Leica split internally on future S configuration

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One aspect of the S system OVF that I don’t recall being mentioned by others is the option to replace the standard focus screen with the variant that has a split image in the centre. It makes the manual focus just like with the M or more specifically many older film SLR’s. For me it makes manual focus much more precise than with any focus aid in Live View ( or any other manual focus method). In my opinion the micro prism collar is less useful than the split image centre. 

You still need to focus/recompose of course and when using AF you use the centre of the division as the cross hairs point

[Joakim]

8 hours ago, hoppyman said:

One aspect of the S system OVF that I don’t recall being mentioned by others is the option to replace the standard focus screen with the variant that has a split image in the centre. It makes the manual focus just like with the M or more specifically many older film SLR’s. For me it makes manual focus much more precise than with any focus aid in Live View ( or any other manual focus method). In my opinion the micro prism collar is less useful than the split image centre. 

You still need to focus/recompose of course and when using AF you use the centre of the division as the cross hairs point

Does the split image focus screen darken the view finder compared to the standard screen?

[Photon42]

6 minutes ago, Joakim said:

Does the split image focus screen darken the view finder compared to the standard screen?

Haven't noticed any darkening on my S2, for which I bought a second hand split / micro prism screen.

I would however say now that the normal screen is perfectly usable for manual focussing for me and I am not sure I would buy one again, if I'd use AF lenses most of the time. In the beginning I was not sure I would invest more into the system (gulp ....) and started with a used V-Adapter and manual focussing. Focussing aids are however very personal and are also vision related.

This camera (like other AF DSLRs) has essentially three optical paths which can be used for focussing: Matte screen, AF box and on-sensor. Two of them can go out of sync relative to the sensor and to each other, so for total perfection the sensor is best, specifically when focus is checked with the effective aperture.

[John McMaster]

2 hours ago, Photon42 said:

I would however say now that the normal screen is perfectly usable for manual focussing for me and I am not sure I would buy one again, if I'd use AF lenses most of the time. In the beginning I was not sure I would invest more into the system (gulp ....) and started with a used V-Adapter and manual focussing. Focussing aids are however very personal and are also vision related

I bought the microprism screen for my S2-P, I have never bothered to move it to my S(007)...

john

[Jeff S]

4 hours ago, Joakim said:

Does the split image focus screen darken the view finder compared to the standard screen?

I found that the split screen did go half black at times when testing the slow end of the already slow S zoom on the S006.  This has always been a possible issue with split focus screens in certain light or when stopping down the lens.  Repositioning the eye can sometimes help, but can be frustrating at times.

Jeff

[earleygallery]

Dr Kaufmann clearly prefers the optical finder; 

"The optical viewfinder has a 3D quality that an EVF lacks".........."We will keep an eye on mirrorless technology and will only move in this direction if, and when, it makes sense for the product. The S is our highest level camera system. The top quality. So, we will not compromise"

 

 

 

[evikne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

Dr Kaufmann clearly prefers the optical finder; 

"The optical viewfinder has a 3D quality that an EVF lacks".........."We will keep an eye on mirrorless technology and will only move in this direction if, and when, it makes sense for the product. The S is our highest level camera system. The top quality. So, we will not compromise"

I guess it means that they are open for changes when the technology is mature enough.

[earleygallery]

25 minutes ago, evikne said:

I guess it means that they are open for changes when the technology is mature enough.

But the implication then is that the EVF technology isn't mature enough for the other cameras such as the SL?

[evikne]

1 minute ago, earleygallery said:

But the implication then is that the EVF technology isn't mature enough for the other cameras such as the SL?

Maybe not when you want only the very best. 🙂

[Photon42]

The best is relative to a given point in time. Development decisions try to anticipate what is going to happen in the future, even if we aren’t quite there yet.

I think a EVF is coming in an S4, if there ever will be one.

[dave.gt]

Interesting that Leica aficionados and critics alike think the S is doomed. 

I don't think so.

Hasselblad killed the V system years ago. Last week, as part of a new and very wise marketing strategy for the very best of Hasselblad, they brought the 907x to market with... the great (old tech, right?) 50c digitalback and HB now has three camera systems: H, X and the V system.

Welcome back!:)

Leica has the very best in the S. Simple, beautiful, great performer and lovely quality and handling. Like the V system, it does have less but then that is why I personally like Leica products

Less is more! (In more ways than one)

 

[TomLiles]

I neglected to mention one thing which some of the guys here might give an approving nod to:

Using an EVF-camera on long shoots is likely going to be a recipe for a serious headache, eye ache, and a kind of finder-hangover feel the next day. A non-issue when you fly OVF.

I speak from experience. Couple years back I used an A7rii on an all-day shoot (I was asked to do it on a company's camera, this A7rii, not my S) -- a fashion shoot, I was shooting models in a studio -- aside from the brief freeze after each shutter while the finder refreshes itself, which was maddening, I knew I had finder-related problems a couple of hours in when my right eye started seriously hurting. I ended up having to switch finder eyes right-left-right-left through the day to get to the end of the shoot. And had a dull headache the whole of the next day. It wasn't the strobes, which also can give headaches if you've had to see them popping all day -- I definitely speak from experience here too, as I modeled before I shot cameras -- I am well used to that now and in a few years of doing these things on an S have never had a problem. Anyway, (anecdotal) data point 1.
Then data point 2 was I used a Sigma DP2Q and DP3Q, my own, for a lark on a similar kind of clothing shoot last year---I had the Sigma loupe "finder" on them (like a Zacuto type thing) so you are really just looking at the rear LCD under a hood... and same again: after a few hours of shooting, real pain.
(And that's before we talk about trying to get good shoot workflow with those Quattros!)

I think for the kind of walk-around-and-shoot, flaneur? street/notebook photography, you wouldn't get this stress on your eye from an EVF. Ditto landscapes. Same again for portrait sessions where you can be in and out in an hour or two. But for the serious work, where you are at it hours and hours at a time, in the finder for a lot of it---OVF all the way.

(If just to protect the most important asset to a photog: his or her eyes!)

[mmradman]

48 minutes ago, TomLiles said:

I neglected to mention one thing which some of the guys here might give an approving nod to:

Using an EVF-camera on long shoots is likely going to be a recipe for a serious headache, eye ache, and a kind of finder-hangover feel the next day. A non-issue when you fly OVF.

I speak from experience. Couple years back I used an A7rii on an all-day shoot (I was asked to do it on a company's camera, this A7rii, not my S) -- a fashion shoot, I was shooting models in a studio -- aside from the brief freeze after each shutter while the finder refreshes itself, which was maddening, I knew I had finder-related problems a couple of hours in when my right eye started seriously hurting. I ended up having to switch finder eyes right-left-right-left through the day to get to the end of the shoot. And had a dull headache the whole of the next day. It wasn't the strobes, which also can give headaches if you've had to see them popping all day -- I definitely speak from experience here too, as I modeled before I shot cameras -- I am well used to that now and in a few years of doing these things on an S have never had a problem. Anyway, (anecdotal) data point 1.
Then data point 2 was I used a Sigma DP2Q and DP3Q, my own, for a lark on a similar kind of clothing shoot last year---I had the Sigma loupe "finder" on them (like a Zacuto type thing) so you are really just looking at the rear LCD under a hood... and same again: after a few hours of shooting, real pain.
(And that's before we talk about trying to get good shoot workflow with those Quattros!)

I think for the kind of walk-around-and-shoot, flaneur? street/notebook photography, you wouldn't get this stress on your eye from an EVF. Ditto landscapes. Same again for portrait sessions where you can be in and out in an hour or two. But for the serious work, where you are at it hours and hours at a time, in the finder for a lot of it---OVF all the way.

(If just to protect the most important asset to a photog: his or her eyes!)

You are describing your experience with eye fatigue working with earlier generation EVFs. 

Do you have opinion based on more modern equipment, did you have the opportunity to try latest EVFs form Leica (SL601) and Panasonic (S1 or S1R), just curious.

[TomLiles]

Hello mmradman,

 

My experience of latest generation EVF’s is limited to short goes of demo units in electronics stores while killing time waiting for my wife or kids (or both!)... so no opinions re: use on long shoots for you, I’m afraid (perhaps fortunately).

I don’t know how you feel about them, but I can say: like the older generation EVF’s, the latest stuff seems to continue the trend of peppering the finder with masses of info and UI by default—which says a lot about what the market and makers want, I think.

I’m going more and more the other way. Leica S is about the only modern camera platform, I reckon, that positions itself for users like me. I like that it isn’t, or it doesn’t attempt to be, retro but instead mixes modern, avant-garde even, with what works (call that “traditional” I guess). The S is very nicely balanced as a photography tool—which is why I pray they don’t mess with it too much. I didn’t say it last couple comments, but if Leica had money to spend on improving the S system, forget OVF vs. EVF, it has to be: customer service, customer service and customer service. Fix tethering, give us massively quicker service and repair times, AF motor repairs for free no questions asked, and so on.

 

But yea. Where I am at now, I want modern recording (digital workflow) but as analog operation as possible, certainly including the finder. Like black & white film which was already perfect and cannot be bettered, I think optical finders are already the answer and EVFs, at best, can only strive to equal them. No mistake, if and when EVF technology achieves that it will be a triumph for the mirrorless style of camera, and surely most makers will switch wholesale to mirrorless platforms... but even then I’d think I’d still prefer an optical finder. Not for being a Luddite, I’m not; I just like reality.

I’m sure there will be a hugely healthy used market for users like me, though, so no great shakes.

 

Cheers

 

Tom

 

P/S mmradman, I guess a part of what I was trying to say before was: on the job-side, like with any job, you just want to keep it simple and make your life easier (so you can do good, quality work). We already know OVFs work, and what problems there are with them, we’ve worked out the workarounds (knee pads for ynp etc!)... How does an EVF make the ship go faster? That’ll be the question. Considering who the S is marketed at, it’s a tough sell, in my opinion of course!

 

If I was Leica, I’d direct users who want an S-style camera but with EVF to the SL (and its future generations). Makes sense to me.

Edited July 22, 2019 by TomLiles

[peterv]

Well said Tom,

I think in the end every S system owner is going to be catered for.

 

With the mirrorless L mount one can adapt his/her lenses and benefit from high pixel density FF and APSC size sensors, with all the bells and whistles. Bayer and hopefully soon Foveon too, lotsa flavours.

 

With the S3, most will likely be okay for the next couple of years, after that Leica can come with an S4. Just like the S3, same basic design, newer electronics.

 

I’ve said it before, Leica is in a great position with DSLRs. Just like the rangefinder flag has been carried along all these years, there will be a - small - market for S system DSLR, I think and hope.

[peterv]

1 hour ago, mmradman said:

Do you have opinion based on more modern equipment, did you have the opportunity to try latest EVFs form Leica (SL601) and Panasonic (S1 or S1R), just curious.

I’ve worked extensively with the Sony RX1RM2 and I hated the electronic viewfinder, and  I’ve gazed through the EVF of the Panasonic S1r for 15 minutes and it immediately felt like looking at a tiny NTSC tv-screen. Magnification was nice and large, but the image is like the worst version of opto-electronic photography, think a coloured version of HP5 developed for 45 minutes in Rodinal at 60°C projected on a 10.000 nits diplay in the complete dark 😎

[mmradman]

18 minutes ago, peterv said:

>>>snip<<<

I’ve gazed through the EVF of the Panasonic S1r for 15 minutes

>>>snip<<<

think a coloured version of HP5 developed for 45 minutes in Rodinal at 60°C projected on a 10.000 nits diplay in the complete dark 😎

Trying to imagine what that must look like, overdeveloped negative of a grainy film, projected via very powerful light source, it's been a while (1980s) since i stepped in a dark room, my imagination is failing me.

[Stuart Richardson]

I understand where TomLiles is coming from, and I agree with most of the points. OVF is inherently faster, less-straining and more pleasant to work with then EVF for me. Given the choice, I would absolutely prefer to maintain an OVF. That said, I am not so sure that it has to be an either or. Fuji has offered a hybrid solution for 8 years. I am not sure if the patents they have for it preclude anyone else from doing it, but it seems like a natural evolution for Leica, particularly with the M line. I am sure there are technical challenges, but it has the unique advantage of allowing the photographer to switch at will. I would be happy to see something like that implemented in the S series. Have the OVF for most occasions, but also have the ability to rapidly switch to an EVF for moments when it is useful to have an EVF. For me that would mean in macro, and for precision focusing, especially with adapted lenses. If this is unnecessarily complex and expensive, then I would prefer to just stick with the OVF and rely on the live view for the other times. 

[Photon42]

I love the OVF of the S, but I likewise have no issues with for instance the EVF of the Nikon Z7. There are simply too many advantages for an EVF. It includes really precise AF (phase and contrast detect AF combined), Face / Eye detect (yes, yes, we don't need it ....) and the possibility of direct display of over and underexpose. Not to mention it is simpler to mass-produce. In 3-5 years the quality will again be much better than today. All this with S lenses. What's not to like 🤐

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I understand where TomLiles is coming from, and I agree with most of the points. OVF is inherently faster, less-straining and more pleasant to work with then EVF for me. Given the choice, I would absolutely prefer to maintain an OVF. That said, I am not so sure that it has to be an either or. Fuji has offered a hybrid solution for 8 years. I am not sure if the patents they have for it preclude anyone else from doing it, but it seems like a natural evolution for Leica, particularly with the M line. I am sure there are technical challenges, but it has the unique advantage of allowing the photographer to switch at will. I would be happy to see something like that implemented in the S series. Have the OVF for most occasions, but also have the ability to rapidly switch to an EVF for moments when it is useful to have an EVF. For me that would mean in macro, and for precision focusing, especially with adapted lenses. If this is unnecessarily complex and expensive, then I would prefer to just stick with the OVF and rely on the live view for the other times. 

Leica stated that they have experimented with a hybrid M finder, but resulted in unacceptable compromises to both approaches; the worst of two worlds.  I'm sure they'll keep trying.

Apparently Leica has patents, too...

https://leicarumors.com/2015/10/14/leicas-patents-for-optoelectronic-rangefinder.aspx/

Jeff