EVF M rumoured

[Leicaflex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 29 Minuten schrieb algrove:

Agree a 96MP sensor would be well placed in the S4 whenever it comes, if ever.
 

For me I very much like a 24MP sensor that can do multi-shot when wanted.

Oh, even better. It would be around 150MP in Leica Pro Format.

I‘m also a fan of 24MP and from a video perspective 24 is quite perfect as you can crop vertically and still have 4k.  

[Advertisement]

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

[JNK100]

34 minutes ago, Leicaflex said:

Oh, even better. It would be around 150MP in Leica Pro Format.

I‘m also a fan of 24MP and from a video perspective 24 is quite perfect as you can crop vertically and still have 4k.  

I don't think there is much demand for a video-capable 'M' - happy to be proved wrong though!

[AZach]

29 minutes ago, JNK100 said:

a video-capable 'M'

It is probably outside "Das Wesentliche"

[didier]

On 4/4/2025 at 11:49 PM, T25UFO said:

The M Edition 70 set a price benchmark, although there has been virtually no press coverage on that camera since it was announced last October.

As far as I know, the 250 copies of the M Edition 70 haven’t been delivered yet…

[FrozenInTime]

On 4/4/2025 at 10:06 PM, jrichie said:

the tariffs will have zero impact on whats announced.  Products aren't just developed on whims, and no doubt are already being manufactured for a May launch date.

Also they have zero effect on the rest of the world, and their sales.  If I was a brand selling products I would shift my focus more onto markets where I could increase market share, rather than the US markets where it is likely to reduce.

‘If France sneezes, Europe catches a cold’ …. ‘If America sneezes, the world catches a cold’

Maybe now is the time for Leica to divert attention from rushing a new product introduction on to clearing the repair backlog.

Edited April 6 by FrozenInTime

[algrove]

5 hours ago, JNK100 said:

I don't think there is much demand for a video-capable 'M' - happy to be proved wrong though!

I mean 24MP for stills or 96MP for multi-shot when wanted.  Most of my digital M shooting has been with 18MP, 24MP or 40MP. The higher the MP for some reason the less I shoot, but then again I prefer 6.0 pixel pitch sensor results.

I could care less about video with any M camera including using it with my SL3 or SL3.

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, FrozenInTime said:

‘If France sneezes, Europe catches a cold’ …. ‘If America sneezes, the world catches a cold’

Maybe now is the time for Leica to divert attention from rushing a new product introduction on to clearing the repair backlog.

Well said.

[raizans]

Maybe it would help if they lifted the parts ban and got independent repairmen to alleviate some of the burden.

[la1402]

6 hours ago, raizans said:

Maybe it would help if they lifted the parts ban and got independent repairmen to alleviate some of the burden.

Certification and quality control on such a setup is a big effort even for larger companies. 

[Leicaflex]

Am 7.4.2025 um 00:12 schrieb algrove:

I mean 24MP for stills or 96MP for multi-shot when wanted.  Most of my digital M shooting has been with 18MP, 24MP or 40MP. The higher the MP for some reason the less I shoot, but then again I prefer 6.0 pixel pitch sensor results.

I could care less about video with any M camera including using it with my SL3 or SL3.

Multi-shot is a great feature – even more so when it‘s possible to be used handheld like in the new Lumix models – but only cameras with IBIS can offer it.

If we get a EVF M and it is called M11-V, I don‘t think it will introduce revolutionary features (for an M) like a shutterless construction or IBIS. Someday these my find there way to the M but I guess not now.

I think this camera will use the same 60MP sensor but with phase detection pixels for some kind of „digital rangefinder“ and no IBIS. Video would be another relatively easy feature to add. It’s not a „traditionalists“ M anyway and the tech is allready there. 
This would still be an interesting addition to the M line.

[SrMi]

I have been shooting with an M11 and 24mm in Portugal. To frame, I use LCD, EVF, or an external OVF. There are a lot of high-contrast situations, and my conclusion is the same as with all other mirrorless cameras: EVFs suck (no detail in shadows). That point was amplified because I could easily switch between OVF and EVF for the same scene.

[LocalHero1953]

5 minutes ago, SrMi said:

I have been shooting with an M11 and 24mm in Portugal. To frame, I use LCD, EVF, or an external OVF. There are a lot of high-contrast situations, and my conclusion is the same as with all other mirrorless cameras: EVFs suck (no detail in shadows). That point was amplified because I could easily switch between OVF and EVF for the same scene.

Curious: is not seeing detail in shadows a major drawback? For me it would be a minor inconvenience, a nice to have. Any viewfinder is mainly a tool for framing and composition, and managing manual focusing. EVFs add the benefits of WYSIWYG framing (where all Ms fail), info bars (a mixed blessing, but I use them) and a histogram. I don't expect/need to see detail in shadows until I see the final image on a monitor. I judge exposure with the histogram: if that looks right, then I can assume that most of the shadows I can't see, and some of the blinkies will be easily recoverable.

[costa43]

I rarely use anything but the rangefinder and I tend to shoot in manual unless indoors but when I do use it, I just keep an eye on the histogram. To be honest, I just expose to the point when I'm not clipping the highlights, as soon as it is under and the pic is not too bright, ill take the shot, I pretty much ignore the detail in the shadows as the recovery on modern sensors is so good. I do agree that EVF dynamic range technology is not up to par though if you want it to be accurate. 

Edited April 8 by costa43

[SrMi]

46 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Curious: is not seeing detail in shadows a major drawback? For me it would be a minor inconvenience, a nice to have. Any viewfinder is mainly a tool for framing and composition, and managing manual focusing. EVFs add the benefits of WYSIWYG framing (where all Ms fail), info bars (a mixed blessing, but I use them) and a histogram. I don't expect/need to see detail in shadows until I see the final image on a monitor. I judge exposure with the histogram: if that looks right, then I can assume that most of the shadows I can't see, and some of the blinkies will be easily recoverable.

It is a major drawback insofar that I often removed EVF and replaced it with an OVF to be able to see what I am framing. WYSIWYG framing does nor help if large parts of the images are without detail. 

Indoors, I am OK using EVF as the contrast is manageable.

I use clipping warnings to maximize exposure, for which I can use the rear LCD. Once exposure is set, I encounter regularly outdoors the issue of large parts of the image being too dark.

 

[costa43]

Just now, SrMi said:

It is a major drawback insofar that I often removed EVF and replaced it with an OVF to be able to see what I am framing. WYSIWYG framing does nor help if large parts of the images are without detail.

This is one of my major gripes with some cameras, they do not allow you to move the WYSIWYG to the shutter half press so if you are in high contrast situations and constantly underexposing you are technically shooting blind. That is one of the reasons I love the M so much. Zero blackout, zero lag. You can always keep your eye on the scene. It has negatives of course too.

Edited April 8 by costa43

[raizans]

One advantage of rangefinder-style EVF mirrorless compared to SLR-style mirrorless is if you’re right eye dominant, you can open your left eye to view the scene. That’ll help see into the shadows if the situation allows.

Edited April 8 by raizans

[LocalHero1953]

All this reminds me, as it should do, that we use cameras in different ways, have different needs and wants, and get upset by different things. It's the nature of the activity.

[algrove]

I just like my M's, but I also like my SL3 and SL3S.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Archiver]

On 2/9/2025 at 1:02 PM, jaapv said:

Unfortunately impossible ( at present) when said by an expert is often the case despite simplistic arguments by laymen I suspect that if Leica had stuck to the M240 body size there would be IBIS by now.  There is no conceivable reason for Leica to leave it off if at all possible . 

I'd buy an EVF M with a body size like the M240 and IBIS. Such a camera would split the Leica M market even further, though. After using the SL2S for a few weeks, I've come to really like EVF focusing, as I can very clearly see if the image is in focus. With a rangefinder, it's easier to dial in quickly, but getting that last bit of precision, especially with f1.4 or f1.2 lenses, is harder than with the SL2S EVF.

But the main reason why I'd buy a Leica EVF M is to have an EVF camera that is does not compromise at all when it comes to image quality from M mount lenses. Even the SL2S isn't like the M9 in this regard.

Edited April 8 by Archiver

[Derbyshire Man]

On 4/7/2025 at 9:33 AM, la1402 said:

Certification and quality control on such a setup is a big effort even for larger companies. 

Currently repair times are a disaster. I don't need to send my car to a main dealer, I can send it to a main dealer, an independent specialist or a generalist. All 3 have access to parts, only one is in any way certified. As the consumer I get to chose what is in *my* best interests. I can see no reason why this should be any different for cameras to cars. It's my risk.