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

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

33 minutes ago, Planetwide said:

Horst Faas - "The Dean of Vietnam War photographers"

A quick image search shows him using Ms (no visoflex) and SLRs in Vietnam too. There are also many more images of photographers using Nikons. Trying to prove anything by illustrating a point with exceptions isn't really very effective.

I think I will refer to this thread as the clockwork thread in future😉.

[Planetwide]

5 minutes ago, pgk said:

A quick image search shows him using Ms (no visoflex) and SLRs in Vietnam too. There are also many more images of photographers using Nikons. Trying to prove anything by illustrating a point with exceptions isn't really very effective.

I think I will refer to this thread as the clockwork thread in future😉.

I doubt that he carried a Visoflex for the odd photo. The visoflex was used by many a professional photographer in the day, that's why Leica made them. Blanket statements, hardly  apply either.

Visoflex's, whether yesteryear or today, are simply a tool to allow for critical focus. People's preference to not use one, does not negate its usefulness to other photographers. At this point, I think it's "horses for courses" so to speak. We each have our preferences, and that is why I advocate for choices.

[pop]

1 hour ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Name one famous Leica photo or photographer that used a Visoflex to create their images? Of course one can't, as it isn't the main purpose/purview of the camera.

You're right. The main purpose for any camera is not to make the owner famous. It's to make pictures. If you can refuse to take a picture merely because the camera is clunky, you don't need the picture in the first place.

[lct]

Bizarre Visoflex 3. Hard to do with a Q camera .

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!

[LocalHero1953]

If Leica had to rely on famous pro photographers for their sales, they would be out of business decades ago*. Amateurs, including the incompetent, clueless, clumsy and unimprovable, keep Leica going**.

 

* except as marketing aids.
** as long as they have money.

Edited December 15, 2022 by LocalHero1953

[charlesphoto99]

28 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

If Leica had to rely on famous pro photographers for their sales, they would be out of business decades ago*. Amateurs, including the incompetent, clueless, clumsy and unimprovable, keep Leica going**.

 

* except as marketing aids.
** as long as they have money.

Since when did Leica use pro photographers for marketing (aside from dusting off Ralph Gibson now and then)? I thought it was all B-list rockers and r&b singers now. 

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Since when did Leica use pro photographers for marketing (aside from dusting off Ralph Gibson now and then)? I thought it was all B-list rockers and r&b singers now. 

Joel Meyerowitz, Steve McCurry, Allan Schaller, etc.

[charlesphoto99]

Just now, SrMi said:

Joel Meyerowitz, Steve McCurry, Allan Schaller, etc.

Sure, but not lately. 

[SrMi]

3 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Sure, but not lately. 

Checking YouTube post, the three I mentioned were "used" within the last year or two.

[Tailwagger]

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Amateurs, including the incompetent, clueless, clumsy and unimprovable, keep Leica going**.
** as long as they have money.

Did you really have target me specifically?!?  Well the jokes on you, now that I'm retired, I don't have any money so you missed... ha!  😆

[LocalHero1953]

Just now, Tailwagger said:

Did you really have target me specifically?!?  Well the jokes on you, now that I'm retired, I don't have any money so you missed... ha!  😆

Well, I didn't see this one coming.
Not targeted at you at all - nor anyone - I quoted no one - just following the thread and its diversion into famous photographers and why they might or might not use a Visoflex.
I have no idea if you were or are a professional.

[Tailwagger]

1 minute ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Well, I didn't see this one coming.
Not targeted at you at all - nor anyone - I quoted no one - just following the thread and its diversion into famous photographers and why they might or might not use a Visoflex.
I have no idea if you were or are a professional.

Was just kidding around!  Apologies if I wasn't being silly enough to make that clear. 

[LocalHero1953]

43 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Was just kidding around!  Apologies if I wasn't being silly enough to make that clear. 

Ah! My apologies, this time, for being dense!

[Tailwagger]

55 minutes ago, Musky said:

what you want is a small ILC mirrorless Leica. you want the FF Fuji XE4 M Mount camera. 

Please refrain from telling me what I want, especially since I spelled it out quite clearly in my post.

1 hour ago, Musky said:

But eventually you’ll all be asking for autofocus too.

Pray tell how long is eventually?  I only ask because I'm one of the more junior members here, having only shot with the M for 10 years and as yet I've never once rued the lack of AF. In fact other than this thread, I can't ever recall the subject coming up.  And if ever I do, it just so happens that I own and use Hasselblad and Pentax MF AF cameras and a SL2 as well. So I'd say I'm somewhat covered on that front. 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Musky said:

I’m not overlooking it. But I can’t post every step on how to make a Q work with M lenses. Make it electronic shutter. That was the other suggestion here no? Take out the shutter because who needs that. 
 
Obviously they have to reengineer it. 

I can’t suggest L mount Because you want to shoot your M lenses. But eventually you’ll all be asking for autofocus too. 

what you want is a small ILC mirrorless Leica. you want the FF Fuji XE4 M Mount camera. 

Can’t suggest just adapting the M lens to another camera because it won’t say Leica in the front. Every suggestion is bad except take the M and kill it. 

I would suggest that you apply for an engineering position with Leica. They are clearly in dire need.

[jaapv]

8 hours ago, lct said:

confusions between M-mount and L-mount cameras

I've said it before - the obvious solution is Superglue on the adapter...    Oh -  and to add a toothpick to activate magnification.

[lct]

32 minutes ago, Musky said:

Here’s your new Leica M

https://www.thephoblographer.com/2020/09/15/using-the-sony-a7c-with-leica-m-mount-lenses-is-an-overdue-dream/

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!

Been there done that but better since 2015 with Kolari mod A7s then A7r2 cameras. Very good cameras indeed, especially the latter with its BSI sensor with thin sensor stack, but in spite of Kolari Vision efforts, all they can do is competing with SL cameras in a smaller package. Only solution to respect M lenses is give those cameras a sensor dedicated to them, an M mount and auto image magnification. 

[Tailwagger]

 

1 hour ago, Musky said:

you’re saying people will get an EVF and then want nothing else ever again right? EVF and IBIS. And then people will stop asking for more and more. 😅

No you're saying it.  Repeatedly. Let me attempt, futile I know, to spell it out one last time for you before I blot this exchange from all memory.

Despite years of arguing about it, there remains a desire among some members of this community for an EVF based camera with an M mount. No AF, no optical RF, just a simple camera solely devoted to creating the best possible experience when using M glass in concert with an EVF.  That notion sadly, but understandably, resurfaced for the umpteenth time in this thread. That is what is being discussed at the moment, not the fantasies of the OP.

Now those who would like to see an M-EVF, as it has been dubbed, are people that a completely familiar with the M.  Many, myself included, have tried adaption, be it on the SL or elsewhere and found the experience wanting.  In the end, I personally concluded that the current solution provided by the M, optical plus electronic viewing, is likely the best one can hope for and largely moved on from this notion. Why did I lose my enthusiasm for the M-EVF?  A belief that the price differential to an M wouldn't justify the loss of the OVF given the lack of auto aperture. AFAIC, it is not possible to quickly and reliably focus wides to a specific point in the scene with an EVF when the lens is stopped down.  For me, that is crucial functionality. But for others this limitation might be preferable to having to employ multiple finders.  So, unlike you apparently, I respect their desire for such a device, despite my relative indifference at this point.  But, one never knows, perhaps the folks at Leica might have some clever solution for this problem or be able to create something so compelling that I'd be willing to work around it, assuming it's priced appropriately. Otherwise, I'm content using the two M-EVF prototypes I already possess, namely the M11 and M10-R.  

And speaking of Leica, before you start in again on why an EVF based M mount camera is dumb ass idea, you should know that it is a matter of public record that Leica has acknowledged these desires and explored variants of this concept in the past. While they long ago nixed the notion of an EVF based RF system any time soon... if ever... there have been more recent rumblings from credible sources that they continue to consider the notion of an non-RF EVF based M mount camera. But then they actually make a serious attempt to listen and comprehend.

[raizans]

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

AFAIC, it is not possible to quickly and reliably focus wides to a specific point in the scene with an EVF when the lens is stopped down. 

Wides stopped down are easy to focus because they have such deep depth-of-field. When working quickly, line things up on the scale or pull the tab by feel, no viewfinder focusing aid needed. When working slowly, there’s 100% zoom. It’s more about the technique than the camera.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Tailwagger]

48 minutes ago, raizans said:

Wides stopped down are easy to focus because they have such deep depth-of-field. When working quickly, line things up on the scale or pull the tab by feel, no viewfinder focusing aid needed. When working slowly, there’s 100% zoom. It’s more about the technique than the camera.

Sorry, but I disagree. There's a qualitative difference between zone focusing and crossing your fingers, as opposed to knowing precisely where the center of the CoC is. Not all pixels within the circle are created equal. Might not matter in some cases... I've certainly run and gunned through crowds with a 21mm without having used either VF and come away reasonably satisfied.  But equally I've run into any number of situations where more precise control of the DoF was quite crucial for the final result. Either way, it's pretty damn simple to run the test how accurate you actually are with the M. And there is zero doubt that in my hands, its far easier, faster and generally more accurate to focus with the RF at any focal length at or below 35mm regardless of aperture. YMMV, of course.