EVF M rumoured

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

[...] There is a reason why one should never evaluate an image based solely on what is shown on an LCD. With OVF, you see what you are photographing.

Should? Never? Some people are not interested in seeing the reality in a viewfinder. What we, at least i, want to see is the way the photo will look when i shoot it, not before the shot.

[LocalHero1953]

This and the cropping thread should be merged. The responses all fall into one of three categories:

1. I agree
2. I don't agree, but if you want it, fine - YMMV
3. I don't agree and this is why you are just wrong to want it.

Edited July 28 by LocalHero1953

[SrMi]

15 minutes ago, jgeenen said:

And although Word was very universally capable and flexible, WYSIWYG made it slow. I started with Wordstar, no WYSIWYG, mysterious „dot“ commands, but astonishing lightweight and fast. I was able to produce more quality contents in less time than with Word - but I couldn’t do leaflets or fancy layouts with it.

and that is my „fear“: an EVF Leica will be a totally different tool than the OVF Leica. From all past experiences with manual lenses on EVF cameras I am lacking the confidence that an EVF Leica will be a close sibling to an M (more like a SL in a different shape). I don’t know if it is that what I want…

An EVF M Leica would not replace a rangefinder Leica, but instead add another arrow to Leica's quiver of products without incurring significant expenses. In a way, it will be something between the discontinued CL and the M.

[SrMi]

9 minutes ago, lct said:

Should? Never? Some people are not interested in seeing the reality in a viewfinder. What we, at least i, want to see is the way the photo will look when i shoot it, not before the shot.

On the LCD, you do not see the image as it will look on your computer or when printed.

[lct]

What i want to see is what the camera take when i shoot. Computers and printers are jut tools i will use after the shot.

[IkarusJohn]

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

I have never seen a camera that provides in the EVF an image that corresponds to what I will get. The shadows lack contrast, the colors are off, and various types of data are overlaid, blocking the view of the scene (without the data, why use an EVF at all?). There is a reason why one should never evaluate an image based solely on what is shown on an LCD.

With OVF, you see what you are photographing.

I’ve never seen any viewfinder that corresponds to what is captured with any accuracy - that doesn’t really bother me.*

Focusing with an EVF will never really be as quick and accurate (note the AND) as the OVF up to 75mm.  For lenses longer than that, while you get the same focus as with wider lenses, the frame lines through the viewfinder are so small, and the depth of field so shallow, that I cannot focus anything longer than 75mm with the same level of accuracy with an EVF that I can with wider lenses.  That’s just plain physics.  For my 135 and R 180 (and 2x APO Extender), I need the EVF.  I often use a magnifier with my 50s and my 75.

Conversely, focusing wide lenses with an EVF is nowhere near as accurate as with the OVF.

I use my M lenses, 21-28-35-50-75-135, with M cameras (with or without a Visoflex), TL2 and SL, so this is just my experience over a number of years.

*I should explain - I use a Monochrom camera, film cameras and colour digital.  Certainly, what you see through the OVF is faithful to real life (in a slightly distorted way), but what is captured isn’t the same.  That can also be said of SLRs, and yes, the EVF is the worst.

Edited July 28 by IkarusJohn

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have my own philosophy regarding different shooting methods, I will try to briefly describe my feelings:

 

EVF: I am not present at the event, I watch a movie in a cinema/dark room on a monitor about the event and choose the still frames I like, I work as a video editor.

LCD: I am present at the event and take frames with a special computerized device, I work as an operator.

DSLR: I do not work, I enjoy the event, but looking out the window of a car/palanquin.

Rangefinder: I am present inside the event, I am its participant and I make mental notes, which, “oh, miracle!”, I can then look at as photographs

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I’ve never seen any viewfinder that corresponds to what is captured with any accuracy - that doesn’t really bother me.*

Focusing with an EVF will never really be as quick and accurate (note the AND) as the OVF up to 75mm.  For lenses longer than that, while you get the same focus as with wider lenses, the frame lines through the viewfinder are so small, and the depth of field so shallow, that I cannot focus anything longer than 75mm with the same level of accuracy with an EVF that I can with wider lenses.  That’s just plain physics.  For my 135 and R 180 (and 2x APO Extender), I need the EVF.  I often use a magnifier with my 50s and my 75.

Conversely, focusing wide lenses with an EVF is nowhere near as accurate as with the OVF.

I use my M lenses, 21-28-35-50-75-135, with M cameras (with or without a Visoflex), TL2 and SL, so this is just my experience over a number of years.

*I should explain - I use a Monochrom camera, film cameras and colour digital.  Certainly, what you see through the OVF is faithful to real life (in a slightly distorted way), but what is captured isn’t the same.  That can also be said of SLRs, and yes, the EVF is the worst.

I agree up to a point.

Present day EVFa are very close to optical viewfinders, but yes, it still is a screen. 
The tipping point between a rangefinder and other systems is more like 100 mm

For the rest:: quite true  

 

[IkarusJohn]

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I agree up to a point.

Present day EVFa are very close to optical viewfinders, but yes, it still is a screen. 
The tipping point between a rangefinder and other systems is more like 100 mm

For the rest:: quite true  

 

90mm was too much for me.  Framing alone was a challenge - that lovely big viewfinder, and a little square in the middle, no thanks.

[Derbyshire Man]

7 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

90mm was too much for me.  Framing alone was a challenge - that lovely big viewfinder, and a little square in the middle, no thanks.

That's the best thing about it🤣

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

90mm was too much for me.  Framing alone was a challenge - that lovely big viewfinder, and a little square in the middle, no thanks.

Anecdotall: I managed to focus 270 mm on my M9. I won’t claim that it was fast but it turned out to be consistent and within DOF ( f 8.0). 

[IkarusJohn]

9 hours ago, jaapv said:

Anecdotall: I managed to focus 270 mm on my M9. I won’t claim that it was fast but it turned out to be consistent and within DOF ( f 8.0). 

I’m very happy for you.

[lct]

I would need a 90mm baselength to focus such a lens with a RF 👏

[jgeenen]

vor 13 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

Anecdotall: I managed to focus 270 mm on my M9

Just out of curiosity: How did you frame?

[lct]

The Real Leica Man frames and focuses with his brain, he could even do it without camera 😜

[costa43]

97 pages in now and we have established that it could be called the M11-V and that Jaapv has the eyes of a hawk 🦅  I wonder if anyone at Leica is reading this and having a chuckle. 

Edited July 29 by costa43

[Alexander108]

vor 5 Minuten schrieb costa43:

97 pages in now and we have established that it could be called the M11-V and that Jaapv has the eyes of a hawk. I wonder if anyone at Leica is reading this and having a chuckle. 

They are too busy working on the M11-V at Leica to read this, let alone chuckle. Also the pricing dice are constantly thrown. 

[costa43]

2 minutes ago, Alexander108 said:

They are too busy working on the M11-V at Leica to read this, let alone chuckle. Also the pricing dice are constantly thrown. 

I hope so, It's nice to give people the choice. It seems like it will be a popular release listening to many on here and elsewhere online.

[evikne]

14 minutes ago, Alexander108 said:

They are too busy working on the M11-V at Leica to read this, let alone chuckle. Also the pricing dice are constantly thrown. 

I'm guessing it's been finished for quite a while, and the beta testers are trying it out. It's been pretty quiet from people like jono lately. 😉

Edited July 29 by evikne

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, jgeenen said:

Just out of curiosity: How did you frame?

The 2x converter has an auxiliary viewfinder with it.