mmradman Posted January 27, 2022 Share #21 Posted January 27, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, I would buy M mount camera with EVF. Reason i have M mount camera is M lenses. I am ok with optical VF however there are, for me at least, more limitations using M lenses with optical RF than with good quality EVF. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 27, 2022 Posted January 27, 2022 Hi mmradman, Take a look here Would you buy an EVF only camera with an M mount?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Al Brown Posted January 27, 2022 Share #22 Posted January 27, 2022 (edited) All my mirrorless cameras are EVF only and all can have a M mount (GFX, Sony FE, Canon RF, M4/3). Would I buy an EVF only Leica M? A hard no. Edited January 27, 2022 by Al Brown 4 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 27, 2022 Share #23 Posted January 27, 2022 18 minutes ago, lct said: Blackout times and only way to reduce them is using the electronic shutter. On M11, the blackout time is short and of the same length regardless of shutter type. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 27, 2022 Share #24 Posted January 27, 2022 22 minutes ago, Jon Warwick said: Mainly on the assumption that a dedicated EVF camera like the SL2 remains superior to what ones gets with a Visoflex - however, I would caveat I haven't tried the new Visoflex 2, so perhaps its resolution is (in practice) a noticeable improvement over the 020 and more than adequate for such uses? IMO the new Visoflex 2 is competitive with the latest mirrorless offerings and a noticeable improvement over Visoflex 020. A tiltable EVF can be very helpful, and few cameras have that. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdmesa Posted January 27, 2022 Share #25 Posted January 27, 2022 Yes. And not some full-frame L-mount rangefinder-style camera. No M adapter. No less-than-fully-optimized sensor for M lenses. No PDAF on the sensor (provided Leica ever does PDAF). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinjun Posted January 27, 2022 Share #26 Posted January 27, 2022 Yes, preferably made by someone other than Leica to keep costs down, with similar size to Leica M and simple analogue controls for shutter speed and ISO. I think it should be possible to make one rather cheaply using an off the shelf BSI sensor and a very thin glass cover. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 27, 2022 Share #27 Posted January 27, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) 22 minutes ago, mmradman said: Nothing wrong only external EVF is extra to buy and to use use EVF. With built in EVF you get best of both worlds, compact camera with M mount and EVF. Agreed, a built-in EVF would be a smaller, lighter, and cheaper camera than an M11 with Visoflex. It would also be less powerful (no OVF/rangefinder benefits), but the price advantage may compensate for that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 27, 2022 Share #28 Posted January 27, 2022 Just now, SrMi said: On M11, the blackout time is short and of the same length regardless of shutter type. Define short . Why would blackout times be any longer than on mere EVIL cameras? There are perhaps (?) some excuses on Visoflex housings but none on a EVF-only camera. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 27, 2022 Share #29 Posted January 27, 2022 7 minutes ago, lct said: Define short . Why would blackout times be any longer than on mere EVIL cameras? There are perhaps (?) some excuses on Visoflex housings but none on a EVF-only camera. A bit longer than with GFX100S. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
raizans Posted January 27, 2022 Share #30 Posted January 27, 2022 The main downside of the Visoflex is that it will always be a clunky accessory. A built-in, rangefinder style EVF is generally preferable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkmoore Posted January 27, 2022 Share #31 Posted January 27, 2022 Yes please. Hate when RF alignment goes out. Would resolve the largest pain point. 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted January 27, 2022 Share #32 Posted January 27, 2022 Sure. I'd want it to be no bigger though. And to have IBIS and a virtual RF as a View option in the EVF. I also want a Ferrari and World Peace. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted January 27, 2022 Share #33 Posted January 27, 2022 No, would rather use a SL camera with af lens option and ibis. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenykepesz Posted January 27, 2022 Share #34 Posted January 27, 2022 (edited) nop, i would not buy an EVF-only M camera - but i am highly interested in a hybrid OVF/EVF solution, with the EVF used actually only for focus-peaking/confirmation, and that too only while pressing the function button. this would be my absolute dream M11-D camera ! Edited January 27, 2022 by fenykepesz 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted January 27, 2022 Share #35 Posted January 27, 2022 And yes M for me is about optical viewfinder seeing the real light in real time. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 27, 2022 Share #36 Posted January 27, 2022 Sure, funds permitting. But I am with @Tailwagger on the other thread. Leaving all the other comments aside, what the rangefinder gives us is the best plane of focus, regardless of focal length of the lens and aperture. This means for wides, it is extremely accurate (if well calibrated); for telephotos, less so. WIth the EVF, focus peaking is rubbish and magnification can be problematic. So, my yes is based on Leica providing focus confirmation for spot focusing - I appreciate this would be tricky, but I think it is essential. The EVF offers accurate framing, exposure simulation and all the metering options people seem to like, and a moveable focus spot. I actually find focusing with the EVF not too bad, but accurate focus confirmation (ie, best plane of focus, regardless of aperture) for your selected spot would seal it for me. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted January 27, 2022 Share #37 Posted January 27, 2022 8 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said: But I am with @Tailwagger on the other thread. 5 hours ago, shirubadanieru said: let’s hope we will always have a rangefinder option that stays true to the M lineup. For the record, allow me to quote myself from that thread.... As I'm a stickler for focus plane accuracy and despite having been a very strong advocate for such a camera over the years, I've now come to a somewhat opposite PoV to the above. More on that in a moment. In the meantime, I'll just mention that Leica has said repeatedly that the optical RF is going nowhere. I believe them and see no reason to concern one's self with the availability of a traditional RF, save price, for the foreseeable future. In terms of the an EVF only camera, I'm in. In fact I've been in since 2017 when I got on my dealer's list for such a camera if it ever appeared... But over the years of using the SL and M evfs with M lenses, I'd be very disappointed if all the camera turned out to be was a M with the RF replaced by an EVF. Focusing perfectly stopped down is not possible in my experience. If like me, you're extremely concerned with the point of focus and want to ensure that the lens falls away from that specific plane, then you either have to act as you're own auto aperture control to ensure that you're not being fooled by DoF or we are all going to need some further help, both in terms of the EVF image resolution as well as some focusing aids far more advanced than the current peaking or zoom. So what did I mean by opposite PoV? Given the EVF-only focusing issues, among other things, I plan to continue to shoot with an M, whether an Mevf appears or not. But if a new EVF only camera meant that the M no longer needs to be anything other than an optical RF, count me out. I would not want to see Leica succumb to all the 'lets make photography even harder than it already is' crowd by removing anything thing related to the EVF that the M already possesses. Where that to happen, I will have bought my last new M. My process honed over the years has been focus via RF, confirm and frame via EVF. I expect it to remain so right up to the bitter end. So I now find myself more concerned that a new Mevf might mean some diminishment of the EVF capabilities currently on offer in the M11 in future generations. If that were the calculation, count me out. But otherwise, assuming Leica's usual standard of excellence, I'd love a Mevf with IBIS as a second body. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mujk Posted January 27, 2022 Share #38 Posted January 27, 2022 Possibly, but only at a price point that Leica might not be able to achieve. So it would probably be manufactured by someone else. And if an EVF M meant that Leica would no longer produce new OVF/RF digital M cameras, I would most likely gradually move away from the M system. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 27, 2022 Share #39 Posted January 27, 2022 I responded to the survey on the other thread, and posted a comment. It would be helpful if the moderators could bring the survey across to the international side and merge the two threads. FWIW, I replied: I would probably not buy one, but I have massive respect for Leica engineers' and designers' ability to create an attractive package, so I'm not saying 'no'. 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. * For all those under a common misapprehension, repeat after me: "A SL is NOT a substitute for a M-sized body with EVF and AF"**. ** And for those under the other common misapprehension, repeat after me: "a SL is NOT the answer to those disappointed with the apparent end of the APSC line". 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cboy Posted January 27, 2022 Share #40 Posted January 27, 2022 Unless it's a global shutter with lag free and blackout free experience then it'll be disappointing compared to the ovf/rangefinder experience of an M. But maybe that's what Leica wanted all along? M now stands for mirrorless? Lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.