Would you buy an EVF only M camera? [MERGED]

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

24 minutes ago, jaapv said:

What is difficult is to understand how Sony would be able to have it... An EVF M mount camera would not have it either.  [...]

Of course an EVF-M would have auto image magnification for the simple reason that it would have an M mount hence the same roller cam (pic) as your and my M cameras have always had. As far as M lenses are concerned, it is a unique feature of M mount cameras and no mirrorless camera, be it Sony, Nikon, Canon or others, can compete with that.  

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!

Edited December 10, 2022 by lct

[pegelli]

41 minutes ago, lct said:

As far as M lenses are concerned, it is a unique feature of M mount cameras and no mirrorless camera, be it Sony, Nikon, Canon or others, can compete with that.

You're right that M-lenses will not do auto image magnification when focussing with an adapter on E-mount Sony bodies. But (if you want) you have this feature on E-mount bodies for native E-mount lenses (even the manual Voigtländer ones). I don't need this feature anyway and always disable it. I just program one of the buttons to do magnification when I want/need it and it doesn't unneseccarily pop up when I don't want it when making slight adjustments on the focus ring. This is obviously a personal preference but I don't see it as a desirable feature for my use. I've also disabled it in my M246M, when using it with an external EVF/Live view I find the front button much more user friendly then auto magnification when turning the focus ring.

Edited December 10, 2022 by pegelli

[lct]

1 minute ago, pegelli said:

You're right that M-lenses will not do auto image magnification when focussing with an adapter on E-mount Sony bodies. But (if you want) you have this feature on E-mount bodies for native E-mount lenses [...]

It is not the topic, at least not mine. I'm referring to M lenses here, nothing else.

[pegelli]

5 minutes ago, lct said:

It is not the topic, at least not mine. I'm referring to M lenses here, nothing else.

Since the M camera discussed here doesn't exist yet we have no idea if it would have auto magnification or not, so I see no problem discussing the feature that does actually exist in a different camera even if it doesn't meet the approval of the "off-topic" police.

[lct]

1 minute ago, pegelli said:

Since the M camera discussed here doesn't exist yet we have no idea if it would have auto magnification or not, so I see no problem discussing the feature that does actually exist in a different camera even if it doesn't meet the approval of the "off-topic" police.

I see no problem either but you will forgive me if I don't answer you as i'm not interested in Sony lenses, although i do have one or two in a drawer.

[pegelli]

7 minutes ago, lct said:

forgive me if I don't answer you

I wasn't aware I asked you a question on this

Edited December 10, 2022 by pegelli

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The rollercam is part of the rangefinder mechanism  ( and not of the mount) which you aim to remove...

 

59 minutes ago, lct said:

Of course an EVF-M would have auto image magnification for the simple reason that it would have an M mount hence the same roller cam (pic) as your and my M cameras have always had. As far as M lenses are concerned, it is a unique feature of M mount cameras and no mirrorless camera, be it Sony, Nikon, Canon or others, can compete with that.  

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!

 

[lct]

6 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The rollercam is part of the rangefinder mechanism  ( and not of the mount) which you aim to remove..

I would keep the roller cam of course, it is one of the main interest of the EVF-M. The roller cam is not only a part of the rangefinder BTW. It allows for auto image magnification with all electronic Visoflexes since the M240 if memory serves me well. 

[pgk]

4 minutes ago, lct said:

I would keep the roller cam of course, it is one of the main interest of the EVF-M. The roller cam is not only a part of the rangefinder BTW. It allows for auto image magnification with all electronic Visoflexes since the M240 if memory serves me well. 

There are no doubt other (electronic using sensors) ways of sensing lens movement (focusing) which could trigger auto image magnification .....

Whilst not impossible though, such ideas are improbable.😉

[lct]

Just now, pgk said:

There are no doubt other (electronic using sensors) ways of sensing lens movement (focusing) which could trigger auto image magnification .....

Whilst not impossible though, such ideas are improbable.😉

Indeed, some good colleagues here have been arguing that a special adapter could be made but they never explained how to do this and Leica has never announced such a special adapter since the launch of the SL in 2015. 

[pgk]

1 minute ago, lct said:

.... they never explained how to do this.....

Motion sensor - wel known technology - which triggers focus magnification. To do this in an adapter would assume that communication etween adapter and camera could include this function which of course it may or may not. Should be simple enough to build into a body .....

[lct]

2 minutes ago, pgk said:

To do this in an adapter would assume that communication etween adapter and camera could include this function which of course it may or may not

It is the role of the roller cam to communicate between the focus cam of the lens and the camera. There is no need for an adapter then or am i missing something?

[pgk]

26 minutes ago, lct said:

It is the role of the roller cam to communicate between the focus cam of the lens and the camera. There is no need for an adapter then or am i missing something?

That is the role of the RF cam. But it does not need to be. A motion sensor could work in a body, or on a different maker's body IF the body could then activate auto image magnification via an adapter fitted with a motion sensor.

[lct]

42 minutes ago, pgk said:

That is the role of the RF cam. But it does not need to be. A motion sensor could work in a body, or on a different maker's body IF the body could then activate auto image magnification via an adapter fitted with a motion sensor.

Could this work with no modification of M lenses? Just curious.

[pgk]

31 minutes ago, lct said:

Could this work with no modification of M lenses? Just curious.

As far as I can see, yes. The thing is, with the exception of Internal Focus lenses (I don't think that any M lenses are), the rear of the lens will move s the lens is focused, so  a motion sensor would have to be able to switch on auto image magnification as soon as it detected the motion of the back of the lens moving.

[jaapv]

However, the longitudinal motion of the helicoid I s minimal and different for each focal length so it would have to be either quite sophisticated or require a “ Blind roller Cam” which I doubt anybody would implement. A replacement by focus peaking or a “focus on “ LED like the OM40 would be more logical. 

[Tailwagger]

21 hours ago, lct said:

Economic reasons then if i understand well so no technical reasons? 

Well, a while back I heard from a solid source that if such a camera was to be produced, the pricing could/would not be significantly less than the M itself, which I took to mean, rightly or wrongly, that it would be 90% or more the cost of the current M.  My response was that if so, count me out.  For an M-EVF to be worthwhile to me, among other things it would have to have a state of the art EVF, 9mpx at this point, and cost somewhere between an SL2 and SL2-S for use as a second body. Once you start getting within a $K of an M, I really don't see the point and certainly if I can only afford one, I'm going with the M as I find real value in having the OVF/EVF combo.

[lct]

3 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Well, a while back I heard from a solid source that if such a camera was to be produced, the pricing could/would not be significantly less than the M itself, which I took to mean, rightly or wrongly, that it would be 90% or more the cost of the current M.  My response was that if so, count me out.  For an M-EVF to be worthwhile to me, among other things it would have to have a state of the art EVF, 9mpx at this point, and cost somewhere between an SL2 and SL2-S for use as a second body. Once you start getting within a $K of an M, I really don't see the point and certainly if I can only afford one, I'm going with the M as I find real value in having the OVF/EVF combo.

I can understand this but how long will it take until M users realize that they need their Visoflex each time they have to nail focus at high resolution and that their dear M11 is not a compact camera anymore this way? I wanted to know is if there are technical reasons against the idea of the EVF-M. With all due respect to my talented opponents i don't see any for now and this, for me, is reason enough to hope . 

[pgk]

54 minutes ago, lct said:

I can understand this but how long will it take until M users realize that they need their Visoflex each time they have to nail focus at high resolution.....

Well, some of us realised that a long time ago😆. Whilst I have high resolution cameras I still prefer ~20MPixel as being perfectly adequate for most photography, but then I'm not into the numbers game so perhaps I'm not a typical user.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[S Maclean]

You're proposing a Leica with Autofocus...there is one.  A small camera with AF and great lenses...those exist as well on equally or better format than the M. (Fuji etc)

The other problem with your principle of an M with AF is that you would have to re-issue a whole set of lenses.  The M system is not only about the camera body, indeed it is very much based on the size and quality of the lenses and the "system" as a whole.  Add a motor for AF to those....and you're no longer having the same lens system.

I am not saying it would be better, or worse, it just would not be an M system.

 

One last item for the OP.  You mention you have several friends etc that all agree an M with AF and EVF incorporated but no video is the way to go....there is another thread where someone elses friends and collegues argue an M system with Video is what is needed for the next step. period.

Honestly, just take the M for what it is. There are amazing options for everything else. Leica and non Leica options.

 

Do I whish sometimes Ihad a very accurate AF like on my Canon?  Yes, but that's driven by my own limitations and the specific event I am capturing (sports etc)  And I still have all my Canon bodies (although I sold most of the lenses) so I can still get super fast focus super fast shooting and video...If I want to carry about a suitcase of equiment with me.

There is a need for AF and Video and EVF for sure....but you don't need to transform an M camera fof that. JUst like you would not compete on an F1 race with an SUV...or go trailing with an F1 car.  There is great beauty and fun on function.