Would you buy an EVF only camera with an M mount?

[Stephen.s1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

YES!!!

And from what I read here Leica will sell a zillion of 'em.

Edited January 29, 2022 by Stephen.s1

[Advertisement]

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

[TheProf]

As to an EVF not being a “real” M, an M is whatever Leica says it is. Heard of the Mustang Mach-E?

[lct]

Being an M-mount camera with a sensor made for M lenses it would be part of the M system i guess so hiding the M letter may sound a bit [fill in blank] .

[mmradman]

If memory serves 1950s and 1960s M types didn’t have M (insert number) designation engraved. If Leica is so keen to return to traditional vales than perhaps they ought to drop strategy of vanilla models at launch and P variant mid life upgrades, it is nothing more than fleecing the gullible. 

Having built-in EVF only or combined built-in OVF/EVF M camera is not matter of if but when, please make it sooner.

[davidvanchu]

3 hours ago, aristotle said:

Real-time view (no discernable degradation in view-lag)

Adding to this. For me, it’s that I don’t want to be staring at a screen when photographing, not necessarily the lag.

[LBJ2]

On 1/27/2022 at 4:07 PM, pgh said:

I'd be curious about it, but honestly the SL2 is close enough for me in that sense - and I can put AF lenses on it. So it would depend on what you give up because I just don't find the weight between the M and the SL2 really to be a big deal in a practical sense - not a compelling enough reason. It also makes even less sense to me if you dress up your M in grips etc. Now, I'm not saying it is a substitute dare anyone accuse me of breaking puritanical devotion, but like for real practical purposes, it really kinda is. 

If they could keep the same size/form of the M and replace the RF with an EVF I'd try it out for sure, but it really feels like splitting hairs. I have my Sl2 and M10 (both with summis mounted) next to each other and just held them both to make sure. Yep, that difference is in in quibble territory.  

I also own and shoot the M10-R alongside the SL2. For those of us that do the same,  I'd have to agree with what you wrote: "I'd be curious about it, but honestly the SL2 is close enough for me in that sense" and ultimately "really feels like splitting hairs" "quibble territory" e.g. SL2+ adapter+M lens.

Edited January 29, 2022 by LBJ2

[martinot]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/27/2022 at 8:56 PM, LocalHero1953 said:

• I would be much more interested in a M-shaped/sized body with an L-mount*. It would be much more versatile, and would balance well with M, Summicron-SL and Sigma lenses.

Totally agree. Would love to see Leica make an L-camera in M-style body.

[martinot]

On 1/27/2022 at 10:25 PM, snooper said:

Take a Q2, give it an M mount, call it a MQ if you want, make a mono version if you want, and voilà: M with an EVF, IBIS, etc.

A winner at $4K.

I would actully prefer Q2 with an L-mount. Then you can use both type of lenses.

[leicavkk]

I'd say a non M. A new Q mount - Q sized with AF and fully weather sealed with an EVF. M's can never be weather sealed. Can take M's with an adapter. Much smaller than the SL line.

[digitalfx]

an interesting observation, take with a grain of salt. The new Visoflex 2 is exactly the same size as the M11 OVF...it looks like it could literally drop into the top plate and replace the OVF.

Blasphemy I know...just reporting what I see

[martinot]

2 hours ago, TheProf said:

As to an EVF not being a “real” M, an M is whatever Leica says it is. Heard of the Mustang Mach-E?

Nothing against electrical cars (I am on my second Tesla), but I do not think it is a real Mustang. It is too much SUV and too little sports car.

[Chaemono]

I focused the M10-P and the Z7 with the same M lens today to see which fringes more (a discussion in another thread) and what a pleasure it was to use the OVF. An M with a well calibrated patch can be focused so quickly and precisely. I like the solution just the way it is. Offer an EVF as an add-on (should be cheaper though) and leave the rangefinder experience intact.

[digitalfx]

5 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

I focused the M10-P and the Z7 with the same M lens today to see which fringes more (a discussion in another thread) and what a pleasure it was to use the OVF. An M with a well calibrated patch can be focused so quickly and precisely. I like the solution just the way it is. Offer an EVF as an add-on (should be cheaper though) and leave the rangefinder experience intact.

I dont think anyone wants to replace the RF with EVF...its just an optional camera. Nothing wrong with options.

[raizans]

Speaking of the Q, all I wish for is a 28-35-50mm f/2.8 Tri-Elmar.

[fotofool]

If the EVF performance is worthy then absolutely!!

There are two things that stop me from switching to the SL with M adaptor:  the larger form factor (I’d rather use my X1D at that point) and the fact that the sensor isn’t as well optimized for M-mount lenses as the N camera sensor.

A well executed “eM”  (electronic Messsucher) would be ideal for me.

[digitalfx]

13 minutes ago, fotofool said:

Iand the fact that the sensor isn’t as well optimized for M-mount lenses as the N camera sensor.

 

The SL2 is optimized for M lenses...as best as it can be that is since its not a native M mount. The performance of M lenses on SL2 is remarkable imo.

That being said, my poor SL2 sits in the case...the M is always my first choice.

[fotofool]

1 hour ago, digitalfx said:

The SL2 is optimized for M lenses...as best as it can be that is since its not a native M mount.

OK, that may be true. Maybe it's the L-mount that compromises the performance of M lenses rather than the sensor.  In any case, I will always chose a camera that produces the best possible results with M lenses but prefer seeing through the lens and taking advantage of modern manual focus aids.

[LBJ2]

1 hour ago, digitalfx said:

The SL2 is optimized for M lenses...as best as it can be that is since its not a native M mount. The performance of M lenses on SL2 is remarkable imo.

That being said, my poor SL2 sits in the case...the M is always my first choice.

"The SL2 is optimized for M lenses...as best as it can be that is since it's not a native M mount." 👍🏼 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[SrMi]

8 minutes ago, fotofool said:

OK, that may be true. Maybe it's the L-mount that compromises the performance of M lenses rather than the sensor.  In any case, I will always chose a camera that produces the best possible results with M lenses but prefer seeing through the lens and taking advantage of modern manual focus aids.

That would be M11 with Visoflex 2. Silver or black?

[fotofool]

24 minutes ago, SrMi said:

That would be M11 with Visoflex 2. Silver or black?

Silver!

But since the Visioex 2 seems to be a little bit of a compromise in terms of performance and covers the hot shoe (I’m one of those crazy people who sometimes shoots my M in a studio with strobes) I’ll keep my M240 a little longer hoping for what I actually want.