Crem Posted January 23 Share #401 Posted January 23 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 56 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said: Or you could just practice and learn which way to turn the lens. Right: subject is closer. Left: subject is further away. Seems like that would be a lot of blingy distraction to do the obvious, and what the traditional rangefinder has made so simple to master over the decades. Of course, YMMV if you use an EVF with the M (I don't - they make me seasick). I could see a box turning green when the eye snaps into focus (and/or arrows at the bottom or top of the screen telling you which way to turn, because "which way was blue again?." What if there aren't eyes or face in the shot? @charlesphoto99 I think you misunderstand me. I have zero desire for this feature. I'm very happy (and proficient) with my film Ms and my M10-R. I'm not a M11 fan and sold it. I don't need help using a rangefinder though laser eye surgery might be useful at some point! I think it's likely that Leica will focus on a very technology packed M12 and a $10k+ USD price tag. I won't be surprised if it is a EVF only or EVF/OVF hybrid. If you read through all these wish lists here, Reddit, etc... there are a lot of people that want a technology packed M. IBIS, EVF, etc... none of it is for me, but features sell expensive upgrades. My previous post was attempting to explain tech they could build if the M had phase detect pixels. I think they could do a lot to make focusing in live view faster and more techie. It would wow a bunch of people into buying a very expensive M12 upgrade. I believe Nikon did some similar stuff to make a better mirrorless manual focus experience and I've read positive posts about it. Regarding the color coding as a focus direction indicator in live view ... they could instead just put little arrows above the focus point to indicate what direction to turn the focus ring. The idea is to make it faster/easier to quickly focus in live view. Especially with a EVF only M it will be useful. The focus point would automatically turn into a box drawn around the subject (eyes, face, cat, dog) when it enters the frame. I enjoy designing product features... but at the end of the day I just want a simple, stripped down, reliable digital M with updates. Like an updated M10-P or M10-R would make me happy. I doubt I'll get that with the M12, but I can hope. Edited January 23 by Crem 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 23 Posted January 23 Hi Crem, Take a look here M12 wishlist. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Stevejack Posted January 23 Share #402 Posted January 23 12 minutes ago, Crem said: at the end of the day I just want a simple, stripped down, reliable digital M with updates. Like an updated M10-P or M10-R would make me happy. I doubt I'll get that with the M12, but I can hope. Hopfully Leica is paying attention to feedback and simply releases two versions of the M12; an evf only version with all the bells and whistles, and a proper rangefinder which is 100% focused on just being a good rangefinder without all the un-needed tech. The M11 is trying to satisfy both and as a result it's not doing either particularly well. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crem Posted January 23 Share #403 Posted January 23 2 minutes ago, Stevejack said: Hopfully Leica is paying attention to feedback and simply releases two versions of the M12; an evf only version with all the bells and whistles, and a proper rangefinder which is 100% focused on just being a good rangefinder without all the un-needed tech. The M11 is trying to satisfy both and as a result it's not doing either particularly well. 100% agree with you they need two separate models. That said, Leica has year over year sales records. The M11 I assume is a major financial success and lots of people love the M11 even with its buggy history. I think the super techie version of the M12 would likely outsell the cheaper stripped down version. Especially since they could charge more for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevejack Posted January 23 Share #404 Posted January 23 1 minute ago, Crem said: 100% agree with you they need two separate models. That said, Leica has year over year sales records. The M11 I assume is a major financial success and lots of people love the M11 even with its buggy history. I think the super techie version of the M12 would likely outsell the cheaper stripped down version. Especially since they could charge more for it. Yeah it would be interesting to see pricing. The rangefinder itself is quite expensive so removing it would save both money and space inside the body, so pricing could be similar overall. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted January 23 Share #405 Posted January 23 3 hours ago, Stevejack said: It's funny, reading that I was sure you were wrong; using the focusing tab on the bottom of the lens I see it as Left: Subject is closer. Right: Subject is further away. Looking top down at the scale though it's correct as you say. Yeah, it's weird, now that I think about it. I've been shooting a LOT with my 135 APO over the last few years, and doing some tracking with it, so that's how I think of it at the moment (had to check myself after writing it and before posting). I can now see how it would be reversed using the tab. Just never really thought it about as using tabs is just so second nature after using M's for almost thirty years now. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 23 Share #406 Posted January 23 Reading these wish lists, it seems to me that what some really want is an SL-M? Then leave the M system alone to return to its original paradigm of das Wesentliche! 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crem Posted January 23 Share #407 Posted January 23 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 52 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said: Reading these wish lists, it seems to me that what some really want is an SL-M? Then leave the M system alone to return to its original paradigm of das Wesentliche! I'd love to see Leica bring back the CL, but full frame. It's very similar in concept to a EVF M concept or a real life Sony A7C style body. It would need to have perfect M lens compatibility so I don't know if they could get away with one of the SL sensors or need a real M sensor in it. Hopefully Leica is listening and the M12 doesn't turn into a feature sandwich. Edited January 23 by Crem 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted January 23 Author Share #408 Posted January 23 Take a frame made of thick paper and look through it at the world around you. Now imagine that there is a button on this frame, by pressing which you save a picture to yourself as a memory, reminding you of this moment. With an EVF, you do not see the real world, but immediately begin with a distorted idea of it. Then you freeze the frame. This is the difference between viewfinders (OVF and EVF). For some, including myself, this is a significant difference. This has a noticeable effect on the choice of what to shoot and how to shoot. Some people won't feel the difference. Therefore, it is likely that dividing M cameras into 2 lines is inevitable. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevejack Posted January 23 Share #409 Posted January 23 50 minutes ago, Smogg said: Take a frame made of thick paper and look through it at the world around you. Now imagine that there is a button on this frame, by pressing which you save a picture to yourself as a memory, reminding you of this moment. With an EVF, you do not see the real world, but immediately begin with a distorted idea of it. Then you freeze the frame. This is the difference between viewfinders (OVF and EVF). For some, including myself, this is a significant difference. This has a noticeable effect on the choice of what to shoot and how to shoot. Some people won't feel the difference. Therefore, it is likely that dividing M cameras into 2 lines is inevitable. Agreed. And unfortunately I don't think the D series is popular enough to make it the sole second version. Too many people still want a rear LCD on their rangefinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted January 23 Share #410 Posted January 23 Hybrid viewfinder will make easy ( and less bulky than visoflex2) to see focus confirmation when needed and easier for 90, 21, 24 mm lens to see what we shot. and able to see the effects of choose exposure settings 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted January 23 Author Share #411 Posted January 23 13 minutes ago, Vip said: Hybrid viewfinder will make easy ( and less bulky than visoflex2) to see focus confirmation when needed and easier for 90, 21, 24 mm lens to see what we shot. and able to see the effects of choose exposure settings Leica has admitted that it is impossible to create a high-quality hybrid viewfinder. Why would you want to see the effect of your chosen exposure in advance? Shoot through the OVF in aperture priority, autoISO and highlight priority modes, then you can always adjust the exposure in post-processing, given the fact that all modern sensors are ISOless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted January 23 Author Share #412 Posted January 23 For shooting at 21, 24, 90, I would prefer a screw-in eyepiece interchangeable lens that reduces or enlarges the image. It could be changed simultaneously with the main lens. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted January 23 Share #413 Posted January 23 Because takes time to change lens, change viewfinder , remove cap ..... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted January 23 Share #414 Posted January 23 3 hours ago, Vip said: Because takes time to change lens, change viewfinder , remove cap ..... Sounds like perhaps you should be using a different camera.... In general, the whole M EVF thing is pretty much a solution looking for a problem. I'm a 60 year old who shoots from 18mm to 135 with the OVF or external OVF no problem, in only manual exposure (in fact I wish they would release a version without A or auto iso). So have many, many others for decades, otherwise the M would not still be around, with the film versions still popular and selling from new. Would an M-EVF be popular? Probably, but of course many would then complain the tech was a generation behind Sony/Canon/Nikon/Panasonic. So why not just get one of them (it's why I have a D850 for when a 300 etc is needed) - or learn to use an M in the way it was meant to, which means having at least a rudimentary understanding of the zone system and how that translates to balancing f/stops and shutter speeds? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted January 23 Share #415 Posted January 23 5 hours ago, Smogg said: For shooting at 21, 24, 90, I would prefer a screw-in eyepiece interchangeable lens that reduces or enlarges the image. It could be changed simultaneously with the main lens. I do think there are innovations around the traditional M finder that possibly could be made/explored. Thing is, it would most likely add bulk or complexity to the camera that Leica has tried to avoid as most would complain about that (they really can't win). I've always wanted to see a revamp of the LCD arrows/info, so that one could at least get full time readout of shutter speeds when in manual metering mode (esp handy in dark places where one can't see the top dial). A swing out type of add on magnifier/reducer might be nice (though anyone who's bought - and then sold - the swing out polarizer can attest to these type of things being nothing but awkward). At the end of the day, it would be nice for Leica to address some of the underlying basics that have been ignored - such as the increasingly long start up/standby times. It's a bit like an audio server program I use called Roon. They have added a lot of bells and whistles over the last few years, almost none of which I and many original users use, but are constantly flubbing the library basics and underlying stability (which then renders the bells and whistles moot if you do use them). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 23 Share #416 Posted January 23 On 1/19/2025 at 5:00 PM, lct said: Makes you wonder why no one is competing with Leica if digital RFs are that cheap to product 😉 Pixii II??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 23 Share #417 Posted January 23 On 1/19/2025 at 5:00 PM, lct said: Makes you wonder why no one is competing with Leica if digital RFs are that cheap to product 😉 Pixii II??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 23 Share #418 Posted January 23 (edited) Duplicate post (does this sometimes!). Edited January 23 by pgk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 23 Share #419 Posted January 23 Why using anything else than M cameras for M lenses? M cameras are not what they used to be half a century ago fortunately. Pixii? I never tried TBH, too short an RF base length for me. YMMV. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 23 Share #420 Posted January 23 1 hour ago, lct said: Why using anything else than M cameras for M lenses? M cameras are not what they used to be half a century ago fortunately. Pixii? I never tried TBH, too short an RF base length for me. YMMV. I was simply showing that others can make Mrf cameras and cheaper ..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now