EVF M rumoured

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 minutes ago, costa43 said:

To be fair, I would also use a Sony if the end product was everything. Leica wouldn’t get a look in! 

As I would/do (I own Sonys, and now Nikons and have access to my wife's Canons) but that isn't why I use an M, because I use an M as it offers an alternative approach, namely the enjoyment of rangefinder photography. Isn't this the essence of why we use Ms? And an EVF-M won't be a rangefinder camera so the whole question of the viability of an evf-M is in itself a bit of a problem. Where is its niche? If its the lenses then its a pretty small niche because many makers produce superb lenses. If its the size and mechanical quality of the lenses then its also a very small niche. And what would it say about Leica? That they are prepared to produce a White Elephant to satisfy a very small number of customers and make money?

[Advertisement]

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

[pgk]

6 minutes ago, TeleElmar135mm said:

... look here (sorry it's in German): Fußball WM 2014: These are sport pictures I like and prefer.

https://m-magazine.photography/ceemes/de/news/one-night-in-rio-1360.html

They aren't sport pictures I'm afraid. And they could be shot on many/most cameras.

Edited September 19 by pgk

[pgk]

7 hours ago, lct said:

Some lenses have been made without focus cams like the ZM 15/2.8 if memory serves but such cams are necessary to modern digital M cameras for their auto focus magnification, aka auto zoom feature. Also such lenses could hardly focus on regular M cameras with rangefinders so chances of such offers seem rather theoritical.

So there would still potentially be the need for a button to activate focus maginfication for any lens (M without focus cam or adapted lens) unable to do so automatically.[😁😜]

[evikne]

34 minutes ago, pgk said:

As I would/do (I own Sonys, and now Nikons and have access to my wife's Canons) but that isn't why I use an M, because I use an M as it offers an alternative approach, namely the enjoyment of rangefinder photography. Isn't this the essence of why we use Ms? And an EVF-M won't be a rangefinder camera so the whole question of the viability of an evf-M is in itself a bit of a problem. Where is its niche? If its the lenses then its a pretty small niche because many makers produce superb lenses. If its the size and mechanical quality of the lenses then its also a very small niche. And what would it say about Leica? That they are prepared to produce a White Elephant to satisfy a very small number of customers and make money?

I think the user groups could be either existing M users with failing eyesight, or wealthy hipsters who think a Leica camera is really cool, but who don't really care about the rangefinder technology.

Other groups could be M users who want a second camera with more accurate framing, especially for wide angle, macro, and telephoto, and the ability to see the real depth of field and focal plane.

And perhaps also those who are tired of miscalibration and focus shift.

I think there are plenty of potential buyers.

Edited September 19 by evikne

[jaapv]

The groups are already (partly) catered for by the Visoflex.  Cheaper and lighter than a second camera. 

[costa43]

36 minutes ago, pgk said:

isn't why I use an M, because I use an M as it offers an alternative approach, namely the enjoyment of rangefinder photography. Isn't this the essence of why we use Ms?

Absolutely yes. 

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 minutes ago, pgk said:

So there would still potentially be the need for a button to activate focus maginfication for any lens (M without focus cam or adapted lens) unable to do so automatically.[😁😜]

Unsure what is laughable but such button exists on the M11 already. It is a Fn button on the back or preferably, to me, near the shutter release (# 6 below). Works with all M and LTM lenses, if needed, but auto zoom is designed for lenses coupled to the rangefinder since focus magnification is triggered by the roller cam of the camera.

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!

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

That they are prepared to produce a White Elephant to satisfy a very small number of customers and make money?

You mean, like a camera with no Bayer filter layer? Or a digital camera with no screen to control the digital bits? 

An EVF-M would be mainstream in comparison.

Edited September 19 by LocalHero1953

[pgk]

34 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The groups are already (partly) catered for by the Visoflex.  Cheaper and lighter than a second camera. 

And SL series too🙂.

[charlesphoto99]

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

It's hardly convincing to cite a few lucky shots

You can speak for yourself. The shots that I posted have nothing to do with luck, but instead with 30 years of working with an M rangefinder. IMO, shots like that will actually be 'luckier' to get for users that rely on squiggly lines and pop ups. Of course, if you are shooting a sports gig and are assigned to be stuck in a spot, then big lens and AF will come into play. But then one is focusing only on the action itself, and perhaps not the bigger picture that is happening otherwise (which is fine, if that's your brief). The heart of the M, imo, is that one doesn't get stuck in 'tunnel' vision like one can with an EVF or SLR. Also, it's the camera you have with you that takes the shot, and for many of us, the M is great that way. I pick up an SL in the shop and go, great looking/feeling camera, but there's no way I'm leaving the house and walking around with this, esp with a 135 AF lens.

(shots below 135mm M APO and 28mm Summicron).

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!

[TeleElmar135mm]

vor einer Stunde schrieb pgk:

They aren't sport pictures I'm afraid. And they could be shot on many/most cameras.

... two disagrees.
First they are sport pictures - ok other than the from the goal in the last minute shot by 100 Photographers. But tey show more from the players and there feelings ...
Second: They are made with an M and are close to the iconic sport pictures like M. Ali etc. So they were rightly shown in the "Deutschen Museum in München".

[pgk]

2 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

You mean, like a camera with no Bayer filter layer? Or a digital camera with no screen to control the digital bits? 

An EVF-M would be mainstream in comparison.

Those are modifications. An EVF-M is a total revision and has vast, much more highly specified and cheaper competition.

The problem here is that what is wanted is an M shaped EVF camera. But such a camera is hobbled and many/most advocates try not to, or don't want to, see its downsides. I DO use EVF cameras, and with numerous adapted lenses, and obviously always with manual focus, so I do know how these work on EVFs, and its not a particularly enjoyable experience, nor particularly quick, but it does work and with practice, like an M, can get a bit quicker. I do so primarily because of the short bayonet to sensor distance which is a prime requisite for many such lenses, and I'd like an EVF camera without a handgrip on it, because this physically gets in the way of using many lenses. But even though an EVF-M would help, its longer register would not, nor almost certainly would its high price.

No matter how I look at the characteristics of an EVF-M, it fails to be as good as an rf-M where the rf-M works best, and obviously it fails to compete with other EVF cameras is most aspects of their performance. Its prime advantage would be shape and sensor tuned to work optimally with many M lenses. To me this is far from a sufficient reason to build an otherwise hobbled camera. But we seem to live in a world where facts are not allowed to get in the way of belief, so .....

[charlesphoto99]

19 minutes ago, TeleElmar135mm said:

... two disagrees.
First they are sport pictures - ok other than the from the goal in the last minute shot by 100 Photographers. But tey show more from the players and there feelings ...
Second: They are made with an M and are close to the iconic sport pictures like M. Ali etc. So they were rightly shown in the "Deutschen Museum in München".

Most photos can be shot on any camera. I think what we're' trying to g to avoid here is reductionism. In other words, the idea that, for example, concert photography is only about counting the nose hairs on the singer, when in fact it can be about a lot of other things that summons rip the experience. For example, if shooting a big show like Pearl Jam, I will have a Nikon with a 70-200 or 300 permanently attached, and then use a Leica with a variety of lenses 18-90/135 that are easy to carry compared to the SLR's. Sure, I could do it all with other cameras. What I'm poking at, and do so often on this forum, is not constantly citing what the M can't do, but showing that with a bit of practice and creativity, it can actually do most things. 

 

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!

[LocalHero1953]

23 minutes ago, pgk said:

Those are modifications. An EVF-M is a total revision and has vast, much more highly specified and cheaper competition.

The problem here is that what is wanted is an M shaped EVF camera. But such a camera is hobbled and many/most advocates try not to, or don't want to, see its downsides. I DO use EVF cameras, and with numerous adapted lenses, and obviously always with manual focus, so I do know how these work on EVFs, and its not a particularly enjoyable experience, nor particularly quick, but it does work and with practice, like an M, can get a bit quicker. I do so primarily because of the short bayonet to sensor distance which is a prime requisite for many such lenses, and I'd like an EVF camera without a handgrip on it, because this physically gets in the way of using many lenses. But even though an EVF-M would help, its longer register would not, nor almost certainly would its high price.

No matter how I look at the characteristics of an EVF-M, it fails to be as good as an rf-M where the rf-M works best, and obviously it fails to compete with other EVF cameras is most aspects of their performance. Its prime advantage would be shape and sensor tuned to work optimally with many M lenses. To me this is far from a sufficient reason to build an otherwise hobbled camera. But we seem to live in a world where facts are not allowed to get in the way of belief, so .....

I wouldn't argue with you about the problems associated with a EVF M, and I decided a while ago that I have no interest in it. I have always lacked any interest in shooting M lenses on the the SL, or using the Visoflex (for preference) on the digital M. Yet, going by reports here, there appear to be as many people doing just that as are using a M11D or a Monochrom. I think there will be plenty of takers for it - even though I won't be one.

Edited September 19 by LocalHero1953

[charlesphoto99]

19 minutes ago, pgk said:

Those are modifications. An EVF-M is a total revision and has vast, much more highly specified and cheaper competition.

The problem here is that what is wanted is an M shaped EVF camera. But such a camera is hobbled and many/most advocates try not to, or don't want to, see its downsides. I DO use EVF cameras, and with numerous adapted lenses, and obviously always with manual focus, so I do know how these work on EVFs, and its not a particularly enjoyable experience, nor particularly quick, but it does work and with practice, like an M, can get a bit quicker. I do so primarily because of the short bayonet to sensor distance which is a prime requisite for many such lenses, and I'd like an EVF camera without a handgrip on it, because this physically gets in the way of using many lenses. But even though an EVF-M would help, its longer register would not, nor almost certainly would its high price.

No matter how I look at the characteristics of an EVF-M, it fails to be as good as an rf-M where the rf-M works best, and obviously it fails to compete with other EVF cameras is most aspects of their performance. Its prime advantage would be shape and sensor tuned to work optimally with many M lenses. To me this is far from a sufficient reason to build an otherwise hobbled camera. But we seem to live in a world where facts are not allowed to get in the way of belief, so .....

100%. I think that's why the add on EVF or the back screen can be invaluable tools for those certain occasions, but overall, esp for what it will cost, imo the M11-V will bring far too little to the table compared to alternatives such as even Leica's own SL or even Q series. 

[pgk]

23 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Most photos can be shot on any camera ...... What I'm poking at, and do so often on this forum, is not constantly citing what the M can't do, but showing that with a bit of practice and creativity, it can actually do most things. 

I've used my M cameras for taking shots for which they are very unsuited. And succesfully, but that isn't to say that they are the ideal solution for such images (leaping dolphins for example from a boat), but more that they were what I had to hand. If any camera could do anything then convergent evolution would have created clones available from many makes. And this does happen to an extent in that specifications become nuanced rather than clearly separable. But it is rare for a camera manufacturer to deliberately step backwards with an underspecified camera which does virtually nothing better than existing cameras.

There are undoubtedly a (vociferous) few who want an EVF-M regardless of its capabilities. How many remains to be seen, and whether Leica will develop a hobbled camera for them will be interesting, given that it needs to both make a profit and not leave a reputational stain as doing so could all too easily suggest a desire to merely chase profits.

[jaapv]

Oh yes- I have been using M cameras for Safari for decades. First with Visoflex 3, on the M240 with EVF when really long lenses were needed. Up to 135 RF only. At any rate they were more robust than R cameras. 

[charlesphoto99]

38 minutes ago, pgk said:

I've used my M cameras for taking shots for which they are very unsuited. And succesfully, but that isn't to say that they are the ideal solution for such images (leaping dolphins for example from a boat), but more that they were what I had to hand. If any camera could do anything then convergent evolution would have created clones available from many makes. And this does happen to an extent in that specifications become nuanced rather than clearly separable. But it is rare for a camera manufacturer to deliberately step backwards with an underspecified camera which does virtually nothing better than existing cameras.

There are undoubtedly a (vociferous) few who want an EVF-M regardless of its capabilities. How many remains to be seen, and whether Leica will develop a hobbled camera for them will be interesting, given that it needs to both make a profit and not leave a reputational stain as doing so could all too easily suggest a desire to merely chase profits.

I didn't phrase that quite right. I should have said it's almost impossible to know which MAKE of camera is being used to take a particular photo (of course different formats, lenses etc can have wildly different aspects and looks), especially with the internet and jpegs as the great equalizer. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[IkarusJohn]

2 hours ago, pgk said:

Those are modifications. An EVF-M is a total revision …

Not really.  It would simply be an M with the Visoflex built in.  I don’t think the sky is going to fall in.  To me, the “improvements” in the M11 are a bigger problem than an evf M.

Not in the market for either camera.

[SrMi]

14 hours ago, pgk said:

The World Athletics Chamionships are on in Tokyo at the moment. Watching the highlights I see Canon's, Nikons and Sonys being used but oddly no Leicas ..... .

Even if Leica had the best AF, I do not think Leica has the same type of support as, e.g., Canon (A Glimpse of Canon Heaven at the 2024 Paris Olympics):

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!