To EVF or Rangfinder

[setuporg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Exactly.  For those who want an OVF/EVF hybrid I highly recommend the just-revealed Fuji X-Pro3.  I used XF from X100 through X100F and X-Pro1/2 and it gives a great OVF/EVF hybrid.

But there's only one Leica M, which is a rangefinder.

[Photoworks]

16 minutes ago, setuporg said:

Exactly.  For those who want an OVF/EVF hybrid I highly recommend the just-revealed Fuji X-Pro3.  I used XF from X100 through X100F and X-Pro1/2 and it gives a great OVF/EVF hybrid.

But there's only one Leica M, which is a rangefinder.

I would not mind a great working hybrid ,  I don't find the one I have on the x100F that accurate, actually I find it impossible to manual focus.
the only reason it works on the fuji is that the lens is AF

To me even the New A7RIV EVF is not easy to manual focus without magnification, but probably the best one I have for now..

I find the rangefinder still a successful way or focusing most lenses. I like to use most lenses at 1.4

I understand the Leica M10 EVF is a few years old, to me it needs a drastic improvement to be able to use it in any situation. It has to be so good that you can focus without focus peeking

[setuporg]

I don't use a Fuji OVF to manual focus, indeed, AF does that.  The OVF is great for FOV.  The whole eye AF is a dead end rabbit hole of gadgetry, RF is faster, and gives you the result you want, because you do it.  I don't need any EVFs on a Leica, in fact the Visoflex is languishing somewhere and I use a Frankenfinder with the WATE and the 24mm while at it.

[lct]

34 minutes ago, setuporg said:

But there's only one Leica M, which is a rangefinder.

Some of us are asking for two: a rangefinder and what Stefan Daniel calls a "second M" i.e. an M camera with an EVF instead of the RF. 

[Matlock]

3 minutes ago, lct said:

Some of us are asking for two: a rangefinder and what Stefan Daniel calls a "second M" i.e. an M camera with an EVF instead of the RF. 

Some may well be, but the vast majority are not.

 

[lct]

2 minutes ago, Matlock said:

Some may well be, but the vast majority are not.

How do you know?

[Matlock]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, lct said:

How do you know?

I don't but nor do you. There are plenty of alternatives with EVF (and many more to come I am sure) so lets just keep the M range as OVF. The new Fuji X-Pro3 looks to be the way to go but not as a replacement for the OVF.

[evikne]

I think Leica has a better overview of this than we have.

[lct]

2 minutes ago, Matlock said:

[...] There are plenty of alternatives with EVF [...]

There are no FF mirrorless alternatives for M lenses besides bigger SL and current Ms. We've been discussing about this many times already. If Leica envisions a "second M" there must be some reason. 

[Matlock]

4 minutes ago, lct said:

We've been discussing about this many times already.

And will probably continue to do so ad nauseam. Until an acceptable means of focussing with an EVF is found then RF reigns supreme  Or maybe you want a full auto focussing Leica M? 

[setuporg]

With an eye AF then!  And a retractable robotic arm for the lenses... 

[lct]

Just now, Matlock said:

And will probably continue to do so ad nauseam. Until an acceptable means of focussing with an EVF is found then RF reigns supreme  Or maybe you want a full auto focussing Leica M? 

What's autofocus?  M lenses are not autofocus and will remain manual hopefully. The EVF is already a more than acceptable means of focussing M lenses on the CL and, i suppose, on the SL as well. 

[evikne]

If Leica makes an EVF M I hope it will emulate the RF's split image. Because this is the fastest and best way to focus manually. But it would be immune to focus shift and calibration issues.

Edited September 24, 2019 by evikne

[Matlock]

5 minutes ago, lct said:

What's autofocus?  M lenses are not autofocus and will remain manual hopefully. The EVF is already a more than acceptable means of focussing M lenses on the CL and, i suppose, on the SL as well. 

I am well aware that M lenses (or LTM) are not autofocus, my remark was rather "tongue in cheek" . As to EVF being an acceptable means of focussing, acceptable maybe, accurate definitely not and that would seem to be the majority view. Still I suppose we could discuss this for ever but, in my opinion, EVFs are ideal on autofocus cameras but for manual, rangefinder cameras there is still a very long way to go. As always YMMV.

[lct]

3 minutes ago, Matlock said:

I am well aware that M lenses (or LTM) are not autofocus, my remark was rather "tongue in cheek" . As to EVF being an acceptable means of focussing, acceptable maybe, accurate definitely not [...]

You mean the RF i guess. It is great when good enough focussing is expected but forget it when nailing focus is required. An EVF with eventually focus magnification is the only way to do the job then. 

[Matlock]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

You mean the RF i guess. It is great when good enough focussing is expected but forget it when nailing focus is required. An EVF with eventually focus magnification is the only way to do the job then. 

I rest my case.

[lct]

1 minute ago, Matlock said:

I rest my case.

No problem but threads like this will go on bothering you i'm afraid. The more MPs sensors will get the more inaccurate the good old rangefinder will appear to pixel peepers.

[jaapv]

1 minute ago, lct said:

No problem but threads like this will go on bothering you i'm afraid. The more MPs sensors will get the more inaccurate the good old rangefinder will appear to pixel peepers.

Highlight mine: very true.

[Matlock]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

No problem but threads like this will go on bothering you i'm afraid. 

The threads don't bother me at all, in fact they amuse me, keep them coming.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

Just now, jaapv said:

Highlight mine: very true.

Sure but Leica users will stop watching their pics at 100% magnification when pigs can fly .