EVF M rumoured

[Stevejack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There's an interesting discussion with Garry Winogrand HERE (starting at 26:35) where he talks about the differences between the rangefinder and the SLR, and it's also relevant to the difficulties using a Visoflex/EVF which have been brought up in this thread. What's he's basically saying is that at 28/35mm you NEED assistance from a rangefinder/split image to be able to focus because at those focal lengths everything looks sharp. So the rangefinder is the correct tool of choice. 

What's more interesting though, is what he thinks about being able to see through the lens in general. When you see what the lens sees, it "forces the photographer to design and make a picture... in the end make basically an illustration. They're not photographic tools generally speaking". He goes on, saying that "I defy you to resist how what you see in that viewfinder will manipulate... and it will manipulate you into designing a picture". 

He's talking specifically about at long lenses, being able to see what's in focus, see what's out of focus - but it's applicable to being able to see what the camera sees under any circumstances I think. 

It's an interesting viewpoint, and for someone like me who likes to make a picture rather than take a picture... and to be able to see the end result via the EVF essentially before I take the picture.. I think it makes me better understand Winogrand's work and how he viewed photography as a whole. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Derbyshire Man]

8 hours ago, Dazzajl said:

Seems Leica need to throw some more money at Fuji then. Someone needs to make such a thing work and they'd be the best bet.

I've got both and the Fuji implementation is a very poor impersonation of a rangefinder. The EVF isn't great either for manual focussing. I understand these were the conclusions Leica came to as well. Unless something has changed if an EVF camera comes it's a variant rather than replacement.

[Smogg]

I am sure that Leica will present us with a worthy solution, as this will be an important product for the company. So in any case, we can count on a very premium execution of all components of the new camera, including the EVF (whatever new Leica integrates there).

[Smogg]

It's interesting to fantasize about the name of the new camera: Leica D1/E1? Leica D12/E12 (as a precursor to the M12)?

[IkarusJohn]

I’m always rather surprised when I see people say an EVF isn’t great for manual focusing - my experience is that it is very good for focusing 50mm and longer, wide open.  Especially with magnification.  But then, those who don’t like it won’t get it.  Far be it from me to say what people can and can’t do.  Some need AF.

[Dazzajl]

1 hour ago, Derbyshire Man said:

I've got both and the Fuji implementation is a very poor impersonation of a rangefinder. The EVF isn't great either for manual focussing. I understand these were the conclusions Leica came to as well. Unless something has changed if an EVF camera comes it's a variant rather than replacement.

Just for clarity, I’m not suggesting the Leica simply adopt the hybrid finder as it is in the X100/Pro. I’ve had nearly all the iterations of both and enjoyed them but the optical side of the VF has never felt like using an M. 
 

But IF a new design started with the M rangefinder and then added in the digital side, with focus aids designed from the start for manual focus lenses, then maybe something that is joyful to use and practical could be produced. 
 

Or perhaps Fuji should step and take the opportunity. It’s been a very long time since they made a real rangefinder. 

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

30 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I’m always rather surprised when I see people say an EVF isn’t great for manual focusing - my experience is that it is very good for focusing 50mm and longer, wide open.  Especially with magnification.  But then, those who don’t like it won’t get it.  Far be it from me to say what people can and can’t do.  Some need AF.

The key words here are “wide open”.

[TeleElmar135mm]

vor 13 Minuten schrieb Smogg:

The key words here are “wide open”.

... and the other key words are 50mm and magnificatiom. an EVF with 21 or 28 or 35 in manual mode are not very useful (among other things, too much depth of field and an image that is too small) ... and magnification makes it not much butter but slows down the camera. In anaog times (DSLR) we have the microprisms. Even with them you  were quicker than the magnification ... 

[Photon42]

1 hour ago, Smogg said:

It's interesting to fantasize about the name of the new camera: Leica D1/E1? Leica D12/E12 (as a precursor to the M12)?

E12 for "elektronischer Sucher", indicating the tech level being on par with the M12 ("Messsucher") - my five cents.

[LocalHero1953]

Jan 27 - M12
Jan 28 - M12P
Jan 29 - M12M
Jan 30 - M12D
Jan 31 - M12Evf
Jan 32 - M13

A natural progression.

But it leaves Leica with the headache of when to launch the Hello Kitty, Jackson Pollock and Lenny Kravitz special editions.

[lct]

5 hours ago, Stevejack said:

There's an interesting discussion with Garry Winogrand HERE (starting at 26:35) where he talks about the differences between the rangefinder and the SLR, and it's also relevant to the difficulties using a Visoflex/EVF which have been brought up in this thread. What's he's basically saying is that at 28/35mm you NEED assistance from a rangefinder/split image to be able to focus because at those focal lengths everything looks sharp. [...]

Interesting discussion thank you but the statement that at 28/35mm everything looks sharp is not true when doing focus magnification. Suffice it to use a mirrorless camera for 5 minutes (same with a Visoflex 2) to see that everything does not look sharp this way. Of course it is less visible with WA and UWA lenses due to the wide DoF but it is there. One can see sharp and blured parts in this crop for instance and it is a 28mm snap at f/8. Now nobody has to use focus magnification of course but then focusing can only be good enough with an EVF. Focus peaking is still visible in this crop though.

[Smudgerer]

33 minutes ago, lct said:

Interesting discussion thank you but the statement that at 28/35mm everything looks sharp is not true when doing focus magnification. Suffice it to use a mirrorless camera for 5 minutes (same with a Visoflex 2) to see that everything does not look sharp this way. Of course it is less visible with WA and UWA lenses due to the wide DoF but it is there. One can see sharp and blured parts in this crop for instance and it is a 28mm snap at f/8. Now nobody has to use focus magnification of course but then focusing can only be good enough with an EVF. Focus peaking is still visible in this crop though.

Well of course I do not agree with you completely over this "focussing" with an EVF issue, I say "of course" because I come from decades of analogue rangefinder, film TTL cine cameras and SLR use through to DSLR, rangefinder again ( but digital ), and EVF use in both stills and cinema cameras, looked through a hell of a lot of viewfinders on the way.

EVF's may be fine / ok with lenses of 50mm FL and above, but they are marginally effective at FL's below 35mm FL due to the reasons you yourself mention. There are of course "tools" such at peaking and zooming, but they both take time, clutter a VF when you are trying to use it swiftly and are not that effective in my view............And anyway as I too frequently say in these discussions EVF's "lie", OVF's are much more WYSIWYG.

Even as most film and TV productions now have moved away from film cameras with their optical TTL VF's and when the EVF/LCD screens are used we pretty much always have the AC / focus puller run a tape lens to focus point to check all focus settings for the lens, plus of course there are pretty accurate off-lens systems that can read lens to subject distances and confirm focus too.........All this confirming that it isn't really a good idea to solely trust that you have focus by using an EVF or a LCD on-camera screen. You need to be certain that the lens is in focus where you need it to be because when thrown up on a big screen the smallest error can be glaring.

Edited February 18 by Smudgerer

[Stevejack]

26 minutes ago, lct said:

Interesting discussion thank you but the statement that at 28/35mm everything looks sharp is not true when doing focus magnification. Suffice it to use a mirrorless camera for 5 minutes (same with a Visoflex 2) to see that everything does not look sharp this way. Of course it is less visible with WA and UWA lenses due to the wide DoF but it is there. One can see sharp and blured parts in this crop for instance and it is a 28mm snap at f/8. Now nobody has to use focus magnification of course but then focusing can only be good enough with an EVF. Focus peaking is still visible in this crop though.

Yep, magnification is my go-to when I have time and no rangefinder but it’s a slow way to work (and mostly unnecessary at wide angles + small apertures). EVFs are otherwise just like looking at a thumbnail in lightroom, very tricky to tell what is in critical focus without zooming in. 

If Leica can provide a novel way for quickly determining the focus point in the EVF with all M lenses and at all apertures - I’ll be a very happy camper. But that’s a big IF as it requires innovation in software + hardware. They haven’t been great at that lately. 
Otherwise a high res EVF will be the best that we can hope for. 

[pgk]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Interesting discussion thank you but the statement that at 28/35mm everything looks sharp is not true when doing focus magnification. Suffice it to use a mirrorless camera for 5 minutes (same with a Visoflex 2) to see that everything does not look sharp this way. Of course it is less visible with WA and UWA lenses due to the wide DoF but it is there. One can see sharp and blured parts in this crop for instance and it is a 28mm snap at f/8. Now nobody has to use focus magnification of course but then focusing can only be good enough with an EVF. Focus peaking is still visible in this crop though.

Yes, using focus magnification with wides can be effective, but .....

To take the discussion back to an evfM, using wides at small apertures (M lenses have manual, mechanical diaphragms) makes it tricky whereas the rangefinder is independent of aperture. Which is why the rfM is at its best with 35mm and wider. I do use focus maginfication quite a lot. Its great with longer lenses, great with modern lenses, great if you can take time. Its not so good with shorter lenses, not so good with older lenses with aberrations when it can become more difficult difficult to pin down the best plane of best sharpness, and of course it isn't so useful if you have to work fast. So we go around in the circular argument yet again. An evfM vs an rfM and perhaps both do have their place; the problem being its a different one. Trying to get one solution to fit all may prove to be an abomination of a compromised camera😆.

[DadDadDaddyo]

So where have we gotten to here?

These viewfinder technologies each have a place - in those situations for which one or the other is optimal. 

That said, it's a heck of a lot easier to fit an updated, high-res auxiliary EVF to a rangefinder M body than it would be to add an auxiliary coupled optical rangefinder to an EVF-based body. 

Once an EVF is in place, either built-in or in the accessory shoe, we then get to the various techniques that have been invented to ease or to speed focusing with the EVF. 

But then, there remains the matter of being able to view outside the frame lines, something many rangefinder users value. 

I don't think it's been shown yet that any of the current approaches, or even all of them taken together, result in an EVF that can replace the optical rangefinder for all the situations in which the rangefinder might still hold an advantage (especially for seasoned users of the rangefinder).

At the same time, magnification and peaking aren't practical in a strictly optical system, not without various technological gymnastics that stretch what's possible with current technology and result in compromised results.  

So where all of this does leave the Leica M user? 

1) For right now, it leaves us with the Visoflex 2, for use in those situations in which it offers an advantage. (It leaves me thinking I'd be delighted with a Visoflex 3, with higher resolution than the 2. I'd use it when it was preferable for a given situation)

3) it leaves those who prefer an electronic viewfinder overall with wishing for an SL in M clothing, or settling for the Visoflex 2, or wishing for the Visoflex 3.

If the form factor of the M is critical to a user who wants an electronic viewfinder exclusively, that user might well wish for the Leica equivalent of the Fujifilm XE line.

I don't think I'd call that an M, though. 

And, it doesn't seem as if Leica feels a hybrid system of rangefinder and EVF, all in one, is ready for prime time yet. 

Yeah. For me, I'll use the Visoflex 2 when there's a reason to, and maybe wish for a Visoflex 3 when it comes along. 

[evikne]

I can imagine that Leica has had many similar, heated discussions internally, as those we have had here on the forum. 😉

[costa43]

I'll go with M11-E as the name. Has a nice ring to it.

[Smogg]

27 minutes ago, evikne said:

I can imagine that Leica has had many similar, heated discussions internally, as those we have had here on the forum. 😉

They won't be able to argue with each other as well as we can😂

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgk]

7 minutes ago, Smogg said:

They won't be able to argue with each other as well as we can😂

But the outcome of our arguments costs nothing🤔.

[lct]

9 hours ago, Stevejack said:

[...] What's more interesting though, is what he thinks about being able to see through the lens in general. When you see what the lens sees, it "forces the photographer to design and make a picture... in the end make basically an illustration. They're not photographic tools generally speaking". He goes on, saying that "I defy you to resist how what you see in that viewfinder will manipulate... and it will manipulate you into designing a picture". 

He's talking specifically about at long lenses, being able to see what's in focus, see what's out of focus - but it's applicable to being able to see what the camera sees under any circumstances I think. 

It's an interesting viewpoint, and for someone like me who likes to make a picture rather than take a picture... [...]

Yes interesting point indeed. I believe i prefer making than taking too but the border is thin in between. I use more and more Leica Perspective Control for instance, which allows to view outside the frame too. Helps me giving wide images a "50mm perspective" so to speak and photos look more "natural" to me. What am i doing then, making more than taking i guess but is it the same if the aim is to come closer to the reality?