lct Posted August 27 Share #2081 Posted August 27 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1 hour ago, Mahesh said: I am enjoying these technical discussions about engineering and possibilities. Seems like we have moved away from what an M should be and should not (relief!). 😅 We've moved away because rumor sites say that the question has been answered already. Some people wanted an EVF-M based on the L-mount, without explaining how it would work with an adapter incapable of transmitting the movements of the focus rings. Leica rejected this strange idea, apparently, choosing the M mount instead. So, the EVF-M (or MV?) is expected to be what M cameras have always been, thankfully, an M-mount camera. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 27 Posted August 27 Hi lct, Take a look here EVF M rumoured. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
charlesphoto99 Posted August 27 Share #2082 Posted August 27 7 hours ago, costa43 said: The rangefinder window to me is the ‘focus patch’ the viewfinder has not been mentioned as missing yet on anything ‘leaked’ The small focus patch window has never been considered the rangefinder/viewfinder window in any vernacular I've read about M cameras for forty decades now. Let's just bury that semantic struggle. On another note, I was hoping the EVF-M would do my taxes and fix me an espresso, but I guess I'll need to wait a few more generations for that.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted August 27 Author Share #2083 Posted August 27 (edited) 12 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said: The small focus patch window has never been considered the rangefinder/viewfinder window in any vernacular I've read about M cameras for forty decades now. Let's just bury that semantic struggle. On another note, I was hoping the EVF-M would do my taxes and fix me an espresso, but I guess I'll need to wait a few more generations for that.... I always thought of 3 key windows on an M. The framelines (CCD&film), the viewfinder (OVF) and the window responsible for the focus patch (Rangefinder patch window) Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology but what do you consider as the rangefinder window? Genuinely curious as I cannot think of what else it could be called. Edited August 27 by costa43 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted August 27 Share #2084 Posted August 27 5 minutes ago, costa43 said: I always thought of 3 key windows on an M. The framelines (CCD&film), the viewfinder (OVF) and the window responsible for the focus patch (Rangefinder patch window) Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology but what do you consider as the rangefinder window? Genuinely curious as I cannot think of what else it could be called. The rangefinder patch is visible within the OVF, so consequently it's known and referred to as the rangefinder window for as long as I've been shooting M's (since 1994). Sure, technically that may be incorrect, but in popular photography vernacular that we can all understand it makes the most sense. Especially if one has never shot an M (which is the demographic Leica is most likely targeting with the MV) then referring to the main window as the rf viewfinder makes most sense from a marketing standpoint. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted August 27 Share #2085 Posted August 27 I did finally get to use the 020 EVF for my M10-R the other day. I've had it for years, and whenever I've tried in the past it just seemed like a kludge. But I was taking install photos of my museum show that's coming down in a few days, and on a tripod, with wide lenses, the EVF was a game changer because for once I cared about getting perfect composition (I'm more of a shoot from the hip kinda guy and I also hate the blackout after taking a pic). That said, I still found it easiest to use the rf for focusing and the 020 for composing. I could easily see an MV (if I could afford it, which I doubt) as a companion to the traditional M for just those times when precision is a must or other obstacles to using the rf is thrown in one's path. It will be interesting to see what lag/blackout/startup is like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted August 27 Share #2086 Posted August 27 (edited) 45 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said: The rangefinder patch is visible within the OVF, so consequently it's known and referred to as the rangefinder window for as long as I've been shooting M's (since 1994). Sure, technically that may be incorrect, but in popular photography vernacular that we can all understand it makes the most sense. Especially if one has never shot an M (which is the demographic Leica is most likely targeting with the MV) then referring to the main window as the rf viewfinder makes most sense from a marketing standpoint. Leica called the M11-D top cover “clean” because it lacked the ISO dial. So it remains to be seen what they mean by a “clean” front on the EVF-M. If it lacks the small RF patch window (or whatever it's called), I would at least consider it “cleaner.” But I'm keeping my fingers crossed that they haven't also wiped out the iconic viewfinder window. Edited August 27 by evikne 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF’sDelight Posted August 27 Share #2087 Posted August 27 Advertisement (gone after registration) Until today this thread had a performance of approx. 350 comments per month. And now six months later there are only very few facts, if any. Much "EVF-M rumored" about nothing I’d say. And now it also turns out that term and technique of a rangefinder needs explanation. 🤪 I recommend Leicas latest video with Peter Karbe explaining how the first rangefinder came to be and how it works. Perhaps it revives the appreciation for a mechanical rangefinder instead of begging for a Fuji–esque EVF. https://leica-camera.com/en-US/blog/photography/the-leica-rangefinder-explained 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted August 27 Author Share #2088 Posted August 27 (edited) 59 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said: The rangefinder patch is visible within the OVF, so consequently it's known and referred to as the rangefinder window for as long as I've been shooting M's (since 1994). Sure, technically that may be incorrect, but in popular photography vernacular that we can all understand it makes the most sense. Especially if one has never shot an M (which is the demographic Leica is most likely targeting with the MV) then referring to the main window as the rf viewfinder makes most sense from a marketing standpoint. Thanks Charles. I think we are talking about the same thing but in a different way. There is an obvious window on the top plate which is related to the patch we see in the viewfinder. That is what I am referring to. Edited August 27 by costa43 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted August 27 Share #2089 Posted August 27 1 hour ago, RF’sDelight said: Until today this thread had a performance of approx. 350 comments per month. And now six months later there are only very few facts, if any. Much "EVF-M rumored" about nothing I’d say. And now it also turns out that term and technique of a rangefinder needs explanation. 🤪 I recommend Leicas latest video with Peter Karbe explaining how the first rangefinder came to be and how it works. Perhaps it revives the appreciation for a mechanical rangefinder instead of begging for a Fuji–esque EVF. https://leica-camera.com/en-US/blog/photography/the-leica-rangefinder-explained Well, we all know that many people have spatial relationship issues, for example the person who buys a mattress and then thinks they can transport it home in their Prius. Same goes for the M: think about the size of the rangefinder module, and where it goes in the M body, and then also think about the size of the guts of the Visoflex 2. Does anybody really believe Leica could magically fit both in the M chassis at the same time without compromising either? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 27 Share #2090 Posted August 27 Interesting article in notebookcheck.net referring to « hints at a lower price » here. Excerpt below. Quote « The camera is expected to be officially unveiled in October [...] Leica's decision to replace the rangefinder, by far the most expensive component, with an electronic viewfinder is likely to significantly reduce production costs. The fact that the Leica M11-V is positioned as an entry-level model is indicated by the 64 GB of flash storage allocated, instead of 256 GB as in the Leica M11-P » Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted August 27 Share #2091 Posted August 27 22 minutes ago, lct said: Interesting article in notebookcheck.net referring to « hints at a lower price » here. Excerpt below. "...much more affordable..." from the article. More wishful, magical thinking. Perhaps $500-1000 less, but is that much more affordable when talking about a near $10k body? If Leica go a lot less, then there would be no need to even consider a future M12. As it is, the current crop of Leica users are older, well heeled, and fickle (constantly buying/rebuying $10k cameras and $5k plus lenses), and are mostly the ones clamoring for an M-EVF, so Leica would just be leaving money on the table if they priced it that much less than a standard M. Of course I could be proven wrong, but I just don't see it. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 27 Share #2092 Posted August 27 Price could be at the same entry level as the original M11. Hence the 64GB SSD. Just a guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brickftl Posted August 27 Share #2093 Posted August 27 (edited) 20 hours ago, Derbyshire Man said: congratulations! What kind of lens did you have for your surgery? thanks, I go the LAL (light adjustable lenses). The amazing thing about these lenses is that the correction of each lens can be changed/fine tuned AFTER implantation. I just had my second eye done Tuesday of this week, and as things stand now, I'm thrilled how well I see - both distance and reading, and I have absolutely no more need of glasses/contact lenses. And yet apparently not only did I have astigmatism in my old lenses but still have it in my corneas. And in 3 weeks when the doctor "dials in" further adjustments, he'll be able to correct for my cornea astigmatism which he says will result in even better vision (I can't imagine how it will be better but we'll see). Further on the topic of the M11V, not having read the many responses in this thread, if in addition to having an EVF it retained a rangefinder and other attributes of my M11P (which I doubt will be the case), I could possibly be interested. But not having a rangefinder now that I have eyes to appreciate how it's intended to work would be a deal breaker for me. Edited August 27 by brickftl 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted August 27 Share #2094 Posted August 27 16 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said: As it is, the current crop of Leica users are older, well heeled, and fickle (constantly buying/rebuying $10k cameras and $5k plus lenses), and are mostly the ones clamoring for an M-EVF, so Leica would just be leaving money on the table if they priced it that much less than a standard M. Of course I could be proven wrong, but I just don't see it. I don't see it being much cheaper than the M11 either. Hardware-wise, it's an SL3 that's been chopped, which means that it won't be cheaper than the SL3. The market consists of people who could buy an SL3, but are willing to pay a premium for something that looks like an M. You really can't blame Leica for charging M prices on this one. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JNK100 Posted August 27 Share #2095 Posted August 27 36 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said: "...much more affordable..." from the article. More wishful, magical thinking. Perhaps $500-1000 less, but is that much more affordable when talking about a near $10k body? If Leica go a lot less, then there would be no need to even consider a future M12. As it is, the current crop of Leica users are older, well heeled, and fickle (constantly buying/rebuying $10k cameras and $5k plus lenses), and are mostly the ones clamoring for an M-EVF, so Leica would just be leaving money on the table if they priced it that much less than a standard M. Of course I could be proven wrong, but I just don't see it. How have you obtained Leica's customer profiles? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Warwick Posted August 27 Share #2096 Posted August 27 2 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said: "...much more affordable..." from the article. More wishful, magical thinking. Then again, the Leica EVF peers such as an SL body (and Q, with a lens “thrown in”) are both much cheaper than the Ms? Maybe the rangefinder itself really is that expensive from a cost perceptive? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 27 Share #2097 Posted August 27 The rangefinder is indeed that expensive… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 27 Share #2098 Posted August 27 RFs are so expensive that cameras without RFs cost almost the same as cameras with RFs. Go figure... Just kidding but i don't remember how much cheaper the M1 used to be compared to the M2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted August 27 Author Share #2099 Posted August 27 (edited) I think Leica will price it strategically at what they think will work best for them, like any business really. The cost to manufacture it is not going to really play a huge part in that decision imo. I think it will come in under the M11P but it’s still going to be a Leica M11 so I doubt it will be a lot lower. Maybe a grand. Edited August 27 by costa43 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JNK100 Posted August 27 Share #2100 Posted August 27 32 minutes ago, Jon Warwick said: Then again, the Leica EVF peers such as an SL body (and Q, with a lens “thrown in”) are both much cheaper than the Ms? Maybe the rangefinder itself really is that expensive from a cost perceptive? Yes- RF mechanisms are very expensive. 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