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

[thrid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 11/4/2023 at 12:45 AM, lct said:

A lower cost EVF-M would kill the rangefinder line i'm afraid. It is the main problem of the EVF-M IMHO. Less expensive it would cannibalize RF sales. As expensive, it would be hard to sell. But i may be wrong as often...

I feel that is a very valid point. 

It certainly would be cheaper to manufacture an EVF M than the mechanical RF type.  I also suspect that the M12 may do away with the mechanical shutter, if they can get a sense with a true global shutter. But I wouldn't hold my breath that those manufacturing savings will be passed along to the customers.

I have no doubt that a EVF-M would be a big seller for Leica and it is not unreasonable to assume that it would outsell its mechanical counterpart. Especially if the EVF model was cheaper (yeah, right) or even if the EVF did not provide the same feedback for some types of shooting.

So, at that point the survival of an OVF RF M becomes a question. What happens if RF M sales drop to 20% or less of total M sales?

But Leica shooters are an odd bunch.

For many people the reason to spend $9000 on an archaic digital camera is that fact that it essentially operates like its analog predecessors. And that includes the lack of an EVF. I have at least one friend who shoots Sony who specifically purchased an M10 for this very reason. You also have the diehard OVF shooters who will never switch.

On the other hand you have people for whom new is always better or their style of shooting does not require split second timing. Some people may simply have issues with their eyesight and the EVF may have some benefit for them.

It's a tough one to predict, aside from the fact that a EVF M is a high probability.

If I had to bet money I would say,- yes, there will be an EVF M, but Leica will keep the RF M in production even id sales drop considerably, just like they still make film bodies.

Edited November 5, 2023 by thrid

[setuporg]

The lenses are still expensive.  So a cheaper body will not change the dynamics.  Plus is you look at Q/SL line, it gives you an idea already.

[thrid]

On 11/3/2023 at 10:32 PM, IkarusJohn said:

Looks like a strawman argument to me.  You say that an EVF doesn’t work for you, then you say “spraying and praying” is the new way to shooting, then you say that doesn’t work with an M camera.

The simple answer, of course, is that you adjust.  

You do realize that capturing the decisive moment is not just about fast moving action with people jumping over a puddle or shooting athletes?

It also occurs when people are not moving quickly or are still, and you are trying to capture an emotion in their eyes that is only there for a fleeting instant.

That's actually much harder to do than grabbing an action shot. Aside from the lag, you may also not see it, because the EVF doesn't necessarily resolve enough detail to see the emotion in a persons eyes.

That's aside from the point that you have to become invisible to the subject.

Do you really want to sit there in an intimate setting firing bursts at 10-20 fps for what could be many seconds or minutes? Aside from the ridiculous amount of data you would be capturing, you would also intrude on the moment and make the subject self conscious.

 

Here's an example. 

You know who this shot was taken? Eugene Smith sat in the corner, very quietly and pretended to be a fly on the wall, so everyone forgot he was there.
Then as the action unfolded and the pose and expression on the woman's face and her body language reached its emotional peak (aka the decisive moment) for a fraction of a second, he snapped a single picture. 

That's why lag in an EVF is a problem. You may never see the moment or miss it. The M series has excelled at this type of work for decades, because of the clear image of the viewfinder, the extremely low shutter lag and comparatively quiet shutter. We already have a shutter release that is less crisp than the film cameras and an EVF with some lag is only going to compound that issue.

If Smith had been sitting here spraying away he would have been noticed and intruded on a very delicate moment. The crowd may have become annoyed or offended and turned on him, because they trusted him and invited him to document this very, very private and intimate moment in a respectful unobtrusive  way.

 

Now, as I said before an EVF-M is going to work just fine for the vast majority of customers. But for a certain percentage of Leica M shooters there is a long way to go with the current technology and an opto-mechanical RF is still going to be the way to go.

I'm going to hedge a bet that we will have both options, which ultimately will make this conversation a moot point.

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!

[thrid]

47 minutes ago, setuporg said:

The lenses are still expensive.  So a cheaper body will not change the dynamics.  Plus is you look at Q/SL line, it gives you an idea already.

Yes, the lenses are still expensive. But the vast majority of them are not $9000 dollars and we all already own lenses that carry over from body to body..

You could also buy a Zeiss ZM or Voigtlander lens.

Lenses also don't have a 'shelf life', unlike digital cameras.

The main stumbling block for many is the cost of the body that is on a 5years upgrade cycle and depreciating every year. If you are a working pro or serious amateur / artist you really need at least two bodies and ideally three.

One is none, two is one and three is two.

That's a serious amount of money on a digital device that is depreciating at a rapid pace and have a fixed life span in the used market.

If the price of the M12 dropped by an appreciable amount, because they don't have the overhead of the very expensive RF unit and the mechanical shutter, then that could present a substantial discount for anyone needing more than one body.

But we all know that it is delusional to think that Leica is going to cut the cost of an EVF-M12, even of it is cheaper to make than the RF model.

You'd have a better chance of Hollywood giving up on making derivative sequels than that happening.

Edited November 5, 2023 by thrid

[IkarusJohn]

32 minutes ago, thrid said:

You do realize that capturing the decisive moment is not just about fast moving action with people jumping over a puddle or shooting athletes?

It also occurs when people are not moving quickly or are still, and you are trying to capture an emotion in their eyes that is only there for a fleeting instant.

That's actually much harder to do than grabbing an action shot. Aside from the lag, you may also not see it, because the EVF doesn't necessarily resolve enough detail to see the emotion in a persons eyes.

That's aside from the point that you have to become invisible to the subject.

Do you really want to sit there in an intimate setting firing bursts at 10-20 fps for what could be many seconds or minutes? Aside from the ridiculous amount of data you would be capturing, you would also intrude on the moment and make the subject self conscious.

 

Here's an example. 

You know who this shot was taken? Eugene Smith sat in the corner, very quietly and pretended to be a fly on the wall, so everyone forgot he was there.
Then as the action unfolded and the pose and expression on the woman's face and her body language reached its emotional peak (aka the decisive moment) for a fraction of a second, he snapped a single picture. 

That's why lag in an EVF is a problem. You may never see the moment or miss it. The M series has excelled at this type of work for decades, because of the clear image of the viewfinder, the extremely low shutter lag and comparatively quiet shutter. We already have a shutter release that is less crisp than the film cameras and an EVF with some lag is only going to compound that issue.

If Smith had been sitting here spraying away he would have been noticed and intruded on a very delicate moment. The crowd may have become annoyed or offended and turned on him, because they trusted him and invited him to document this very, very private and intimate moment in a respectful unobtrusive  way.

 

Now, as I said before an EVF-M is going to work just fine for the vast majority of customers. But for a certain percentage of Leica M shooters there is a long way to go with the current technology and an opto-mechanical RF is still going to be the way to go.

I'm going to hedge a bet that we will have both options, which ultimately will make this conversation a moot point.

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!

Leaving aside the patronising nature of your post (which I’m sure was unintentional), yes I do understand that.  And no, I have never run and gun.  I assume you were making a general comment, rather than responding to my post.

From the film days as a child with my first camera, I learned to sit and watch, decide where I wanted to take the image, and waited for the right moment.  If I can, I don’t raise my camera to the eye, as that is a distraction (the last of which is not possible with an ovf with any accuracy).  I have found that an EVF is no impediment to this approach developed over more than 50 years of taking photos.

My post was simply to share my experience with an EVF.  I thought I was being respectful to your opposing view (sadly not reciprovated).

[lct]

2 hours ago, thrid said:

[...] You do realize that capturing the decisive moment is not just about fast moving action with people jumping over a puddle or shooting athletes? It also occurs when people are not moving quickly or are still, and you are trying to capture an emotion in their eyes that is only there for a fleeting instant [...]

Some of us have been shooting decisive moments for several years or decades and did not quit doing this when using mirrorless cameras instead of RFs or (d)SLRs. Not only capturing emotions is possible with mirrorless cameras but it proves often easier thanks to the WYSIWYG features of good EVF displays.

 

[raizans]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 11/4/2023 at 12:45 AM, lct said:

A lower cost EVF-M would kill the rangefinder line i'm afraid. It is the main problem of the EVF-M IMHO. Less expensive it would cannibalize RF sales. As expensive, it would be hard to sell. But i may be wrong as often...

You mean all those people raving about the “rangefinder experience” are lying? They secretly would prefer to use an EVF? I don’t believe it. 😂

[lct]

26 minutes ago, raizans said:

You mean all those people raving about the “rangefinder experience” are lying? They secretly would prefer to use an EVF? I don’t believe it. 😂

People raving about the RF experience are not interested in the EVF-M by definition.

[adan]

3 hours ago, thrid said:

Here's an example. 

You know who this shot was taken? Eugene Smith sat in the corner, very quietly and pretended to be a fly on the wall, so everyone forgot he was there.
Then as the action unfolded and the pose and expression on the woman's face and her body language reached its emotional peak (aka the decisive moment) for a fraction of a second, he snapped a single picture. 

That's the myth - the reality is that that photo was made with an off-camera flash, that Smith had to set up, with wires trailing over to Smith and his camera.

Smith's quote regarding that photo and others he made with off-camera flash (Country Doctor, Nurse Midwife😞 "Available light is any damn light that is available [even if it comes in my camera bag]!"

It is possibly true that having done the set-up work, he then did wait for the best moment. But he was not above "directing" his subjects as well. It is also the case the woman furthest to the left is looking directly at Smith and his lens - he was a fairly large "fly" after all.  

- from a follower of Gene Smith's great photography (and even greater mythology) for 50+ years.

But you are right about EVF lag.

[IkarusJohn]

9 hours ago, adan said:

But you are right about EVF lag.

As I recall, every system has lag bewteen firing the shutter and capturing the image.  Granted, the M system probably has the least lag, but the single lens reflex and the electronic shutter also have measurable lag.  Gene Smith’s photo above will have had the added complication of the flash firing.  There are figures somewhere, but none of those lags are really impediments to capturing the decisive moment with anticipation and understanding your equipment.

The biggest difference between an EVF and OVF M (having used the EVF on my M10-D reasonably extensively) is seeing around the image - something only rangefinders acheive.  For portrait and critical image capture (people interacting), I prefer to hold the camera away from my face, even with the rangefinder, so I can see the scene und folding.  The timing of the capture, and any lag in the EVF, is then irrelevant.

From my experience, I should add that this approach is not to avoid EVF lag, but to remove the camera from my face so I am interacting with the scene and to see outside the viewfinder - even the wider scene in the optical viewfinder.

[pgk]

On 11/4/2023 at 5:32 AM, IkarusJohn said:

The simple answer, of course, is that you adjust.  

As many Leica M users who use them on an EVF body have done. Despite this I will repeat that using a native Sony lens on a Sony body (and this no doubt includes all other EVF camera makers own products) is a fundamentally better, albeit different, experience than using an M lens on a Sony body. M lenses work best as intended, in my experience that is, on RF bodies. And, optical considerations aside, where does this leave us?

Well after all the posts made so far, essentially what it all boils down to is that some want an M sized and shaped EVF body which is optimised for M lenses. The paradox is that the lenses for which most optimisation is required are wide-angles and these are the hardest to accurately focus on EVF bodies, relative to RF bodies. So, given this and the other technical issues described in this thread ad nauseam, an EVF-M camera body will be a compromise with plenty of apparent competition. All that will differentiate it from this competition will be its maker and its form factor. Given that Leica are highly unlikely to build a cheap EVF-M (my guess would be that it would be on a par with RF-M cameras price wise) where does that leave us? Well with an expensive compromise which face competition from cheaper alternative compromises. Perhaps it is a finacially feasible product and I'm sure that Leica will be well aware of potential costs/pricing/sales requiremets to make it viable.

Personally,I still think that an L mount, M shaped body with integrated but removable M adapter would be a far better solution, but even if the adapter seamlessly fitted there seems to be opposition to such a concept. It would be a far more versatile camera with less compromises.

[lct]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Personally,I still think that an L mount, M shaped body with integrated but removable M adapter would be a far better solution, but even if the adapter seamlessly fitted there seems to be opposition to such a concept. It would be a far more versatile camera with less compromises.

Not sure what is the point of using an adapter on a camera dedicated to M lenses. Also we'd loose the auto zoom feature this way and adapting the L mount to an M sensor sounds unnecessarily complicated. The L mount is made for AF lenses which M lenses are not and will never be anyway.

[pgk]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Not sure what is the point of using an adapter on a camera dedicated to M lenses.

Potential sales.

[algrove]

If the length and content of this thread is an indication, then the voting is about right.

Agree with those who say it will not be an M shape. Yes, it could be a Q shape but with L mount. That means it could take M and L mount lenses and any others that adapters offer.

Back to the CL like size and look? Leica has so many options I am sure the internal discussions can get extremely biased and I bet all listen to Daniels comments. Some time ago he said an EVF type of M needs AF lenses. Lately he said let's try one to see how it goes, but stopped short of elaborating on that statement.

 

I know of a few who use CL lenses on their SL2, especially the macro 60.

I just hope in 2024 it has a 24MP sensor like the SL2S.

Edited November 6, 2023 by algrove

[lct]

As already recalled, Leica said that that if there was sufficient demand, they would consider producing an M with EVF.
https://www.macfilos.com/2022/10/18/leicas-stefan-daniel-on-the-retirement-of-the-leica-cl-and-some-hints-for-the-future/#comments

 

[pgk]

17 minutes ago, lct said:

..... if there was sufficient demand .....

That's the tricky one. Leica may potentially have costed out such a camera and may have an idea of the sales required to make it profitable but those sales will be a part of a small niche market at best, and risk damaging an existing and presumeably profitable niche which already exists. If they come to the conclusion that an EVF-M can make money then they will then need to tackle the other queries surrounding it. I still think that an M shaped, L mount with a really well thought out adapter which looks to be a part of the camera when fitted offers a great deal more potential with fewer negatives but we will (maybe) see.

[setuporg]

To clue in some folks, an L-mount camera with an EVF already exists.  In face there are several! 

[algrove]

Not with 60MP sensors.

[pgk]

Nor the size and shape of an M.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[evikne]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

I still think that an M shaped, L mount with a really well thought out adapter which looks to be a part of the camera when fitted offers a great deal more potential with fewer negatives but we will (maybe) see.

I might have accepted such a solution if the adapter didn't protrude from the camera (but that's pretty much impossible I guess).