Jump to content

EVF - how do you like it?


Schittra

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, setuporg said:

Darn we all failed.:)

Haha

But in general I found nay sayers argument not entirely convincing. For instance, some say it’s ugly - well I don’t give a crap about that. Blasphemy is a bit more convincing but you know life is full of that, especially mine. OVF vs. EVF argument is in some ways rhetorical although I do love really good OVF like that of M-10 or of Pentax MF. But I do think that EVF has come a long long way and at a point where it offers enough good that I can no longer ignore. In the end I decided to give it a try mainly because my visual acuity is in such a progressive decline these days and I find myself not focusing as well or as quickly as before and I’m hoping with focus peaking it would help me somewhat. LV/focus peaking too difficult for me in bright settings. There is then the question of why Leica instead of other brands. For me it’s the rendition of Leica M lenses, the intangible factor that is near impossible to replicate with other lenses. Maybe I ought to try SL then. Who knows. Will see how I like it (or hate it) when I get it. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I currently have a M10 but I won’t buy another M without a EVF or even better a hybrid solution. For me, the advantages of a EVF are too many and to be honest I couldn’t care less about the rangefinder, I’m in only for the lenses. 
I’d prefer to move to another platform rather than buy a OVF-only M. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I currently have an m262 and i would only buy another m if it had a rangefinder and did not have a built in EVF.

I could not care less about EVF as i much prefer the real life view of the optical finder and the wonderful precision instrument that is the rangefinder.

I cannot move to another platform as leica is the only company making a rangefinder camera,for people who prefer an EVF why not choose one of the vast number of cameras available with this vastly overrated viewing system?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, steve 1959 said:

I currently have an m262 and i would only buy another m if it had a rangefinder and did not have a built in EVF.

I could not care less about EVF as i much prefer the real life view of the optical finder and the wonderful precision instrument that is the rangefinder.

I cannot move to another platform as leica is the only company making a rangefinder camera,for people who prefer an EVF why not choose one of the vast number of cameras available with this vastly overrated viewing system?

Again, with all due respect, I am not sure what disadvantages one may face by having an EVF on a rangefinder. EVF will not ruin the real life view of an OVF by any means. Because of the low light capability of modern sensors, one is more likely to encounter poor lighting condition, a situation in which OVF can actually be detrimental. Depending in focal lengths, framing is forever easier with EVF. The visual quality of EVF has steadily improved every year. It is a matter of time in my opinion when one can longer tell the difference between the two. But who knows - I reserve my final judgement until I actually use one for an extended period of time. It is due to arrive in a couple of days . . . . 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, steve 1959 said:

I currently have an m262 and i would only buy another m if it had a rangefinder and did not have a built in EVF.

I could not care less about EVF as i much prefer the real life view of the optical finder and the wonderful precision instrument that is the rangefinder.

I cannot move to another platform as leica is the only company making a rangefinder camera,for people who prefer an EVF why not choose one of the vast number of cameras available with this vastly overrated viewing system?

I'm not saying that Leica should stop producing a OVF model, if they can release a no-screen camera for the 1000 or so people buying it, they can for sure release a EVF/hybrid model alongside a classic OVF model.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do not like it overall. Very slow. I also will not remove my Thumbs Up unless I have good reason to do so. Too much hassle to deal with. 

I want an M10 body with built-in EVF. Sacrilegious to some, desirable to me.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 6bit said:

I do not like it overall. Very slow. I also will not remove my Thumbs Up unless I have good reason to do so. Too much hassle to deal with. 

I want an M10 body with built-in EVF. Sacrilegious to some, desirable to me.

So, here I find this to be a compelling argument against it. This is a very practical point of view. It would be cool if there is an EVF with a thump up incorporated into the design. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe leica will be shrewd enough to keep the EVF as an add on to its rangefinder cameras for a very long time to come or until there is no market for a rangefinder camera.

Maybe leica could add a hybrid viewfinder to  to the SL,CL and Q cameras with a rangefinder incorporated? 

Silly idea right? well so is adding an EVF/OVF to a leica m in my view .

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2020 at 4:48 PM, sblutter said:

When I need macro, I pull out the Canon 5DM3 and mount the terrific f:2.5 compact

M's were never designed for that sort of work in the field.  The old cumbersome Viso's are great in the studio, and for many, also in the garden

I agree. Thankfully I have an S2 and CL if I need macro. While my right eye is good for the rangefinder focusing, I am happy with the patch for general photography. As many say, it’s faster and straight forward. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Feel free to call it whatever you want, I just want a M-lookalike full frame ILCE that is not a SL, doesn't have a OVF and accepts M mount. ;)

Well you can’t have that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As the old saying goes, "Vote with your wallet!"  If you don't like what Leica is selling, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, etc all have products that DO have all the things you are looking for (for a lot less money)! :)  I wouldn't buy a camera if it wasn't what I wanted; can't imagine anyone would.

Edited by Mikep996
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, strohscw said:

I would be happy if Leica would release with the M10-R also an updated EVF with higher pixel count and higher refresh rate.

The updated EVF won't happen.  The M is first and foremost an OVF camera and will remain so.  The Visoflex has always been just an accessory, useful in some circumstances, but not really at the core of the M camera.  I'm sure it would be possible to produce an upgraded Visoflex, but Leica development funds will go elsewhere.

As many on this forum have remarked, the M works best in the range 28mm - 50mm and the most popular focal length is 35mm.  The OVF is fine for these lenses.  Leica's latest (and greatest) at 75mm - 90mm are much easier to use on the SL2, and I guess would not be that easy to focus wide open on the M, even with the EVF (although I haven't tried - restricted by cost constraints!). A one kilo lens will not balance well on the M body anyway.

Tomorrow, we will see the expected evolution.  It will look like a plain vanilla M, have all the little extras included in the P and a Bayer filter array sitting in front of the Mono sensor.  That's it.  Not sure how Leica will make the presentation and reveal last for the scheduled 30 minutes!

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jdlaing said:

Goodbye and best wishes with your choices. Leica has already decided.

I find this comment quite disheartening in the way it try's to crush an alternate opinion. Are you so delicate that you can't fathom that Leica might add an EVF camera to their range that natively accepts M lenses without that kind of attitude? Why is it so hard to conceive that some people love M lenses but not the cameras they can currently strap them on to. I don't think any one said such a camera would replace an analogue M. Rather it would sit beside it. And it would be up to Leica to decide if it were an M or something else.

I suspect that you have ZERO idea about what Leica has decided.

Gordon

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I find this comment quite disheartening in the way it try's to crush an alternate opinion. 

Sadly these are the times.  That a device, so steeped in a tradition of reportage, seems to have engendered a user base that all too often is unwilling to entertain, let alone explore, diverse points of view, is rather ironic.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Rather it would sit beside it. And it would be up to Leica to decide if it were an M or something else.

 

This.  It may not be my cup of tea, but so what.  We didn’t think that a sensor would replace film in any M.  Most derided the notion of an all-b&w digital M. And a screen-less digital M?  Silly (as even Dr. Kaufmann admitted was his initial reaction). Who would have foreseen demand for a 40 MP M just 10 years ago? Yet they all sit side by side, including 2 film versions, and sell well even to the former naysayers.  Names are easy to change, if need be.  
 

I look forward to the product/technology that Dr. Kaufmann recently told Hugh Brownstone would “change the industry”, saying we’d know more in coming months.  Not necessarily part of the M, but this doesn’t sound like a company unwilling to merge past and future.

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...