A New Year Wish for the M System

[astrostl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To remind, the context was this: "But i fail to see how [an EVF is] better for accurate focus compared to a rangefinder?"

Not which is more fun, more familiar, better in a non-existent situation where EVF magnification is mandatory, good enough in a specific shooting situation, feels simpler, is more pleasant to your eyes, etc. Simply better for accurate focus.

It's also a matter of fact rather than popular vote. The fact is, EVFs are better for accurate focus compared to a rangefinder. And it's still possible to recognize that fact and still like Leica, like rangefinders, and even prefer Rangefinders to an EVF. I do!

[cirke]

4 hours ago, steve 1959 said:

So now bresson would have to say "hang on a minute while i put my 10 times magnification on so i can capture the moment" ?

What a stupid idea

So 1] compose 2] magnify 3] shoot  but wait a minute my 7 year old grand daughter has gone!!

No magnification at all and focus peaking are still better and faster than RF

Plus you can see in black and white and use magnification when you want or need

As I said I used to shoot a lot of sports events with the M240 a full day without using the handicapped RF 

your 7 years old grand daughter  would be always in focus and not more or less 

the 135 apo telyt with RF is just absurd when it is such a good lens easy to use with EVF

so many good M lenses not bought and somehow lost because of that outdated RF

 

[fisheess]

7 hours ago, evikne said:

An EVF is precise when you have time to use it, but it's not very suitable for street photography and moving subjects. And you have no idea of the composition when the image is zoomed in 10 times. For fast, manual focusing nothing beats a RF. 

The Fuji X100V's hybrid finder with e-focusing patch solves this problem. Though I have not used it first-hand.

[fotografr]

We seem to have two separate schools of thought here and I seriously doubt that either side will bring the other around to their way of thinking. On one side we have people who are process oriented. On the other side are people who are ease and speed oriented. For the first group, photography can be slow and deliberative and, in fact, that's part of the enjoyment. For the second group, getting a great image is important, but getting it as quickly and easily as possible is paramount. 

I put myself solidly in the first group. My goal has always been to produce good photographs, but when I pick up one of my M cameras, it is never with the intent of catching fast moving objects or being able to react to a situation instantaneously. I appreciate using a camera that slows me down and lets me be more deliberative. 

There's no right or wrong side in this. There are just different preferences. We all want to end up with good images. We just don't agree on how to get them and likely never will.

A few years ago I took a brief foray into the ease and speed approach. I packed my M equipment away and bought a CL system. The results were very good but in less than a year I realized I wasn't getting any enjoyment out of making images and I sold it all. From here out it's the classic M with rangefinder for me.

[lct]

1 minute ago, fotografr said:

On one side we have people who are process oriented. On the other side are people who are ease and speed oriented.

And on the third side there are people oriented to both. Makes two sides interested in EVF-M cameras .

[fotografr]

1 hour ago, lct said:

And on the third side there are people oriented to both. Makes two sides interested in EVF-M cameras .

I suppose that third group would also be the same ones who want to do 290 Kilometers per hour on the autobahn while enjoying the scenery.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, fotografr said:

I suppose that third group would also be the same ones who want to do 290 Kilometers per hour on the autobahn while enjoying the scenery.

Or simply who like shooting their children and do a bit of landscape or macro afterwards. Normal people so to speak . 

[fotografr]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

Or simply who like shooting their children and do a bit of landscape or macro afterwards. Normal people so to speak . 

So, those of us in the first category aren't "normal?" Every time someone tries to tone things down in this thread, somebody comes along with that kind of comment. Go ahead and have the last word. I'm going out to shoot.

[lct]

16 minutes ago, fotografr said:

So, those of us in the first category aren't "normal?" Every time someone tries to tone things down in this thread, somebody comes along with that kind of comment. Go ahead and have the last word. I'm going out to shoot.

Don't take it personally please this is just an internet forum. Now don't forget your Visoflex, could be useful who knows? . Just kidding.

 

[fotografr]

52 minutes ago, lct said:

Don't take it personally please this is just an internet forum. Now don't forget your Visoflex, could be useful who knows? . Just kidding.

 

The Visoflex is for sissies. Real men shoot with rangefinders. Just kidding. 😁

[jdlaing]

17 minutes ago, fotografr said:

The Visoflex is for sissies. Real men shoot with rangefinders. Just kidding. 😁

^

[analog-digital]

Am 27.12.2020 um 22:10 schrieb setuporg:

A lot of folks wish various things for the M to become.  Ultimately, if you sum up all the wishes here, it should have a lidar, a printer, and a kitchen sink.

Since we all can wish here, I wish that people who want to make it something very much unlike the M system will just leave it the heck alone.

• Want EVF?  Get something else.
• Want IBIS?  Get something else.
• Want eye tracking?  Get something else.
• Want GPS?  Get something else.
• Want video?  Get something else.
• Want easy battery/card access, or two SD card slots?  Get something else!
• Want autofocus?  You get the idea.

Wishing you all a very happy New Year with a real M camera!

OMG. What are you always discussing about wishes of the M-Leicas around? A rangefinder M-Leica is a rangefinder M-Leica without what you're listing. If you want something else, do NOT buy an M-Leica!

[mujk]

In addition to a Leica M shooter I'm also an engineer, so I may have a slightly different view on this. 

In the beginning, cameras with interchangeable lenses didn't have any coupling between the camera and the lens. Then Leica (or Zeiss or someone else) invented the coupled rangefinder. The current M system is the only one still implementing this mechanical coupling. Other camera systems have other couplings between the body and the lens. Today they are all electronic, although in some cases there may be some compatibility with older mechanical couplings.

Even when there is no other compatibility the bayonet may still be the same, making the use of older lenses without the original coupling possible. In many cases it is also possible to use lenses of one system on bodies of another one using an adapter. In a few cases, also some coupling has been implemented in the adapter, e.g focus confirmation.

Based on the above, I don't really see why Leica would start producing EVF-only M-mount cameras without introducing (or having plans on introducing ) a new series of M-mount lenses with electronic coupling, at least for aperture control, possibly also focus confirmation/autofocus.

An EVF-only body without any coupling with the lens (other than possibly the optical lens code) is in my mind functionally equivalent to adapting lenses. This is, of course, a fully working solution, but not the basis for a commerciably viable camera system with a future.

[lct]

3 minutes ago, mujk said:

In addition to a Leica M shooter I'm also an engineer, so I may have a slightly different view on this. 

In the beginning, cameras with interchangeable lenses didn't have any coupling between the camera and the lens. Then Leica (or Zeiss or someone else) invented the coupled rangefinder. The current M system is the only one still implementing this mechanical coupling. Other camera systems have other couplings between the body and the lens. Today they are all electronic, although in some cases there may be some compatibility with older mechanical couplings.

Even when there is no other compatibility the bayonet may still be the same, making the use of older lenses without the original coupling possible. In many cases it is also possible to use lenses of one system on bodies of another one using an adapter. In a few cases, also some coupling has been implemented in the adapter, e.g focus confirmation.

Based on the above, I don't really see why Leica would start producing EVF-only M-mount cameras without introducing (or having plans on introducing ) a new series of M-mount lenses with electronic coupling, at least for aperture control, possibly also focus confirmation/autofocus.

An EVF-only body without any coupling with the lens (other than possibly the optical lens code) is in my mind functionally equivalent to adapting lenses. This is, of course, a fully working solution, but not the basis for a commerciably viable camera system with a future.

Please allow me to disagree. The future is that of M lenses. We're just discussing about different digital backs for such lenses. They are already the best compact lenses in the world, there is nothing to change to them IMHO. YMMV.

[fotografr]

7 minutes ago, lct said:

Please allow me to disagree. The future is that of M lenses. We're just discussing about different digital backs for such lenses. They are already the best compact lenses in the world, there is nothing to change to them IMHO. YMMV.

Please allow me to disagree. The future of M lenses, IMHO, is intimately tied to the future of M cameras.

[lct]

12 minutes ago, fotografr said:

Please allow me to disagree. The future of M lenses, IMHO, is intimately tied to the future of M cameras.

 To me the future of M lenses is M lenses and cameras that will succeed will be tied to the laters. Interesting discussion anyway .

[mujk]

41 minutes ago, lct said:

Please allow me to disagree. The future is that of M lenses. We're just discussing about different digital backs for such lenses. They are already the best compact lenses in the world, there is nothing to change to them IMHO. YMMV.

Exactly. My point was just that this approach may not secure the commercial future of M lenses. At least it did not do so for e.g. Leica R and Hasselblad V series lenses. Neither are manufactured anymore, even if both had or have their digital backs and can be adapted to cameras of other systems.

[lct]

M lenses are manual lenses and cannot be anything else because the M mount is like that. For AF and other automatic purposes, there are L and other mount lenses already. 

[Guest]

It would help if we could see sales figures for various leica cameras and lenses.

If sales are strong for M10 cameras i cannot see leica messing about with the rangefinder.

Also why produce remake's of classic old rangefinder lenses to put on a camera with a modern EVF system [minus auto-focus]?

More than any other camera manufacturer leica history is relevant,they even lose sales because so many people love buying old leica lenses.

I believe the M11 will be a RF camera with an improved EVF as an optional accessory.

The olympus VF-4 hot shoe EVF is at least as good as the original Q EVF so why cant a  leica external EVF be decent?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[adan]

15 hours ago, cirke said:

No magnification at all and focus peaking are still better and faster than RF

Oh, goody! Focus peaking!

Just what I want in my viewfinder - a 4-year-old's crayon scribbles all over my potential pictures.

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!