Tseg Posted June 19 Share #1 Posted June 19 Advertisement (gone after registration) I bought the M11-D, my first M camera, because of the appeal of removing tech from the photographic act, yet still producing digital images. Now that I am more than 1/2 year into ownership I really have grown to appreciate the benefits of rangefinder focusing, manual mechanical focusing and no lcd on the back to scratch and chimp. I really like the M11-D and it has ended up being more than expected. But I have now also added close focus lenses and a Visoflex 2, which can completely change the dynamic of the M11-D when I want to. I walk around with the Visoflex 2 on my camera more than I care to admit, mainly if a close focus opportunity arises and I don't want to disrupt the flow of the moment going into my bag to get the EVF. I was just watching a Fuji X100V video specific to the functionality of the hybrid viewfinder and, man, would that really optimize the experience I'm having with my D camera. Over course, I would want the OVF view to be a true mechanical patch view, which is the big difference vs. what Fuji offers. I'm sure there is discussion somewhere in these forums why hybrid cannot work with a rangefinder patch, but it really would be next level, as opposed to the polarizing EVF at the expense of OVF. I now have 3 close focus lenses and they are wonderful, but awkward, at the same time. Time for a seamless integration (with no LCD back screen). I continue to not be a fan of the LCD on the back of a camera. 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 19 Posted June 19 Hi Tseg, Take a look here Really would love hybrid viewfinder on D variant. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted June 19 Share #2 Posted June 19 The external EVF is not polarizing at the expense of OVF on the M11. At least no more so than external OVFs have been polarizing for almost a century. I would not like to have the built-in OVF cluttered with anything hybrid personally. For those preferring EVFs the rumored EVF-M is the solution IMHO. YMMV. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S Maclean Posted June 20 Share #3 Posted June 20 This is what I don’t really get about the D over the regular M. Digital. You can turn the LCD off, there are even cases that cover it. that said, more to your point, I would think they can use whatever space they save on the back screen and make 2 viewfinders. One, the trusty classic, and the other just a micro screen with a loupe. I say this without any idea of what it would take to actually do it. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakontil Posted June 20 Share #4 Posted June 20 9 hours ago, lct said: The external EVF is not polarizing at the expense of OVF on the M11. At least no more so than external OVFs have been polarizing for almost a century. I would not like to have the built-in OVF cluttered with anything hybrid personally. For those preferring EVFs the rumored EVF-M is the solution IMHO. YMMV. Leave the RF alone.. anything else will be a useful addition.. i love the RF for what it is,… and an external evf will be quite useful at times 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
setuporg Posted June 20 Share #5 Posted June 20 A regular reminder that an EVF-M is not a rangefinder. The hybrid viewfinder on any Fuji is not one either. The fake suffix on GFX100RF is a despicable and misleading abomination. 5 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JNK100 Posted June 20 Share #6 Posted June 20 2 hours ago, setuporg said: A regular reminder that an EVF-M is not a rangefinder. The hybrid viewfinder on any Fuji is not one either. The fake suffix on GFX100RF is a despicable and misleading abomination. Agreed ,a cheap marketing gimmick! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted June 20 Share #7 Posted June 20 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Whenever I read posts like these from Mxx-D owners asking for just a little bit more tech for their hair shirt, I am reminded of the prayer of St Augustine: "Lord, give me chastity and continence, but not yet"! 😉 Edited June 20 by LocalHero1953 2 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20 Share #8 Posted June 20 3 hours ago, JNK100 said: Agreed ,a cheap marketing gimmick! Like Steiff Teddy Bears and Leica Q2 Seal and Disney special editions perhaps? Oh, wait a minute, you wrote "cheap", sorry! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20 Share #9 Posted June 20 3 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said: Whenever I read posts like these from Mxx-D owners asking for just a little bit more tech for their hair shirt, I am reminded of the prayer of St Augustine: "Lord, give me chastity and continence, but not yet"! 😉 As a man of a certain age I couldn't understand why St Augustine wouldn't want his incontinence fixed! I checked your quote out and now see it has a different meaning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kivenemi Posted June 20 Share #10 Posted June 20 I really appreciate your take the M11-D’s simplicity is exactly what makes it special, and adding the Visoflex 2 gives you that flexibility without losing the essence of a pure rangefinder. A true hybrid viewfinder that preserves the mechanical patch would be incredible combining close focus convenience with that classic Leica feel, all while keeping the back screen-free. I’d love to see Leica explore this balance more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tseg Posted June 20 Author Share #11 Posted June 20 8 hours ago, setuporg said: A regular reminder that an EVF-M is not a rangefinder. The hybrid viewfinder on any Fuji is not one either. The fake suffix on GFX100RF is a despicable and misleading abomination. Exactly, but if Leica could make a true rangefinder that also had a HUD electronic view toggle, specifically for me to more seamlessly use new Leica glass close focus, that would be my ultimate solution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S Maclean Posted June 20 Share #12 Posted June 20 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Tseg said: Exactly, but if Leica could make a true rangefinder that also had a HUD electronic view toggle, specifically for me to more seamlessly use new Leica glass close focus, that would be my ultimate solution. Would make more sense to create an OVF that can work the added range, rather than electronic, a mechanical extra loupe or something for the close focus. like the function of the goggles on the DR old lens, but incorporated. Again, I say this with absolutely no idea of mechanics etc, I don’t know what it would take. Edited June 20 by S Maclean Spelling edits Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 20 Share #13 Posted June 20 At the minimum it would take a hefty price tag. And probably a larger body Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tseg Posted June 20 Author Share #14 Posted June 20 20 minutes ago, S Maclean said: Would makE more sense to relate an OVF that can work the added range, rather than electronic, a mechanical extra loop or something for the close focus. like the function of the goggles on the DR old lens, but incorporated. Again, I say this without any idea absolutely no idea of mechanics etc, I don’t know what it would take. Stop making sense. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S Maclean Posted June 20 Share #15 Posted June 20 17 minutes ago, jaapv said: At the minimum it would take a hefty price tag. And probably a larger body Price tag…. I think we are already there. On the larger body, if there’s no LCD panel and electronics, wouldn’t they be able to utilize that space for ovf optic enhancement? we’re talking the D versions. I hear there are elves somewhere in the black Forrest that have really amazing skills. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 20 Share #16 Posted June 20 Not really, the space needed would be under the top plate. To utilize space created behind the sensor would necessitate a complete internal redesign, if at all possible. And price tag? You ain’t seen nothing yet… 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
T25UFO Posted June 20 Share #17 Posted June 20 1 hour ago, jaapv said: And price tag? You ain’t seen nothing yet… Everything Leica has a hefty price tag. We always complain about the price of the latest product but we still buy. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted June 20 Share #18 Posted June 20 2 hours ago, S Maclean said: Would make more sense to create an OVF that can work the added range... Accuracy of focus using large-aperture lenses wide-open at such close range with an OVF would almost certainly require the M to have a longer rangefinder base... Philip. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxo Posted June 20 Share #19 Posted June 20 vor 5 Stunden schrieb pippy: Accuracy of focus using large-aperture lenses wide-open at such close range with an OVF would almost certainly require the M to have a longer rangefinder base... Philip. Or a magnifier, the lupe used by the 1:2.8 135mm But what will you see? You can only see a section of the picture as the rest is covered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 20 Share #20 Posted June 20 Enlarging the RF's base length would improve focus accuracy but for closeups, i'd rather expect goggles like those of Summicron 50/2 DR or Macro-Elmar 90/4. 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