EVF M rumoured

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, Corius said:

[...] if you don't use focus magnification, the cropped area is shown as a rectangle within the full image area. Every other camera that provides a digital zoom expands the zoomed area to fit the entire EVF display. [...]

The M11 displays 1.3x or 1.8x framelines you can view outside of them if you wish. Otherwise suffice it to trigger focus magnification to expand the zoomed area to fit the entire EVF display. Works fine for me but YMMV.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Robert Ardinger]

One use of a functioning lens cam/roller cam in an EVF "M", besides triggering focusing aids, would be to give the camera an idea what the subject to camera distance is.  That information could be useful for metering and TTL flash use.

[BernardC]

13 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Maybe an L mount and adapter.

That was one of the joke suggestions, earlier in this thread (I think). Leica could offer an L-mount camera with an M adapter that has a wax seal. That way those who want an "M" EVF camera will be satisfied, as long as they never break the seal, and those who want a smaller L-mount camera will be happy too.

[FrozenInTime]

14 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Not for an M mount, the register distance is too long. Maybe an L mount and adapter.

That is why I qualified this on the next line with: "The main downside would be the M-mount flange would need to extend beyond the current Q body shell; the sensor-flange distance in a M is 27.8mm."

The result would be ugly; similar to the Ricoh GXR M-mount module;  no one wants this.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

That was one of the joke suggestions, earlier in this thread (I think). Leica could offer an L-mount camera with an M adapter that has a wax seal. That way those who want an "M" EVF camera will be satisfied, as long as they never break the seal, and those who want a smaller L-mount camera will be happy too.

A Leica branded Red Dot  bottle of Superglue @ 95€ would do the trick.  

[JNK100]

1 minute ago, jaapv said:

A Leica branded Red Dot  bottle of Superglue @ 95€ would do the trick.  

And the more expensive glue bottle without the red dot - just a picture of a screw.

[costa43]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, Corius said:

Assuming you're correct, I wonder how many people have bought the Visoflex 2 for their M? I have one, but don't enjoy using it and certainly would not want that to replace the OVF. However, the number of Visoflex sales might influence Leica's decision making.

Interestingly, Leica haven't even added the capability to zoom in on the EVF when using crop, either in M or Q series. So their commitment to a "modern" EVF solution has been lacking to date.

Looking at this thread one thing's sure, even we M diehards can't agree what we want in an EVF product.  Good luck to Leica in keeping a majority of current users happy with their new solution.

The easiest path might be for Leica to introduce a small body SL camera much as Sony has done with the a7CR and A7CII. Effectively a Q size camera with SL capability. You then get to use AF lenses and M lenses.

I agree, replacing the rangefinder and OVF with a built in Visoflex is a total non starter for me, I also have a Visoflex 2 but do not use it. It’s there though if I ever need it along with my OVF RF. people have been asking for this camera for a long time so and I think using the current M11 is the path of least resistance for Leica from a cost perspective. Less R&D and they also get to price it higher as it’s an M. A full frame CL type camera would be nice but that’s a whole new line and you would ideally want smaller AF lenses too alongside it. 

[LocalHero1953]

If you have an EVF then certain functions can be transferred to the display and a function button/wheel. The ISO wheel on the top plate probably takes up space that the designers would rather have for the EVF. If it makes the top plate cleaner, what's not to like?

If we get a M11-V in September, then (IMO) the main outstanding matter for realistic speculation (i.e. not fantasising about wish lists) is what visual confirmation of focus will be offered and how controlled. Will it be just as in other Leica EVF bodies (focus peaking, magnification) or will there be something new e.g. limiting focus peaking to detected faces/eyes, or direct magnification right into detected eyes?

And although it wouldn't be new tech in itself, I am sure the EVF speed (lag) will be much faster than the Visoflex, if only because it will be integrated into the camera electronics, not an external add-on. But how much faster? There will inevitably (and correctly) be complaints that it is not as immediate as an OVF, but minimising lag will help justify the purchase to those who worry about losing a real-life OVF.

Edited July 9 by LocalHero1953

[charlesphoto99]

One innovative thing Leica could do is possibly have an optional 'EVF rangefinder patch' in the middle of the EVF as a focusing aid (squiggle lines and/or magnification in just that area of the patch). Of course the entire screen would change with the focus of the patch, but at least one wouldn't be overwhelmed with snakes or miss the moment somewhere else in the scene due to overall magnification. 

 

Edited July 9 by charlesphoto99

[evikne]

14 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

One innovative thing Leica could do is possibly have an optional 'EVF rangefinder patch' in the middle of the EVF as a focusing aid (squiggle lines and/or magnification in just that area of the patch). Of course the entire screen would change with the focus of the patch, but at least one wouldn't be overwhelmed with snakes or miss the moment somewhere else in the scene due to overall magnification. 

I thought this was a good idea until I saw it demonstrated on a Fuji camera. A simulated RF patch on top of an unsharp EVF image (before it is in focus) is not ideal. The RF patch works much better in an optical viewfinder, which is sharp all the time.

On the other hand, being able to see the actual depth of field and plane of focus is one of the biggest advantages of an EVF. But I'm afraid these two focusing methods work better separately than together.

[jdlaing]

20 hours ago, evikne said:

 

…..which is sharp all the time.

 

As sharp as the user’s eye.

[M11 for me]

Am 9.7.2025 um 13:07 schrieb evikne:

On the M11-D, it's perfect to have the ISO wheel on the back, where it belongs. But I wouldn't miss it much on a regular (screen) M either, as I usually don't change ISO in my daily use. I mostly do it like with analog cameras, where you choose an ISO for the occasion and leave it there.

Why not leave it on AUTO (in "normal" conditions anyway)?

I know some work that you do and what you publish here. AUTO would be what I would choose.

[evikne]

29 minutes ago, jdlaing said:

…..which is sharp all the time.

 

As sharp as the user’s eye.

I assume you understand what I mean (equally sharp regardless of aperture). But if you have unsharp eyes, an EVF will give you an advantage, yes.

[evikne]

28 minutes ago, M11 for me said:

Why not leave it on AUTO (in "normal" conditions anyway)?

I know some work that you do and what you publish here. AUTO would be what I would choose.

I always set everything manually; that's how I like to do it. The times I've tried setting something to Auto, it always goes wrong in one way or another.

[M11 for me]

vor 1 Minute schrieb evikne:

I always set everything manually; that's how I like to do it.

You are right. I appreciate that attitude.

At the beginning of my M career I did the same. But I moved slowly to A modes. But I feel that you go the better way. M should stand for "M"esssucher and for "M"anual . . .

[SrMi]

36 minutes ago, evikne said:

I always set everything manually; that's how I like to do it. The times I've tried setting something to Auto, it always goes wrong in one way or another.

How about WB?

[evikne]

4 minutes ago, SrMi said:

How about WB?

I always use shoot with AWB. But I usually take a reference shot with a WhiBal card or an ExpoDisc. Then I can compare in LR and see what I prefer, and that's usually the custom WB.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, evikne said:

I always use shoot with AWB. But I usually take a reference shot with a WhiBal card or an ExpoDisc. Then I can compare in LR and see what I prefer, and that's usually the custom WB.

So not "everything manually" 😆.

I find the camera's WB guesswork often annoying and quite misleading (any manufacturer).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[evikne]

9 minutes ago, SrMi said:

So not "everything manually" 😆.

I find the camera's WB guesswork often annoying and quite misleading (any manufacturer).

All exposure is manual. Previously, I also set the WB manually before shooting, using the tools I mentioned, but I gradually realized that this meant I was missing out on the additional option of seeing what the camera “thought” at the moment of capture (WB As Shot). Now I have both, and can compare them afterwards.

Edited July 10 by evikne

[sdk]

On 7/8/2025 at 2:01 PM, Le Chef said:

Stefan Daniel has already rejected this as an unacceptable compromise. If you want rangefinder and EVF, buy a Visoflex.

Yes, that is what I am doing already, and it's a fantastic way to work. I often focus with the RF viewfinder and compose with the Visoflex 2. An EVF M could theoretically have an EVF beside the RF finder, but I don't think there would be room for them to be on the same side of the camera. A two finder camera could kind of like the last Leica III model. But those had a short RF base-length, and the RF mechanism took up less room. And the camera starboard side has the thumb wheel so there really would be no room over there for an EVF.