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

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 minutes ago, Musky said:

One of the reasons the M isn’t as bulky is Because it has none of the things the SL has, but then you want to make the M into an SL. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Anyway. I hope they make your mirrorless M camera so we don’t have to talk about this nonsense anymore 😂

You don't get it i'm afraid.  Again (and again...) point is not to mimic whatever SL camera but to put an EVF in place of the RF in an M body. It's as simple as that.

Edited December 8, 2022 by lct

[01af]

vor 16 Minuten schrieb lct:

... but to put an EVF in place of the RF in an M body. It's as simple as that.

Yeah, sure. As simple as grabbing the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.

[jaapv]

10 minutes ago, lct said:

You don't get it i'm afraid.  Again (and again...) point is not to mimic whatever SL camera but to put an EVF in place of the RF in an M body. It's as simple as that.

Not THAT simple. Have you seen that bump on top of the SL ? 

[jaapv]

24 minutes ago, Musky said:

there are so many cameras out there that have these features. If I wanted an EVF IBIS autofocus the last camera I would buy is an M and then demand Leica to change it and put all these things in it. 
 

The M needs to be nothing but a simple manual rangefinder that can’t do a lot of things well. Because it’s for a very specific type of photography. 

The M was never meant to be a general purpose camera (not in the digital age)

Not in the film age either. There was a good reason for the R series. 

[lct]

Just now, jaapv said:

Not THAT simple. Have you seen that bump on top of the SL ? 

Hardly more complicated than putting IBIS together with an RF in the same compact body i guess. Such things will happen soon or late. Then people will wonder why their superb M12 with 60 or 100 megapixel sensor still needs a Visoflex to nail focus at full resolution... 

[jaapv]

Leica should hire you as an engineer. 

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

22 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Leica should hire you as an engineer. 

To paraphrase Talleyrand "cameras are too serious a thing to be left to engineers" . Just kidding.

[MRJohn]

On 12/7/2022 at 3:52 AM, JulyLL said:

I believe there is a clear market for a well-built M model with EVF and Autofocus. Leica is truly missing a giant opportunity here.....

The latest release of the M6 keeps the original theme of the brand alive, a true film/range finder camera. Perfect for those who want the old feel and tech. 

After speaking to multiple friends I noticed we were all saying the same thing, users want the SL tech inside of the M body without video. 

I believe Lecia can position their camera lines like the following  

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. 

My final thought is that Leica should offer an M11A just like they offer a monochrome version. There are currently 3 film models and the standard m11 that offers the range finder experience.

 

Let me know your thoughts 

 

I agree with you. 

[JulyLL]

44 minutes ago, MRJohn said:

I agree with you. 

Thank you, I think most people are afraid of change. Again the modern M is nothing like the original so why stop? 

 

Why release a digital M?

Why add a video display to the back of it?

Why create an EVF adapter? 

Why create focus peaking?  

Why create an M with USB-C?

Why create an M with Internal Memory?

Why add 60 Megapixels? 

Why remove the bottom plate? 

 

Seriously this whole idea that Leica should not embrace change is a dangerous mindset.  

 

 

Edited December 8, 2022 by JulyLL

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, JulyLL said:

Why release a digital M?

Why add a video display to the back of it?

Why create an EVF adapter? 

Why create focus peaking?  

Why create an M with USB-C?

Why create an M with Internal Memory?

Why add 60 Megapixels? 

Why remove the bottom plate? 

Good questions. I am puzzled by these developments as well.

[lct]

24 minutes ago, JulyLL said:

Seriously this whole idea that Leica should not embrace change is a dangerous mindset.  

Too outdated to be dangerous IMO. Leica has decided to follow the modern route with the M11 already. The rest will follow at Leica's pace i.e. slowly but (hopefully) surely.

[darylgo]

33 minutes ago, JulyLL said:

Thank you, I think most people are afraid of change. Again the modern M is nothing like the original so why stop? 

 

Why release a digital M?

Why add a video display to the back of it?

Why create an EVF adapter? 

Why create focus peaking?  

Why create an M with USB-C?

Why create an M with Internal Memory?

Why add 60 Megapixels? 

Why remove the bottom plate? 

 

Seriously this whole idea that Leica should not embrace change is a dangerous mindset.  

 

 

Well said, you make a very valid point, why are some innovations acceptable and others not.  

[Erato]

 

People are often confused about the smart camera, mirrorless camera and rangefinder camera, or...

 

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!

 

 

 

Edited December 9, 2022 by Erato
more intel added

[jaapv]

On 12/7/2022 at 6:16 PM, JulyLL said:

You are missing the point, the M line is a Luxury tool Just like the Mercedes G Wagon.

A point worth missing - I found them quite good at bush-bashing when staying at Hatari Lodge in Arusha. A bit spartan compared to the ubiquitous Discoveries and Landcruisers though. Nor is the Bundeswehr a five-star establishment...

[JulyLL]

1 hour ago, JulyLL said:

Thank you, I think most people are afraid of change. Again the modern M is nothing like the original so why stop? 

 

Why release a digital M?

Why add a video display to the back of it?

Why create an EVF adapter? 

Why create focus peaking?  

Why create an M with USB-C?

Why create an M with Internal Memory?

Why add 60 Megapixels? 

Why remove the bottom plate? 

 

Seriously this whole idea that Leica should not embrace change is a dangerous mindset.  

 

 

 

This is why I believe Leica should keep the range finder and also offer a hybrid with EVF and Autofocus  

[jaapv]

15 minutes ago, JulyLL said:

 

This is why I believe Leica should keep the range finder and also offer a hybrid with EVF and Autofocus  

It would have a different lens range then, as autofocus is not one of the strengths of M lenses and a different mount as the M mount cannot accommodate the electronic contacts needed for AF. The L mount would be the obvious solution . That would mean L lenses. Making the camera a superfluous flop. 

[Jeff S]

26 minutes ago, JulyLL said:

 

This is why I believe Leica should keep the range finder and also offer a hybrid with EVF and Autofocus  

AF aside, Leica experimented with a hybrid RF/EVF combination for the M and abandoned the effort, which resulted in an unacceptable compromise to both approaches given the space available. This has been covered many times here.

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

1 hour ago, JulyLL said:

Thank you, I think most people are afraid of change.

I 'spose I should be glad I missed most of this discussion as I was indeed in the process of fearing change, some of which was unfounded, some of which was and the rest we'll have to see how it plays out. Namely, moving from a 2019 Intel MBP to a new M1Pro MBP.  Among other more mundane things, With new CC/PS/LR/Topaz/Nik/Epson Print Drivers/i1Studio/etc some running under emulation, hell, there are some damn good reasons to resist change when everything was working just fine. But when recently my primary machine showed distinct and certain signs that it is on its way out, there was no choice. 

Now as to the M.  Resisting change, at least your particular notion of it, has nothing to do with fear or a lack of understanding nor experience with the technologies you'd like to foist on the M. Quite the contrary. Most of us here own and use several other cameras that offer all the features you suggest and then some. What perhaps you miss in all this is that the M ethos, that of a simple, direct camera where the photographer retains control over all the core aspects of the photographic process, may not be a fit for just anyone, at least in this day and age. But it is spot on for those who have discovered, either by experience or accident, that they don't give a crap about most of the things that are more important to the broader market.  Some seem to wish to force fit the M, a camera whose unique working style has evolved over 7 decades, to their personal notion of some modern theoretical ideal. Nothing new in that, these pages are full of such notions... I've penned some myself. But many of us have found over time that those aspects of the M which might have initially seemed to be severe limitations, in the end, have forced a reexamination of technique and overall approach to the process of image making. And in the end, the supposed hardships these limitations have imposed have been in reality a creative positive. 

When a shot fails with an M, one has no one to blame other than one's self. You had full control over all the necessary parameters and either screwed up, failed to properly understand the tool in your hand, were too slow in the moment or failed to think sufficiently in advance to have developed a strategy to be successful. Once one accepts and becomes intimately familiar with this alternate, more deliberate method of working, one that places the onus squarely on the photographer, the tendency is to become fiercely protective of the camera that provided it.  So no, we on the other side of this particular discussion don't fear change per se, what we fear is altering the existing formula in such a way that we can no longer have an avenue for working in the way we have found success with.  There simply is no other camera (digital) currently in production that can replace the M in this regard.

 

 

 

 

[DenverSteve]

On 12/6/2022 at 7:52 PM, JulyLL said:

I believe there is a clear market for a well-built M model with EVF and Autofocus. Leica is truly missing a giant opportunity here.....

The latest release of the M6 keeps the original theme of the brand alive, a true film/range finder camera. Perfect for those who want the old feel and tech. 

After speaking to multiple friends I noticed we were all saying the same thing, users want the SL tech inside of the M body without video. 

Let me know your thoughts 

My thoughts are (I can't believe I read this whole post, AND am responding to it, yet again); First- If I want a M with other tech inside the body - that's why I own a CL & Q2 - different tools for different jobs.  Next, I want my M11 to be....... an M11.  An ILC-Q or full-frame CL would be a camera like what you describe so making it an M would be unnecessary.  I would actually much prefer a CL with a full-frame sensor as it would remain smaller and lighter than an M and retain use of my M lenses. 

On 12/7/2022 at 9:45 AM, Musky said:

I honestly don’t care and I ignore when these discussions come up. I already have my M. 

Just people wanting Leica to become another mirrorless camera manufacturer churning out model after model of mirrorless AF cameras made in China. general use cameras for mass market.  Just get a Fuji or a Sony or canon or Nikon. So many options. 

And yet, you've responded .... many, many times (more than anyone). Unfortunately, it has been to bash others' comments or minimize their input rather than postulate a different or unique thesis.  And no one on the Leica forum (except maybe you) are promoting Fuji, Sony, Canon or Nikon as an alternative to Leica.  We're discussing, for the 400th time, M changes, which is pointless because you can only photograph with a camera that has already been manufactured - not one that may, or may not, ever come. 

On 12/7/2022 at 2:36 PM, Jewl said:

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 😉 

If you are having crashing with an M11, you should contact Leica and have it addressed (assuming you have downloaded and installed all firmware updates.  Or maybe I'm the only one with a properly functioning M11.  

On 12/7/2022 at 5:15 PM, jaapv said:

Because the essence of the Q is the integrated lens-sensor unit that makes it possible to have such a fast and good lens in a compact body. As soon as you remove the integration to create a lens mount, the camera would bloat to something like an SL. 

I know you'll educate me but - I don't see this as accurate.  The Q is larger than the CL and the CL already has a lens mount.  Simply add a full-frame sensor to the CL and put it in a slightly larger Q-sized body. It won't bloat it any larger than that and certainly not approximating a SL.  Then you have a M-type camera with 2022 tech.  In fact, it would likely remain smaller, lighter and cheaper (which is probably why Leica hasn't made it yet). 

On 12/7/2022 at 5:02 PM, Musky said:

The M already has an EVF you can use. They can make that better with each generation. 

sticking an EVF in an M the M will still “suck” at the things rangefinders suck.

One doesn't (or shouldn't) buy anything..... anything.... dwelling on what it sucks at or what it can't do.  I don't find that M cameras suck at anything.  They do everything they were designed to do, very, very well.  What M camera(s) do you have that "suck at the things rangefinders suck (at)."  As has been stated many times, a camera is just a tool with which to make photographic images.  We use different cameras for different chores.  I use Sony equipment for most of my professional work because they are at the top of the game and allow my workflow to be much faster and more efficient.  I use my Leicas for personal enjoyment and fine-art work.  I don't expect either platform to replace or compare to the other.  When I put my Visoflex 2 on my M11 it doesn't "suck at the things rangefinders suck." It enhances the rangefinder camera and allows me to work at waist-level, ground-level... more creative angles.  I'm finding it hard to believe that you are a M shooter since you have, numerous times, derided it as you did above.  My M cameras (any of my Leicas) don't suck at anything. 

On 12/7/2022 at 7:32 PM, THEME said:

Of course, there is a market for everything.If I'd go A, there's already a myriad of offering. Wait, Leica offers 'em already, just not in the iconic M body shape and verse.

I go M because I like the old-school technique and mechanics, the handling of the visual object via manual inputs.

To me - the Ms have been, for a very long time, far more than an "old-school", mechanical camera since it now has electronic ISO, a huge rechargeable battery, focus-peaking, EVF... it's a semi-automatic camera with manual focus.  To me there's nothing "basic" about it. 

9 hours ago, lct said:

.............point is not to mimic whatever SL camera but to put an EVF in place of the RF in an M body. It's as simple as that.

Hmmmm..........But, there isn't any reason to make the M bigger or heavier.  We already have that technology and it's been discussed, and discussed, and dis............ The CL is a M-shaped body with interchangeable lenses (which, of course) you can mount your M lenses on.  We also have the Q cameras which, again, are M-type bodies and have; stabilization, autofocus, EVF, large sensor...... but the lens, of course, is fixed.   As has been hit upon numerous times, it's folly to lust after a M11 (for example) and say "I would buy one of these great partly-manual cameras, if they just put in full electronics and changed it to suit my needs."  Then just buy a camera that does what you need/want.  What you've described is an A7c.  Everything people are asking for is already in the CL and Qs.  The easy answer is to take the discontinued CL digital and put in a FF sensor which would make it faster, lighter and cheaper than a M. OR take the Q system and convert it to a new ILC body and use the L-mount so AF and M glass could be used.  The CL wasn't discontinued because it's not an excellent camera - it is.  I believe it was slashed because Lecia never really pushed it & decided to focus on full-frame offerings.  I love mine (CL) for the times I know I want a small camera w/ zoom and great pictures and don't want to carry two bodies at the time.   To me, what people are actually saying is, "I don't want to buy 2 Leicas, but I want an M camera so, change the M cameras so I don't have to have an M and Q2 or M & CL or M &........... Leica will never please those who want major changes to the M because every time they make advancements/changes they aren't enough - and probably never will. 

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!

Edited December 9, 2022 by DenverSteve

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

I fear the CL has half the sensor size and is not especially small for an APS-C camera. Dragging it into a discussion about full frame cameras makes little sense - and it did not work commercially