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

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, pegelli said:

Too bad for people who use FLE lenses, and these AF adapters are clunky at best (at least that's the impression I get when reading several reviews).

Not that i use the Techart adapter that often but it seems so easy to use (in good light preferably) that i never read a review so far. Just prefocus manually and let the adapter nail the focus by itself. Makes no difference between FLE and non FLE lenses then.

[Advertisement]

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

[pgk]

17 hours ago, JulyLL said:

I believe there is a clear market for a well-built M model with EVF and Autofocus.

Individual's 'belief' and the reality of the marketplace for a small, expensive to develop and technically challenging to create may well not coincide.

This topic has been done to death here before. If there was a simple solution and it was potentially profitable, I am sure that Leica would have produced something by now.

[JulyLL]

6 minutes ago, Knipsknecht said:

Yes, sure - but then you will have to live with its technological shortcomings. The same way as your rather pricey A. Lange & Söhne watch pleases your eyes while every 100 Euro Seiko or 50 Euro Casio digital watch will always be much more accurate and precise. As the world looks right now you cannot have both - the latest tech and the super-luxurious looks -, at least as long as Apple didn’t acquire Leica😄.

lol wow, imagine if apple dropped some of its reserved on Leica. 

I also love G shocks   but very good point 

[JulyLL]

9 minutes ago, pgk said:

Individual's 'belief' and the reality of the marketplace for a small, expensive to develop and technically challenging to create may well not coincide.

This topic has been done to death here before. If there was a simple solution and it was potentially profitable, I am sure that Leica would have produced something by now.

lol that's why I started with I believe 

All good points 

[dpitt]

25 minutes ago, JulyLL said:

lol wow, imagine if apple dropped some of its reserved on Leica. 

I also love G shocks   but very good point 

Posted too early. See below.
 

Edited December 7, 2022 by dpitt

[dpitt]

2 minutes ago, JulyLL said:

lol wow, imagine if apple dropped some of its reserved on Leica. 

I also love G shocks   but very good point 

Oh no. Bad idea! While I am loving the Apple products since the 90's, IMO Apple has a totally different understanding of High End Product marketing and distribution.
Apple designs and produces great products, but their long term vision and customer service are not even in the same ball park as Leica's.

If Apple took over Leica, your M11 would be discontinued after a year, warranty would be limited to 1 year and price would drop as fast as the competitions prices.  Serviceability would be probably 5 years or less.
Issues like a coffee stain on my M8 were solved gracefully and out of 2 year warranty period by upgrading to an M9 for a discount more than what I paid for my M8.
My M9 got a new improved sensor and complete CLA after the corrosion problem. Both problems were caused by their suppliers, but Leica made the best of it.

Try this with Apple. My Macbook Air died with HDD failure one month out of warranty... total loss, because the main drive is soldered on the motherboard and Apple thinks a 2 years old product must be upgraded soon anyway.
Apple Aperture was an other adventure that caused a lot of pain to users. Not only was it discontinued fairly abruptly. Soon, it would not work on the newest OS which you  were forced to upgrade to because your newest Mac or iPhone needed it to work.
And I can go on...

No luck for M3 or Barnack camera owners also...happily using 70 year old systems.

[pegelli]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

33 minutes ago, lct said:

Just prefocus manually and let the adapter nail the focus by itself. Makes no difference between FLE and non FLE lenses then.

I think that sounds more like  a MF/AF hybrid solution. I agree it will work technically but I don't think it will attract many people.

[dpitt]

17 hours ago, JulyLL said:

SL3 - Offer 2 models, Auto Focus EVF with Video Capabilities, SL3S, 

M - Offer 3 models, Film, Digital Range Finder, EVF/Auto Focus 

Q3 - Offer 3 models, fixed 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm lens - Great entry into the brand and the perfect second cam.

Not sure about the SL3.

I'm afraid the M idea would not work at all as stated above by others.

The Q3 makes some sense to me. I would even go further. Why not make it with interchangeable lenses. The Summilux 28mm to begin with and a Leica M adapter.
Actually this kind of Q3 looks a bit like the M in your initial idea, and because it is a Q, it seems a logical evolution to me. Reminds me of the Digilux 3 successor to the Digilux 2. Hopefully it would fare better than the Digilux 3 that ended the product line 🙂

[lct]

1 minute ago, pegelli said:

I think that sounds more like  a MF/AF hybrid solution. I agree it will work technically but I don't think it will attract many people.

Good for M lens users getting older like truly yours, or for younger ones with children around them. Others don't need AF or don't use M lenses anyway. 

[dpitt]

1 minute ago, lct said:

Good for M lens users getting older like truly yours, or for younger ones with children around them. Others don't need AF or don't use M lenses anyway. 

And probably a better experience for tele and macro than the EVF on the M series. The Q3 would be a complimentary system to the M as well as being a nice compact package on its own.
Also, of course in time more AF lenses like the 28mm would follow to make all AF users happy.

[Herr Barnack]

I don't need it. 

[pegelli]

14 minutes ago, lct said:

Good for M lens users getting older like truly yours, or for younger ones with children around them. Others don't need AF or don't use M lenses anyway. 

I can see where it's useful if it would be available, but I doubt it will attract enough customers to be interesting for Leica with so many very good full AF solutions available from  other brands as well as Leica. Did Techart already develop such an adapter for AF of M-mount lenses on an L-mount camera?

I have several AF cameras as well as two M-series rangefinders, both have strong and weak points and for me and I really wouldn't see any need to have a camera where I need to prefocus manually first and then let the AF take over. I just imagine too many missed shots when the small throw hits its limits when the pre-focus is set at a slightly too long or too short distance,

Edited December 7, 2022 by pegelli

[JulyLL]

28 minutes ago, dpitt said:

Not sure about the SL3.

I'm afraid the M idea would not work at all as stated above by others.

The Q3 makes some sense to me. I would even go further. Why not make it with interchangeable lenses. The Summilux 28mm to begin with and a Leica M adapter.
Actually this kind of Q3 looks a bit like the M in your initial idea, and because it is a Q, it seems a logical evolution to me. Reminds me of the Digilux 3 successor to the Digilux 2. Hopefully it would fare better than the Digilux 3 that ended the product line 🙂

This makes sense, I would love a Q with M Mount options 

[pegelli]

11 minutes ago, dpitt said:

Also, of course in time more AF lenses like the 28mm would follow to make all AF users happy.

If Leica went through all the trouble of developing an M-mount AF camera that focusses by moving the mount rather than moving glass elements inside the lens-housing what would be their motivation to develop AF M-mount lenses that don't use that system?

[dpitt]

1 minute ago, pegelli said:

If Leica went through all the trouble of developing an M-mount AF camera that focusses by moving the mount rather than moving glass elements inside the lens-housing what would be their motivation to develop AF M-mount lenses that don't use that system?

I just meant a 'dumb' M adapter to begin with, nothing can/needs to be changed in the M lens line up. Perfectly happy to focus any M lens manually. It would just be an easy way to make the system more flexible and using almost all existing products like the Q2 body, Summilux 28 and some kind of bajonet mount. AFAIK the Q is not using a fixed L mount. That would be too easy 😀
AF lenses would need  be 'native' Q like the Summilux 28mm is now.

[lct]

1 minute ago, pegelli said:

I really wouldn't see any need to have a camera where I need to prefocus manually first and then let the AF take over [...]

That's what i've been doing manually for 30+ years, except that i did and can still nail focus with a steady hand. Will come a day when i (we?) will need a bit of help though and AF can be a solution w/o having to change our gear.

[Jewl]

I‘d be happy already with having a non crashing / error free M11. If I think of even more electronic features in an M body, this could get interesting in terms of reliability and robustness 😉 

[lct]

4 hours ago, pegelli said:

Why not? Voigtländer, Ricoh and Minolta have called cameras with an M-mount differently and even Leica didn't give every camera they made with an M-mount an M-series designation

Indeed we've got M-Rokkor (Minolta M), M-Hexanon (Konica M), VM (Voigtlander M) and ZM (Zeiss M) lenses, why not M-Leikor or M-Leikon, sounds good for you? . Just kidding.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[LocalHero1953]

Much though I would like a SL3 in a M-sized body with a range of AF lenses matched to size, this subject has been done to death so many times on this forum that we have the answers off pat.

• Even if you omit video to cut down heat dissipation requirements (omitting video would stop me buying it immediately), you still need to fit the EVF and its optics in the M body shape. Even in the CL they couldn't quite manage it. Compromise option? Low quality EVF.
• Adding AF to a lens isn't just adding a motor. It's redesigning the lens so that the motor just has to throw one light element or group around. This is a constraint the exceptionally small M lenses don't have to deal with. Compromise option? Slow AF.
• The Q isn't just a lens fitted to a camera. It's a camera and lens designed as a piece with a leaf shutter and optical stabilisation. Make the lens interchangeable, and you either need a new range of AF lenses with leaf shutters and OIS, or you need to add a focal plane shutter and IBIS. Compromise? A fatter camera than the M, or bigger lenses.

The compromises you get with the M are functional, but they make the system small and svelte. The compromises you get with a SL are not functional, but weight and size. The compromises you get with the Q are the limited range of effective focal lengths. 

Life and photography are full of compromises.

Edited December 7, 2022 by LocalHero1953

[pop]

7 minutes ago, Musky said:

I don’t understand your logic. The M is unique because nobody else is making digital rangefinders.

The M is unique because not many others make digital rangefinders.

Rangefinder cameras are very good at very few things.

Rangefinder cameras suck at many other things.

In order to do the things where rangefinder cameras are not best, you need another camera or other cameras.

Having spent a sound amount of money on an insanely good set of lenses, using those lenses on other cameras seems very sensible. Actually, it's mandatory if you want any kind of homogenity in your work. Using the lenses with the same sensor stack and camera software is nearly equally important.

Therefore, you'd need a camera with the same sensor stack and the same lenses but with a body and finders better suited to the task than the rangefinder one.

Which could be an EVF M.