My dream for a future EVF-M

[evikne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have recently purchased a used Visoflex for my M10 because I was curious, but I was quite disappointed. I thought it would be so much easier to get the photos properly focused, but it wasn't, at least not for my type of photography with shallow depth of field on moving subjects. There is no time for zooming, and it's very difficult to clearly see where the focus plane really is. Sometimes everything seems to be in focus, but with shallow depth of field it isn't. I realized how much better the rangefinder is! The most subtle focus deviation is immediately visible, and focusing is fast and easy as a breeze. At least when everything is properly calibrated.

But this calibration is however the biggest inconvenience with the rangefinder system, and I guess Leica is pretty tired of the endless flow of customers returning miscalibrated lenses and cameras for service (and the customers are too). If Leica some day make an EVF-M I hope they can make it into the best from both worlds. What about an EVF that shows the actual depth of field over the entire screen, but with a small, electronic split image in the middle, like a rangefinder? It would give us the possibility to see what's in focus out to the edges, without the need for recomposing. And the split image would maintain the accuracy and the feeling of a real rangefinder, but without the risk of miscalibration.

Edited July 22, 2019 by evikne

[Advertisement]

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

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, evikne said:

 

But this calibration is however the biggest inconvenience with the rangefinder system, and I guess Leica is pretty tired of the endless flow of customers returning miscalibrated lenses and cameras for service (and the customers are too). 

Are Leica and customers really tired, or is just those who have to have their say on forums such as this?

[evikne]

6 minutes ago, Matlock said:

Are Leica and customers really tired, or is just those who have to have their say on forums such as this?

Of course I cannot know, but at least I guess nobody think it's a fun thing to deliver a lens for service and be without it for several weeks and maybe months. I had to send in my 75 Summilux four times to service because of back focusing. It took a whole year. When testing the lens the last time, it was much better, but still with some focus shift. I also have some focus shift on some other lenses. Therefore I purchased the Visoflex. But I still think the rangefinder is a much faster and more precise way of focusing – when properly calibrated.

[Matlock]

3 minutes ago, evikne said:

Of course I cannot know, but at least I guess nobody think it's a fun thing to deliver a lens for service and be without it for several weeks and maybe months. I had to send in my 75 Summilux four times to service because of back focusing. It took a whole year. When testing the lens the last time, it was much better, but still with some focus shift. I also have some focus shift on some other lenses. Therefore I purchased the Visoflex. But I still think the rangefinder is a much faster and more precise way of focusing – when properly calibrated.

I wasn't doubting your word but I know that, on some forums, people like to make a point when it is not a great issue. What I was saying was, whilst we know that calibration issues can manifest themselves, is it a common problem or only an isolated issue? I have never experienced any cases with Leica lenses.

[evikne]

5 minutes ago, Matlock said:

is it a common problem or only an isolated issue?

I guess the problem is more common when using older lenses, like I do. I didn't experience any issues with my newer ASPH lenses.

[dkmoore]

I've experienced quite a few issues but granted I've owned 30+ different lenses and cameras, some multiple times, because I'm slightly gear crazy. (ok, fully crazy).

I would love to have an indestructible rangefinder mechanism. I guess that is not possible otherwise Leica would have already made one.

My idea that I posted a while back was to keep the mechanical rangefinder but integrate an in-focus notification that lights up green when the subject is in focus. 

I'd be happy with the OVF if they could make it impervious to drift. 

[evikne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

43 minutes ago, dkmoore said:

My idea that I posted a while back was to keep the mechanical rangefinder but integrate an in-focus notification that lights up green when the subject is in focus.

That's a good idea too. I guess you mean that the in-focus notification should indicate when the image is actually in focus on the sensor.

Edited July 23, 2019 by evikne

[dkmoore]

48 minutes ago, evikne said:

That's a good idea too. I guess you mean that the in-focus notification should indicate when the image is actually in focus on the sensor.

correct. No idea if it's possible but it would help eliminate calibration concerns while retaining the OVF.

[jaapv]

22 hours ago, evikne said:

Of course I cannot know, but at least I guess nobody think it's a fun thing to deliver a lens for service and be without it for several weeks and maybe months. I had to send in my 75 Summilux four times to service because of back focusing. It took a whole year. When testing the lens the last time, it was much better, but still with some focus shift. I also have some focus shift on some other lenses. Therefore I purchased the Visoflex. But I still think the rangefinder is a much faster and more precise way of focusing – when properly calibrated.

The Summilux 75 has slight focus shift in general, but that has to do with not fully corrected spherical aberration, not with calibration.

That goes for a number of other lenses as well.

[evikne]

7 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The Summilux 75 has slight focus shift in general, but that has to do with not fully corrected spherical aberration, not with calibration.

That goes for a number of other lenses as well.

Yes, but that's just another reason why a rangefinder isn't fully reliable in all situations. Many old things have their charm, and even some benefits over the newer. But the world must go on. That's how I think about the rangefinder technology too.

I love it, but I am still open for new ideas and improvements.

[jaapv]

Focus shift is a problem with SLRs with automatic aperture as well.

[Nick_S]

8 hours ago, dkmoore said:

correct. No idea if it's possible but it would help eliminate calibration concerns while retaining the OVF.

Overlaying an electronic focus aid in the viewfinder like the Contax RX camera, but with information taken off the digital sensor, would be a nice addition without spoiling the M camera's classic optical viewfinder. The Contax could display either a focus scale or a depth of field indicator.

In addition to helping with wide aperture lenses, close focussing etc., it would also provide a way to keep using M cameras when a user develops eyesight difficulties, e.g., ageing related.

Edited July 23, 2019 by Nick_S

[evikne]

12 minutes ago, Nick_S said:

Overlaying an electronic focus aid in the viewfinder like the Contax RX camera, but with information taken off the digital sensor, would be a nice addition without spoiling the M camera's classic optical viewfinder. The Contax could display either a focus scale or a depth of field indicator.

In addition to helping with wide aperture lenses, close focussing etc., it would also provide a way to keep using M cameras when a user develops eyesight difficulties, e.g., ageing related.

But if a lens is miscalibrated or suffers from focus shift, wouldn't it be confusing if the focus aid and the rangefinder split image doesn't match?

[Nick_S]

If a lens is miscalibrated, or the camera's optical rangefinder is out of alignment following a knock, then the discrepancy with an electronic focus aid taken from the sensor would be useful information that a service is required.

In the case of focus shift, I think it would be good to know immediately that the optical rangefinder was significantly out at a particular aperture. In this situation a depth of field indicator mode would provide some idea of whether it was likely to be a problem.

Edited July 23, 2019 by Nick_S

[evikne]

I just had another (weird?) idea: What about an optical viewfinder with an electronic split screen overlay taken from the sensor, instead of the mechanical? It would look and feel almost like a real old fashioned rangefinder, but it would be immune from any kind of focus shift or calibration issues.

And for those who want more choices: With the push of a button we could also  fill the optical window with a fully electronic image with the actual depth of field displayed. The same button could then give us three revolving choices: optical viewfinder with electronic split screen, or an electronic image with or without an electronic split screen.

[NigelG]

1 hour ago, evikne said:

I just had another (weird?) idea: What about an optical viewfinder with an electronic split screen overlay taken from the sensor, instead of the mechanical? It would look and feel almost like a real old fashioned rangefinder, but it would be immune from any kind of focus shift or calibration issues.

I think that was the idea that Leica pursued and patented a while ago but could not get to work to their satisfaction...

[Rob L]

That is a Fuji X100F

[Ko.Fe.]

I went from most of old 50 between Summar and V4. None of them had RF calibration issues. All of them had focus shift, but never to the point to have lens unusable.

If EVF is need here is CL, Z, R and so on. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[cp995]

vor einer Stunde schrieb NigelG:

I think that was the idea that Leica pursued and patented a while ago but could not get to work to their satisfaction...

I think Leica decided to focus on the strenghts of their systems.

M= RF (+Visoflex for special lenses)
SL= EVF

Why mix it?

 

[dkmoore]

3 hours ago, evikne said:

I just had another (weird?) idea: What about an optical viewfinder with an electronic split screen overlay taken from the sensor, instead of the mechanical? It would look and feel almost like a real old fashioned rangefinder, but it would be immune from any kind of focus shift or calibration issues.

And for those who want more choices: With the push of a button we could also  fill the optical window with a fully electronic image with the actual depth of field displayed. The same button could then give us three revolving choices: optical viewfinder with electronic split screen, or an electronic image with or without an electronic split screen.

This is kind of like the Fuji X100F. I played around with one in a best buy. It was ok...

I'm sure Leica's would be better.