If an M camera with an EVF was released, would it replace your SL?

[Markey]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use my M`s and my CL most of the time .. I have rarely used my SL2s .

I find the weight discouraging ( and frankly unnecessary)

I`ve only invested in a 24 -70 and even then I use that on the CL .

I find my M lenses on the CL to be an ideal fit so a smaller high MP sl would be perfect.

 

[tomasis7]

On 4/26/2024 at 11:08 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

It's an interesting topic. I think it's the kind that Leica will read. They want to know what their base is thinking. I do know that the poll I started on the M forum over a year ago surprised them as they had thought the desire for an EVF camera for M lenses was low. It wasn't. Not to mention that other brands cameras are being used and Leica might want that market. The Nikon ZF for example.

If I can, I'll ask the question a bit differently. 

Currently, who is using the SL system exclusively as a body for M lenses? Are you completely happy with the SL styled body as an M lens holder?

Gordon

I do

For weight comparison, 

SL + 50mm Summilux M lens = little above 1kg 

SL + SL 50mm Summilux = almost 2kg 

M body + 50mm Summilux M lens = around 1kg

 

You can still use SL body as M body and don't complain about weight. SL3 reduced the 200gr difference to only 100gr versus M body. 

Want an AF lightweight lens? 370gr for ASPH SL 50mm (non APO). Almost the same as M Summilux. Not bad though. I would use AF for video only. 

A big plus for the SL body and M lens is picture quality as the sensor is tailored for such a combo of body and lens.

 

 

[jaapv]

There are plenty of EVF cameras in RF shape. Space would not be a problem. The RF takes a lot of space and it helps that the register distance is short. Heat dissipation might be problematic 

[f8low]

From the perspective of M film shooters the experience of picking up a Barnack for a day comes to my mind. Coming from an M they are so much smaller and sometimes that is just so nice! The price is a worse viewfinder experience (and LTM).

Now back to digital. Let's say the dimensions of a FF EVF camera are more 'Barnack' like, the bayonet is M and of course the viewfinder experience is not the same but it is that of a decent EVF... then I can see a point for someone coming from the M world or entering the M lens world.
 
The benefit over a Q is slightly smaller size (height) plus you can mount small M lenses like a 28mm Elmarit or a 35/50 Summicron. Yet the Q gives you a weather-proof Summilux all-round package for a comparably low price.

[Stuart Richardson]

I think one reason for the hump in the SL cameras is that they use very high quality optics in the EVF module. Remember, an EVF is not just the resolution of the screen...it is the entire optical package. The EVF in the Q cameras is fine, but not of the same quality. I expect that making a smaller SL or EVF based M style camera would involve compromising on the quality of the EVF...not necessarily the EVF resolution, but the overall quality.

[Simone_DF]

That’s fine by me if they can keep it at least at the same level of the Q3, even though Sony has no problem in squeezing a 9.44m dots EVF into their A7 line, which is still substantially smaller than a SL

[robb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’d love to add a digital M with electronic viewfinder built in as long as it had Ibis…. That’s the game changer to me in M.  I’d even buy an M without electronic viewfinder as long as it had ibis.  

but it would not replace my sl2 or sl2-s cameras.

so hopefully an m12 adds ibis.  

and I do love my electronic viewfinders in my sl2 and sl2-s cameras.  I think the viewfinder is still better than anything else from any maker out there.

Robb

[Coral Palm]

Robb—Agree an M with IBIS would be a game changer, at the very least would probably start some online flame wars. 😅

As far as SL viewfinder yes a winner, not that many years ago EVF viewfinders all looked like antique TV’s with flickering screens, they were horrendous!

[DadDadDaddyo]

If I had to choose: a body with IBIS that uses the Visoflex 2 and retains the rangefinder and optical viewfinder. That could certainly still be seen as an M-series Leica. It'd be a trick to fit all of that into the M-series body however. 

Given what "M" stands for (Messsucher), I'm not certain an M-sized&shaped body with an exclusively electronic finder would still be an "M" body. It would be, in the eyes of many I'm sure, a new series altogether. 

It's a lot more straightforward to have the rangefinder built into the body and to add the electronic finder as an accessory, rather than the other way around (not even certain you could even add a coupled rangefinder externally). The Visoflex 2 is an excellent, evolved accessory. 

There's always still the path open, I guess, for Leica to take a cue from Fujifilm and the X-Pro series: to have a hybrid optical/ electronic finder system built into the body. It would surpass the X-Pro series by retaining the coupled rangefinder, by employing the full-frame sensor, and by being able to use the vast majority of M-series lenses from the past half century without adaptation. 

Be a pretty tight fit though....

With my X-Pro bodies, coming to them from Leica as I did, I used the optical finder predominantly, switching to the electronic finder for things like zooms and long or very wide lenses. To my mind, the Visoflex 2 is a perfectly elegant way to make such functionality available to the M-series when called for. 

 

[V23]

On 4/26/2024 at 10:46 AM, Planetwide said:

It would not replace my SL, but I would buy it in heartbeat.

 

On 4/26/2024 at 10:46 AM, Planetwide said:

It would not replace my SL, but I would buy it in heartbeat.

Me 3!

[jaapv]

On 4/28/2024 at 10:40 AM, f8low said:

From the perspective of M film shooters the experience of picking up a Barnack for a day comes to my mind. Coming from an M they are so much smaller and sometimes that is just so nice! The price is a worse viewfinder experience (and LTM).

Now back to digital. Let's say the dimensions of a FF EVF camera are more 'Barnack' like, the bayonet is M and of course the viewfinder experience is not the same but it is that of a decent EVF... then I can see a point for someone coming from the M world or entering the M lens world.
 
The benefit over a Q is slightly smaller size (height) plus you can mount small M lenses like a 28mm Elmarit or a 35/50 Summicron. Yet the Q gives you a weather-proof Summilux all-round package for a comparably low price.

Actually the killed off the only Barnack like camera they had in the form of the CL

[costa43]

The L to M adapter is so unobtrusive that a smaller L mount option in the design of a rangefinder could work. You can use your M lenses, You can use L/TL native lenses and it's smaller and lighter than the SL line of bodies, like a full frame CL or Interchangeable Q if I was to attach a name to it. The M stays the M, with the rangefinder and ovf.

 

[KenTanaka]

An M with an EVF?  No. Actually it already has a pretty good one, albeit as an accessory attachment. 
 

No, but if the M12 has 5+ stop IBIS I might be tempted to divest of the SL3. The fact is that I only bought into the SL2/3 to have a more versatile and stabilized platform for my M lenses. I have other camera systems that are far more capable for many tasks. But nothing beats, or even rivals, a Leica sensor for using M lenses. 

[Jean-Michel]

An M with IBIS? Yes, I would likely purchase one to add to or replace my M-P(240)

Would keep my SL2 as that is used for different work.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 4/28/2024 at 10:00 PM, Simone_DF said:

That’s fine by me if they can keep it at least at the same level of the Q3, even though Sony has no problem in squeezing a 9.44m dots EVF into their A7 line, which is still substantially smaller than a SL

No denying the Sony are the masters of miniaturization. For me the A7R5 and A1 evf's aren't any better than the SL2/3. One may have more dots but the Leica's have much better optics in front of those screens. Something Nikon also does. And those horrible little buttons and cramped grip with bigger lenses.

Small can have it's downsides as well and I think Sony's EVF suffers a bit because of it.

The SL3 sits neatly between the A7R5 and Z8 in size and weight.

Generally I agree that the Q3 EVF would be fine. And there's no reason this couldn't be in an M/XPro sized body.

Gordon

[PeterGA]

I have paired down my Leica gear to an M10M for B&W and kept my SL2 for autofocus happy snaps. 60MP and no IBIS is an experiment I ran with for 2 years and couldn't really get any joy from - so I ditched the M11.  An EVF M sans IBIS fixes nothing - and I wont go into the other issues plaguing the M11. The real problem I have with Leica's M direction is its pricing - love the M lenses - laugh at the IQ trade down compared to Hasselblad and even Fuji that the M11 chip delivers.

If I want to show off discretionary expenditure idiocy - I'd rather do it by adding to my Ducati collection - not semi functional jewelry that looks no different to the functional jewelry in cameras made by teh same camera company - 15 years ago.

I'm still angry about Leica dumping teh CL body instead of adding a full frame chip and IBIS - that is teh camera that would interest me - the SL3 ...yeah nahhhh.

[IkarusJohn]

57 minutes ago, PeterGA said:

I'd rather do it by adding to my Ducati collection

I am sticking with my 2013 Multistrada, as I’ve personalised it significantly.  That said, I do lust after OEM cruise control, radar and hill hold on the latest model!  Sense prevails!

[Planetwide]

2019 Pikes Peak here. I will not look at the SL3 until I can examine the AF in person. My gut is telling me that it will be a slow camera. I am looking at the Hasselblad and the Fuji...

[PeterGA]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

I am sticking with my 2013 Multistrada, as I’ve personalised it significantly.  That said, I do lust after OEM cruise control, radar and hill hold on the latest model!  Sense prevails!

Ive added a 'daily ride' to the collection to see what the dark side is up to in a BMWS1000RR M. It is like riding in a video game the amount of chip controlled stuff going on. just for its and giggles they have a wheelie height control as well as rear wheel power slide functionality - amazing what the computer connected gyros matched to all teh other sensors are able to achieve - all useless for street riding of course. One day I might go to the Multistrada-a but I think teh GS has it covered for chook chasing and comfort riding stuff - but I have to convince myself track days are over.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[IkarusJohn]

The R1200GS was always my preference, but someone here (can’t remember who) suggested trying the Multistrada first - there’s such a party going on in the middle there, the BMW was boring by comparison.  I’d like to try the Super Duke GT,  but so far the Multistrada is the best Sports Touring bike I’ve ridden.

Edited April 30, 2024 by IkarusJohn