up. 

Investment? In a product that depreciates over 50% in 3 years? just don't tell your bank manager... :rolleyes:

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Today, I used M10 plus Visoflex 020 with R lens (Apo-Telyt-R 3.4/180), I'm pleased that otherwise I have the choice of the nice optical M viewfinder.

In this use, R lens with the Visoflex 020 is better than former EVF, but may I think that the "timing parallax" in EVF is very ennoying as regular M user.

 

That said, I'm bothered also by the flickering and the image (in Viso) not really sharp or defined as clear as I used to have/appreciate with OVF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Not that clear to me which one has the unnecessary crap!

 

Should be obvious... all the others other than the M10  :-)  And I'll note, I own a 240 and a Q. The excess buttons, particularly on the Q, drive me nuts now. 

 

The other crap is the added menu items and odd button modes necessary to support AF, video, PASM modes, etc. which gunk the experience up AFAIC. But ok, maybe all that can be reconciled to the general satisfaction.  Regardless, this is a secondary issue.  I've considered the SL more than once and came to the conclusion that it only makes sense if I'm prepared to invest in its native glass. Then it does duty as a complimentary system, gets me AF and reach beyond what is reasonable to expect from an M. But as far as my current lenses are concerned, that it can mount them is a bonus, a perk, but nothing compelling given there are other systems, with admittedly there own set of issues, that can do this as well. The SL is a perfectly reasonable, sane, platform for Leica and for some provides a strategy to bridge from old to new.  But, after careful consideration, its not one I'm overly interested in at least until I get to a point with AF is a necessity, in which case, most of my M glass will be on the block anyway.

 

As I've said, I'm not all that unhappy with the EVF on M solution. Its not ideal, but it works and after a few years of use on the 240 and 6 months on 10, outside of the interminable blackout of the former, it gets the job done well enough I no longer find its flaws overtly distracting. The EVF compliments the weaknesses of the OVF, while its own limitations are mostly mitigated by the OVF's presence.  That said, I wouldn't turn down the opportunity to trade the 240, for an EVF only solution.  The SL, miniaturized or not, at this point, simply doesn't fit that bill for me. But if Leica never produces the sort of camera I've described, no tears. I'm quite happy with the status quo. If, in a few years, the bar moves sufficiently with the next M version, then finances and eyesight willing, that will do as well. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some M users prefer to see the world through glass than a little TV screen. 

 

 

I like that simple statement

 

+1

I have the EVF and every time I use it it's for a specific need.

Everytime I take it off, I have that "ahh that's more like it" moment.

 

Why do we need an EVF Leica M, add the pop on EVF and you have what you want already .... oh wait!, the quality is not good enough ..

News flash ... It'll never be good enough.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hard to believe that it took all the way to post #69 for someone to tell us again in this forum, what the "M" stands for.  You guys just never get tired of relaying that same tired information here, huh?  I literally skimmed through the entire thread for the sole purpose of seeing where that bit of apparently mandatory information would show up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that it took all the way to post #69 for someone to tell us again in this forum, what the "M" stands for.

 

Is that an admission of your waste of time, a compulsion, or another silly complaint similar to the posts themselves? Yeah, this post is almost a waste of time, but a timely recursion.

Edited by pico
Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 favorite things on this forum are when someone tells us what the M stands for and when someone reposts the hand drawn diagram of how to adjust the rangefinder focusing mechanism and writes that that should be enough for us to figure out how to adjust the focus. I usually chime in at that point and say why doesn’t someone make a video to explain the process and then everyone tells me I’m crazy and I should be really greater that someone took the time to create the drawing and that that should be all I need to figure it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that it took all the way to post #69 for someone to tell us again in this forum, what the "M" stands for.  You guys just never get tired of relaying that same tired information here, huh?  I literally skimmed through the entire thread for the sole purpose of seeing where that bit of apparently mandatory information would show up.

Well, if some people apparently don't hear, a repeat is useful.  "My Canon D6 would be perfect, if only it had a rangefinder built in..." Answer: SLR stands for Single Lens Reflex. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 favorite things on this forum are when someone tells us what the M stands for and when someone reposts the hand drawn diagram of how to adjust the rangefinder focusing mechanism and writes that that should be enough for us to figure out how to adjust the focus. I usually chime in at that point and say why doesn’t someone make a video to explain the process and then everyone tells me I’m crazy and I should be really greater that someone took the time to create the drawing and that that should be all I need to figure it out.

Video aside, most people don’t post Julian Thompson’s multiple diagrams and step-by-step procedure, which cautions that the process is not for everyone. His initial graph is only part of several diagrams and written guidance....

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/118043-m9-coincidence-at-infinity/page-1?do=findComment&comment=1292675

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The EVF is so slow because the M cameras have limited processing power; the body design does not allow easy dissipation of the heat generated by intensive computing.

I would not call it impossible that a smaller full-frame EVF camera might appear at some point of time. But as it would cannibalize some portion of M, SL and CL sales, I don't think it would be a very attractive sales prospect for Leica.

isn't the CL cannibalizing M10 sales? I believe you yourself have dropped the M10 in favour of the CL and so has many others in the CL threads?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

isn't the CL cannibalizing M10 sales? I believe you yourself have dropped the M10 in favour of the CL and so has many others in the CL threads?

 

Steve Jobs once said, "If we don't cannibalize our product, someone else will."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the technology has been shrunk down, and so long as it does not compromise on what we have now, I don't see how a switchable OVF to EVF would be an exceedingly offensive gesture to the M crew. In many ways, this feature would not just be a practical but also a considerate move for many Leica users whose eyesight has worsened in their advancing years, which probably contained excessive M shooting!

 

Until that technology is available, I would absolutely love a redesigned EVF for the longer lenses. I don't know why they chose to base the current plastic looking EVF design on the hideous Visoflex. The EVF would look so much more charming if it was modelled after the same aesthetics as the brass brightline viewfinder, or even a chrome Leica VIDOM from the 1930s.

 

I think these EVFs would sell like hotcakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't the CL cannibalizing M10 sales? I believe you yourself have dropped the M10 in favour of the CL and so has many others in the CL threads?

Yes, it is. I guess Leica deemed the percentage acceptable. I wasn't buying an M10 anyway, so I don't count. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is. I guess Leica deemed the percentage acceptable. I wasn't buying an M10 anyway, so I don't count. ;)

 

Best hint are the latest price increases released by Leica for the US market - seems like the M10 is much more in demand than the CL, therefore prices for the M10 are rising and the CL price remains unchanged. If the CL would be highly in demand, its price also would have been raised. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...