wattsy Posted April 24 Share #1541 Posted April 24 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm a recent convert to the SL system and am very impressed so far but I'm happy to join the crowd that thinks an EVF is a substandard method of focussing a manual focus lens in any situation where you need accuracy and speed. The RF wins that game every time (even if it does have the downside of an inevitable bias towards subject-centred compositions or the occasional loss of focus accuracy when focus-recomposing). The EVF is great if are using AF lenses (especially with modern gizmos like face/eye detect) or have a few seconds to take the photograph. I use my 35 Summilux-M a lot on my SL2-S but I'm mostly using it for casual landscape stuff – I wouldn't want to photograph a people event with that combination (notwithstanding @lct's claim to the contrary). In any case, I'm not sure why the possibility of an EVF-M seems so polarising. Leica aren't going to replace the RF M with it so just use whatever suits your style. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 24 Posted April 24 Hi wattsy, Take a look here EVF M rumoured. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted April 24 Share #1542 Posted April 24 Now that is quite a feat on a hypothetical camera with no price published… 45 minutes ago, Tseg said: Great news, there will be no price hike on the M11-V. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted April 24 Share #1543 Posted April 24 1 hour ago, wattsy said: In any case, I'm not sure why the possibility of an EVF-M seems so polarising. Leica aren't going to replace the RF M with it so just use whatever suits your style. I don't think those opposed are truly against it (I'm not). People can spend their money however they want. Just trying to temper expectations though that an M EVF will be *easier* to use than the rangefinder, or that the rf is an outdated mode of focusing/viewing or one can't photograph action with it (which has been disproved by photographers for the last 100 years). For a $9k body, if one truly needs EVF, there are better options for less (including sticking a Visoflex on an M11). 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerrick10 Posted April 24 Share #1544 Posted April 24 (edited) Does anyone think it’s unrealistic for Leica to introduce such a drastic departure from their traditional product line at the end of the M11 product life cycle? I think we will see the M11 Safari as the last M11 with the yet unknown evf M coming as an entirely new model later this year or 2026. I think this is the case, especially if the body dimensions rumor is accurate. Edited April 24 by soccerrick10 Typo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tseg Posted April 24 Share #1545 Posted April 24 Whether RF or EVF, I'm sure I'll still get that cherished Leica Look. 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! 2 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/419143-evf-m-rumoured/?do=findComment&comment=5791569'>More sharing options...
costa43 Posted April 24 Author Share #1546 Posted April 24 27 minutes ago, Tseg said: Whether RF or EVF, I'm sure I'll still get that cherished Leica Look. 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! That shutter is rolling! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tseg Posted April 24 Share #1547 Posted April 24 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 36 minutes ago, costa43 said: That shutter is rolling! Exactly. More important things to work on than EVF. EVF is just a distraction. BTW, no issue getting focus on moving object with OVF. Edited April 24 by Tseg 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted April 24 Share #1548 Posted April 24 I am totally polarised when it comes to focusing options: I manually focus with a RF M, and auto focus with an EVF. Any alternative is a distraction from photography. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted April 24 Share #1549 Posted April 24 2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said: I am totally polarised when it comes to focusing options: I manually focus with a RF M, and auto focus with an EVF. Any alternative is a distraction from photography. I liked DSLRs much more than modern autofocus cameras because of their clean (no light distortion) look. Unfortunately, they stopped developing and producing them. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted April 24 Share #1550 Posted April 24 A digital SLR camera that copies the shape and size of the Canon AE-1 with a set of small lenses 28/f4, 35/f4, 50/f4 would be my dream camera and would compete with the Leica M11. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
raizans Posted April 24 Share #1551 Posted April 24 I think people know what their needs and preferences are when it comes to viewfinders and focusing options. Reverse-Galilean viewfinder vs. TTL viewfinder Rangefinder focusing vs. ground glass or EVF Manual focusing vs. AF It's coo-coo bananas when people try to police the needs and preferences of other people, however. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-ph- Posted April 24 Share #1552 Posted April 24 As the discussion is meandering around, let me state my angle again: I love my rangefinder. I can focus it fast, and usually quite reliably, even my 50/1.0. However the 90/2.0 seems to be less reliable. But that isn't the problem. The problem is, due to my glasses I have big troubles even to see the 35mm frame lines. So the RF is great for my 50, and the further I get from there, the worse it gets. So I am interested in possible alternatives. Especially, considering the considerable amount of money a new M would demand. Just a better Visoflex would help a lot. Still it is a bit of an odd attachment, so this is where the idea of an EVF-M comes in. But I would be all ears for any other proposal which considerably improves the current VF situation. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derbyshire Man Posted April 24 Share #1553 Posted April 24 I wish I could go back to the days when my eyes could actually be arsed to focus. I find that out of my 3 rangefinder bodies two of them are nicely corrected with a +1.5 diopter but the M11D isn't, being in between +1.5 and +2.0. This is a pain, either up close is hard to focus (+1.5) or far away (+2.0), I seem to need +1.75! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted April 25 Share #1554 Posted April 25 1 hour ago, -ph- said: But I would be all ears for any other proposal which considerably improves the current VF situation. Have you considered an optical viewfinder for the hot shoe? Might have similar but somewhat less issues with one of those (ftr I'm also an eyeglass wearer). For the wide lengths, I've always gone more by feel, so to speak, with the M. Obviously, Leica will have to change the viewfinder port on the M to be like the Q/SL/CL, otherwise everyone will still have the same issue seeing the edges even with an EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 25 Share #1555 Posted April 25 2 hours ago, -ph- said: As the discussion is meandering around, let me state my angle again: I love my rangefinder. I can focus it fast, and usually quite reliably, even my 50/1.0. However the 90/2.0 seems to be less reliable. But that isn't the problem. The problem is, due to my glasses I have big troubles even to see the 35mm frame lines. So the RF is great for my 50, and the further I get from there, the worse it gets. So I am interested in possible alternatives. Especially, considering the considerable amount of money a new M would demand. Just a better Visoflex would help a lot. Still it is a bit of an odd attachment, so this is where the idea of an EVF-M comes in. But I would be all ears for any other proposal which considerably improves the current VF situation. What about adapting the diopter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DadDadDaddyo Posted April 25 Share #1556 Posted April 25 A non-orthodox-M change I would welcome would be a variable diopter adjustment built in to the M finder system. 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 25 Share #1557 Posted April 25 This is a wish of decades. Don’t ask me why, but according to Leica this is not possible due to the telescope character of the system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
archive_all Posted April 25 Share #1558 Posted April 25 2 hours ago, -ph- said: As the discussion is meandering around, let me state my angle again: I love my rangefinder. I can focus it fast, and usually quite reliably, even my 50/1.0. However the 90/2.0 seems to be less reliable. But that isn't the problem. The problem is, due to my glasses I have big troubles even to see the 35mm frame lines. So the RF is great for my 50, and the further I get from there, the worse it gets. So I am interested in possible alternatives. Especially, considering the considerable amount of money a new M would demand. Just a better Visoflex would help a lot. Still it is a bit of an odd attachment, so this is where the idea of an EVF-M comes in. But I would be all ears for any other proposal which considerably improves the current VF situation. Have you considered contact lenses? I wear glasses too but usually install contact lenses for times I plan to bring any camera with me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted April 25 Share #1559 Posted April 25 35 minutes ago, jaapv said: What about adapting the diopter? As a glasses wearer, I'll say this worked well in the film days, but is a pain in the digital, unless one doesn't 'chimp' the back screen. Also depends on how bad one's eyes are (my script is pretty mild, mostly close up and very far, with a bit of astigmatism - I wear progressives). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted April 25 Share #1560 Posted April 25 2 hours ago, jaapv said: This is a wish of decades. Don’t ask me why, but according to Leica this is not possible due to the telescope character of the system. A detailed explanation of that would interest me, if I could follow it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now