EVF M rumoured

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 minutes ago, jaapv said:

 A narrow view, my lads.  The M was quite a universal tool, in fact still can be. Why make things like Visoflexes and V-mount lenses from 60 to 800 mm otherwise? Why even think about EVFs?  Only in this century has it been turned into a religion with some users. 

I agree that we can see an M11 as an excellent digital "back" (no PDAF stripes). The long exposures work very well, and the IQ is superb.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

I agree. Ever since the M240 this has been the case. The previous Visoflexes were a bit harder to handle with long lenses and were laggy, but still, I did do quite a bit of wildlife and travel with good results. I even wrote an article back in 2013, referenced it here a couple of times. It would be naive to claim that an M can compete in all fields with an SLR or AF EVF camera, but in the proper configuration and hands it is surprisingly versatile. 
Come to think of it Leica must be of the same opinion, given that they had the Visoflex/ V mount line of lenses(60-800)  for decades, even the PLOOT and Leica Gun before that and put an EVF on the M240 as soon as they were able to. Now, with the M11 they are attempting to take the M line into the same mainstream direction as they that attempted to with the 240. Who knows, maybe the market will be more acceptive and less Luddite now. I would not be surprised if they came out with one or two zoom M lenses for an EVF M or if the M12 would have video capability again. ( for horrified conservative users: ohne mich, I have CL//SL gear as well). 

[LocalHero1953]

11 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I’m not sure which camera series such a daft camera would kill more quickly - the M or the L cameras.  Maybe both!

Daft, niche??? How can it be that and yet kill off a range or two of cameras? It can only do that if it's successful. And if it's successful...isn't that a good thing?

[pgk]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

I agree that we can see an M11 as an excellent digital "back" (no PDAF stripes). The long exposures work very well, and the IQ is superb.

No its not, or at least its nowhere near as good as it could be due to the narrow diameter M mount and relatively long flange to sensor distance. To me an M shaped L-mount camera would make vastly more sense (it could accomodate a vast array of adapted lenses comfaortably) and could potentially be much cheaper and still take M lenses via an adapter.

[UliWer]

Yes, the L-mount gives more opportunities to use and adapt different lenses. Though how would one choose the f-stop for an L-mount lens on an M? 

[jaapv]

There are Sigma L lenses with aperture rings.  However, aperture in the camera is part of the L mount. It simply would not function with the M converter mounted. 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica is in a quandary here: the potential market of M fanatics who for various reasons will not use, cannot use or reject the rangefinder are strongly opposed to a hybrid L/M mount solution, but in order to ease the niche status of the restricted mount to be able to sell the camera to a somewhat wider customer base an L+M mount would be mandatory. Let’s be surprised by Leica”s  choice -if any. 

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Daft, niche??? How can it be that and yet kill off a range or two of cameras? It can only do that if it's successful. And if it's successful...isn't that a good thing?

Loss of clarity, but then I think they’ve already headed in that direction with the M11.

If I wanted the M to do all that, I have better options.

[IkarusJohn]

Well, if these experts are right, I see more XCD lenses in my future!

I don’t expect my Monochrom or my M10-D to see me out (even though the Monochrom has continued to work flawlessly long after the experts said was its useable life).  But my M-A will. I’ll be happy, even when called a Luddite (they had a point, you know!) 😏

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb SrMi:

I agree that we can see an M11 as an excellent digital "back" (no PDAF stripes). The long exposures work very well, and the IQ is superb.

Do you have a reliable sources that confirm that the Sony sensor used in the M11 does not have PDAF circuitry? It's clear that the M11 doesn't provide PDAF because the M-mount and its lenses don't support autofocus anyway. But that doesn't automatically mean to me that there are two versions of the Sony sensor (one with PDAF circuitry and one without), and that Leica is therefore using a slightly different sensor in the M11 than in the Q3 and the SL3. Besides, the occurrence of visible "PDAF stripe" artifacts in real-world use is probably a rather rare problem. Have you ever seen them in real-world applications?

[jgeenen]

The Sony Semiconductor website lists two 60 MPix sensor variants with same specs, the only difference being the masking of PDAF pixels.

Edited Tuesday at 10:36 AM by jgeenen

[Smogg]

14 minutes ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

Do you have a reliable sources that confirm that the Sony sensor used in the M11 does not have PDAF circuitry? It's clear that the M11 doesn't provide PDAF because the M-mount and its lenses don't support autofocus anyway. But that doesn't automatically mean to me that there are two versions of the Sony sensor (one with PDAF circuitry and one without), and that Leica is therefore using a slightly different sensor in the M11 than in the Q3 and the SL3. Besides, the occurrence of visible "PDAF stripe" artifacts in real-world use is probably a rather rare problem. Have you ever seen them in real-world applications?

Try taking photos with very contrasting light. For example, a dark church with windows as the only light source. Then, when you process the shadows, you'll see banding.

[lct]

How often did we discuss this on this good old forum? For the first time in history we can use M and LTM lenses as if they were reflex lenses. For the first time, we can have both compactness and WYSIWYG vision with them. No comparison is relevant between optical and electronic visoflex from this viewpoint. With optical visoflex, we had to use V lenses or M lenses with special adapters. With EVF, M and LTM lenses can be used as is, as if we had only one focus aid, the rangefinder.

[jgeenen]

vor 18 Minuten schrieb Smogg:

Try taking photos with very contrasting light. For example, a dark church with windows as the only light source. Then, when you process the shadows, you'll see banding.

Not sure, if banding is caused by PDAF pixel masking or just the way the sensors are being read. There is an article somewhere discussing IR conversion of a Q3. In one of the samples the PFAF pixels could be identified as fine lines across the sensor. If I trust this source, it looks totally different than banding.

[Smogg]

36 minutes ago, jgeenen said:

Not sure, if banding is caused by PDAF pixel masking or just the way the sensors are being read. There is an article somewhere discussing IR conversion of a Q3. In one of the samples the PFAF pixels could be identified as fine lines across the sensor. If I trust this source, it looks totally different than banding.

I wrote it incorrectly, I meant PDAF artifacts

[3D-Kraft.com]

vor einer Stunde schrieb jgeenen:

The Sony Semiconductor website lists two 60 MPix sensor variants with same specs, the only difference being the masking of PDAF pixels.

Thanks, but even this does not necessarily mean that Leica also buys and uses these different variants.

Looks like we talk about, what was discussed e.g. in 2018 here: https://www.dpreview.com/news/6974141509/sony-striping-heres-the-fix

The Sony A7III, A7RII / III and A9 seemed to have it more pronounced in their RAWs because of the lower resulution and larger / more PDAF pixels. Meanwhile with higher resolutions and RAW converters that take care of it, I do not see an issue here anymore.

[luigi bertolotti]

8 hours ago, lct said:

Compactness is one of the main, if not the main reason why people prefer M and LTM lenses. Not sure what 800mm lenses have to do with that.

Never say never 😉

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!

[luigi bertolotti]

14 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Right.  And this is relevant to an EVF M how?  

For what it’s worth, while I think such a camera is good for Leica, I won’t be buying one either.

I think I'd buy one, but only if with IBIS : for teles which I love, and marginally for WAs 15 - 21 ( annoying to mount VFs...)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

Do you have a reliable sources that confirm that the Sony sensor used in the M11 does not have PDAF circuitry? It's clear that the M11 doesn't provide PDAF because the M-mount and its lenses don't support autofocus anyway. But that doesn't automatically mean to me that there are two versions of the Sony sensor (one with PDAF circuitry and one without), and that Leica is therefore using a slightly different sensor in the M11 than in the Q3 and the SL3. Besides, the occurrence of visible "PDAF stripe" artifacts in real-world use is probably a rather rare problem. Have you ever seen them in real-world applications?

The PDAF is customer-specific. The same Sony sensor can have different PDAF rows (see X2D vs. GFX). There is no evidence that M11 has any PDAF rows.

CFV100C has some issues with PDAF stripes when mounted on technical cameras. Most manufacturers seem to have mitigated PDAF banding with firmware updates or with new models.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, luigi bertolotti said:

I think I'd buy one, but only if with IBIS : for teles which I love, and marginally for WAs 15 - 21 ( annoying to mount VFs...)

I’m happy with the SL system for that. Horses for courses.