EVF M rumoured

[AlanJW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

27 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Have you ever actually used an EVF-M? It doesn't automatically mean that it will be better for poor eyesight and in some cases can make it worse. In fact had a young woman ask me the other day why she was getting eye migraines while using her Sony for extended periods. They do that to me too, and at times can make me feel like I'm having a seizure. So be careful what you wish for. I'm 61 FTR. 

Yes I have used an M with the visoflex. And used m lenses on an SL.  An evf M is a more elegant solution. 

[Advertisement]

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

[duoenboge]

When shooting with lenses without a automatic diaphragm, focusing with the rangefinder is often more accurate when the aperture is not fully open, bacause the selected aperture does not affect the rangefinder. With the aperture fully open, the EVF is often more accurate and, above all, more convenient. A well-designed hybrid viewfinder would be the optimal solution.I think this will be a real challenge for Leica. 

[NightPix]

5 hours ago, AlanJW said:

If you don't like what Leica comes out with in an EVF-M don't buy one. But I don't think I am alone in my thinking that a camera like that will help me, and I really don't see the point of trashing either the idea or the people who will buy one.

Exactly. Years ago I had a detached retina in my right eye and subsequent repair efforts plus now wearing glasses with prisms has made using a RF extremely difficult for me. Except for special applications like wildlife I mostly shoot with m-lenses on one of my SL’s or use my Q3. The SL’s are overkill and overweight for using m-lenses, so a smaller, lighter EVF-M would be a welcome addition for me (especially if it costs less than an m11 + visioflex).  I used to have Canon’s and Sony’s but sold the lot because they weren’t for me (lots of reasons). The point is, no one has to buy an EVF-M, (or any other camera) so I don’t understand all the anxiety on this thread - unless there’s a belief that Leica plans to ditch the RF, and I really don’t think there’s much chance of that happening. Maybe others disagree. 

Edited September 21 by NightPix

[lct]

2 hours ago, NightPix said:

[...] The point is, no one has to buy an EVF-M, (or any other camera) so I don’t understand all the anxiety on this thread - unless there’s a belief that Leica plans to ditch the RF, and I really don’t think there’s much chance of that happening [...]

Neither do i but some people seem to fear the success of the M11-V, as if it could overshadow the rangefinder. For the second time in half a century, M lenses can be used without RF on a normal M camera. First time was the M1 that had an OVF but no RF either. It was less expensive than its sister M2 but not affordable enough to justify the lack of focus aid, i guess, which could explain its limited success. Now that such focus aids exist, a more affordable price will be welcome by the market hopefully. We shall see.

[Tseg]

I worked in Marketing for years for a big corporation.  I always said, “Sales can sell best what they don’t have.”   It is easy to get behind a not clearly defined solution as everyone has a different take on how it will be executed.   If/when this EVF M is launched it will not be loved by most, at least for some time.

[jaapv]

Missing one EVF drawback here: in bright weather it slows you down. You’ll have to take your sunglasses off before you can see anything in the viewfinder which may cause you to miss that instant-reaction shot.  Street photographers? 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, lct said:

Neither do i but some people seem to fear the success of the M11-V, as if it could overshadow the rangefinder. For the second time in half a century, M lenses can be used without RF on a normal M camera. First time was the M1 that had an OVF but no RF either. It was less expensive than its sister M2 but not affordable enough to justify the lack of focus aid, i guess, which could explain its limited success. Now that such focus aids exist, a more affordable price will be welcome by the market hopefully. We shall see.

Hopefully indeed   Does not sound like Leica. It would position the EVF camera as inferior. 

[wattsy]

18 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

What if Jono's report isn't glowing? Or is he just a shill for Leica now? 

😂

Edited September 22 by wattsy

[pgk]

39 minutes ago, jaapv said:

It would position the EVF camera as inferior. 

How on earth could a manual focus, limited lens EVF camera be considered to be inferior? 😜

[jaapv]

Precisely. But market positioning is something different. The outside world would consider the camera handicapped by lack of functionality, the Leica world by lack of heritage. You cannot feed those perceptions by making it substantially cheaper. 

[NigelG]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

Missing one EVF drawback here: in bright weather it slows you down. You’ll have to take your sunglasses off before you can see anything in the viewfinder which may cause you to miss that instant-reaction shot.  Street photographers? 

And yet amazingly I walk around London every day - even sometimes in bright weather - and I see no one using an optical rangefinder or indeed optical SLR viewfinder as they are all using an EVF or their rear screen…

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

Missing one EVF drawback here: in bright weather it slows you down. You’ll have to take your sunglasses off before you can see anything in the viewfinder which may cause you to miss that instant-reaction shot.  Street photographers? 

??  I wear prescription sunglasses in daylight with or without my cameras, including the SL2, and without problems. Of course there’s the issue of whether an M EVF would be as effective as the one on the SL2. 

[jgeenen]

vor 6 Minuten schrieb NigelG:

And yet amazingly I walk around London every day - even sometimes in bright weather - and I see no one using an optical rangefinder or indeed optical SLR viewfinder as they are all using an EVF or their rear screen…

Probably because most of the cameras sold don‘t have an OVF nowadays?

on the other hand, the bright light advantage of optical viewfinders easily turns into a disadvantage once the light has faded away… But who cares, once you understand the odds and ends of your gear you can begin working around (remember the „sports finder“ called hole in the Rolleiflex finder hood).

 

[jaapv]

20 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

??  I wear prescription sunglasses in daylight with or without my cameras, including the SL2, and without problems. Of course there’s the issue of whether an M EVF would be as effective as the one on the SL2. 

Those are not polarizing. In that case. Mine certainly do. 

[NigelG]

Quite

My point was rather the use of the wearing of sunglasses as a rather specious reason to pooh-pooh any prospective EVF-M

I’m merrily shooting often with an M9M and Edition 60 neither of which have a live view or visoflex option…

 

(Re #2573)

Edited September 22 by NigelG

[jaapv]

Who pooh-poohs?  It is just a consideration. Some of use -like me- need to in overly bright light. 

[Jeff S]

27 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Those are not polarizing. In that case. Mine certainly do. 

I use non-polarized glasses for this reason, as well as for driving (“rainbow” effects through windshield).  One needs to adapt viewing habits for modern tech.  Removing glasses not required.

[charlesphoto99]

16 hours ago, NightPix said:

I don’t understand all the anxiety on this thread

Being critical doesn't mean one is anxious. I for one am fine with Leica making this. It's just tempering some of this notion (red herring if you ask me) that an EVF will be so much better than the rangefinder, and the idea that one can't shoot moving subjects easily with a rangefinder, and that an EVF will solve that for many (it won't). Of course there will be cases where the EVF will be best (such as quoted members eye surgery) and others like myself where it won't (again due to eye/neurological issues). FTR I would love to get a Nikon or Leica EVF (the latter unaffordable at the moment though) but so far I just haven't had a great experience with the mini-TV. I'm happy others do. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pedaes]

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

 It would position the EVF camera as inferior. 

Of course it would not be inferior, just different. However, if the old fashion concept of there being some relationship between cost and price is in play will a EVF M sans rangefinder be 'cheaper' than standard M?

[pgk]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

Precisely. But market positioning is something different. The outside world would consider the camera handicapped by lack of functionality, the Leica world by lack of heritage. You cannot feed those perceptions by making it substantially cheaper. 

Leica's response may instead be to make it more expensive, and thus costlier for lower functionality and less viability than existing Ms. Could be the best strategy😆. What would those who want such a camera make of such a move I wonder?

I'm actually intrigued as to what the eye relief of an EVF-M could be. Is there sufficient room within the area of an M viewfinder to provide a great EVF within the existing confines of an M viewfinder and so that there is no external difference in comparison to current cameras?

Edited September 22 by pgk