To EVF or Rangfinder

[setuporg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 minutes ago, rosuna said:

The EVF-M will become the standard M, and the OVF-rangefinder based M would be for fashion-sensitive, brand-sensitive, luxury-sensitive, typical-Leica-users vintage-lovers. 

I'd rather say, EVF-M will be a gadget-sensitive, latest-megapixel-counting, last-year-morally-obsolete-give me new crowd, with the latest iPhone and always demanding release cycles matching Sony and lamenting that Sony makes its own sensors faster.  And pixelshift!  And IBIS!  More pixelshift, more IBIS!  Eye AF!  Let's add a joystick too.  And a few wheels.  Heck apertures and shutter dials can be menus!

And the rangefinder M will be about light, unimpeded, and the lenses developed for it without any electronics whatsoever.:) . So that film Leicas and the decades of tradition can continue at a pace that does not make one's heart and wallet sync when a competing EVF is unveiled with a few megapixels more...  

[Advertisement]

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

[sblutter]

Rangefinder - and take many shots while moving your body slightly in & out.  Then pick the best one in post.  Better than having to go back & reshoot - or worse, missing what you wanted

I love having 10 or so to choose from - and why not?  Doesn't cost anything, takes a few seconds & there's always one 'best' - and easier on aging eyes like mine

[sblutter]

PS:  I skipped the M10 due to no improvement in the sensor.  I'm hoping M11 will have M10's VF or better + a state of the art sensor.  That said, if I 'have' to keep using the great M240 for years, that's fine.  Have 100's of prints I'm very happy with and no camera problems whatsoever.  My only complaint is not being able to do a Dust Detection with LTM mounts.  Big deal...

[spersky]

59 minutes ago, setuporg said:

I'd rather say, EVF-M will be a gadget-sensitive, latest-megapixel-counting, last-year-morally-obsolete-give me new crowd, with the latest iPhone and always demanding release cycles matching Sony and lamenting that Sony makes its own sensors faster.  And pixelshift!  And IBIS!  More pixelshift, more IBIS!  Eye AF!  Let's add a joystick too.  And a few wheels.  Heck apertures and shutter dials can be menus!

And the rangefinder M will be about light, unimpeded, and the lenses developed for it without any electronics whatsoever.:) . So that film Leicas and the decades of tradition can continue at a pace that does not make one's heart and wallet sync when a competing EVF is unveiled with a few megapixels more...  

I disagree.  I have basically been driven from the Leica M at this point.  The little square patch for rangefinder focus is woefully a disaster for someone like me with glasses/bifocals.  This is not a search for Megapixels or Gadgets.  I just wanted to use the M lenses.

Edited September 25, 2019 by spersky

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Spersky,

Welcome to the Forum.

Just for fun you might put a lens on an M3 & then look thru the range/viewfinder & try focusing & viewing with it. Some of the "M" cameras have different focusing/viewing systems than some of the others do.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited September 25, 2019 by Michael Geschlecht

[dkmoore]

2 minutes ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Spersky,

Welcome to the Forum.

Just for fun you might put a lens on an M3 & then look thru the range/viewfinder & try focusing & viewing with it. Some "M" cameras have different focusing/viewing systems than some of the others do.

Best Regards,

Michael

For someone claiming the M rangefinder is "woefully a disaster", the M3 rangefinder isn't going to make much of a difference. Yes, I have used one.

Also, judging by his last two sentences I surmise that Spersky is talking digital primarily. 

I'd rather recommend the SL for using M lenses if the M cameras didn't work.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, spersky said:

I disagree.  I have basically been driven from the Leica M at this point.  The little square patch for rangefinder focus is woefully a disaster for someone like me with glasses/bifocals.  This is not a search for Megapixels or Gadgets.  I just wanted to use the M lenses.

Well, aren't you fortunate that Leica provides an acceptable EVF on the M10 and produces the SL and CL?.

[pico]

20 minutes ago, dkmoore said:

[...] judging by his last two sentences I surmise that Spersky is talking digital primarily.

I add that many people accustomed to SLR or mirrorless cameras will find a true rangefinder to be complex, inconvenient. So be it.

I can imagine that in a couple generations people will find it difficult that in our age people actually drove, controlled their cars and passenger aircraft had two human pilots.

Aside: About thirty years-ago when my current sweetheart and were new to each other and just before our first cross-country road trip I asked her if she had used computer navigation (crude at the time) and she said, "No. I use Rand-McNally paper maps, and I can fold them with my eyes shut."  Nuff said! Ours has been a relationship made in heaven.

Edited September 25, 2019 by pico

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello DKMoore,

For someone who is talking about digital cameras: Trying an M3's range/viewfinder might give them some perspective. Since the decision to replace a 0.91X range/viewfinder with a model with the magnification of 0.68X only provides about 3/4th's of the previously available image magnification. For some people that amount of difference in image magnification might be significant.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited September 25, 2019 by Michael Geschlecht

[dkmoore]

2 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello DKMoore,

For someone who is talking about digital cameras: Trying an M3's range/viewfinder might give them some perspective. Since the decision to replace a 0.91X range/viewfinder with a model with the magnification of 0.68X only provides about 3/4th's of the previously available image magnification. For some people that amount of difference in image magnification might be significant.

Best Regards,

Michael

Might, but probably not. 

Of all the M cameras the eye relief of the M10 would probably be better for a glasses wearer than the higher magnification of the M3 if you weigh the pros and cons.  

And, I am as nostalgic as anyone about M film cameras and still use one (I post pics in the film threads).

But, I think your advice in this case is not valid and that is simply my opinion. As someone that uses both types of cameras I respectfully disagree.  

SL with that giant EVF is still the better recommendation for someone wanting to use M lenses and a Leica (digital) body. 

Edited September 26, 2019 by dkmoore

[setuporg]

9 hours ago, spersky said:

I disagree.  I have basically been driven from the Leica M at this point.  The little square patch for rangefinder focus is woefully a disaster for someone like me with glasses/bifocals.  This is not a search for Megapixels or Gadgets.  I just wanted to use the M lenses.

I was facetiously replying to @rosuna yanking our chain here:)

[rosuna]

10 hours ago, dkmoore said:

SL with that giant EVF is still the better recommendation for someone wanting to use M lenses and a Leica (digital) body. 

The SL is a camera designed for SL lenses.

The EVF M has to be a M camera designed for M lenses (body, weight, size, shape, volumes, etc.).

[lct]

6 minutes ago, rosuna said:

The SL is a camera designed for SL lenses.

The EVF M has to be a M camera designed for M lenses (body, weight, size, shape, volumes, etc.).

+1. Makes at least two . And this would be a true M camera in that it would be designed for M lenses actually. Be it called "M" or otherwise ("NM" for Non-M would be fun), it would be much smaller than the SL hopefully.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Again DKMoore,

Something that was made a while ago that still works today is not necessarily "nostalgic". Something it is simply something that works.

Suggesting that a person try something to see what, if any, difference there might be is sometimes beneficial.

Discarding options because of when they were made can limit a person's perspective.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

[dkmoore]

33 minutes ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Again DKMoore,

Something that was made a while ago that still works today is not necessarily "nostalgic". Something it is simply something that works.

Suggesting that a person try something to see what, if any, difference there might be is sometimes beneficial.

Discarding options because of when they were made can limit a person's perspective.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

Not quite Michael. Your missing the point that a film camera is irrelevant in this discussion. 

But anyway, I don’t need to be convincing. We all have our own points of view. 

[dkmoore]

4 hours ago, rosuna said:

The SL is a camera designed for SL lenses.

The EVF M has to be a M camera designed for M lenses (body, weight, size, shape, volumes, etc.).

I agree the SL is big for M lenses. The new SL doesn't appear to have resolved that issue either. Ict's example illustrates this albeit slightly exaggerated because most Leica lenses are much larger than the Summaron.

That said, the best option available (non M camera) for adapting M lenses and retaining most if not all of the quality, that would  be more glasses friendly,  is the SL.

For now at least..

 

Edited September 26, 2019 by dkmoore

[jaapv]

4 hours ago, rosuna said:

The SL is a camera designed for SL lenses.

The EVF M has to be a M camera designed for M lenses (body, weight, size, shape, volumes, etc.).

According to Leica at introduction, the SL was specifically designed to be able to use M lenses (through an adapter) as well. The same goes for the CL. These cameras can, for instance, recognize the coding and apply lens profiles. The sensors are suitable for M lenses as well.

[setuporg]

Here's an idea, @jaapv: there really needs to a separate subforum in the M system forums, "The EVF-M", which will be a honey trap for all those mirrorless carpetbaggers who come looking for it.  The FAQ will have the links to all the previous threads and a hearty invitation to keep discussing it in that special area, safely corralled!  That way the rangefinder folks will not have to defend their choice, the original Leica, and be at peace.  We can even peek inside the EVF corral from time to time to see whether they reinvented a Fuji X-Pro yet...

Edited September 26, 2019 by setuporg

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Michael Geschlecht]

3 hours ago, dkmoore said:

Not quite Michael. Your missing the point that a film camera is irrelevant in this discussion. 

But anyway, I don’t need to be convincing. We all have our own points of view. 

Hello DKMoore,

I think that I might have not been clear in the way that I was writing. 

I am not advocating for or against film or digital. I was writing about range/viewfinder magnification.

When Leitz first introduced the M3 their target audience was photographers using mostly normal to medium long focus lenses. Wider angle & longer focus lenses were more of specialty lenses.

With the advent of newer optical glasses & computers to aid in lens design in the 1950's: Correction levels were enhanced & focal lengths, both wider & longer, became more available.

Leitz realized that there could be a significant saving in cost of camera bodies by redesigning the range/viewfinder at a lower magnification. The majority of the cost differential between the M3 & the M2 was the difference in the cost of the 2 range/viewfinders. And that cost differential is significant.

The M2 was bought both by people trying to save money & also by those people for whom a 35mm lens was a priority. Even though there were M3 compatible 35mm lenses made. While people who were more likely to favor normal to long focus lenses often preferred the M3.

There were significantly more M3 cameras manufactured than there were M2 cameras. Both were replaced by the M4. Which is an updated M2.

The M2 range/viewfinder is the basis for all of the range/viewfinders in all of the range/viewfinder cameras that succeded the M2. Including the range/viewfinders with 0.58X & 0.85X magnification.

Whether or not Leica decides to manufacture a larger magnification range/viewfinder in the future should not be an impediment to whether or not a person can see what it is possible to have.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited September 26, 2019 by Michael Geschlecht

[lct]

49 minutes ago, setuporg said:

Here's an idea, @jaapv: there really needs to a separate subforum in the M system forums, "The EVF-M", which will be a honey trap for all those mirrorless carpetbaggers who come looking for it.  The FAQ will have the links to all the previous threads and a hearty invitation to keep discussing it in that special area, safely corralled!  That way the rangefinder folks will not have to defend their choice, the original Leica, and be at peace.  We can even peek inside the EVF corral from time to time to see whether they reinvented a Fuji X-Pro yet...

Would you mind to explain what a carpetbagger is? Just curious.