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

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, lct said:

Indeed, reason why nobody i recall about is asking for that. The M in EVF-M suggests that it would be an M-mount camera.

You need to read back through the threads, mate!  Maybe JeffS will use his exemplary search skills to find a post or two. 😂  There are plenty of them.

Edited December 3, 2023 by IkarusJohn

[lct]

14 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

You need to read back through the threads, mate!  Maybe JeffS will use his exemplary search skills to find a post or two. 😂  There are plenty of them.

Plenty really? Glad the burden of proof is not on me 😄

[IkarusJohn]

22 minutes ago, lct said:

Plenty really? Glad the burden of proof is not on me 😄

Burden of proof?  Oh dear.

[jaapv]

22 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

I guess I'm a fool then...

I’m a fool as well. My M cameras have been on plenty of Safaris since 1988 with lenses up to 800 mm…

[Herman Zhang]

My onpnions on this is that the reason a lot of people use leica is because of the unique rangefinder M mount system, and if that one day dissapears, why wouldn't people just buy a Sony or a Nikon? I believe that the RF of the m system is very accurate and fast(not much slower than AF, and arguably faster than autofocus in some occasions), and manual focusing on a evf will be slower.

[lct]

18 minutes ago, Herman Zhang said:

My onpnions on this is that the reason a lot of people use leica is because of the unique rangefinder M mount system, and if that one day dissapears, why wouldn't people just buy a Sony or a Nikon?

Why would rangefinders disappear? The reason is M lenses. They can work fine on my Sony body but its sensor must be modded for that (Kolari Vision).

[Jacobjuul]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I keep seeing this being mentioned over and over. Do we really want an M EVF camera? I think it would make much more sense to make an SL in the form factor of an M camera (with an L mount of course), and include an M-adapter in the package. 

Why is no one talking about this approach? 

[Eugene Young]

Why not, smaller and lighter. But I don’t know it is possible to put all function inside the small form size such as M camera. Although it will be possible , very costy.

[Jacobjuul]

5 minutes ago, Eugene Young said:

Why not, smaller and lighter. But I don’t know it is possible to put all function inside the small form size such as M camera. Although it will be possible , very costy.

If we ignore IBIS, wouldn't the mount itself be the only difference?

[dpitt]

I think that Leica killed the APS-C line of L mount camera's with exactly that in mind. Something like a CL form factor with L mount, but then FF in stead of APS-C

[Stevejack]

There are lots of people who love the M form factor and love using M lenses, but want the benefits of a good EVF and electronic shutter. If they get it right I think it would provide a boost for Leica's sales of wide and telephoto M lenses, and that alone might make the model worthwhile for them. 
I don't consider the external visoflex the equivalent of a good in-built EVF, though I do love that it swivels up and I can look down into it - I use this single feature enough that I personally wouldn't want to give that up. 

I don't think an EVF only M is a terrible idea, and I think it will be a decent seller for them - but I don't think anyone wants it to be a replacement for the rangefinder M.
They would need to branch the M line into both EVF and rangefinder models to make sure that the rangefinder experience isn't compromised. 

 

 

[JRWhite]

Fuji just stuffed IBIS in their new X100VI. Apparently only added a mm or so in size. My X100V is a smaller form factor than my M10R. And it has an OVF and an EVF. Of course, no RF system, and that will take up space. Certainly there are differences - FF vs APSC and the M supports interchangeable lenses, both of which add to the size of the M. However, it seems to me Leica has the real estate inside the M bodies to provide EVF and IBIS. That would be a very expensive M.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, JRWhite said:

Fuji just stuffed IBIS in their new X100VI. Apparently only added a mm or so in size.

The difference is 2 mm. The M240 was too thick (42mm), 3.5mm thicker than the M11 (38.5mm).

The user may notice the 2 mm extra thickness negatively. I still think that a stacked sensor (no mechanical shutter) is the best way to add IBIS without increasing the thickness.

On the other hand, M6 is 40mm thick.

[Stevejack]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

The difference is 2 mm. The M240 was too thick (42mm), 3.5mm thicker than the M11 (38.5mm).

The user may notice the 2 mm extra thickness negatively. I still think that a stacked sensor (no mechanical shutter) is the best way to add IBIS without increasing the thickness.

On the other hand, M6 is 40mm thick.

I'm not sure how it fits, but looking at other cameras Isn't the IBIS mechanism needing to fit behind the sensor though? If the distance between the sensor and lens mount on the M is fixed, and if the IBIS mechanism is only taking up space to the sides and behind the sensor, removing the mechanical shutter might not save any space where it's actually needed.  

[Jacobjuul]

5 hours ago, Stevejack said:

There are lots of people who love the M form factor and love using M lenses, but want the benefits of a good EVF and electronic shutter. If they get it right I think it would provide a boost for Leica's sales of wide and telephoto M lenses, and that alone might make the model worthwhile for them. 
I don't consider the external visoflex the equivalent of a good in-built EVF, though I do love that it swivels up and I can look down into it - I use this single feature enough that I personally wouldn't want to give that up. 

I don't think an EVF only M is a terrible idea, and I think it will be a decent seller for them - but I don't think anyone wants it to be a replacement for the rangefinder M.
They would need to branch the M line into both EVF and rangefinder models to make sure that the rangefinder experience isn't compromised. 

 

 

I think you’re missing the point of my question. 
I’m curious why people want an m-mount evf camera. When an L mount in the form of an M camera would be a better solution (in my opinion at least). 

[cboy]

Great in theory but with current ( non stacked / global shutter) sensors it just be a poor experience for a M imo. Current evfs experience lag, slow readout, and poor performance in low light which isn't the performance you'd expect with a M. Also the evf readout wouldn't be from the lens/sensor plane but from elsewhere ie rangefinder window. They'd need to invent a whole new tech...$$$

[Stevejack]

6 minutes ago, Jacobjuul said:

I think you’re missing the point of my question. 
I’m curious why people want an m-mount evf camera. When an L mount in the form of an M camera would be a better solution (in my opinion at least). 

Right, maybe.  I am probably thinking more along the lines of the lenses. I would never want to use an L lens on an M body so I'm not thinking outside that box.  The compact lenses for the M-mount are where the system shines IMO. 

[Jacobjuul]

1 hour ago, cboy said:

Great in theory but with current ( non stacked / global shutter) sensors it just be a poor experience for a M imo. Current evfs experience lag, slow readout, and poor performance in low light which isn't the performance you'd expect with a M. Also the evf readout wouldn't be from the lens/sensor plane but from elsewhere ie rangefinder window. They'd need to invent a whole new tech...$$$

Agreed. But I’m not even talking about whether or not Leica is ready - I just think all the noise about people wanting a M EVF is misguided. I think what we really want is an SL in an M form factor. 
I’d hate being stuck with an evf only camera that doesn’t at least have the option of using AF

[costa43]

There are benefits to an evf M. A more fluid experience of using close focus m lenses which are now plentiful. Telephoto lenses are easier to use, a big one for me is the ability to use wider than 28mm lenses with ease. All that said, I love the ovf experience and am firmly in the camp of giving the consumer the choice if they cannot integrate a hybrid option. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jacobjuul]

20 minutes ago, costa43 said:

There are benefits to an evf M. A more fluid experience of using close focus m lenses which are now plentiful. Telephoto lenses are easier to use, a big one for me is the ability to use wider than 28mm lenses with ease. All that said, I love the ovf experience and am firmly in the camp of giving the consumer the choice if they cannot integrate a hybrid option. 

I am not trying to argue the usefulness of an EVF, I am sure it would be useful to many people. I am just trying to make the argument that what people are asking for is the wrong thing. We should ask for an L-mount M body (with an evf)