Smudgerer Posted March 27 Share #1141 Posted March 27 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 3 hours ago, evikne said: There have been many different arguments for an EVF-M, but being able to say goodbye to miscalibration and focus shift is what I see as the biggest advantage as well. Yes it's quite obvious that the M11-V, ( or whatever it's moniker will be ), is going to happen, I truly doubt if it will be something that I would be interested in myself as Leica pricing alone will no doubt have me reaching for other EVF camera alternatives should I feel I wanted such but anyway my Q2M fills that need very nicely now, however I have to say that it is good to see that Leica is not standing still in regards to the M line of cameras and is further innovating is offerings. I wish them luck with this, we all should, innovation and new product lines are the lifeblood of manufacturing whether that's Leicas or toasters and stagnation with only a few incremental improvements with the M every few years will soon enough prove not to be a sufficient income base for the company. If the M11-V line is successful that would help ongoing support for the RF-M's which may well be approaching the limit of what's desireable or possible. Edited March 27 by Smudgerer 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 27 Posted March 27 Hi Smudgerer, Take a look here EVF M rumoured. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted March 27 Share #1142 Posted March 27 22 minutes ago, Smudgerer said: Yes it's quite obvious that the M11-V, ( or whatever it's moniker will be ), is going to happen At the moment it is only happening on the Internet... Predicting is hard, especially the future. Leica will produce a camera that they think they can sell in sufficient numbers, otherwise not. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smudgerer Posted March 27 Share #1143 Posted March 27 6 minutes ago, jaapv said: At the moment it is only happening on the Internet... Predicting is hard, especially the future. Leica will produce a camera that they think they can sell in sufficient numbers, otherwise not. Yes you're probably right jaapv, it's not here until it's here.........if at all. Thanks for the correction. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 27 Share #1144 Posted March 27 2 hours ago, evikne said: That’s how I use my camera too, especially now with the almost ISO invariant sensors. I usually just set my M10 at ISO 200 and leave it there. When it gets too dark, I just raise the exposure in post, of course after letting in as much light as possible with the settings of shutter speed and aperture. The nice thing about OVF is that it does not gets darker as you "underexpose." After importing to LrC, I apply Auto adjustments to all images to make them well viewable. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 27 Share #1145 Posted March 27 2 hours ago, SrMi said: Do you understand that increasing ISO reduces shadow noise? The exposure triangle misconception often leads to wrong conclusions. Er...yes And misconceptions about aperture and DoF leads to the wrong conclusions as well - see other LUF discussions. I'm all in favour of understanding how things work. But putting the effects of changing ISO in a category that should be considered somehow differently from those of aperture and shutter speed is nit-picking, IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted March 27 Share #1146 Posted March 27 7 minutes ago, SrMi said: The nice thing about OVF is that it does not gets darker as you "underexpose." After importing to LrC, I apply Auto adjustments to all images to make them well viewable. That's a nice thing about the D-series M's too; you don't have to see the underexposed image on the LCD. 😉 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 27 Share #1147 Posted March 27 Advertisement (gone after registration) 2 hours ago, SrMi said: It made a big difference to my photography once I understood it. It made a big difference to my photography when I could adjust ISO photo by photo and not roll by roll. It allowed my far more flexibility in selecting shutter speed and aperture for the subject. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 27 Share #1148 Posted March 27 3 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said: Er...yes And misconceptions about aperture and DoF leads to the wrong conclusions as well - see other LUF discussions. I'm all in favour of understanding how things work. But putting the effects of changing ISO in a category that should be considered somehow differently from those of aperture and shutter speed is nit-picking, IMO. Another nitpick: exposure is determined by aperture, shutter speed, and scene light. The visible noise is determined mainly by the exposure, noi by ISO. If you mix ISO into the same pot with exposure settings, that message is unclear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hexx Posted March 27 Share #1149 Posted March 27 (edited) 9 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said: It made a big difference to my photography when I could adjust ISO photo by photo and not roll by roll. It allowed my far more flexibility in selecting shutter speed and aperture for the subject. Oh yes! When I had my Hasselblad 501C, I would often have 2 “backs” in my bag - A12 with ISO100 film and A12 with either ISO400 or ISO800 film. Can’t say I miss those days much Edited March 27 by hexx typos, always typos 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 27 Share #1150 Posted March 27 7 minutes ago, SrMi said: Another nitpick: exposure is determined by aperture, shutter speed, and scene light. The visible noise is determined mainly by the exposure, noi by ISO. If you mix ISO into the same pot with exposure settings, that message is unclear. If that's a message you find useful, I won't disagree. I look forward to your long night-time exposures at ISO 100, resulting in noise-free images with no motion blur. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 27 Share #1151 Posted March 27 16 minutes ago, SrMi said: Another nitpick: exposure is determined by aperture, shutter speed, and scene light. [...] Now you have made it a triangle again 🥲 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 27 Share #1152 Posted March 27 14 minutes ago, jaapv said: Now you have made it a triangle again 🥲 Not everything with three elements has a triangular relationship 😄. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 27 Share #1153 Posted March 27 13 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said: [...] putting the effects of changing ISO in a category that should be considered somehow differently from those of aperture and shutter speed is nit-picking [...] +1. I've been using isos as an exposure mode for 20+ years. Especially auto iso in M mode i discovered with a Nikon D70 if i remember well. In that mode, one can change aperture and shutter speed manually and isos are used as an exposure factor. Works well for me. Others' mileage may vary 😎 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 27 Share #1154 Posted March 27 1 minute ago, lct said: +1. I've been using isos as an exposure mode for 20+ years. Especially auto iso in M mode i discovered with a Nikon D70 if i remember well. In that mode, one can change aperture and shutter speed manually and isos are used as an exposure factor. Works well for me. Others' mileage may vary 😎 ISO is mainly used as a brightness factor, not an exposure factor. Brightness is not part of exposure, even though post-processors label a slider "exposure." The term "underexposure," which essentially means keeping the image darker without relating to exposure, only adds to the confusion. The clarity of concepts is essential to apply the knowledge to the best of its possibilities. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 27 Share #1155 Posted March 27 1 hour ago, SrMi said: The nice thing about OVF is that it does not gets darker as you "underexpose." After importing to LrC, I apply Auto adjustments to all images to make them well viewable. This works not only with OVF. I always turn off Exposure simulation on all ISOless cameras that have this option. I shoot in Highlight priority and -1EV metering mode. In this case, I significantly underexpose the frame, which guarantees that the highlights will be preserved. I correct the exposure in Lightroom. That's why I don't like SL3 and Q3, there is no way to turn off Exposure Simulation in aperture priority mode (very strange decision). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 27 Share #1156 Posted March 27 3 minutes ago, SrMi said: Brightness is not part of exposure, even though post-processors label a slider "exposure." These sliders are not brightness, as they influence the gamma. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted March 27 Share #1157 Posted March 27 (edited) They could almost have called the exposure slider for “ISO”, because that’s mainly what it is and what I use it for. The only difference is that it doesn’t automatically add noise reduction, so this must be done manually if desired. Edited March 27 by evikne Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 27 Share #1158 Posted March 27 12 minutes ago, jaapv said: These sliders are not brightness, as they influence the gamma. That is correct, though they are not exposure either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 27 Share #1159 Posted March 27 If you read The Digital Negative by Jeff Schewe you'll find that the naming of controls during the development of Photoshop was often a bit of a struggle. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 27 Share #1160 Posted March 27 14 minutes ago, Smogg said: This works not only with OVF. I always turn off Exposure simulation on all ISOless cameras that have this option. I shoot in Highlight priority and -1EV metering mode. In this case, I significantly underexpose the frame, which guarantees that the highlights will be preserved. I correct the exposure in Lightroom. That's why I don't like SL3 and Q3, there is no way to turn off Exposure Simulation in aperture priority mode (very strange decision). I use that with X2D in manual mode or using a button for a quick switch with the Olympus camera. The problem is that clipping and histograms are inaccurate if exposure simulation is turned off. If I have to suffer an EVF :), I like to see the histogram/clipping information. 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