EVF M rumoured

[pgh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, SrMi said:

Bottom line is important, but heritage/soul is even more important to them.

 

This seems optimistic and naive given the current state of things. Not to mention the latter words are essentially fungible to the point of losing all meaning. My only hope is that a certain sense of design and utility would win over profit, but a hope is only that - certainly not a theory or a hunch. 

[pgk]

4 hours ago, mikelevitt said:

The M Rangefinder does not know which lens is attached.  The focusing accuracy (which is mediocre at best IMO) is the same regardless of which lens is attached.  "Precise focus of wide-angles" is just as unlikely as precise focus of telephotos, but the inherent greater depth of field of wide angles covers up user error.  Conversely, there is no way to look at a photo taken with a wide-angle and determine exactly where the point of focus was, unless what you were shooting was a ruler or test chart at short range, wide open.

The "apparent" large depth of field is actually a measurable and demonstrable large depth of field.  It's physics.

You are wrong. This is no place to discuss circle of confusion nor the physics of rangefinders. But in one sense only you are right, its mostly physics ......

[pgk]

2 hours ago, Robert Blanko said:

According to a friend of our cat's cat friend's owner .....

At last a definitive statement from someone 'in the know' 😁

[pgh]

4 hours ago, mikelevitt said:

The focusing accuracy (which is mediocre at best IMO) is the same regardless of which lens is attached.

I could squint and see a sort of discussion that relies on semantics to demonstrate that this sentence is, in some sense, technically, correct. 

But in practice, no, this is not the case. Try shooting a 35mm at f2 on the rangefinder and then stick on a 135mm lens at f 3.4 and tell me focusing accuracy of the rangefinder is the same. While both are usable indeed I'd wager my house that the majority of users would find that, in practice, achieving accurate focus with the 35mm is easier. It's a primary selling point of the M system and it stays that way for a reason - users find that to be true in real field work. 

[SrMi]

12 minutes ago, pgh said:

This seems optimistic and naive given the current state of things. Not to mention the latter words are essentially fungible to the point of losing all meaning. My only hope is that a certain sense of design and utility would win over profit, but a hope is only that - certainly not a theory or a hunch. 

What current state of things are you referring to? I am referring to the comments and interviews by Leica's leadership as well as the products launched.

[pgk]

20 minutes ago, pgh said:

..... users find that to be true in real field work. 

Who was it that said that when theory and reality don't coincide its rarely reality that's wrong?

[Scrapbook]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you need some latest news about the Leica 11-EVF You should try to visit Cafe Leitz. You'll meet very important Leitz-experts sitting in the center and referring about the new M-Camera. You'll get any information you want, on condition that these informations stay top secret til 23th October 2025.

Claus

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!

Edited 8 hours ago by Scrapbook

[adan]

4 hours ago, lct said:

It is not difficult to focus WA and even UWA lenses with a good EVF. Even the Visoflex 2 can do it easily with focus magnification. Here with a 15mm lens.

Oh, goodie - an action photo of a flower? Of oourse it was not difficult.

But it is (as is so often the case with the "easy") also boring.

If anyone took more than 1.5 seconds to see and focus and shoot that picture - it was a waste of time and effort (no matter how minimal).

Could an EVF camera make effective photographs, like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_Escape_Collapse

(Made pre-AF in 1975, won Pulitzer Prize for News Photography 1976)

Or this: (same photographer - the next year)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Soiling_of_Old_Glory

Because those are my standards for what any camera must be capable of doing.

[algrove]

I love pre-AF, that's why I own an M11.

[algrove]

35 minutes ago, Scrapbook said:

If you need some latest news about the Leica 11-EVF You should try to visit Cafe Leitz. You'll meet very important Leitz-experts sitting in the center and referring about the new M-Camera. You'll get any information you want, on condition that these informations stay top secret til 23th October 2025.

Claus

I would love to know what the M EV-2 will have in it?

 

[lct]

10 minutes ago, adan said:

Could an EVF camera make effective photographs, like this [...]

Do you prefer that? Say hello to my grand daughter😍 Easy to do, i mean taking the photo of course (Blurred for privacy sorry).

[lct]

48 minutes ago, Scrapbook said:

If you need some latest news about the Leica 11-EVF You should try to visit Cafe Leitz. You'll meet very important Leitz-experts sitting in the center and referring about the new M-Camera. You'll get any information you want, on condition that these informations stay top secret til 23th October 2025.

Glad you were allowed to disclose two secrets, the name of the camera (11-EVF seriously?) and that something will happen the 23th October. When suspicions turn into certainty

[kiwidad]

4 hours ago, lct said:

What Summilux? I must have used most of them, bar 90/1.5 and 75/1.25, and none was of any complication with an EVF. Rangefinders? I've been using them for 50+ years so i begin to know how they work. I have nothing against RFs per se but it is less a question of technique, to me, than the way i like seing the world in a viewfinder. I'm not that much interested to see it through a little window. I prefer seeing the world the way the camera sees it and a RF cannot do that unless with an accessory EVF.

So why do you even own an M . 

[kiwidad]

4 hours ago, lct said:

What Summilux? I must have used most of them, bar 90/1.5 and 75/1.25, and none was of any complication with an EVF. Rangefinders? I've been using them for 50+ years so i begin to know how they work. I have nothing against RFs per se but it is less a question of technique, to me, than the way i like seing the world in a viewfinder. I'm not that much interested to see it through a little window. I prefer seeing the world the way the camera sees it and a RF cannot do that unless with an accessory EVF.

Hmmm pretty hard to focus fail with any 28mm at f4. Spent most of the day enjoying the summilux 28 on my m11. Used the EVF a couple of times at f1.4 but pretty much shot at f5.6 the rest of the time. RF works great it just give a little more crop room than the EVF

[kiwidad]

1 hour ago, adan said:

Oh, goodie - an action photo of a flower? Of oourse it was not difficult.

But it is (as is so often the case with the "easy") also boring.

If anyone took more than 1.5 seconds to see and focus and shoot that picture - it was a waste of time and effort (no matter how minimal).

Could an EVF camera make effective photographs, like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_Escape_Collapse

(Made pre-AF in 1975, won Pulitzer Prize for News Photography 1976)

Or this: (same photographer - the next year)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Soiling_of_Old_Glory

Because those are my standards for what any camera must be capable of doing.

Any camera can take that picture. Know your gear and how to use it

[lct]

4 minutes ago, kiwidad said:

So why do you even own an M . 

7 Ms in half a century actually. For M lenses and compactness of the gear.

[Jipster]

16 minutes ago, lct said:

7 Ms in half a century actually. For M lenses and compactness of the gear.

Yes, these are my reasons took, although an additional important one now is the ability to use the same lenses and system whether I am shooting film or digital, as I shoot as much film as digital now (maybe a little more, actually).

[Yihong]

I was intrigued by the EVF-M idea years ago, but the leaked images just look like an oversized Q, aesthetically it doesn’t win me over. If it comes with IBIS I’d take a serious look.  For now I’m far more interested in the 35mm Noctilux and the close-focus 50 APO, hopefully they won’t be too long. 

[IkarusJohn]

3 hours ago, pgh said:

I could squint and see a sort of discussion that relies on semantics to demonstrate that this sentence is, in some sense, technically, correct. 

But in practice, no, this is not the case. Try shooting a 35mm at f2 on the rangefinder and then stick on a 135mm lens at f 3.4 and tell me focusing accuracy of the rangefinder is the same. While both are usable indeed I'd wager my house that the majority of users would find that, in practice, achieving accurate focus with the 35mm is easier. It's a primary selling point of the M system and it stays that way for a reason - users find that to be true in real field work. 

The focusing accuracy is the same, regardless of the lens mounted - its impact on the image varies wildly!  I use a Visoflex for my Noctilux and anything longer …

This whole thread makes for interesting reading when all one needs to do is use your M camera with a Visoflex to get an understanding of what an EVF basement would be like (though, I should add that a Visoflex won’t fit onto my M-A and doesn’t work on my Monochrom).

3 hours ago, pgk said:

Who was it that said that when theory and reality don't coincide it’s rarely reality that's wrong?

Jonathan Swift - “Falsehood flies while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

Edited 5 hours ago by IkarusJohn

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[beewee]

Latest “leaked” photo looks unconvincing. Someone forgot to photoshop out the smaller rangefinder window.

https://leicarumors.com/2025/10/19/is-this-the-first-leaked-picture-of-the-rumored-leica-m-ev1-camera.aspx/

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!