EVF M rumoured

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Steve Ash said:

I would guess the same. M240 makes sense to gain space for the evf.

... and IBIS. I'm using both M11 and M240 bodies currently and would not mind to trade the latter for a similar-in-size EVF-M where video is replaced by a built-in Visoflex 2 and IBIS.  M11 users would not be jealous this way. They could laugh about the fat EVF-M for retired dentists and lawyers 😄

 

Edited February 13 by lct

[gammarART]

vor 11 Minuten schrieb lct:

M11 users would not be jealous this way. They could laugh about the fat EVF-M for retired dentists and lawyers 😄

 

If an M11 user finds this boost in life necessary to feel satisfied…

[wizard]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Smogg:

I think those who wanted to add EVF-M to their rangefinder have already done so by purchasing the Q28 or Q43.

Better still, just buy a Visoflex 2 and you are done.

[phojomatic]

One mistake I made using a Visio with M11-P is that I exposed my images based on how they looked in the finder…I didn’t even use the light meter bc I was so locked into composition. In truth I also forgot to toggle the info display levels with the back button. 
 

In hindsight this was bad practice because the EVF was at least one stop and up to two stops darker than the actual scene. Thankfully this was an easy correction but way more unintentional “exposure compensation” than I would have applied (if any). 
 

Defiantly user error here but I think an EVF-M might have a little bit of a learning curve  after using RFs for so long.

As a funny footnote, my brain was also in analog mode and instead of reviewing the images, I put the SD card in my pocket and said “looking forward to seeing these images when I get home.”

old dog, new tricks. 

[TeleElmar135mm]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

Why would an EVF M have EVF contacts in the hot shoe? 😜

... 2 EVFs? One for video  and one for stills (video will come back surely)? Oh no it's for the new electronic "Spiegelsucher"  

 

Come on: Let an M be an M

[UliWer]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Smudgerer:

Sure there is that, but there's also the fact that the Q's, excellent though they are and I for one am a big fan of the Q2-M, do not allow for the use of interchangeable M lenses which I think is a very big "wish list" item for those pressing for an EVF M.

Whichever way this debate flops there's winning and losing issues.

Yes, as has been already said, the rumored "EVF-M" - and it is just a rumor which is going on for years now - is nothing else than an Q with interchangeable lenses. Who is going to pay the price of an M - i.e. 2500,-€ more than for a Q with lens - and on top at least 2450,-€ for the "cheapest" Leica lens, to have such a camera?

If the "EVF-M" would cost much less what would this tell you about the price of the "normal" M? 

Everybody who likes may believe in some rumors. I am sure, they won't realize, as they would ruin Leica's pricing system. 

 

[Smudgerer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, UliWer said:

Yes, as has been already said, the rumored "EVF-M" - and it is just a rumor which is going on for years now - is nothing else than an Q with interchangeable lenses. Who is going to pay the price of an M - i.e. 2500,-€ more than for a Q with lens - and on top at least 2450,-€ for the "cheapest" Leica lens, to have such a camera?

If the "EVF-M" would cost much less what would this tell you about the price of the "normal" M? 

Everybody who likes may believe in some rumors. I am sure, they won't realize, as they would ruin Leica's pricing system. 

 

I think we, Leica buyers, surprise ourselves continuously in regards to what we can and do justify in terms of the forking over the €€€€ when we purchase Leica "bits", it's Leica Crack and maybe it's treatable, maybe not.

Leica cannot afford to make an "affordable" M, EVF or RF, dropping pricing for one would snowball to a loss across the board, not going to happen, if a EVF-M will appear it will not be at a discount I am sure.

More attractive would be a re-issue of a CL but with full frame and L/M mount acceptability, that could be a cheaper "buy" and would make a decent "B" camera in anyone's M bag. Whether that's feasible or possible I wouldn't know.

I think what this thread is talking about though is not necessarily an interchangeable Q but a EVF M-like camera that will accept and work with M lenses, a different beast altogether and one that would not have the AF/IOS capabilities that the Q's offer, so I could see some division in the two lines there, I don't think they would compete too much.

Who knows?

[DadDadDaddyo]

Feeling cynical before my first cup of coffee...

Who wants to look through an optical finder when you can look at a screen?

The use of the rangefinder will be preserved only by 3 groups:

1) Eccentrics who chose it for its strengths in selected circumstances,

2) process geeks who find it cool,

3) utter poseurs who chose it for how they think it makes them look to others.

 On the other hand, it's a security feature!

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15142307/how-to-drive-a-ford-model-t/

Who's going to steal a camera that fewer and fewer want or know how to use?

For those who insist, there is help available:

https://gilmorecarmuseum.org/learn/model-t-driving-experience

For those who wish to find their own way there is self-help:

https://www.fordmodelt.net/how-to-drive-ford-model-t.htm

Edited February 13 by DadDadDaddyo
... reaching for coffee cup

[Smogg]

2 hours ago, wizard said:

Better still, just buy a Visoflex 2 and you are done.

That's what I did. M11-P is my main camera. Q43 is only for bad weather, unsafe places and walks with family, when I'm not allowed to shoot in peace😀

[Smogg]

56 minutes ago, DadDadDaddyo said:

Feeling cynical before my first cup of coffee...

Who wants to look through an optical finder when you can look at a screen?

The use of the rangefinder will be preserved only by 3 groups:

1) Eccentrics who chose it for its strengths in selected circumstances,

2) process geeks who find it cool,

3) utter poseurs who chose it for how they think it makes them look to others.

 On the other hand, it's a security feature!

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15142307/how-to-drive-a-ford-model-t/

Who's going to steal a camera that fewer and fewer want or know how to use?

For those who insist, there is help available:

https://gilmorecarmuseum.org/learn/model-t-driving-experience

For those who wish to find their own way there is self-help:

https://www.fordmodelt.net/how-to-drive-ford-model-t.htm

You forgot another group, which includes those for whom the distortion caused by the narrow dynamic range of the EVF is unacceptable. The EVF does not show shadow detail, colors are distorted, there is no useful frame to predict changes in the scene and the appearance of new participants, and so on. Seeing a live image is critical to me, so I almost never use the EVF if possible. On cameras with an EVF(Q43, X2D, A7RV), I use only an external screen to stay in touch with the live scene.

Edited February 13 by Smogg

[phojomatic]

I think an M-EVF that has framelines overlayed would be a good solution. 
 

I use a 50mm M rangefinder much differently than a 50mm with EVF.
 

But I’m sure this will never happen bc if Leica can overlay framelines, they can also only show single framelines as requested forever and 50/75mm are destined to be married forever.

[TeleElmar135mm]

I think the main problem with the M cameras is that many people can't get used to the principle of the rangefinder or don't understand it, but want an M camera. The reasons for "wanting to have" could be discussed in great detail here, but ultimately it is not productive.

Rather, it seems that if someone cannot cope with the "rangefinder" principle, the camera has to be changed until the wishes are fulfilled. Unfortunately, there are many different “wishes” that cannot all be reconciled. Many people say that company xy has this and that and please build it into an M. For this group I can only say: The model already exists at company xy, then use it  - or who wants a Rolex with a digital display or a fully assembled Ikea cabinet?

[UliWer]

vor 4 Minuten schrieb phojomatic:

I think an M-EVF that has framelines overlayed would be a good solution.

Yes!

I'd propose an EVF which shows something more than the angle of view you get with a 28mm lens and then frames for 35,50,75,90 and 135mm. They might even add a small lever on the camera's front where you can switch between different frames. 

[Smogg]

I wonder how quickly accessory manufacturers will start releasing external OVFs for the EVF-M? Will the frankenfinder fit it?😜

[lct]

Electronic framelines exist already in LV mode for Leica Perspective control. Good to have both modes in modern M bodies BTW, RF mode in OVF with optical framelines, and LV mode on screen and/or EVF with electronic framelines. Of course the possible EVF-M would have LV mode only but it could fit accessory OVFs in the hotshoe if needed. Pure imagination on my part.

Edited February 13 by lct

[UliWer]

Well, Leica Rumors probably will reveal a new EVF-M with inbuilt Frankenfinder.

[charlesphoto99]

12 minutes ago, phojomatic said:

think an M-EVF that has framelines overlayed would be a good solution. 

But I’m sure this will never happen bc if Leica can overlay framelines, they can also only show single framelines as requested forever and 50/75mm are destined to be married forever.

No, if they were to do something like show frame lines in an EVF, they wouldn't be optically created, they would be electronically created, so they could show one at a time. The mask in the traditional rangefinder is mechanically constrained, so that's why the couplets. 

Thing is, if they were to always show a 28mm + full window, with frame lines for longer lenses, then people would complain about what the EVF is actually most effective for, and that's using longer lenses. So it's a conundrum. 

[Crem]

8 minutes ago, UliWer said:

Yes!

I'd propose an EVF which shows something more than the angle of view you get with a 28mm lens and then frames for 35,50,75,90 and 135mm. They might even add a small lever on the camera's front where you can switch between different frames. 

If I understand you correctly you want the EVF M to have one or two small cell phone cameras on the front of it so you can see 28mm even if you have a 75mm lens attached? I assume it also needs something to deal with changing focus like the existing mechanical system if you want a focus patch. My guess is the EVF M is just a Visoflex 2 built into the body so, but I’d love to see Leica build a true rangefinder using an EVF. 

[Chris W]

On 2/10/2025 at 8:56 PM, 3D-Kraft.com said:

Yes - and how many of them use a 50 or 75 Noctilux successfully wide open for portraits on an M where the eyes are not in the center?

 

This is where internet lore has taken over the debate.

I imagine hardly any working professional shoots wide open at F1.0 or F1.2. They are niche lenses and were originally developed to help low light photography when most film speeds topped out at ISO800.

I think the 1.4 lenses are very popular with professional Leica users, whether the lens is glued to f1.4 I don't know. Usually you want some context in your image, a subject, a middle distance and a far away plane.

The M system doesn't have to compete with Sony A7 or Fuji (various). It is unique and the people who use it appreciate it's unique features.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[charlesphoto99]

I suppose they could have a toggle switch for a full viewfinder EVF view or a traditional rangefinder frame lines view. I'm just not sure focusing will be that much easier than with the traditional rangefinder patch in the latter view (well either, actually, but that's me).