To EVF or Rangfinder

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Now that is not true. There were plenty of small high quality cameras at the time. They chose Leica, probably for much the same reasons we do now, but they could just as well have chosen a Contax, a Canon or a Robot, etc. Or a small SLR (from Exacta to Olympus OM.) Robert Capa used multiple other cameras, like Contax, so did Ansel Adams.

[Jeff S]

40 minutes ago, jaapv said:

As soon as Leica is released from that restriction, they will build larger lenses to improve quality - R, SL, TL, Digilux2/3,  X Vario, etc. For the very best IQ you don't buy an M. Although it is pretty good

If they do, it will be in large part because it’s so much easier to make quality lenses bigger, not necessarily because of a dramatic quality increase.  (Of course inclusion of AF or OIS drives size as well).  

One need only compare the APO Summicron M 50 to the APO Summicron SL 50, or the 50 Summilux counterparts, to see the incredible difference in size for a relatively small increase in quality.  No wonder some M lenses have taken 15 or more years to go from conception to reality.  Small, fast, high quality M lenses are not just a design challenge, but as Karbe noted regarding the current 50 Summilux ASPH, it was a ‘production nightmare’.  

I’d love to see the RF concept continue to rule, if for no other reason than to maintain the motivation to produce these small M lens gems, challenges be damned.  

Jeff

 

[lct]

36 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Now that is not true. There were plenty of small high quality cameras at the time. They chose Leica, probably for much the same reasons we do now, but they could just as well have chosen a Contax, a Canon or a Robot, etc. Or a small SLR (from Exacta to Olympus OM.) Robert Capa used multiple other cameras, like Contax, so did Ansel Adams.

Those plenty of small cameras were rangefinders when reflex cameras did not exist yet and when the latters appeared, they were and remained more bulky together with their lenses than their M counterparts. It is not a matter of Leica vs Zeiss or anyone else. It is a matter of compactness and high image and build quality. Only M lenses, not necessarily Leica's, offer that in the FF format and they can work fine not only with rangefinders but also with EVFs and/on mirrorless cameras.

[IkarusJohn]

Speaking for myself, the rangefinder was secondary (and to an extent a compromise I had to accept) to the high quality manual lenses and the manual camera controls on the M9.  I didn’t want a camera controlled by menus - I wanted aperture on the lens, shutter on the top right and manual focus.  To be honest, the reality of rangefinder focusing was a surprise which I soon came to like.  

Now, some may feel they can speak for every other M buyer.  I do not.

The quality of EVF have become so good, I see no reason for Leica not to offer an M10-E.  Why not?  Rangefinder lovers can still buy the M10-P, M10-D or M10-M, or an M-A or MP.  Adding to the line up expands the market, it doesn’t reduce it.  The core of my M system is the lenses, not the cameras.  It really doesn’t answer the issue by saying that’s what the CL is for (it’s APS-C) or the SL (it’s quite a different beast).  As a user of the TL2 & SL, I can see an EVF based M as being quite a different animal to either of those cameras.

It’s just a choice ...

Edited September 4, 2019 by IkarusJohn

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, lct said:

Those plenty of small cameras were rangefinders when reflex cameras did not exist yet and when the latters appeared, they were and remained more bulky together with their lenses than their M counterparts. It is not a matter of Leica vs Zeiss or anyone else. It is a matter of compactness and high image and build quality. Only M lenses, not necessarily Leica's, offer that in the FF format and they can work fine not only with rangefinders but also with EVFs and/on mirrorless cameras.

Reflex cameras existed since the middle 1930-ies. I had an Exa 2 + 50 mm Sonnar IIRC as my first "real" camera.. It was about the same size as an M3, just a bit fatter towards  the lens, but the triangular shape made it quite compact.  the  first  Exa  dates from 1936. The first Exacta from 1933. The -admittedly, somewhat larger- Asahiflex with quick return mirror predates the M3 by one year.

Anyway, that was not my point. My point was that Leica lenses were never "the best" by definition. ~Excellent - yes. Industry leading, - sometimes- but there were always choices.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

Actually, it is so simple. People buy the Leica M because it is a rangefinder camera. 

Defiantly not at all. I bought the M10 so that I can use my M lenses on it WITH AN EVF. The SL has an EVF but I couldn't stand the ugliness of the SL so I sold it. I then needed something to screw my M lenses onto (Naughtylux in particular )

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes. I read in this forum that you hated the camera. And you take better landscape photographs with the Q.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Yes. I read in this forum that you hated the camera. And you take better landscape photographs with the Q.

Exactly but what has that got to do with an EVF on a M10?

[jaapv]

That one of the reasons to hate it was probably that you weren't using it as a rangefinder camera. Buying it to use with the EVF is bound to lead to a user-tool mismatch. And if you want a camera with a 28 mm lens, the Q is the camera to go for. Those are not the strengths of the M10.

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, jaapv said:

That one of the reasons to hate it was probably that you weren't using it as a rangefinder camera. Buying it to use with the EVF is bound to lead to a user-tool mismatch. And if you want a camera with a 28 mm lens, the Q is the camera to go for. Those are not the strengths of the M10.

What????

[Viv]

I am mulling over the purchase of an M10  with a 50 ( Zeiss Planar) to complement my Q.

I neither want nor need an EVF on the M10. Just because something can be done does not necessarily mean that it should be done.

[RagingCANE]

I'm brand new to the Leica RF experience. I sold all of my soulless Sony gear and bought a M10-P with a 35mm Cron and so far I love it!. I am crap at focusing quickly but most of the time I am accurate and I am confident that I will get faster with practice. I did not buy the EVF and I am resisting although I am about to get a 21mm Elmarit for landscapes. That said, if an M10 or M11 was released with a built in EVF I would buy it in a heartbeat. I don't own a Q but I might get one eventually since it's cheaper than a 28mm Lux M lens.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, RagingCANE said:

I'm brand new to the Leica RF experience. I sold all of my soulless Sony gear and bought a M10-P with a 35mm Cron and so far I love it!. I am crap at focusing quickly but most of the time I am accurate and I am confident that I will get faster with practice. I did not buy the EVF and I am resisting although I am about to get a 21mm Elmarit for landscapes. That said, if an M10 or M11 was released with a built in EVF I would buy it in a heartbeat. I don't own a Q but I might get one eventually since it's cheaper than a 28mm Lux M lens.

 I think the EVF with the 21mm is a good Idea. Ive just sold my M10 as I guess a rangefinder camera is just not my cup of tea. I will wait and see what the new SL looks like in December and maybe buy one of those.

Neil

[Herr Barnack]

On 8/15/2019 at 4:09 PM, jdlaing said:

You must become one with the rangefinder.

A few questions:

Where is your lens focus ring parked when carrying?

Do you keep both eyes open when focusing?

Are you wearing glasses?

More true words are seldom spoken in these parts.  Or in other parts for that matter.

Maybe Leica should consider engraving that on the back of M cameras near the eyepiece.

[david strachan]

Sometimes the EVF is needed.

For example parallax problems, field of view with wide-angle lenses, close-up photography, if one wants to use the electronic level, if one wants to check front, or back-focusing, if you want a histogram, etc.

 

So it's a bit silly really.  Nice to use the M with the rangefinder OVF...but sometimes the EVF needs to be used.

 

...

Edited September 7, 2019 by david strachan

[astrostl]

On 9/6/2019 at 10:08 AM, RagingCANE said:

I'm brand new to the Leica RF experience. I sold all of my soulless Sony gear and bought a M10-P with a 35mm Cron and so far I love it!. I am crap at focusing quickly but most of the time I am accurate and I am confident that I will get faster with practice. I did not buy the EVF and I am resisting although I am about to get a 21mm Elmarit for landscapes. That said, if an M10 or M11 was released with a built in EVF I would buy it in a heartbeat. I don't own a Q but I might get one eventually since it's cheaper than a 28mm Lux M lens.

FWIW I have an M10 20000, a 21/3.4 11145, a Visoflex 18767, and Leica 21mm OVF 12008. I bought the latter because I found the EVF experience horrific, from the clunky Live View double-clutch shutter to the doofy physical attachment. I think the OVF is light years better as a shooting experience (even with glasses), the framing is fine, and practically everything is in focus at f/8 so the rangefinder doesn't really need to be used. There are several 12008s on eBay.

Edited September 8, 2019 by astrostl
ebay mention

[AndreaP75]

I always use optical RF with 35mm and 50mm lenses, as it gives me faster and more precise focusing than the Visoflex (up to f1.4). For 28mm and 75mm, it depends. For example, I find the M10-P optical RF frame lines a bit bigger for having a complete scene framing with a 28mm lens. You can't see clearly the whole scene without "jumping" left-right / top-bottom with the eye. 75mm in daylight is also fine with the RF. 

For anything wider than 28mm and above 75mm, I would use the Visoflex, which I find perfectly acceptable and it does the job it's supposed to do. Not SL level, but with enough resolution, for a non primary use. In my opinion, it's a must have accessory with the M10 (and variants), if the intention is to use with lenses different from 35mm/50mm.

[gui]

I only use the EVF for table-top shooting. Much more comfortable than crouching or sitting on a chair behind a tripod.

Position was best with my old Hasselblad.

 

 

[jakontil]

The won’t make M10 with evf yet, as the visoflex fills this gap, may be in the next M series 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[spersky]

I wish Leica had an EVF like any other mirrorless camera.  The lack of built in EVF in the Leica M bodies have caused me to move on to another camera brand.  I had about 15k burning a hole in my pocket a few months ago to obtain some mirrorless camera gear and I had to move on to another brand.

Maybe the M11 will have one you never know.