Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, John Robinson said:

A Leica SL with the Leica M-Adapter L does everything one could wish for with M-series lenses [...]

Too big for M lenses, adapter not wanted for them, sensor not optimized to work best with them, lack of mechanical link with them, no auto zoom capabilities...

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the 'non-dismissive' posts from one who is close to the factory, it is going to happen and I am sure the design is already fixed. So only thing to discuss is when. Is betting allowed here?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, pedaes said:

Reading the 'non-dismissive' posts from one who is close to the factory, it is going to happen and I am sure the design is already fixed. So only thing to discuss is when. Is betting allowed here?

Before or after the M12? I bet before to reassure M12 users that they will remain the best :D

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If electric kettles now can have IBIS I don't know why Leica cannot squeeze it into the M yet........

Bouilloire électrique Ibis - 0.5 L - Inox mat - BODUM

 
Bouilloire électrique Ibis - 0.5 L - Inox mat - BODUM
ibis05l_amb.jpg.pagespeed.ce.w8zKUfvF5e.
ibi05l_bodum.jpg.pagespeed.ce.epKB_By5G6
  • Bouilloire électrique
  • Arrêt automatique
  • Capacité : 0,5 L
  • Coloris : Chrome
  • Matériaux : Acier inoxydable et ABS
 
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Chris W said:

If the EVF M is a separate product, fine.

It makes me laugh that on a Leica forum so many people post negative comments at people who like to use a rangefinder and appreciate a simpler, mostly manual workflow.

 

In large part, it's because they don't know what they want. After going through a spreadsheets worth of Sony's and Fuji's, they pony up to get an M for a more 'pure' photographic experience, but then discover that actually means work (which includes the digital darkroom), and embracing a sort of imperfectionist mindset -  having to 'let go' to a large degree, get loose, and that can be really difficult.  One can't have the camera do everything for you, and also have it be a return to the basics. I see a lot of "the M isn't capable of doing this or that" versus "the photographer isn't capable..." which puts too much reliance on the gear versus the ability to see and create with what one has. Sometimes limitations are liberating. (I'm generalizing, of course - others come at the M from many different angles and for different reasons). 

That said, I think it's great if Leica release this camera. Will it make some people happy? Sure. Will it make their photography better? Some, possibly. Worse? Possibly some too. I know for me it would make mine worse. I would get to hung up on the little screen in front of me, making sure the focus is always 'perfect' versus reacting to the scene outside the camera like I do with the traditional optical viewfinder, and just taking the shot. 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

In large part, it's because they don't know what they want. After going through a spreadsheets worth of Sony's and Fuji's, they pony up to get an M for a more 'pure' photographic experience, but then discover that actually means work (which includes the digital darkroom), and embracing a sort of imperfectionist mindset -  having to 'let go' to a large degree, get loose, and that can be really difficult.  One can't have the camera do everything for you, and also have it be a return to the basics. I see a lot of "the M isn't capable of doing this or that" versus "the photographer isn't capable..." which puts too much reliance on the gear versus the ability to see and create with what one has. Sometimes limitations are liberating. (I'm generalizing, of course - others come at the M from many different angles and for different reasons) [...]

Indeed it is generalizing since many (most?) colleagues here are not new comers to photography. Now i quite agree that "one can't have the camera do everything for you" and the so-called magenta cast issue is a good example, but i don't understand what all this has to do with the topic. One can have experience with either RF or reflex cameras or both. The rumoured EVF-M is nothing but an M-mount camera with a built-in EVF in lieu of the RF. It will require skills that are similar if not identical as those involved in using an M11 with the Visoflex 2. Different skills as those involved when using the same camera in RF mode perhaps but i fail to see in what this has the least link with asking a camera to do everything for you. The M11 can be easier to use in LV mode than RF mode for some people and the opposite for others. I may be missing something though...

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, lct said:

Indeed it is generalizing since many (most?) colleagues here are not new comers to photography. Now i quite agree that "one can't have the camera do everything for you" and the so-called magenta cast issue is a good example, but i don't understand what all this has to do with the topic. One can have experience with either RF or reflex cameras or both. The rumoured EVF-M is nothing but an M-mount camera with a built-in EVF in lieu of the RF. It will require skills that are similar if not identical as those involved in using an M11 with the Visoflex 2. Different skills as those involved when using the same camera in RF mode perhaps but i fail to see in what this has the least link with asking a camera to do everything for you. The M11 can be easier to use in LV mode than RF mode for some people and the opposite for others. I may be missing something though...

If you don't get what I'm on about, you don't get it. That's fine. I'm not asking you to. And your second to last line is exactly what I said. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After over twenty years of AF and other automatic functions (IBIS to replace steady hands and shooting technique to name but one), many will be newcomers to manual photography and won't appreciate relinquishing their dependence on automation and the learning curve that comes with it. We see too many posts in the vein of "i cannot do it, so it is impossible" in the M forums. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently picked up a Q3 for curiosity whilst my 35mm Summilux is at the doctors and I find it harder to work with autofocus than manual focus. It frustrates me and I tend to use the Q in MF now more often than not. There are things I dislike about manual focusing with an evf but what I do love is being able to compose my frame as I see it and then focusing without having to recompose. As you turn the focus you see the scene change and come alive, the layers evolve and I really enjoy having that tactile control. It’s a good benefit of the evf, especially when critical focus on a certain spot is not a priority.

Edited by costa43
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, costa43 said:

I recently picked up a Q3 for curiosity whilst my 35mm Summilux is at the doctors and I find it harder to work with autofocus than manual focus. It frustrates me and I tend to use the Q in MF now more often than not. There are things I dislike about manual focusing with an evf but what I do love is being able to compose my frame as I see it and then focusing without having to recompose. As you turn the focus you see the scene change and come alive, the layers evolve and I really enjoy having that tactile control. It’s a good benefit of the evf, especially when critical focus on a certain spot is not a priority.

Yes, agreed with using the Q with manual focusing. I have the Q2-M that I really do like, that camera I use 80% of the time in manual focus mode. I still vastly prefer an OVF over a EVF but the way that the Q2-M's EVF functions is still pretty good and for a B&W shooter the B&W EVF is a treat.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Smudgerer said:

Yes, agreed with using the Q with manual focusing. I have the Q2-M that I really do like, that camera I use 80% of the time in manual focus mode. I still vastly prefer an OVF over a EVF but the way that the Q2-M's EVF functions is still pretty good and for a B&W shooter the B&W EVF is a treat.

I have exactly the same feeling. EVF is good as an additional tool (it's nice to have in some cases), but not as a primary one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Smudgerer said:

Yes, agreed with using the Q with manual focusing. I have the Q2-M that I really do like, that camera I use 80% of the time in manual focus mode. I still vastly prefer an OVF over a EVF but the way that the Q2-M's EVF functions is still pretty good and for a B&W shooter the B&W EVF is a treat.

The SL2s is even more of a joy, it has a better evf and a much better dial for exposure comp etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smudgerer said:

Yes, agreed with using the Q with manual focusing. I have the Q2-M that I really do like, that camera I use 80% of the time in manual focus mode. I still vastly prefer an OVF over a EVF but the way that the Q2-M's EVF functions is still pretty good and for a B&W shooter the B&W EVF is a treat.

Yes, the resolution in the Q2M is really good and with or without focus peaking it’s pretty easy to see where you are on manual focus. It too preferred manual when I had one. Due to the high res EVF in the R5 mk2 it’s easy there without focus peaking. On my visoflex 2? No way! I’m much better with the RF patch but that of course means compulsory focus and recompose which is what it is. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, costa43 said:

As you turn the focus you see the scene change and come alive, the layers evolve and I really enjoy having that tactile control. It’s a good benefit of the evf, especially when critical focus on a certain spot is not a priority.

This is exactly the kind of situation where I would like to have an EVF as well. The rangefinder is the best option when I know where I want the focus to be. But if, for example, I'm photographing a flower meadow with a shallow depth of field, it's great to be able to see how the focal plane travels when you turn the focus ring.

Edited by evikne
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, evikne said:

This is exactly the kind of situation where I would like to have an EVF as well. The rangefinder is the best option when I know where I want the focus to be. But if, for example, I want to take a picture of a flower meadow with a shallow depth of field, it's a fantastic feeling to see how the focus plane moves when you turn the focus ring.

Yes, I’m exactly the same. On the flip side, what I dislike very much about most evf manual focus implementations is zoom to focus, especially on non static scenes. I’m an instinctive photographer so I like to click when I see a moment, when the camera zooms in I lose that moment and the experience is painful to say the least. I much prefer being able to see the scene as it is and having some kind of confirmation of focus. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lct said:

Did you try to turn focus aid off? Autozoom is disabled this way but it can be enabled manually if needed.

 

Yes, it’s always turned off. On the SL2s I have it mapped to the joystick for the odd occasion I want critical focus on a still scene.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TeleElmar135mm said:

I think the main problem with the M cameras is that many people can't get used to the principle of the rangefinder or don't understand it, but want an M camera. The reasons for "wanting to have" could be discussed in great detail here, but ultimately it is not productive.

Rather, it seems that if someone cannot cope with the "rangefinder" principle, the camera has to be changed until the wishes are fulfilled. Unfortunately, there are many different “wishes” that cannot all be reconciled. Many people say that company xy has this and that and please build it into an M. For this group I can only say: The model already exists at company xy, then use it  - or who wants a Rolex with a digital display or a fully assembled Ikea cabinet?

You've got to stop thinking of EVF-M proponents of trying to change the rangefinder M. It's the exact opposite. We are literally asking Leica to stop messing with what I would say is a perfect camera system, and offer a separate model instead.  I love the rangefinder M, I don't want Leica to keep adding more features to it because it's starting to ruin the experience, and I'm worried for where they will take it in the future if they keep going down that road. 

And I can assure you company xyz doesn't offer what we want or I would have already bought it. The M camera has more going for it than just the rangefinder - that is only a small part of why people love the M. Size, layout of controls, ergonomics, lens choice. 

 

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...