lct Posted February 21 Share #701 Posted February 21 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1 hour ago, 3D-Kraft.com said: I do not consider it impossible to integrate an AF mechanism into an M-body in the next iteration. How would this be compatible with the register distance of an M-body? Just curious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 21 Posted February 21 Hi lct, Take a look here EVF M rumoured. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
3D-Kraft.com Posted February 21 Share #702 Posted February 21 (edited) vor 39 Minuten schrieb lct: How would this be compatible with the register distance of an M-body? Just curious. The current Techart Pro adapter can move the lens about 4.5mm, which is enough for lenses up to 50mm focal length (longer focal lengths would need some prefocusing). There would be two options: You could either think about a mechanism that moves the sensor but this would require the bayonet mount to protrude slightly from the housing. The other option would be to have a kind of tube with a larger diameter (e.g. in the size of an L-mount) and some mechanics moving inside this tube that has an M-mount bajonet, similar to the construction of the Techart Pro LM-EA9 (using 4 small servo motors). In order to maintain the form factor of the M housing, it would of course mean sacrificing the rangefinder coupling mechanism. This would mean that it would no longer be an "M", but would still have the form factor and would allow the M lenses to be used with autofocus. If you ask Grok-3 what that could look like, you get the following suggestion (but Grok still tries to keep the view-/rangefinder 😄😞 Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Don't take it too serious. Also Grok seems to have problems to think out of the box and is bound to traditions... Edited February 21 by 3D-Kraft.com 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Don't take it too serious. Also Grok seems to have problems to think out of the box and is bound to traditions... ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/419143-evf-m-rumoured/?do=findComment&comment=5761133'>More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted February 21 Share #703 Posted February 21 Show the engineering drawings. Especially the part where a mount like shown above would totally block the viewfinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3D-Kraft.com Posted February 21 Share #704 Posted February 21 (edited) vor 13 Minuten schrieb jdlaing: Show the engineering drawings. Especially the part where a mount like shown above would totally block the viewfinder. If you pay for, I would do that. But you are still making a mistake in your thinking. The blockage of the (optical) viewfinder would no longer be an issue, since it can be replaced by an EVF also in an AF variant. At least we had already come that far in this thread. Edited February 21 by 3D-Kraft.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted February 21 Share #705 Posted February 21 17 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said: It may be easier now to make lots of 'good' photographs, but it's just the same trying to make a 'great' photograph as it was with film. It's important to make that distinction. Sort of. A great photograph is still truly rare - it probably feels even more rare because we are so inundated with the stuff. But a lot of past stuff that holds up - at this point because of its historical value primarily - wouldn’t be strong today. And there are less technical impediments towards making a great image now. Maybe the most accurate thing to say is that the goalpost has moved significantly for what defines “great” - I would buy that, I think the bar now is a lot higher and has to be to break through - but that would be the only way I’d say there are no more great photos now than there were decades ago. I’ve been a professional for years and am not sure I’ve ever made a great photograph yet myself, yet I know I’ve made ones that are just as strong as some historically significant images (without the historical significance..so far at least, on my part) - they just get lost in the sea of other photographers who make stuff that’s even better these days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke_Miller Posted February 21 Share #706 Posted February 21 What I expect (if rumors are true) is a new full-frame CL. With the M to L-mount adapter one would have an EVF camera close to the size of an M that took M lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted February 21 Share #707 Posted February 21 Advertisement (gone after registration) 10 hours ago, Stevejack said: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! That Pelikan is a wall-hanger! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted February 21 Share #708 Posted February 21 1 hour ago, lct said: How would this be compatible with the register distance of an M-body? Just curious. Didn't Contax tired something like that with their Reflex cameras do maintain compatibility with the manual focus lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleElmar135mm Posted February 21 Share #709 Posted February 21 The worst cast scenario is getting worse ... not only the price ... hopefully it's a rumor and stays that way https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/rumored-leica-m12-specs-smaller-and-with-hybrid-viewfinder/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 21 Share #710 Posted February 21 (edited) • Edited February 21 by lct Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 21 Share #711 Posted February 21 1 hour ago, Photon42 said: Didn't Contax tired something like that with their Reflex cameras do maintain compatibility with the manual focus lenses? Not the same register. About 45mm vs 28mm IIRC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 21 Share #712 Posted February 21 2 hours ago, 3D-Kraft.com said: The blockage of the (optical) viewfinder would no longer be an issue, since it can be replaced by an EVF also in an AF variant. So why have a viewfinder? The base problem we have is that some people want an M shaped SL body which only takes M lenses. I can understand the M shaped SL body which actually makes a lot of sense in many ways. Its the M lens only bit that doesn't. A cleverly built adapter could fit onto an M shaped SL body almost seamlessly. What doesn't seem usable about an M shaped SL with a really well taylored adapter for M lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 21 Share #713 Posted February 21 (edited) Duplicated post - it does this sometimes🙄. Edited February 21 by pgk 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted February 21 Share #714 Posted February 21 12 minutes ago, pgk said: So why have a viewfinder? The base problem we have is that some people want an M shaped SL body which only takes M lenses. I can understand the M shaped SL body which actually makes a lot of sense in many ways. Its the M lens only bit that doesn't. A cleverly built adapter could fit onto an M shaped SL body almost seamlessly. What doesn't seem usable about an M shaped SL with a really well taylored adapter for M lenses? You know what these people do first? They buy a handgrip🤣 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3D-Kraft.com Posted February 21 Share #715 Posted February 21 vor 27 Minuten schrieb pgk: So why have a viewfinder? My description also said, it would not require an (optical) viewfinder anymore, but the Grok AI model still sticked to that tradition in further renderings even after asking it explicitely to remove it from the rendering. Seems to be hardcoded in the model (and also in some heads) that an M needs an optomechanical range-/viewfinder to be an M... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! vor 27 Minuten schrieb pgk: What doesn't seem usable about an M shaped SL with a really well taylored adapter for M lenses? That's also my question (including the AF capability). 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! That's also my question (including the AF capability). ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/419143-evf-m-rumoured/?do=findComment&comment=5761255'>More sharing options...
Ray Vonn Posted February 21 Share #716 Posted February 21 (edited) 3 hours ago, TeleElmar135mm said: The worst cast scenario is getting worse ... not only the price ... hopefully it's a rumor and stays that way https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/rumored-leica-m12-specs-smaller-and-with-hybrid-viewfinder/ Ah right, so a sort of FF Fuji Xpro camera but smaller. I can just see it now; image stabilisation, the bright coloured light of focus peaking, image stabilisation and spirit level in the EVF to make sure one gets their composition straight. And most importantly an M camera with a bright red Leica badge (not a L/CL/SL camera, I mean it just hasn't got that same status has it). A successful hit with instagrammers/Youtubers/those that can't be arsed with all that challening exposure triangle stuff no doubt. If that rumour's true of course. Edited February 21 by Ray Vonn 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted February 21 Share #717 Posted February 21 (edited) Quote Rumored Leica M12 specs: Smaller and with hybrid viewfinder? OMG no! Don't make it smaller!! The same people who yelled about the M240 being fat will yell about the M12 being too small!! 😳 Edited February 21 by Herr Barnack Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 21 Share #718 Posted February 21 Leaving aside technical discussions of what is possible, I think the benefits and challenges of focusing an OVF v EVF based M camera have been done to death in this thread, and many threads previously (at least since the first CMOS based M camera, the M(240)). For anyone with remaining doubts, perhaps re-read this thread and get out and try you digital M with and without the Visoflex. The odd question is - what image this would have on your photography. Or, more generally, what impact has digital technology had on your photography? I bought a motor drive for my FM2 back in the 1980s. I liked the grip, didn’t like the increase in bulk and weight and found I didn’t take more images because my hit rate didn’t improve. My F5 could focus bracket and exposure bracket, but again I never used those functions. Has having even more functional SL & X2D EVF based cameras changed the way I photograph? No, not really. I take different images with them, but that is really more to do with their use. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3D-Kraft.com Posted February 21 Share #719 Posted February 21 vor einer Stunde schrieb Herr Barnack: The same people who yelled about the M240 being fat will yell about the M12 being too small!! 😳 Why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted February 21 Author Share #720 Posted February 21 An EVF only M could also open up more conversions of other vintage glass to M mount. Without rangefinder coupling it would be easier to do. Could be interesting. 1 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