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

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, fleeja said:

Keep it as an optical viewfinder but instead of lining up the rangefinder patch mechanically make a small area read directly off the sensor with phase detect pixels. Give me a green dot or something showing when that area is in focus. You could have green arrows outside the red exposure arrows showing which way you need to focus and then a green dot in the middle when it’s in focus. 

This leaves the exact same user experience as we have now but eliminates mechanical inaccuracies in the lenses, camera/rangefinder as it’s read off the sensor itself. This also allows ‘rangefinder type’ focusing to be used with adapters and alternate mount lenses. It’s easy to see in low light and allows people with glasses or aging eyes to still use the M system as intended. It’s simple to implement as there’s nothing really to add, it’s just removing the rangefinder and adding a few more indicators to the viewfinder window. They already have sensors with phase detect pixels. Hell, even leave the rangefinder and give me that as a second confirmation to it. Although, I’d rather have the rangefinder space filled with an internal flash or something else. 
 

I don’t want a full time EVF. The dual Fuji X-Pro type would be best but I don’t see any way leica implements that without lots of compromises that make it a step backwards 

The problem is the M lenses do not communicate anything electronically, therefore the best you could hope for would be a mediocre accuracy. You also need distance information from the lens to get the directional indicators such as Canon uses with their Focus Guide overlay, which tells you which way to move the lens to bring it into focus. Without any electronics in the lens communicating with the body, highly-accurate digital focus confirmation is a lost cause.

 

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

We can assume that Leica would use M sensor geometry in an M type body. 

My point was that the SL2/SL2-S as currently designed requires quite a bit of space behind the sensor to make room for IBIS and perhaps other electronics and/or cooling. If the M maintains the sensor almost flush with the rear of the camera, the IBIS mech would have to be designed from scratch to have most of its mass in front of the sensor. Even then, is there enough room in the M between the sensor and the rear inside of the camera to move the sensor backward far enough to achieve a decent number of stops of stabilization? 

[Advertisement]

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

[fleeja]

4 hours ago, pop said:

This is not the case.

The user experience as we have now includes seeing exactly which part of the scene is in focus. The focus confirmation tells that something within the focusing area is exactly in focus. Not the same.

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) 

[fleeja]

1 hour ago, hdmesa said:

The problem is the M lenses do not communicate anything electronically, therefore the best you could hope for would be a mediocre accuracy. You also need distance information from the lens to get the directional indicators such as Canon uses with their Focus Guide overlay, which tells you which way to move the lens to bring it into focus. Without any electronics in the lens communicating with the body, highly-accurate digital focus confirmation is a lost cause.

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? 

Edited February 19, 2023 by fleeja

[fleeja]

39 minutes 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? 

Expanding on my previous thought. Leica has a tight relationship with Panasonic. If they were only concerned with their own lenses (which I assume they would) they could license the DFD technology which used the out of focus areas to determine which way the lens needed to focus by knowing the characteristics of the lens, which they would with the 6 bit code. Seems as though they have abandoned this on their latest cameras. It worked great for photos but couldn’t keep up with video in some situations. 

Edited February 19, 2023 by fleeja

[IkarusJohn]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

We can assume that Leica would use M sensor geometry in an M type body. 

Agreed, and I don't really see a smaller SL - at least, not M sized.

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, hdmesa said:

The problem is the M lenses do not communicate anything electronically, therefore the best you could hope for would be a mediocre accuracy. You also need distance information from the lens to get the directional indicators such as Canon uses with their Focus Guide overlay, which tells you which way to move the lens to bring it into focus. Without any electronics in the lens communicating with the body, highly-accurate digital focus confirmation is a lost cause.

 

My point was that the SL2/SL2-S as currently designed requires quite a bit of space behind the sensor to make room for IBIS and perhaps other electronics and/or cooling. If the M maintains the sensor almost flush with the rear of the camera, the IBIS mech would have to be designed from scratch to have most of its mass in front of the sensor. Even then, is there enough room in the M between the sensor and the rear inside of the camera to move the sensor backward far enough to achieve a decent number of stops of stabilization? 

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. 

[raizans]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

M lenses don’t have IS, so IBIS would be nice.

[jaapv]

8 minutes ago, raizans said:

M lenses don’t have IS, so IBIS would be nice.

And M cameras have no IBIS - so we have to do what photographers have been doing for over 150 years - hold the camera steady.

[IkarusJohn]

So, what's the best camera for M lenses?

Let's see:

• sensor with micro lenses to cope with the low incidence angle off centre
• a cam to read focus adjustment off the lens helicoid
• M mount
• M body

Switching out the OVF for an EVF requires no other changes, to my mind.  That's the point.  The cam could be dispensed with, but then there would be no option of auto-magnification, which I find very useful.  If you take an M10, with the EVF, and change nothing but putting the EVF inside the body, then you have the concept.

Don't change anything else!

[raizans]

If an M camera ever ends up with IBIS, would you still buy it?

[IkarusJohn]

1 minute ago, raizans said:

If an M camera ever ends up with IBIS, would you still buy it?

Probably not.

[raizans]

5 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Probably not.

Why not definitely?

[jaapv]

And if it had IBIS which implies M240 size would you buy it? 

[lct]

5 minutes ago, jaapv said:

And M cameras have no IBIS - so we have to do what photographers have been doing for over 150 years - hold the camera steady.

Not the same on low and high res sensors. I'm rather proud of my steady hand for an oldie but i need 1/(2f)s on the M11 and other colleague here prefer 1/(3f)s or 1/(4f)s as minimum shutter speed. I miss the time when i could use slow shutter speeds and i can do it only with IBIS on high res sensors. BTW the reason why IBIS is not implemented in the M11 is camera size according to Leica who considers it a "desirable improvement". 

[raizans]

Yes, I’d buy it.

[raizans]

Thin rangefinder, thicc EVF-M. Sounds like a nice pair.

[IkarusJohn]

24 minutes ago, raizans said:

Why not definitely?

Because it's a low priority; much like higher resolution sensors.

If it isn't a negative, then I'd probably just switch it off.  The negatives are - another thing to go wrong; it's not necessary; and I really don't need moving parts in my M camera.

Edit - where the M is concerned, more isn't always better.  The whole point is what is "essential".

Edited February 19, 2023 by IkarusJohn

[raizans]

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

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[fleeja]

2 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Because it's a low priority; much like higher resolution sensors.

If it isn't a negative, then I'd probably just switch it off.  The negatives are - another thing to go wrong; it's not necessary; and I really don't need moving parts in my M camera.

Edit - where the M is concerned, more isn't always better.  The whole point is what is "essential".

The M has more moving parts than pretty much any modern camera…..most cameras won’t even have moving shutters in a few years.

The Sony A7C has IBIS, full frame sensor, and is smaller then an M. 

[IkarusJohn]

5 minutes ago, fleeja said:

... The Sony A7C has IBIS, full frame sensor, and is smaller then an M. 

Had one of them - not going back there.