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

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 minutes ago, raizans said:

If your current camera had IBIS, would you still have bought it?

None of my current cameras have IBIS ...

[Advertisement]

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

[fleeja]

1 minute ago, IkarusJohn said:

Had one of them - not going back there.

Oh I’m not saying it’s a good camera. I’m just saying It’s been done. 

[Erato]

Building a mystery of new Leica Ice Cream?

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!

[IkarusJohn]

I guess the thing for me is that things should only be added to the M camera if it is absolutely essential - it's not a case of "why not", but "why".  If the case is compelling, then I'm interested.  Hence my indifference to higher resolution - I don't need it, I don't really want it, but if there's little to no downside, then fine.

As for moving parts, I'm not sure that the M has more moving parts than any modern camera.  Comparing like with like?  There isn't really one - the M has a shutter, focus and aperture.  The A7 has AF and a whole of of other things which move, beyond what an M has.

Anyway, it's not about what other cameras have, but what the M has - adding stuff isn't what the M system is about ...

[fleeja]

21 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I guess the thing for me is that things should only be added to the M camera if it is absolutely essential - it's not a case of "why not", but "why".  If the case is compelling, then I'm interested.  Hence my indifference to higher resolution - I don't need it, I don't really want it, but if there's little to no downside, then fine.

As for moving parts, I'm not sure that the M has more moving parts than any modern camera.  Comparing like with like?  There isn't really one - the M has a shutter, focus and aperture.  The A7 has AF and a whole of of other things which move, beyond what an M has.

Anyway, it's not about what other cameras have, but what the M has - adding stuff isn't what the M system is about ...

The AF is phase detect on the sensor, Nothing moves at all. Most of the top models don’t even have a mechanical shutter now either and that will trickle down. I honesty can’t even think of a moving part in the camera itself besides the IBIS on those. The M has parallax corrected framelines that move and then also change a mask separately based on the the lens focal length. There’s also a preview lever to override this. Then the mechanical shutter, and I don’t even know how many moving parts in the rangefinder mechanism (which this thread is mostly about) more than a few anyways. I’ve seen diagrams of the assembly, it’s not a basic item. Just because it seems like a simple photo tool on the outside doesn’t mean it is on the inside. 

Edited February 19, 2023 by fleeja

[SrMi]

1 minute ago, fleeja said:

Most of the newest ones don’t even have a mechanical shutter.

AFAIK the only cameras without a mechanical shutter are Nikon Z9, Sigma fp-l, and iPhone. Most of the newest cameras come with mechanical shutters.

[fleeja]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 minutes ago, SrMi said:

AFAIK the only cameras without a mechanical shutter are Nikon Z9, Sigma fp-l, and iPhone. Most of the newest cameras come with mechanical shutters.

Technically I guess the R3, A9 and A1 models do have them but they aren’t for the main intended use of the camera, more of a backup. 
 

The point I’m trying to make is that people confuse the simple user experience of the M with it being a simple camera internally. I’m trying to say that’s not true. It’s probably the most complex camera internally out of the full frame flagships. Mechanical assemblies at those tolerances are much harder to manufacture and assemble than electronics. 

Edited February 19, 2023 by fleeja

[raizans]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

None of my current cameras have IBIS ...

Imagine if it did. Would you still have bought it?

[SrMi]

To survive as a company, Leica needs to evolve its products. Being stuck with the M10 design is not an option. However, giving up the "soul" of Leica is also not an option. This "walk on a wire" is not trivial.
I am curious whether Leica will ever build an EVF-only M, as it does not fit the M cameras. However, I believe Leica will eventually add IBIS and eliminate the mechanical shutter in their M cameras. 

[raizans]

Some features the M11 has that it doesn’t need:

- Combined rangefinder/viewfinder

- Illuminated framelines

- Light meter

- Autoexposure

- 60MP

- 1/4000 mechanical shutter

- ISO 50,000

- Rear touchscreen

- Self-timer

- 64 GB internal memory

- Wi-Fi

 

Edited February 19, 2023 by raizans

[hdmesa]

4 hours ago, fleeja said:

Interesting. I had an R5 at one point and thought it did all of the above with dumb adapters and vintage glass. I could be mistaken though. I thought that was the advantage of phase detect vs contrast based systems. It already knows which way it has to go and doesn’t hunt. Leica lenses do transmit distance information via the cam though, just not electronically. Could they not just use this is a different means? 

No, adapted manual focus lenses without electronic contacts do not bring up the Focus Guide overlay, at least they didn't when I was using the R5 a while back.

 

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

Is there any reason for an EVFM to have IBIS?  It is not like it is a camera aimed at a large user group who do not know how to hold a camera steady. 
As for accuracy, I have not heard any complaints from M lens on EVF body users yet. 

The question would be is there a reason to exclude IBIS? Let's dispense with the fear-based negatives such as "it will overcomplicate" and only consider real negatives. IBIS takes extra space – solved by removing the mechanical shutter. It takes extra battery – a real potential drawback especially with a full-time EVF running.

As for the benefits of IBIS, this is a long-running and beat-to-death topic. But I would summarize it as: if you use a camera with IBIS for a long enough period of time and then go back to using an M camera, you will miss it. That doesn't mean it's necessary, it just means it may be highly beneficial.

The accuracy issue – I was only commenting on the fact that electronic-based focus confirmation in the EVF is only accurate when distance information is provided by the lens via electronic contacts (or perhaps the M focus cam). Being able to get accurate focus using only magnified view and/or focus peaking is another topic, and I didn't mean to say there was anything lacking for many of us focusing that way.

 

3 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

...The cam could be dispensed with, but then there would be no option of auto-magnification, which I find very useful...

 What I wouldn't give for the M-Adapter-L to be able to engage with the cam and provide auto-magnification on the SL cameras.

Edited February 19, 2023 by hdmesa

[xiaubauu2009]

On 2/17/2023 at 11:23 PM, SrMi said:

Fuji cameras do not have rangefinders in their OVFs; the widest lens supported by their OVFs is 35mm (FF equivalent). As a result, Fuji's solution does not look workable for a digital M.
While I like the X-Pro3 and X100V for their hybrid viewfinder (I prefer OVF to EVF), many Fuji owners are using the cameras as EVF-only (my impression from forums).

Hence if leica could do one with a real rangefinder and they hybrid EVF for critical focus (anything 75mm is a stretch on the current system at least for me), then that’s true innovation.

When I first use the xpro1. I feel pretty surprise by that implementation, in a good way. But I don’t like the uncertainty of focus.  Whatever Fujifilm designed is actually more suitable for a real manual focus rangefinder system like Leica. 

[pop]

6 hours ago, fleeja said:

Not really. You’re seeing when 2 mechanical assemblies are coinciding using trigonometry. Sure, It can be the exact part of the scene that’s in focus but that requires all parts of the lens and rangefinder assemblies being in perfect calibration. The person interpreting the coincidence must also make a correct decision on when this occurs. Even so you’re still making as assumption that this all correlates to it also being perfectly in focus on the sensor plane. Reading directly off the sensor itself gives you that every time. I’m an avid M user, and yes, the vast majority of the time it’s correct and great, but it’s not a perfect science by any means. Sensor density and the resolving power of the lenses keeps increasing but the base length of the rangefinder is a fixed commodity (without alteration from the classic M setup) 

One: we always have to assume that the cameras to be compared work as intended. The RF has to be properly adjusted and the AF camera has to be properly programmed. AF cameras have been known to mis-focus in certain situations, so the point is not academic.

Two: It's irrelvant that I see when "2 mechanical assemblies are coinciding". What I see is whether two images of one particular edge within the focusing window are in exact alignment. There might be other edges within the same focusing window that are not in alignment. Just looking through the range finder, I can immediately see which of several edges are in alignment and which ones are not. I can do that even when wearing the wrong glasses. I can not do that with a focus confirmation. What's more, given a bit of experience, I can see beforehand whether I will be able to see when the desired edges are aligned so that I can find another place to focus on. It's much more difficult to predict the success of any electronic focus confirmation and it takes me much more deliberation to acquire the correct focus, thus distracting me from the more important parts of the process of taking the wanted picture.

To be sure, I am not speaking as a technophobe. I have had basic tuition in physics, have worked for four decades in different disciplines of IT and have been using AF cameras for half a century.

[otto.f]

10 hours ago, lct said:

We shall see. The results of the LSI survey should be interesting, to begin with. 

But LSI is not Leica AG, is it?

[IkarusJohn]

5 hours ago, raizans said:

Imagine if it did. Would you still have bought it?

Too hyperthetical.

As I said, no interest in it.  If there was no downside, I wouldn’t really be bothered.  I don’t see it as a positive, but provided it didn’t have a downside, I wouldn’t mind - probably wouldn’t turn it on.

@fleeja, I have never said an M camera was “a simple camera internally”.  The OVF alone is horrednously complicated.  My point, which you seem to ignore to make your point 😁 is that there has to be a very good reason to add to the digital M camera as exemplified by the M10.  As I said, not a case of “why not”, but “why”.

I have zero interest in Sonys.  The Z9 looks interesting, but not quite there yet, technically.  The global shutter could be interesting, if it gets there.  

[Ouroboros]

On 2/16/2023 at 1:36 AM, DenverSteve said:

Yes, but this time the questionnaire came directly from Leica.  I received mine from Leica as it was sent to registered Leica owners.  I sent them my answers this week.  They are actively looking into this. 

Are you suggesting that ‘survey’ is meant to be taken seriously? 

[LocalHero1953]

This thread has gone a long way since I last looked. Catching up on EVF lag a few pages back......

I have recently been shooting dancers, trying to capture the exact moment of a leap (the initiation and rise, not coming down). As it is not always obvious when the dancer is about to leap, I was often just missing the right moment. But then I switched to manual focus and found that any perceptible shutter or EVF lag disappeared. I could press the shutter button and get the exact moment I saw something in the EVF.

I would have no worries about EVF lag in a M-EVF.

[otto.f]

.

Edited February 19, 2023 by otto.f

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pippy]

4 hours ago, raizans said:

Some features the M11 has that it doesn’t need:

- Combined rangefinder/viewfinder

- Illuminated framelines

- Light meter

- Autoexposure

- 60MP

- 1/4000 mechanical shutter

- ISO 50,000

- Rear touchscreen

- Self-timer

- 64 GB internal memory

- Wi-Fi

 

Nope.

From this list of features and for the way I shoot with an M camera I "need" a combined rangefinder/viewfinder; illuminated framelines; light-meter; self-timer. Furthermore I'm 100% sure there will be folks here who have different "needs" to my own therefore, and as usual, this is a 'YMMV' situation.

Philip.

[jaapv]

On 2/17/2023 at 7:29 AM, evikne said:

Probably just a feeling I have because I have an aversion to adapters. And to me, an M camera that can't natively take M lenses, would be stupid.

Now that would be simply solved: the camera would come with an adapter and - of course - a Red Dot tube of Superglue.  (and an EVF camera would not be an M camera, but an M-shaped Panasonic 😅)