EVF M rumoured

[Viv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/8/2025 at 11:09 PM, Jipster said:

Oh, the 50,000 pictures I have taken in the last 3 years was with a camera that didn’t work? Damn. The M is not for everybody, just like a manual clutch is not for everybody.  No need to say silly things.

Talking of silly things, there is no such thing as a manual clutch.

Think about it.

[Advertisement]

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

[Stevejack]

4 minutes ago, Alberti said:

Interesting, because I used the 35mm Summicron (IV) on the Lumix S5 mirrorless, and yes the output was nice, but did not have the M- 'magic' in some way. I never looked 'for flare'. So what is then left in the EVF as 'special'? Yes. e.g. the Summarit 75mm (modern) is great that way but the shalow DOF wide open makes wide open shooting hard. Same with modern Summiluxes. With a EVF: I prefer point and shoot = achieve focus somewhere (with smartness or not, intended or misdirected by way of my nose if you understand the impracticalities - what I mean), but at a higher quality than available by hand.

Also, I found it is very hard to see in live view that special separation of the foreground/background that Mandler achieved in his lenses. I prefer the astonishment afterwards. It is quite different from that in modern lenses that I also like for other reasons (astonishment about the presentation that Karbe et al. achieves). 

Yep I get what you're saying, and a big part of the joy of using the rangefinder is coming back and downloading the files and seeing for the first time how the picture rendered. 

I do shoot into the sun a lot because those scenes attract me, so maybe I suffer from flare and other related issues disproportionally I don't know, but the visoflex helps. Honestly though the real benefit came when I started using old lenses. I had a 1938 lens which had a bit of internal haze, and with the visoflex I could make the image soft right where I wanted it - making creative use out of the flaws in the old glass. 

Something like this picture for example - I took this as a test the first time I attached the lens to the camera. Half a shuffle to my right and the haze in the lens would light up so much it obscured the painting entirely, but in the visoflex I could see it and make adjustments to include some of the effects from the haze but still show enough detail in the painting. Through the rangefinder this would have been down to luck whether I had a useable image or not. Fine for something like this, but not in situations like portraits of the kids which I can't re-take.  I love using old glass on the SL2 for the same reasons, but I just don't like the SL2 as a camera (at least in comparison to the M).

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, Viv said:

Talking of silly things, there is no such thing as a manual clutch.

Think about it.

DuckDuckGo is your friend

There are historical examples as well.

Then there are motorbikes......

Edited February 12 by LocalHero1953

[UliWer]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb costa43:

If it’s not an innovative product that has been well thought out and designed then it will be disappointing, especially if they release it at anywhere near the price of a current M. I just hope it’s not a lazy release with a 3.69m Visoflex EVF experience in an M11. I like the idea of an M11 body but the solution needs to be unique and special. It has to improve on the shooting experience of using an SL/other mirrorless camera with adapter. Otherwise what’s the point. 

Is there anything you could imagine they put into an „EVF-M“ which could not be implemented in an SL or Q?

Leica tells us that the „unique and special“ solution of the M which is also the reason for the absurd high price - is the optical rangefinder. 

 

[lct]

4 hours ago, Smogg said:

This is not possible since most modern lenses have an FLE design.

I don’t see significant differences between FLE lenses and others the way i use my Techart adapter. In both cases, i prefocus the lens manually till it looks sharp enough in the EVF and i let the adapter nail the focus. Only issue would be register distance on M-mout cameras, i suspect, but i have no idea about that.

[Smogg]

7 minutes ago, lct said:

I don’t see significant differences between FLE lenses and others the way i use my Techart adapter. In both cases, i prefocus the lens manually till it looks sharp enough in the EVF and i let the adapter nail the focus. Only issue would be register distance on M-mout cameras, i suspect, but i have no idea about that.

Prefocus is exactly what I meant when I talked about the impossibility of full autofocus.

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 2 Minuten schrieb lct:

I don’t see significant differences between FLE lenses and others the way i use my Techart adapter. In both cases, i prefocus the lens manually till it looks sharp enough in the EVF and i let the adapter nail the focus.

That‘s interesting. 

So you use a Techart adapter to „nail the focus“ even though you use the EVF. I know people who do the same with M-mount lenses adapted on a Nikon Z9. 

But why are we told that the EVF is the solution for exact focussing and that this is the main reason for an EVF-M? Would it need autofocus as well?

[lct]

1 minute ago, UliWer said:

That‘s interesting. 

So you use a Techart adapter to „nail the focus“ even though you use the EVF. I know people who do the same with M-mount lenses adapted on a Nikon Z9. 

But why are we told that the EVF is the solution for exact focussing and that this is the main reason for an EVF-M? Would it need autofocus as well?

Not for me, i prefer manual focus with auto zoom, but i don't see AF as a problem with M lenses on my Kolari mod Sony A7r2, provided the lens is not too bulky. I seem to recall a colleague here using a Noctilux 50/1 on a Sony with a Techart adapter.

[costa43]

Just now, UliWer said:

Is there anything you could imagine they put into an „EVF-M“ which could not be implemented in an SL or Q?

Leica tells us that the „unique and special“ solution of the M which is also the reason for the absurd high price - is the optical rangefinder. 

 

The hope is for something new. A different way of manual focusing or at least an improvement to the current formula. If I was to paint a perfect picture for my liking then an OVF with a rangefinder but with an element of electronic focus confirmations could be interesting.

If we just get a standard EVF in an M11 then unless it is pretty low cost (for Leica) I would not even consider it. The M at 9k is already absurd as you say but it is unique in the market (Bar the Pixii but it's not there yet) so Leica has a bit more scope to price it high, I think the minute that USP goes then the price becomes an even bigger issue. 

Edited February 12 by costa43

[jaapv]

22 minutes ago, lct said:

I don’t see significant differences between FLE lenses and others the way i use my Techart adapter. In both cases, i prefocus the lens manually till it looks sharp enough in the EVF and i let the adapter nail the focus. Only issue would be register distance on M-mout cameras, i suspect, but i have no idea about that.

Given that the only function of the floating element on the Summilux 35 FLE is to correct focus shift it is hardly surprising that you don’t see a difference when focusing using an EVF and an AF gizmo. 

[Jon Warwick]

3 hours ago, evikne said:

I think there are also many other types of potential buyers, such as M fans who want better control of framing

....exactly why i'd like an EVF version ...and also ability to constantly see the histogram in the viewfinder, which i tend to rely on a lot

 

[Jon Warwick]

4 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

I remember the histograms in the seventies, eighties and nineties, when all M photographers used them to.... oh wait

Less highlight clipping then to consider though (for C41 at least !)

Edited February 12 by Jon Warwick

[Smogg]

1 minute ago, Jon Warwick said:

Less highlight clipping then to consider though (for C41 at least !)

Highlights metering eliminates need a histogram for me

[FrozenInTime]

I'm okay with rangefinder path focusing, but yes, histogram and in viewfinder image review is something that every EVIL camera provides.

I use my M10 and M10M less as reviewing images on the LCD requires reading glasses; so the MP, M-A, and lowly £500 G100D, with micro43 15 and 25mm summilux lenses, get more use.

No EVF-M and I'm probably never going to buy another digital M.  I also feel money spent in prior years trying the SL2-S and CL was wasted.

 

 

[Viv]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

DuckDuckGo is your friend

There are historical examples as well.

Then there are motorbikes......

Bikes yes indeed, of course!

[jaapv]

4 hours ago, Alberti said:

Interesting, because I used the 35mm Summicron (IV) on the Lumix S5 mirrorless, and yes the output was nice, but did not have the M- 'magic' in some way. I never looked 'for flare'. So what is then left in the EVF as 'special'? Yes. e.g. the Summarit 75mm (modern) is great that way but the shalow DOF wide open makes wide open shooting hard. Same with modern Summiluxes. With a EVF: I prefer point and shoot = achieve focus somewhere (with smartness or not, intended or misdirected by way of my nose if you understand the impracticalities - what I mean), but at a higher quality than available by hand.

Also, I found it is very hard to see in live view that special separation of the foreground/background that Mandler achieved in his lenses. I prefer the astonishment afterwards. It is quite different from that in modern lenses that I also like for other reasons (astonishment about the presentation that Karbe et al. achieves). 

You probably need to get an SL2S or SL3S. Or maybe S5ii

[jonoslack]

On 2/8/2025 at 7:12 PM, lct said:

Good news. If the EVF-M (or M-EVF?) has IBIS i can keep my M11 and let go my M240 that i'm still using for low shutter speeds.

Sorry if I'm stupid, but I still don't quite understand why you need to be using low shutter speeds? after all the difference in ISO between the M240 and the M11 would allow you about 4 stops more shutter speed if the light is low?

All the best

[mjw3]

Perhaps the rumor should have been titled as “compact SL” in the vein of the a7c line. Though I prefer it as an ILC Q rumor.

It would cause far less drama, so perhaps it is called an M for other reasons.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Smudgerer]

3 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

I only shot E6. It was brutal and unforgiving.

Yes, I remember.......but no doubt you learned from it..........Easy things don't teach us much.

[phojomatic]

18 hours ago, Overgaard said:

There is an interesting and cozy podcast here where Stefan Daniel tells about Leica and products. It is worth noting that towards the end of the podcast, he encourage people to not have too high hopes for a lot of new things.

I think if one look over the recent releases of M cameras, such as the Glossy Black, it confirm what level of newness to (not) expect. I think that it is likely that if an EVF version arises, it will simply be moving the EVF from external housing, to inside the Leica M11 body. In the last two-three years Stefan Daniel have moved from "it'll be over my dead body" to later stating (at an LSI meeting) that if Leica can sell 800-1,000 units, it would be worth doing. He also stated to me, that "the only way to find out, is making it."

Between now and the probable release of Leica M12 in spring 2027 there would be time to test it. 

There are for sure some emotional barriers, just like when it was discussed putting a digital sensor inside a Leica M, which had always been a film camera. It did work out, and today we have still three Leica M film cameras in production and available, as well as the Leica M11 digital, plus Q3 and SL3. 

Based on that, the rangefinder version will never die, I'm sure.

 

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!

https://www.iainfarrell.com/prime-lenses-podcast/blog-post-title-one-99kbz-brgy6-r8a6z-ftgy9-2px27-pfg8m-385mm-wtxz4-xdkyb-gy8fd-7db4e-tw2zl-gxkc3-3k6rw-h6dj9-ftzwl-tx8ay-w4kxx-2jmt2-8w6z2-7ke34-dmf28-f2j5p-rzk4b-dj9xj-jndsj-64rft-3d3ex-sbljh-m4p5p

 

Thank you Thorston for posting this...it was very enjoyable and timely to listen to last night while developing film. 

A few other key points revealed that pertain to this discussion: 

-- Leica is happy with the current product line (M. Q, SL, etc.) and they aren't looking to add another line.

-- Asked about making a removable Q lens, Stephan explains how specialized the design is and how far back the rear element is from the sensor. If they made interchangeable lens Q, the lenses would be the size of the SL lenses.

-- Stephan talks about three principles that guide their philosophy, and to paraphrase two points, they must adapt outside technologies and innovations to their products, in a very Leica way.

Therefore, I think it's pretty safe to say this thread is in the correct section of the forum, and if such a product is released, it's an EVF M, not the Q-M or Q-SL/M or M-SL or what not. 

Lastly, Stephan release his three favorite lenses and notes that the 50mm Lux non-asph (early) is his #3. This "coincidently" is the lens rumored to be releases soon in silver.

Definitely worth the listen for Leica enthusiasts.