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

[pegelli]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

45 minutes ago, lct said:

so the question i'm interested in is could the roller cam be used for the EVF-M or not. 

I think yes, but it probably needs to be re-developed since it's now an integral part of the viewfinder/rangefinder assembly and by taking that out Leica needs to think how to do that.

In that process they might find out that a different way to determine movement of the lens is easier/cheaper/more reliable/better than re-engineering the roller cam. I don't care if they do as long as it works reliably and you are able to switch it off since I don't need it, but I understand many people do like the option. In short, wether they do it by roller cam or another way is for me not important, as long as it works reliably. I think the function is infinitely more important than the "how to".

What I do not understand is that you seem to have no problem changing the whole viewfinder/rangefinder assembly with an EVF but seem fully against changing the roller cam for something different where your only reasoning seems to be "it worked well for 50 years, so why change it?" In my mind the same can be said about the viewfinder/rangefinder in the M-series. New technology would allow to put an EVF in its place which some people like and I think is fine as long as they keep making classical viewfinder/rangefinder cameras and couldn't care less which technology is used to feed the lens information to the viewfinder/rangefinder or EVF as long as it is a reliable method.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

19 hours ago, jaapv said:

I fear that this is personal experience. Of course some users are happier using an EVF but others like me have no problem nailing critical focus on an M at least up to 90 mm. I’ll post the graph by Günther Osterloh on focus precision later. In fact, I can manage to focus 270 mm on an M9….   

 

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!

[Planetwide]

This thread has actually made me chuckle. The resistance to EVF M is really mind boggling. Nobody is advocating for dumping the RF in the current M.

An EVF M mount camera would expand market share for M mount lenses, and allow people with poorer eyesight to remain within the M segment. Many people such as myself, do not really like the "rangefinder" experience. I would buy this EVF M camera in heartbeat.

All that really needs to happen is to place the SL or Q guts into an M size body and let manual focus zoom be triggered by either an auto sensing and/or a button. None of this is hard, requires much engineering, and could be done quite quickly while leveraging existing engineering.  You could even develop a line of AF Q style interchangeable lenses.

[lct]

19 minutes ago, pegelli said:

What I do not understand is that you seem to have no problem changing the whole viewfinder/rangefinder assembly with an EVF but seem fully against changing the roller cam for something different where your only reasoning seems to be "it worked well for 50 years, so why change it?" In my mind the same can be said about the viewfinder/rangefinder in the M-series. New technology would allow to put an EVF in its place which some people like and I think is fine as long as they keep making classical viewfinder/rangefinder cameras and couldn't care less which technology is used to feed the lens information to the viewfinder/rangefinder or EVF as long as it is a reliable method.

I am not interested in novelties for the sake of novelty but in an M-mount camera like a digital MD-2 so to speak with a built-in EVF in place of nothing, in this example, as the MD-2 had no RF. EVF instead of RF is the only difference i'm interested in to complement my 6 rangefinders.

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!

[pop]

6 minutes ago, Planetwide said:

An EVF M mount camera would expand market share for M mount lenses

This is still open to debate. A camera designed from the ground up to be used with an EVF has many properties an M type camera without the rangefinder would not be able to produce. Hence, it would be a flawed or restricted camera both for the dyed-in-the-wool M user and for the EVF camera user. Expanded market share might be miniscule.

[pegelli]

20 minutes ago, lct said:

I am not interested in novelties for the sake of novelty but in an M-mount camera like a digital MD-2 so to speak with a built-in EVF in place of nothing, in this example, as the MD-2 had no RF. EVF instead of RF is the only difference i'm interested in to complement my 6 rangefinders.

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!

I'm also not interested in novelties for the sake of novelty either, I don't know where you got the idea that I would, I'm only interested in functionality and the method by which the functionality is achieved is unimportant as long as it's sturdy and reliable.  

Btw, I don't see a roller cam in the photo of the MD-2 you showed in your post. How do you suggest the EVF detects lens movement so you get the automatic viewfinder enlargement you were striving for if they only build an EVF in that body as you suggest?

[Knipsknecht]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 32 Minuten schrieb Planetwide:

[…] An EVF M mount camera would expand market share for M mount lenses, […]

Probably not to the degree that would be necessary to refinance r&d as well as new production lines. Although I like the idea of a EVF M mount camera, I fear it would do more harm to Leica than anything else. The fight for market shares is already waging, and Leica (as a small company) has done a great job in identifying niches that work and cutting of those that don’t work (CL, looking at you).

[jaapv]

Who in the world is going to buy a handicapped manual focus EVF camera at a price point of at least $ 8000 and with lenses in the range of 4000-10.000 $, outside the core die-hard Leica M customer base? And how many  of those will be attracted by a non-rangefinder "abomination" ?

My guess is that if Leica were to develop such a camera, they would test the water by issuing a 20.000$ limited edition first.

[pgk]

41 minutes ago, Planetwide said:

An EVF M mount camera would expand market share for M mount lenses .....

There are already many options for doing exacly this. I don't see massive market share increase as a result, because for the vast majority of users the advantage of having an EVF camera capable of taking M lenses is that they can use MF M lenses on a camera in addition to 'native' fully functional AF lenses and not instead of (there wll be a few exceptions of course). I do this myself - M lenses on a Sony and I use manual focus magnification if I need to do so. The Leica M rangefinder camera remains a niche camera. An EVF version would be a niche within a niche. If Leica can make one and make a profit by doing so then great, but there are technical hurdles to overcome as well as the conceptular concerns which many of us have too and whilst no doubt Leica will be looking into the idea, they will be doing so with a business head on.

[pgk]

8 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Who in the world is going to buy a handicapped manual focus EVF camera at a price point of at least $ 8000 and with lenses in the range of 4000-10.000 $, outside the core die-hard Leica M customer base? And how many  of those will be attracted by a non-rangefinder "abomination" ?

My guess is that if Leica were to develop such a camera, they would test the water by issuing a 20.000$ limited edition first.

Well, some do say that they will surprising as it might seem to many of us. I would suggest that a digital version of the viewfinderless M cameras could have some interesting applications, mostly scientific and technical, but not at the current potential pricepoints suggested.

Your last post was interesting too because I do find that my preferred cameras for shorter <90mm focal lengths are my Ms (with exceptions for close focusing). The rangefinder M has some real strengths which are all too often ignored in the quest for innovation and ever higher specification.

[lct]

1 minute ago, pegelli said:

How do you suggest the EVF detects lens movement so you get the automatic viewfinder enlargement you were striving for if they only build an EVF in that body as you suggest?

The same way as with current Visoflexes. Only difference the Viso will be built-in instead of being an accessory EVF.

[pegelli]

3 minutes ago, lct said:

The same way as with current Visoflexes. Only difference the Viso will be built-in instead of being an accessory EVF.

It can't, there's nothing in the MD-2 body that will detect when you turn the lens.

[lct]

3 minutes ago, pegelli said:

It can't, there's nothing in the MD-2 body that will detect when you turn the lens.

Not sure what you're trying to demonstrate here @pegelli. If the only thing you are interested in is winning some kind of game against me, i am not interested sorry.

 

[SrMi]

37 minutes ago, pegelli said:

I'm also not interested in novelties for the sake of novelty either, I don't know where you got the idea that I would, I'm only interested in functionality and the method by which the functionality is achieved is unimportant as long as it's sturdy and reliable.  

Btw, I don't see a roller cam in the photo of the MD-2 you showed in your post. How do you suggest the EVF detects lens movement so you get the automatic viewfinder enlargement you were striving for if they only build an EVF in that body as you suggest?

We can live without automatic magnification when moving the focus ring. I have turned it off in each of my cameras that offer it. Using a button press instead to magnify gives me more control.

[pegelli]

28 minutes ago, lct said:

Not sure what you're trying to demonstrate here @pegelli. If the only thing you are interested in is winning some kind of game against me, i am not interested sorry.

I have exactly the same feeling of you.

I'm only interested in trying to understand why you're so wed to the rollercam and can't see (or don't want to see) that there are other technical means to achieve the same functionality. You don't seem to to read or want to understand what I'm writing and keep posting responses that are beside the point.

[lct]

58 minutes ago, SrMi said:

We can live without automatic magnification when moving the focus ring. I have turned it off in each of my cameras that offer it. Using a button press instead to magnify gives me more control.

Pressing a button to trigger image magnification is something i can do with my Sony cameras as well. As far as M lenses are concerned, auto image magnification is a unique feature of digital Ms giving them a superiority over other mirrorless cameras IMHO.

[raizans]

3 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

Because it is far too easy to thoughtlessly cast aside something that has worked well since the 1950s (to paraphrase @lct) for something that is "new and improved" and supposedly "better."

I fervently hope that the decision makers at Leica are smarter than that.  More than a few commentators are not, but then these are people who simply do not grasp the meßsucherkamera ethos.

Has Leica given any signs of a lack of dedication to making rangefinders? I can't think of a single cause for concern, and many on the contrary. I am totally confident that Leica will continue to make rangefinders even if they add an M-mount EVF model.

[pop]

6 hours ago, pegelli said:

A rollercam without the attached rangefinder mechanism doesn't exist either, so it will require additional R&D to mount it in the camera "solo".

A rollercam does exist which has some 'extra' elements attached, namely the coupling of the cam position to the range finder. Building a camera with the very same roller cam arm, roller and spring without the parts which read out the position of the cam is not even 'engineering'; it's straightforward.

Anyway, it's not that important an issue. There are lots of sensors capable of detecting the lens moving forward and backward. It's not rocket science.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[JulyLL]

Hey everyone I originally created this post just to share my thoughts on the future of M models and Leica. 

I love the fact that the community got involved and we all voiced our opinions. 

I'm happy to announce after a few weeks of going back and forth I decided to purchase the M11 Black 

Super excited  to use the range finder and hope to capture some amazing memories with friends, and family.

[pop]

4 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

something that has worked well since the 1950s

How well it has worked since the 1950s can be seen by the existence of the Visoflex, among other contraptions, and I don't mean the pseudo Visoflex for the digital M but the original Visoflex. The Messsucherkamera is a lovely thing with well nigh perfect ergonomics for a smallish spectrum of photographic tasks. There are other tasks where the M does not excel, at times not even with the Visoflex.

4 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

the meßsucherkamera ethos

Er - what? Since when is there an ethos to Messsucher cameras? Am I guilty of something when I choose not use a Messsucher for any given photograph?