Jump to content

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

FlashGordonPhotography

By FlashGordonPhotography
in Leica M11

 Share

Survey: Would you buy an EVF only camera with an M mount?  

473 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Leica make a manual focus EVF camera?

    • Absolutely. I'm second in line after Flash.
      191
    • Never! It's the work of the Devil.
      77
    • Hmmm? Not sure. I'd want to see it first.
      106
    • I want one of each. M11 and this new wonder camera!
      30
    • Not for me but I'd be happy if it exists.
      61
    • Does it come in Monochrom?
      8

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

LUF Admin
LUF Admin

Was the umpthieth account of this guy. Banned again… Andreas

shirubadanieru
shirubadanieru

Rangefinder is still the best system ever made for manual focus. Much better than an SLR, much better than an EVF, much better than anything else out there. That’s the reason why I use Leica, because

charlesphoto99
charlesphoto99

It's sad to see how many users buy into the M system but don't understand the working ethos of it. The M is, and should always be, about the OVF and rangefinder focusing. It's what makes it unique, es

Posted Images

evikne

evikne

Posted
Posted

I would consider an EVF-M if it could display the actual depth of field with a virtual RF patch in the middle. The best of both worlds!

And I don't care about any other features as long as it looks exactly like a regular M.

Link to post
Share on other sites
charlesphoto99

charlesphoto99

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, lct said:

Different experience here. I use focus magnification at working aperture and i don't find it hard to focus at all. CV 15/4.5 v2 at f/5.6 on M11 here, FF and 100% crops.

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!

Not even sure what this example is supposed to prove, esp with a 15mm. Were those trees running at full speed across your path? No need for anything but the rf with stationary objects and superwide lenses, if even that. At 5.6 I would expect things to be in focus from about Infinity to ten feet, at least. I never have understood M users so called inability to focus wide lenses accurately. Here's with an 18mm Elmar and an M10 using the RF at f4 or thereabouts. It's not rocket science.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
lct

lct

Posted
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Not even sure what this example is supposed to prove, esp with a 15mm. Were those trees running at full speed across your path? No need for anything but the rf with stationary objects and superwide lenses, if even that. At 5.6 I would expect things to be in focus from about Infinity to ten feet, at least.

Because you're not used to high res sensors perhaps. The good old DoF rules based on 0.03mm CoC value are made for A4 or A5 (don't recall) prints watched at arm's length more or less. Not for billboards or high res digital images watched on 100% crops.  I chose a 15mm pic on purpose to show that even with such UWA lenses, all is not equally sharp and that nailing focus may be useful or necessary. But also that it is not a difficult task with an EVF in reply to a post above suggesting the opposite.

Edited by lct
Link to post
Share on other sites
SrMi

SrMi

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Actually I was intrigued. I put the Summilux 24 on the SL and focused by FP unmagnified wide open at 1m.  Switching to magnification, FP was spot-on - 100% of the time...

Did you shoot wide open or at f/4 or even f/8? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
evikne

evikne

Posted
Posted

50mm Summilux ASPH wide open at 1.5 meters distance. Three shots in a row of dancing girls in very dim light (much darker than these pictures). Only RF focusing, but all shots with perfect focus (only some motion blur). No problem. 😉

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
charlesphoto99

charlesphoto99

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, lct said:

Because you're not used to high res sensors perhaps. The good old DoF rules based on 0.03mm CoC value are made for A4 or A5 (don't recall) prints watched at arm's length more or less. Not for billboards or high res digital images watched on 100% crops.  I chose a 15mm pic on purpose to show that even with such UWA lenses, all is not equally sharp and that nailing focus may be useful or necessary. But also that it is not a difficult task with an EVF in reply to a post above suggesting the opposite.

Hmmm, I don't know about that. I currently have an M10-R and M10m, but perhaps those are not hi-res enough? I did shoot for years with a much higher res 'sensor' rangefinder camera called the Mamiya 6/7 and had little problem consistently nailing focus, even doing book of breakdancers with them. But maybe that's just me. Below, M10M, 135mm APO, f8. No way would I have been able to take that with an EVF - I would find it just too 'busy' not to mention the blackout issue. But like I said, it seems many need/desire the EVF - I'm just wondering how often this 'crutch' (in my mind) actually helps or hurts.  

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
otto.f

otto.f

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

No way would I have been able to take that with an EVF

That's what I thought too. I cannot imagine in the actual state of EVF's that you can shoot as fast and direct as with a well adjusted M

Link to post
Share on other sites
otto.f

otto.f

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, lct said:

Nice pic :). Focused at f/11 with an EVF here (Digital CL, Tessar 35/3.5, Macro-adapter-M). 

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-qcxMQzZ/0/c46961f0/X4/i-qcxMQzZ-X4.jpg

Except that the bird flies away in a fraction of a second and the insect stays on the leaf for a while

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Kiwimac

Kiwimac

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, SrMi said:

I meant: why an M-mount EVF (not RF) camera instead of an L-mount EVF camera? Let's assume an L-mount camera that is lighter and about the same size or smaller than a digital M. What would be the advantage of an M-EVF? Maybe taking video out of SL2 would be enough to make it smaller and lighter.

In my case, because I like the build and aesthetics of the M body shape. 
 

I’ll continue to use them as they are, but the thread is about whether I’d buy an M11 fitted with an SL EVF internally instead of a RF if such a thing were to eventuate.

I almost certainly would.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
charlesphoto99

charlesphoto99

Posted
Posted

Well, the one thing I think we can all agree on is that for anything under .7m an EVF is far superior to the M rangefinder, lol.

In a moment of pandemic weakness, I did impulse buy a CL with the 18mm pancake and M adapter. Cute, well built camera for what it is, but I found the whole experience to be slow and subpar to an M, except in p&s mode with the 18, and the humongous, expensive native lenses over that rendered the whole concept moot, imo. Which reminds me, I need to dig it out of the case and sell it one of these days while I still can. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
charlesphoto99

charlesphoto99

Posted
Posted

I will also concede that just like it takes hundreds of hours (if not many years) to master the rangefinder, it may take just as long to master using an EVF successfully. I'm probably just stuck in my ways. I say Leica go for it with an EVF M, it just won't be for me for the reasons stated, and I'd hate for others to miss out on the magic of an all manual system of focus and exposure because they're not given the chance. But I'm sure they won't do so without having rf M's always in the line up. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Herr Barnack

Herr Barnack

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, SrMi said:

Let's not. The N-word has a very negative connotation and so does an N-camera.

My mind didn't go there - neither did anyone else's.  It's interesting that only yours did.

At the end of the day, the letter "N" is just another letter in the alphabet.

 

Edited by Herr Barnack
Link to post
Share on other sites
SrMi

SrMi

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Herr Barnack said:

My mind didn't go there - neither did anyone else's.  It's interesting that only yours did.

At the end of the day, the letter "N" is just another letter in the alphabet.

[deleted]

Edited by SrMi
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...