EVF M rumoured

[S Maclean]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

Yes, it's undeniably a different experience shooting with an M, which is why I still occasionally pull out my M9. But many people actually argue that they take better photos with it because they have more control or are more "conscious" in their shooting.

It could equally be argued that you take better photos with a more automated camera because it takes care of many things that computers usually do better these days, allowing you to focus more on the subject, composition, etc., and the chance of capturing the "best moment" is simply higher.

The M11-V will be a step into this direction.

Yeah, I agree with you that one does not take better photos with an M as a principle.

Also agree one can potentially take better technical photos with a modern camera with all the bells and whistles.

But  I think photography being what it is, it’s really about what a specific photographer likes and feels. And perfection is not always great.

i enjoy the limitations I have when I shoot with an M. I may be frustrated here or there about a missed shot, but that’s the work. I personally like to use the camera rather than the technology use me. To that end, I often, most often, shoot manual with the Q and the SL. And there are times when rangefinder focusing is faster than autofocus. IS is definitely a game changer…. But I just have to be a little better with my technique without it.

its just my personal approach, that’s all. I’m not competing, nor am I making a living taking pictures, so the process of taking a picture is more important to me. 
 

I was once in a beach for 3 hours taking long exposures of a dock. Nd filters, tripod, different angles and lenses. A guy walked to me and said “ I can take that picture I a minute with my phone. “ and he was right, but I wanted to spend hours not minutes. 

 

[S Maclean]

25 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I’m not sure about that.  Not sure I quality as a “serious photographer”, but I certainly take better photos with an M than other cameras for the simple reason that it is constrained by its manual evereything nature and its focal length limitations.  Even more so with my Monochrom!

You can shoot almost any camera with “manual everything” and you can limit yourself to a specific focal length. It’s not the camera, it’s how you use it and feel with it that makes you take better pictures.

the Q3, SL3 and M11 all have the same sensor and are equally capable from an optical perspective. They all have different limitations and strengths…. How they appeal to us for a moment, a specific series or a lifetime is what makes one or the other take a “better” picture.

The monochromes are a different animal though.

from an IQ point of view my hasselblads beat all three though. But, alas, I sold them because in the end the benefit on image quality was not more important to me than the fun of using the M, or the Q, or the SL.  All of those three feel like extensions of my arm. I just use them for different purposes as I feel in the moment. After all, that’s why I take pictures, it makes me happy.

Edited August 26 by S Maclean

[IkarusJohn]

Good to know.

I can use my Hasselblad in a similarly constrained way (in fact, I do); but my experience differs from your observation.  Does that mean I make sweeping generalisations about other “photographers”?

There’s always room for more than one opinion.

[tomasis7]

1 hour ago, 3D-Kraft.com said:

Yes, it's undeniably a different experience shooting with an M, which is why I still occasionally pull out my M9. But many people actually argue that they take better photos with it because they have more control or are more "conscious" in their shooting.

It could equally be argued that you take better photos with a more automated camera because it takes care of many things that computers usually do better these days, allowing you to focus more on the subject, composition, etc., and the chance of capturing the "best moment" is simply higher.

The M11-V will be a step into this direction and will make it easier to use, for example, a 90/2 or a Noctilux 75/1.25 on the M.

M11V for 90mm

M11 for 35 or 50mm

M11 for 21 mm and external vf

talk about being rich and afford 3x M11 like it is nothing. 30k eur plus costs of lenses maybe 30k total 60k eur. 

[3D-Kraft.com]

Don't forget the backup M11, which is always recommended here when traveling - and the Monochrome including filter-sets, when you think, converting color to mono is no option.

Edited August 26 by 3D-Kraft.com

[charlesphoto99]

I would drop the word 'better.' What the M can do, is take more 'interesting' or mysterious photos, as one doesn't see exactly what one is getting at the moment one takes the photograph, so it'a up to the photographer to visualize in their mind what the light will do, and how the plane of focus of will look. It's always been this way with rangefinder versus dslr, back to Winogrand's point on 'taking' (rf) versus 'making' (slr) the photograph. 

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, chris7273 said:

Because of IBIS 🙂

Q system has OIS.

 

[Viv]

5 hours ago, S Maclean said:

Yeah, I agree with you that one does not take better photos with an M as a principle.

Also agree one can potentially take better technical photos with a modern camera with all the bells and whistles.

But  I think photography being what it is, it’s really about what a specific photographer likes and feels. And perfection is not always great.

i enjoy the limitations I have when I shoot with an M. I may be frustrated here or there about a missed shot, but that’s the work. I personally like to use the camera rather than the technology use me. To that end, I often, most often, shoot manual with the Q and the SL. And there are times when rangefinder focusing is faster than autofocus. IS is definitely a game changer…. But I just have to be a little better with my technique without it.

its just my personal approach, that’s all. I’m not competing, nor am I making a living taking pictures, so the process of taking a picture is more important to me. 
 

I was once in a beach for 3 hours taking long exposures of a dock. Nd filters, tripod, different angles and lenses. A guy walked to me and said “ I can take that picture I a minute with my phone. “ and he was right, but I wanted to spend hours not minutes. 

 

It's about process. And flow.

[pgk]

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

Yes, it's undeniably a different experience shooting with an M, which is why I still occasionally pull out my M9. But many people actually argue that they take better photos with it because they have more control or are more "conscious" in their shooting.

It could equally be argued that you take better photos with a more automated camera because it takes care of many things that computers usually do better these days, allowing you to focus more on the subject, composition, etc., and the chance of capturing the "best moment" is simply higher.

The M11-V will be a step into this direction and will make it easier to use, for example, a 90/2 or a Noctilux 75/1.25 on the M.

Arguing that something is so doesn't make it true, nor even an accurate representation of what is actually happening. FWIW I use dRFs, EVFs and have gone back to dSLRs too. Each has its pros and cons relative to how I take photos. There are also many 'difficult to define' attributes which go into making equipment effective in use. One thing I am sure of though is that a more automated camera does not allow 'better' photos to be take because of its automation. It may however allow a photographer who understands the advantages of utilising its automation in situations where this is benficial, to take 'better' photos. This is an entirely different thing.

[tomasis7]

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

Don't forget the backup M11, which is always recommended here when traveling - and the Monochrome including filter-sets, when you think, converting color to mono is no option.

also M-D when fingers are sweaty

Edited August 26 by tomasis7

[chris7273]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

Q system has OIS.

 

Ok, I Should have written : image stabilization. I don’t care the technology as long as I can shoot at 1/f (or even slower) with a significant success rate. 

[brickftl]

for what it's worth . . . as someone who has struggled focusing with rangefinder in any light other than very bright, I've been almost exclusively focusing with the visoflex 2,  looking forward to an EVF M cam. 

Update: last week I had cataract surgery, then on Sunday went shooting with my M11P and favorite lens (lux 50/1.4 pre-asph v2).  I decided to take a look through the rangefinder, and WOW WOW WOW, the view was crisp, clear and BRIGHT. Focusing with the rangefinder was so easy and natural, and I felt more accurate than what I could do with focus peeking through the visoflex 2 or LCD.

Just my 2 cents.

[costa43]

The Leica rumors site is now speculating on a hybrid viewfinder. Just an opinion it seems but it would be very interesting if Leica pull it off. 

https://leicarumors.com/2025/08/26/leica-m11-v-camera-coming-with-a-hybrid-viewfinder-like-the-fuji-x100-x-pro.aspx/

[jaapv]

Leica already experimented with a hybrid viewfinder and rejected it a few years ago. But then, they rejected a digital M and came out with it some time later. 

[LocalHero1953]

1 minute ago, jaapv said:

Leica already experimented with a hybrid viewfinder and rejected it a few years ago. 

They tried it in 2018. How many decades should they wait before trying again. Does technology never change?
(No, I don't want a hybrid VF, but I don't see why Leica shouldn't revisit the option from time to time).

[Derbyshire Man]

5 hours ago, brickftl said:

for what it's worth . . . as someone who has struggled focusing with rangefinder in any light other than very bright, I've been almost exclusively focusing with the visoflex 2,  looking forward to an EVF M cam. 

Update: last week I had cataract surgery, then on Sunday went shooting with my M11P and favorite lens (lux 50/1.4 pre-asph v2).  I decided to take a look through the rangefinder, and WOW WOW WOW, the view was crisp, clear and BRIGHT. Focusing with the rangefinder was so easy and natural, and I felt more accurate than what I could do with focus peeking through the visoflex 2 or LCD.

Just my 2 cents.

congratulations! What kind of lens did you have for your surgery?

 

[jrichie]

22 hours ago, pgh said:

If you take the idea down to the studs, so to speak, you have rumors of a design centric camera company using new tech to work (only) with old tech lenses. Leica has an evf camera already in the SL series.

It’s just hard for me to understand a market out there that rejects putting m lenses on an sl camera (despite negligible size/weight difference imo) but would get an EVF if it were shaped like an M. The SL cameras may seem big, but that’s largely the lens line up. Put a 35mm summicron on it and put it in your camera bag and tell me the bag feels different than when a digital m is in there. I don’t feel it, personally. No, it’s not the same form but then it’s actually a better form for what an EVF camera can do. 

I hope if Leica is making this I’m wrong and it does well but who is really asking for this thing? have those who want it ever shot extensively using only manual focus using an EVF? It’s a highly unpleasant experience to sustain. Live view is nice to have in a pinch and all, but the M without an optical viewfinder is nothing. 

this is a very good point and an observation I have been thinking about a lot recently, and coming to the conclusion, an SL3 is better value than an M evf camera.....  I am leaning towards an SL3 and SigmaBF combo, to share lenses, use my M lenses and have an everyday and purposeful set up.  The sole reason I wanted an EVF with the M is I struggle to see framelines and what I am actually getting in the picture with glasses - never had the issue with the SL2S.  Although I have backtracked a little on my opinions of the rangefinder and its benefits, and do appreciate the clear view of the world.  tricky decisions really, although I do think this M V is going to look quite nice [and I am a sucker for aesthetics].

[jrichie]

adding one more thing - I think this M V will be cheaper than the M11, and is something to attract the younger generations into the M world with more accessible pricing [25% lower price than M11?].  I also don't think the rangefinder is going anywhere.

[Kiwimac]

2 hours ago, Derbyshire Man said:

congratulations! What kind of lens did you have for your surgery?

 

Sounds like a Summilux…! 🤣

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[adan]

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

They tried it in 2018. How many decades should they wait before trying again. Does technology never change?

Tech changes - but physics doesn't (at least at the scale of building viewfinder optics).

.............

As a generaI aside: I'm perfectly willing to accept an engineering sketch for exactly how a hybrid RF/EVF viewfinder would work in an M-digital body (now that Leica finally sweated it down to a close approximation of a film M). Including which other parts would have to be deleted to make room - especially in the critical RF optical arrangement.

One could start here:

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!

 

Otherwise, I'm afraid much of what I read on this thread amounts to "children jumping up and down in the toy store at Christmas time, screaming 'Ooooo, Mommy, I WANT.....!' "

Which is not a serious engineering proposal. 😁