Popular Post elmars Posted 10 hours ago Popular Post Share #1 Posted 10 hours ago Advertisement (gone after registration) The Leica M EV1 is something new; it is different from previous M cameras. But is it something entirely different? The name M EV1 might suggest that. EV is likely to stand for the electronic viewfinder it features, and the number 1 probably indicates that it is the first of its kind, with more to follow. But despite the different name and the electronic viewfinder (EVF), is the Leica M EV1 still a true M? It feels like an M, it looks like an M, and it operates (almost) like an M. So, it must be an M, right? The answer isn’t that simple. Opinions will differ on the absence of the rangefinder. In the following, I will try to explain why the M EV1 might even herald the future of the M. This is a bold thesis, which should not obscure the fact that I have a rather ambivalent attitude towards an M with EVF in general and the M EV1 in particular. 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! There have long been calls for an M with EVF, even long before the SL series. Back then, EVFs were poor. You could immediately tell you were looking at a screen and not at the real world, as with an optical viewfinder. With the SL in 2015, electronic viewfinders became so good (Leica was a pioneer here and led the field for a long time) that they became acceptable to me. However, that did not mean I was drawn to an M with an EVF: although there was now a qualitatively acceptable alternative viewfinder technology, why should one prefer this alternative when the, in my opinion, superior optical rangefinder still existed? Moreover, EVF enthusiasts could adapt their M lenses to an SL or, if compactness was the goal, use a Q. That’s what I thought for a long time. When Leica asked me if I wanted to try the M EV1, I immediately voiced this skepticism, but they gave me the camera anyway (or perhaps because of it). I then went through a lengthy process of getting acquainted with it, during which I not only gained important insights into my style of photography through use and discussions with fellow testers but also developed a much more nuanced view of the M EV1 and recognized the camera’s benefits and the opportunities it presents. To explain this in more detail, I must first describe the camera. M11 as a Basis In summary, Leica has removed the rangefinder from the M11 and replaced it with the viewfinder from the Q3 or SL3. The base is an M11 with all its other features: 60 MP BSI sensor with Triple Resolution Technology (option to reduce to 36 MP or 18 MP) 64 GB internal storage plus SD card slot (this is more than in the original M11) Gorilla Glass monitor Leica Content Credentials USB-C port for charging the battery and downloading photos via PTP Low Energy Bluetooth (for time synchronization, geodata, remote shutter release, and background transfer of preview images) Extremely durable and resistant black lacquer finish 484 g with battery (weight of M11 black: 530 g) Same height as the M11 EVF The viewfinder has the following specifications: 5.7 MP (5,760,000 dots); same resolution as Q3 and SL3; the Visoflex 2 of the M11 has 3.7 MP 60 fps 0.76× magnification at 3:2 aspect ratio 100 % frame coverage Eye relief of 21 mm Adjustable from −4 dpt to +2 dpt Eye sensor for automatic switching between viewfinder and monitor No special front glass While there are EVFs with even better technical specs, the general standard has now reached a level where visual differences are hardly noticeable. I personally found the EVF of the M EV1 to be excellent. Glasses wearers like me can easily view the entire image—a significant advantage over the classic M rangefinder in its previous form. Unlike the rangefinder, however, there is a brief blackout period after the shutter is released (in continuous shooting mode, only after the first shot, not the subsequent ones). Although I can't measure the exact duration, the blackout is noticeable and likely longer than some competitors. It doesn't bother me—in fact, I see it as an additional confirmation of a successful shot (and with an electronic shutter it's the only feedback). I'll discuss the inherent pros and cons of an EVF compared to an optical (rangefinder) viewfinder in detail in the analysis section. The EVF layout is very clean. All indicators (except the level gauge, grid lines, and clipping warning) are outside the image area. Even when all displays are turned off, pressing the shutter button halfway (which also locks exposure) always shows ISO, shutter speed, and exposure meter/exposure compensation. When the info bar is permanently displayed, battery status and exposure mode (A for Auto or M for Manual) are also shown. Unfortunately, the rear LCD doesn't display all information outside the image area. Some data appears as a semi-transparent overlay at the edges, partially obscuring the subject. I dislike this because it interferes with composition. I understand that displaying all info outside the image would make the picture significantly smaller. A good compromise might be to eliminate the semi-transparent background of the info bar and just use white text, making the image behind the text more visible. The EVF displays the full image (100%) that will be captured—no more, no less. With a rangefinder, you always see a bit (with 28 or 35 mm lenses) or much more (with focal lengths over 50 mm) of the surrounding scene because the optical viewfinder in an M is independent of the sensor image and has a field of view comparable to a 24 mm lens. An EVF, however, cannot show more than what the lens captures. That said, the M EV1 has a digital zoom similar to the Q3. You can select a 1.3x or 1.8x crop (via the menu or by assigning a function button to the digital zoom). The viewfinder doesn't crop and magnify the image; instead, it displays the cropped area within a frame, allowing you to see some of the surroundings. When shooting JPGs, only the cropped image is saved. When shooting DNG, the full image is saved, with the crop only applied to the preview, which can be removed later. Focusing with the M EV1 works the same way as with the M11 using the Visoflex 2. You can focus in full view, activate the magnifier manually or automatically in two levels, and use focus peaking. For focus peaking, the menu offers two sensitivity settings, which may seem counterintuitive: high and low. High sensitivity means the camera reacts to lower contrast, highlighting more areas in red as sharp. Low sensitivity requires higher contrast, so finer structures are highlighted in red. I prefer the "low" setting because the highest contrast area is smaller, making focusing more reliable. The downside is that in low-contrast situations, nothing may be highlighted, even if there are reasonably sharp areas. You can manually activate the magnifier by assigning it to a function button. I personally prefer the button to the right of the release button. The frame selector is also suitable; you can briefly move your thumb from the lens to press the lever to the right. Alternatively, the magnifier can activate automatically when focusing, if set up in the menu. The M EV1 also has an internal roller above the mount, like rangefinder M cameras. While it's mainly for distance measurement in rangefinders, in the M EV1, its main purpose is to activate the magnifier. It's a good idea to trigger the magnifier when adjusting focus, but unfortunately, it responds slowly—you'll have changed the focus quite a bit before the magnifier kicks in. You can move the magnified area using the rear joystick. Unfortunately, it's not easy to recenter the field. You can assign a function button for recentering or turn the camera off and on again. Currently, there are no other options. A quick double-press of the joystick would be a good solution, avoiding the need to "waste" a function button. In Use The external controls of the M EV1 are consistent with those of the M11. However, there are differences in functionality. Perhaps the most noticeable is a small detail: the tiny window below the shutter speed dial. This window is essential for the optical rangefinder. It superimposes two images using triangulation to focus. One of these images is reflected into the viewfinder through this small window. A camera without an optical rangefinder doesn’t need such a feature. In the M EV1, it doesn’t serve for focusing; instead, it houses the LED for the self-timer. Certainly, this LED could have been placed elsewhere. I suspect the chosen location is for design reasons, as the front looks more harmonious. Upon closer inspection, one notices what is the frame selector in the M11 (and earlier M cameras). Retaining this lever is quite a clever idea because it now serves as a customizable function button—or even two function buttons: Function 1 when pressed to the left, Function 2 when pressed to the right. Of course, simple buttons could have been used (like on the SL3), but the lever fits better with the M design, and its operation is even more secure. On the SL3, I always wondered whether my finger was on the upper or lower button. The lever is much clearer, with left and right being hardly interchangeable. The lever can be assigned the following functions when pulled in the desired direction and held briefly: Digital zoom Focus assist Focus peaking Off I find it very convenient to quickly activate and deactivate focus peaking in this manner (independently of an info profile), as it often bothers me when focusing. In the relatively few instances where it’s helpful, I can engage it with a quick lever movement. However, I do miss the ability to assign perspective correction, exposure compensation, and ISO settings to the lever as function options. Another difference in operation is the FN button next to the rear LCD display. It remains freely assignable. On the M11, it was pre-assigned to activate Live View (LV), which made a lot of sense. This isn’t necessary on the M EV1, as it’s virtually always in LV. The button is now pre-assigned to switch between the EVF and the rear LCD display (LCD). There are four modes: EVF (LCD off) LCD (EVF off) Auto (EVF activates when the camera is brought to the eye; otherwise, the LCD is active) EVF-Extended (like EVF, but pressing the menu button allows menu navigation on the LCD, and pressing play lets you view images there) When switching between modes, the active mode is always displayed on the LCD—even in EVF mode, where the LCD is technically off. This is very helpful and was programmed by Leica at the request of beta testers. Although I generally prefer EVF-Extended, I occasionally like to use the LCD display. If you want to toggle this via the FN button, you have to cycle through all the modes mentioned above. I’d like to see the FN button configurable to simply turn the LCD display on and off, independently of whether the EVF is on or off. This should work similarly to how focus peaking can be toggled on and off, independent of the info profile settings. White Balance The cameras of the M11 series have a different white balance tuning compared to the Q3 or the SL3, even though the same sensor is used. The white balance of the M11 is slightly shifted towards magenta. This has been a topic of discussion for a long time. Many like it, many do not. Therefore, I believed that Leica should resolve the debate on this matter by offering a second setting for a more neutral white balance tuning in the firmware. Leica did not take this approach but has fortunately decided on a "major" solution. You can now adjust the white balance tuning freely in four directions using a crosshair: green, magenta, yellow, blue. Energy consumption and Battery From the very beginning, I noticed that the M EV1 consumed more energy than the M11. This is a drawback, but the additional consumption can be limited. Then, the M EV1 has good battery life. With all EVF cameras I’ve tried so far, I’ve never liked that the EVF, in its default setting, automatically switches to standby mode after a very short time and always has to be reactivated (which, however, can be done almost without delay). For the M EV1, the default standby time for the EVF is 30 seconds. Initially, I extended the automatic shutdown time to 5 minutes. This worked well for me, as I hardly ever had to activate the EVF when bringing the camera to my eye while taking photos. I did not expect this would increase energy consumption, though. I also always used the EVF-Extended setting, thinking it would save energy: when the eye is not at the viewfinder, the EVF does not display an image and consumes no power. That was a misconception. The standard M11 loses about 10% of its battery capacity in an hour simply because it’s turned on, and taking photos doesn’t consume much more energy. For the M EV1, it’s about 15% when the EVF switches to standby mode after 30 seconds. That’s not much more than the M11. However, if the EVF is not in standby mode (regardless of whether it’s displaying an image or not), it’s about 30%. After discovering this, I reset the EVF shutdown time back to the default of 30 seconds. This way, the energy consumption is only moderately higher than the M11. On average, I can shoot continuously with the M EV1 for between four and six hours. During this time, the camera itself is rarely in standby mode (automatic shutdown is set to 30 minutes), and I always use Low Energy Bluetooth to transfer geodata and all images as previews to the iPhone. During this period, I take between 80 and 150 photos. Design The design of the camera was certainly a challenge for Leica, but it seems to me that they handled it well. The M EV1 has no viewfinder window, just like the Leica MD-2 from the 1980s (and its predecessor, the Leica MD), which was primarily connected to microscopes or used to photograph analog telephone fee counters for the postal service. The MD-2 camera always felt "blind" to me due to the lack of a viewfinder window. The M EV1 does not give me that impression. Even though I still prefer M cameras with viewfinder windows, I must say that Leica has done a good job giving the M EV1 an appealing design. The camera doesn’t look "empty" but rather sleek, modern, and tidy. Unfortunately, the ISO dial is missing. However, this was not a design decision but due to the integration of the EVF. Analysis: Viewfinder A viewfinder has two essential functions. The more important one, the basic function so to speak, is to determine the framing of the image: which section of reality will be captured by the sensor/film and become the content of the photo. The optical viewfinder of M cameras fulfills this function well, though not perfectly. Depending on the distance to the subject, one must orient more towards the inner or outer edge of the bright frame. Additionally, due to the differing optical axes of the viewfinder and the lens, perspective shifts can occur, which may affect the composition at closer distances. The EVF, on the other hand, fulfills this function perfectly: everything visible in the viewfinder appears in the photo; the perspective is also accurate. The other function of a viewfinder is to previsualize the final image: how accurately does the viewfinder display the image I am capturing and will later see? This involves the representation of lighting mood, colors, and contrasts. In previsualization, the EVF has a clear advantage. The optical viewfinder shows these parameters as the eye perceives them without the viewfinder. This often does not match what the sensor captures. The sensor cannot detect contrasts nearly as well as the eye; they must be compressed. Colors are also rendered differently compared to the eye, and the eye’s "white balance" produces different results than the sensor’s white balance. Exposure control further influences this. Depending on actual conditions, the taken image may be somewhat close to reality or significantly different from what is perceived with the eye (through the optical viewfinder). The EVF, however, is based on sensor information. Therefore, it reproduces reality with the same transformation steps relevant to the image. Thus, an EVF visualizes the final image much better than an optical viewfinder. However, one should not expect miracles from an EVF. The EVF does not process the sensor information exactly as a RAW converter or a JPEG engine would. Additionally, the EVF may have its own exposure control and white balance. Therefore, lighting mood, colors, and contrasts are displayed somewhat differently than they will appear later on a home computer. Moreover, it is a well-known fact that the quality of an image composition cannot be fully assessed in a viewfinder; one apparently needs the display on a monitor or on paper of a certain size and viewing distance. Nevertheless, considering the overall quality achieved by EVFs, these are relatively minor limitations compared to the rangefinder when it comes to previsualization. They will not hinder the success of the M EV1. History shows that over time, a viewfinder technology that enables better previsualization has always prevailed. The SLR viewfinder replaced the optical bright frame viewfinder long ago, and in recent years, the EVF has overtaken the SLR viewfinder. The bright frame viewfinder, as seen in the classic M, requires significantly more imagination and experience to previsualize the final image in one’s mind compared to the EVF. In this regard, the EVF offers simpler photography. This alone will attract many potential buyers to the M EV1. Additionally, the EVF provides better visibility for eyeglass wearers compared to the rangefinder. The 35 mm frame of the rangefinder is difficult to view entirely with glasses, and the 28 mm frame is practically impossible to capture in one glance. To compensate, one can either shift their gaze or mentally fill in the image borders—something that, with a bit of experience, works surprisingly well. Similarly, it is possible to mentally fill in areas of the viewfinder obscured by protruding lenses. Despite its weaknesses, the optical rangefinder is far from obsolete. Working with it still appeals to many (or at least enough) photographers. Some want to see the world as it is through the viewfinder, rather than looking at a monitor; some prefer to imagine the final image in their mind first; some enjoy being surprised. However, most likely want to keep the photography process as simple as possible without distractions. This simplicity aligns more with the M photography concept. Another advantage of the rangefinder is that it always shows a bit more than what is captured. This benefits composition, allowing the photographer to anticipate whether shifting the frame would improve the shot. More importantly, it helps identify early if someone or something is moving into the frame, enabling better preparation for the right moment to take the photo. Finally, a significant advantage of the optical viewfinder is that it handles high contrasts and bright light (such as strong sunlight) much better than an EVF (at least with current technology). However, an EVF excels in low-light conditions. Analysis: Focusing I must first briefly describe how I came to the M. Despite having good eyesight at the time, I always had trouble focusing using the ground glass of SLR cameras. Split-image and microprism focusing screens didn't help me, and the brighter image of the later laser matte screens only helped a little. Autofocus was then a great help. Eventually, I discovered another wonderfully effective focusing method for me: the Leica M with its rangefinder. No more guessing whether the image on the ground glass was truly sharp; aligning the two images in the rangefinder felt simple, precise, and very quick. It works equally well regardless of the focal length and aperture setting. That remains largely true. However, my right eye, which I use to look through the viewfinder, has worsened due to the onset of cataracts. Based on my self-observation, a visual acuity of around 80% is sufficient to focus well with the rangefinder. With less, it still works decently for most subjects, especially when there are clear edges and decent lighting. Finer details (like focusing on the eye) often lead to guesswork. Focusing with an EVF is different. Without additional aids, it's like focusing on the ground glass in the past. I can't really judge whether the image is properly focused. Sometimes, a slight flickering effect helps, similar to the microprisms on old ground glass screens. However, this flickering is not a built-in focusing aid but a physical phenomenon I can't explain. Since it doesn't appear with every subject and is hard to identify, it's unreliable as an aid. Focus peaking can be useful, but only if the high-contrast areas aren't too large; otherwise, too many areas are highlighted in red. Focus peaking provides good support only with relatively wide apertures and short distances. Some people manage to use focus peaking similarly to hyperfocal focusing; the red areas are interpreted as sufficiently sharp. That's not my preference. The best focusing aid of the M EV1 is the viewfinder magnifier, especially at its maximum magnification level. With its help, even with my deteriorating eyesight, I could focus on almost any subject with reasonable confidence. However, as with focus peaking, focusing is easier when the depth of field is shallower. It works better with wider apertures, shorter distances, and longer focal lengths. Practically speaking: with my favorite 35mm focal length, it was effortless and reliable up to f/4; from f/5.6, more attention was needed to ensure the optimal focus point. However, using the viewfinder magnifier comes at a cost: it takes time. Focusing takes longer than with the rangefinder. With the rangefinder, I'm very quick: possibly a brief shift of the camera to the focus point; focussing the lens; possibly adjusting the framing; then shooting. The viewfinder magnifier, on the other hand, must first be activated. Automatic activation is sluggish, as mentioned above, and manual activation requires pressing a function button. Finding the focus point is often more challenging than with the rangefinder, as you have to shift the highly magnified image section or move the magnifier. Actual focusing isn't as quick as with the rangefinder because assessing sharpness isn't as intuitive as aligning the two rangefinder images. After focusing, you must press the shutter to return to the full view, then possibly adjust the framing again before shooting. This procedure initially annoyed me. I found it too slow. Perhaps this was because it involved an extra step (activating and deactivating the magnifier) that wasn’t necessary with the rangefinder. I generally dislike overly complicated operations. Over time and with more practice, I became faster and got used to the different workflow. Even quick street portraits, which I occasionally took, worked quite well. I can now recognize and use the focusing advantages of the M EV1 for myself and my aging eyes, even though I still prefer the rangefinder. Many people won’t understand my reservations about the magnifier workflow, or it may be irrelevant to them. They take their time preparing and capturing each image, especially with an M. However, those who, like me, prefer to work quickly—whether out of necessity or preference—must carefully weigh this disadvantage against the camera's advantages. For who? Who is the M EV1 suitable for? First, it should be said that even people like me, who love and are used to rangefinders, will find the M EV1 to be a good, fully capable camera. However, in my view, it is particularly suitable for specific target groups: Photographers who are accustomed to an EVF but have never used a rangefinder will find it an easier entry into the M system. Photographers who place great value on image control and viewfinder clarity. Photographers who prefer shooting with 75 mm (or longer) or 28 mm (or shorter) lenses. Photographers who like to utilize the close focus range (under 0.7 m) of modern Leica lenses or many Voigtländer lenses. Eyeglass wearers. Photographers who can no longer manage with the rangefinder; this especially includes older individuals with declining eyesight. Photographers who do not like the rangefinder but do appreciate the M system. In many of these cases, one could argue that the corresponding need or interest is similarly met with the Visoflex2 on an M11, which is technically not much inferior to the EVF of the M EV1. However, this overlooks the fact that the Visoflex2 makes the M11 larger, considerably heavier, and less aesthetically pleasing. Additionally, my nose touches the viewfinder eyepiece of the M11 and smudges it with nose grease when I use the Visoflex. Or one might ask: Why not an SL? Many photographers love (older) M lenses and have been using them with an SL. The M EV1 is the more beautiful, compact, lighter, and equally fast alternative (only the rangefinder is faster when using M lenses). The M EV1 is the best camera for M lenses without having to use a rangefinder, if you want to use M lenses with an EVF in a compact, lightweight, M-like body. The form factor of the M should not be underestimated. Next Level M What defines an M? This question has occupied my mind a lot. Is it the rangefinder? Is it the manual focusing? Is it the appearance, the design? Is it the handling? In my opinion, it is above all the idea of a specific type of photography that is embodied in the M. The M makes few decisions for the photographer; the essential elements for image composition must be consciously set. It’s not the camera that makes the picture, but the photographer. While most cameras suggest, “I’ll take the picture for you,” the M suggests, “Set me up correctly.” Of course, this mostly happens in the mind, but with the always necessary choice of aperture and distance, it also has a real background, not just one based on the camera’s aura. Additionally, the M is simple and easy to use; it doesn’t do much, it’s not overloaded, and the controls are directly accessible. The camera and lenses are compact and therefore unobtrusive. The familiar shape that has persisted for decades adds to this. As I wrote above: one should not underestimate the M’s form factor. The failure of the M5 made this very clear. And what about the rangefinder? Does a true M need a rangefinder? Yes and no, I would say. The rangefinder stands for simple and quick manual focusing. It has existed for decades, but it wasn’t always there. It took from the Leica I in 1925 to the Leica M3 in 1954 for the rangefinder to find its current form and function. Were the screw-mount Leicas not real Leicas? Hardly! Changes, even to the rangefinder, are possible without betraying the essence of the M. The key is to preserve or improve the rangefinder’s function. So far, I don’t see this with the M EV1. As I tried to show above, the M EV1 offers advantages over the rangefinder in image control, which some may not need but are undeniable. However, the M EV1 also has the disadvantages in focusing as outlined; there is no innovation in this area. Thus, the M EV1 is, for me, a borderline case, perhaps a first step towards a different type of M. An M EV2 should have something comparable to the optical rangefinder, especially concerning focusing. For many years, I’ve read that an electronic rangefinder based on the triangulation principle, which also governs the optical rangefinder and requires overlaying two images to focus, is technically possible. I can’t judge that. But such a concept, or one equally effective, would make for a fully-fledged M with an electronic viewfinder. That would be the Next Level M—a step similar to the transition from the screw-mount Leica to the M-Leica. Such a camera should not replace the M with an optical rangefinder. Rather, two genuine M lines could coexist, using the same amazing M lenses. My conclusion: The Leica M EV1 is a very good camera that will find many fans. But it’s not a revolution; it’s more of a directional test. Leica should boldly continue this path and create something truly new with an M EV2. 9 11 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! There have long been calls for an M with EVF, even long before the SL series. Back then, EVFs were poor. You could immediately tell you were looking at a screen and not at the real world, as with an optical viewfinder. With the SL in 2015, electronic viewfinders became so good (Leica was a pioneer here and led the field for a long time) that they became acceptable to me. However, that did not mean I was drawn to an M with an EVF: although there was now a qualitatively acceptable alternative viewfinder technology, why should one prefer this alternative when the, in my opinion, superior optical rangefinder still existed? Moreover, EVF enthusiasts could adapt their M lenses to an SL or, if compactness was the goal, use a Q. That’s what I thought for a long time. When Leica asked me if I wanted to try the M EV1, I immediately voiced this skepticism, but they gave me the camera anyway (or perhaps because of it). I then went through a lengthy process of getting acquainted with it, during which I not only gained important insights into my style of photography through use and discussions with fellow testers but also developed a much more nuanced view of the M EV1 and recognized the camera’s benefits and the opportunities it presents. To explain this in more detail, I must first describe the camera. M11 as a Basis In summary, Leica has removed the rangefinder from the M11 and replaced it with the viewfinder from the Q3 or SL3. The base is an M11 with all its other features: 60 MP BSI sensor with Triple Resolution Technology (option to reduce to 36 MP or 18 MP) 64 GB internal storage plus SD card slot (this is more than in the original M11) Gorilla Glass monitor Leica Content Credentials USB-C port for charging the battery and downloading photos via PTP Low Energy Bluetooth (for time synchronization, geodata, remote shutter release, and background transfer of preview images) Extremely durable and resistant black lacquer finish 484 g with battery (weight of M11 black: 530 g) Same height as the M11 EVF The viewfinder has the following specifications: 5.7 MP (5,760,000 dots); same resolution as Q3 and SL3; the Visoflex 2 of the M11 has 3.7 MP 60 fps 0.76× magnification at 3:2 aspect ratio 100 % frame coverage Eye relief of 21 mm Adjustable from −4 dpt to +2 dpt Eye sensor for automatic switching between viewfinder and monitor No special front glass While there are EVFs with even better technical specs, the general standard has now reached a level where visual differences are hardly noticeable. I personally found the EVF of the M EV1 to be excellent. Glasses wearers like me can easily view the entire image—a significant advantage over the classic M rangefinder in its previous form. Unlike the rangefinder, however, there is a brief blackout period after the shutter is released (in continuous shooting mode, only after the first shot, not the subsequent ones). Although I can't measure the exact duration, the blackout is noticeable and likely longer than some competitors. It doesn't bother me—in fact, I see it as an additional confirmation of a successful shot (and with an electronic shutter it's the only feedback). I'll discuss the inherent pros and cons of an EVF compared to an optical (rangefinder) viewfinder in detail in the analysis section. The EVF layout is very clean. All indicators (except the level gauge, grid lines, and clipping warning) are outside the image area. Even when all displays are turned off, pressing the shutter button halfway (which also locks exposure) always shows ISO, shutter speed, and exposure meter/exposure compensation. When the info bar is permanently displayed, battery status and exposure mode (A for Auto or M for Manual) are also shown. Unfortunately, the rear LCD doesn't display all information outside the image area. Some data appears as a semi-transparent overlay at the edges, partially obscuring the subject. I dislike this because it interferes with composition. I understand that displaying all info outside the image would make the picture significantly smaller. A good compromise might be to eliminate the semi-transparent background of the info bar and just use white text, making the image behind the text more visible. The EVF displays the full image (100%) that will be captured—no more, no less. With a rangefinder, you always see a bit (with 28 or 35 mm lenses) or much more (with focal lengths over 50 mm) of the surrounding scene because the optical viewfinder in an M is independent of the sensor image and has a field of view comparable to a 24 mm lens. An EVF, however, cannot show more than what the lens captures. That said, the M EV1 has a digital zoom similar to the Q3. You can select a 1.3x or 1.8x crop (via the menu or by assigning a function button to the digital zoom). The viewfinder doesn't crop and magnify the image; instead, it displays the cropped area within a frame, allowing you to see some of the surroundings. When shooting JPGs, only the cropped image is saved. When shooting DNG, the full image is saved, with the crop only applied to the preview, which can be removed later. Focusing with the M EV1 works the same way as with the M11 using the Visoflex 2. You can focus in full view, activate the magnifier manually or automatically in two levels, and use focus peaking. For focus peaking, the menu offers two sensitivity settings, which may seem counterintuitive: high and low. High sensitivity means the camera reacts to lower contrast, highlighting more areas in red as sharp. Low sensitivity requires higher contrast, so finer structures are highlighted in red. I prefer the "low" setting because the highest contrast area is smaller, making focusing more reliable. The downside is that in low-contrast situations, nothing may be highlighted, even if there are reasonably sharp areas. You can manually activate the magnifier by assigning it to a function button. I personally prefer the button to the right of the release button. The frame selector is also suitable; you can briefly move your thumb from the lens to press the lever to the right. Alternatively, the magnifier can activate automatically when focusing, if set up in the menu. The M EV1 also has an internal roller above the mount, like rangefinder M cameras. While it's mainly for distance measurement in rangefinders, in the M EV1, its main purpose is to activate the magnifier. It's a good idea to trigger the magnifier when adjusting focus, but unfortunately, it responds slowly—you'll have changed the focus quite a bit before the magnifier kicks in. You can move the magnified area using the rear joystick. Unfortunately, it's not easy to recenter the field. You can assign a function button for recentering or turn the camera off and on again. Currently, there are no other options. A quick double-press of the joystick would be a good solution, avoiding the need to "waste" a function button. In Use The external controls of the M EV1 are consistent with those of the M11. However, there are differences in functionality. Perhaps the most noticeable is a small detail: the tiny window below the shutter speed dial. This window is essential for the optical rangefinder. It superimposes two images using triangulation to focus. One of these images is reflected into the viewfinder through this small window. A camera without an optical rangefinder doesn’t need such a feature. In the M EV1, it doesn’t serve for focusing; instead, it houses the LED for the self-timer. Certainly, this LED could have been placed elsewhere. I suspect the chosen location is for design reasons, as the front looks more harmonious. Upon closer inspection, one notices what is the frame selector in the M11 (and earlier M cameras). Retaining this lever is quite a clever idea because it now serves as a customizable function button—or even two function buttons: Function 1 when pressed to the left, Function 2 when pressed to the right. Of course, simple buttons could have been used (like on the SL3), but the lever fits better with the M design, and its operation is even more secure. On the SL3, I always wondered whether my finger was on the upper or lower button. The lever is much clearer, with left and right being hardly interchangeable. The lever can be assigned the following functions when pulled in the desired direction and held briefly: Digital zoom Focus assist Focus peaking Off I find it very convenient to quickly activate and deactivate focus peaking in this manner (independently of an info profile), as it often bothers me when focusing. In the relatively few instances where it’s helpful, I can engage it with a quick lever movement. However, I do miss the ability to assign perspective correction, exposure compensation, and ISO settings to the lever as function options. Another difference in operation is the FN button next to the rear LCD display. It remains freely assignable. On the M11, it was pre-assigned to activate Live View (LV), which made a lot of sense. This isn’t necessary on the M EV1, as it’s virtually always in LV. The button is now pre-assigned to switch between the EVF and the rear LCD display (LCD). There are four modes: EVF (LCD off) LCD (EVF off) Auto (EVF activates when the camera is brought to the eye; otherwise, the LCD is active) EVF-Extended (like EVF, but pressing the menu button allows menu navigation on the LCD, and pressing play lets you view images there) When switching between modes, the active mode is always displayed on the LCD—even in EVF mode, where the LCD is technically off. This is very helpful and was programmed by Leica at the request of beta testers. Although I generally prefer EVF-Extended, I occasionally like to use the LCD display. If you want to toggle this via the FN button, you have to cycle through all the modes mentioned above. I’d like to see the FN button configurable to simply turn the LCD display on and off, independently of whether the EVF is on or off. This should work similarly to how focus peaking can be toggled on and off, independent of the info profile settings. White Balance The cameras of the M11 series have a different white balance tuning compared to the Q3 or the SL3, even though the same sensor is used. The white balance of the M11 is slightly shifted towards magenta. This has been a topic of discussion for a long time. Many like it, many do not. Therefore, I believed that Leica should resolve the debate on this matter by offering a second setting for a more neutral white balance tuning in the firmware. Leica did not take this approach but has fortunately decided on a "major" solution. You can now adjust the white balance tuning freely in four directions using a crosshair: green, magenta, yellow, blue. Energy consumption and Battery From the very beginning, I noticed that the M EV1 consumed more energy than the M11. This is a drawback, but the additional consumption can be limited. Then, the M EV1 has good battery life. With all EVF cameras I’ve tried so far, I’ve never liked that the EVF, in its default setting, automatically switches to standby mode after a very short time and always has to be reactivated (which, however, can be done almost without delay). For the M EV1, the default standby time for the EVF is 30 seconds. Initially, I extended the automatic shutdown time to 5 minutes. This worked well for me, as I hardly ever had to activate the EVF when bringing the camera to my eye while taking photos. I did not expect this would increase energy consumption, though. I also always used the EVF-Extended setting, thinking it would save energy: when the eye is not at the viewfinder, the EVF does not display an image and consumes no power. That was a misconception. The standard M11 loses about 10% of its battery capacity in an hour simply because it’s turned on, and taking photos doesn’t consume much more energy. For the M EV1, it’s about 15% when the EVF switches to standby mode after 30 seconds. That’s not much more than the M11. However, if the EVF is not in standby mode (regardless of whether it’s displaying an image or not), it’s about 30%. After discovering this, I reset the EVF shutdown time back to the default of 30 seconds. This way, the energy consumption is only moderately higher than the M11. On average, I can shoot continuously with the M EV1 for between four and six hours. During this time, the camera itself is rarely in standby mode (automatic shutdown is set to 30 minutes), and I always use Low Energy Bluetooth to transfer geodata and all images as previews to the iPhone. During this period, I take between 80 and 150 photos. Design The design of the camera was certainly a challenge for Leica, but it seems to me that they handled it well. The M EV1 has no viewfinder window, just like the Leica MD-2 from the 1980s (and its predecessor, the Leica MD), which was primarily connected to microscopes or used to photograph analog telephone fee counters for the postal service. The MD-2 camera always felt "blind" to me due to the lack of a viewfinder window. The M EV1 does not give me that impression. Even though I still prefer M cameras with viewfinder windows, I must say that Leica has done a good job giving the M EV1 an appealing design. The camera doesn’t look "empty" but rather sleek, modern, and tidy. Unfortunately, the ISO dial is missing. However, this was not a design decision but due to the integration of the EVF. Analysis: Viewfinder A viewfinder has two essential functions. The more important one, the basic function so to speak, is to determine the framing of the image: which section of reality will be captured by the sensor/film and become the content of the photo. The optical viewfinder of M cameras fulfills this function well, though not perfectly. Depending on the distance to the subject, one must orient more towards the inner or outer edge of the bright frame. Additionally, due to the differing optical axes of the viewfinder and the lens, perspective shifts can occur, which may affect the composition at closer distances. The EVF, on the other hand, fulfills this function perfectly: everything visible in the viewfinder appears in the photo; the perspective is also accurate. The other function of a viewfinder is to previsualize the final image: how accurately does the viewfinder display the image I am capturing and will later see? This involves the representation of lighting mood, colors, and contrasts. In previsualization, the EVF has a clear advantage. The optical viewfinder shows these parameters as the eye perceives them without the viewfinder. This often does not match what the sensor captures. The sensor cannot detect contrasts nearly as well as the eye; they must be compressed. Colors are also rendered differently compared to the eye, and the eye’s "white balance" produces different results than the sensor’s white balance. Exposure control further influences this. Depending on actual conditions, the taken image may be somewhat close to reality or significantly different from what is perceived with the eye (through the optical viewfinder). The EVF, however, is based on sensor information. Therefore, it reproduces reality with the same transformation steps relevant to the image. Thus, an EVF visualizes the final image much better than an optical viewfinder. However, one should not expect miracles from an EVF. The EVF does not process the sensor information exactly as a RAW converter or a JPEG engine would. Additionally, the EVF may have its own exposure control and white balance. Therefore, lighting mood, colors, and contrasts are displayed somewhat differently than they will appear later on a home computer. Moreover, it is a well-known fact that the quality of an image composition cannot be fully assessed in a viewfinder; one apparently needs the display on a monitor or on paper of a certain size and viewing distance. Nevertheless, considering the overall quality achieved by EVFs, these are relatively minor limitations compared to the rangefinder when it comes to previsualization. They will not hinder the success of the M EV1. History shows that over time, a viewfinder technology that enables better previsualization has always prevailed. The SLR viewfinder replaced the optical bright frame viewfinder long ago, and in recent years, the EVF has overtaken the SLR viewfinder. The bright frame viewfinder, as seen in the classic M, requires significantly more imagination and experience to previsualize the final image in one’s mind compared to the EVF. In this regard, the EVF offers simpler photography. This alone will attract many potential buyers to the M EV1. Additionally, the EVF provides better visibility for eyeglass wearers compared to the rangefinder. The 35 mm frame of the rangefinder is difficult to view entirely with glasses, and the 28 mm frame is practically impossible to capture in one glance. To compensate, one can either shift their gaze or mentally fill in the image borders—something that, with a bit of experience, works surprisingly well. Similarly, it is possible to mentally fill in areas of the viewfinder obscured by protruding lenses. Despite its weaknesses, the optical rangefinder is far from obsolete. Working with it still appeals to many (or at least enough) photographers. Some want to see the world as it is through the viewfinder, rather than looking at a monitor; some prefer to imagine the final image in their mind first; some enjoy being surprised. However, most likely want to keep the photography process as simple as possible without distractions. This simplicity aligns more with the M photography concept. Another advantage of the rangefinder is that it always shows a bit more than what is captured. This benefits composition, allowing the photographer to anticipate whether shifting the frame would improve the shot. More importantly, it helps identify early if someone or something is moving into the frame, enabling better preparation for the right moment to take the photo. Finally, a significant advantage of the optical viewfinder is that it handles high contrasts and bright light (such as strong sunlight) much better than an EVF (at least with current technology). However, an EVF excels in low-light conditions. Analysis: Focusing I must first briefly describe how I came to the M. Despite having good eyesight at the time, I always had trouble focusing using the ground glass of SLR cameras. Split-image and microprism focusing screens didn't help me, and the brighter image of the later laser matte screens only helped a little. Autofocus was then a great help. Eventually, I discovered another wonderfully effective focusing method for me: the Leica M with its rangefinder. No more guessing whether the image on the ground glass was truly sharp; aligning the two images in the rangefinder felt simple, precise, and very quick. It works equally well regardless of the focal length and aperture setting. That remains largely true. However, my right eye, which I use to look through the viewfinder, has worsened due to the onset of cataracts. Based on my self-observation, a visual acuity of around 80% is sufficient to focus well with the rangefinder. With less, it still works decently for most subjects, especially when there are clear edges and decent lighting. Finer details (like focusing on the eye) often lead to guesswork. Focusing with an EVF is different. Without additional aids, it's like focusing on the ground glass in the past. I can't really judge whether the image is properly focused. Sometimes, a slight flickering effect helps, similar to the microprisms on old ground glass screens. However, this flickering is not a built-in focusing aid but a physical phenomenon I can't explain. Since it doesn't appear with every subject and is hard to identify, it's unreliable as an aid. Focus peaking can be useful, but only if the high-contrast areas aren't too large; otherwise, too many areas are highlighted in red. Focus peaking provides good support only with relatively wide apertures and short distances. Some people manage to use focus peaking similarly to hyperfocal focusing; the red areas are interpreted as sufficiently sharp. That's not my preference. The best focusing aid of the M EV1 is the viewfinder magnifier, especially at its maximum magnification level. With its help, even with my deteriorating eyesight, I could focus on almost any subject with reasonable confidence. However, as with focus peaking, focusing is easier when the depth of field is shallower. It works better with wider apertures, shorter distances, and longer focal lengths. Practically speaking: with my favorite 35mm focal length, it was effortless and reliable up to f/4; from f/5.6, more attention was needed to ensure the optimal focus point. However, using the viewfinder magnifier comes at a cost: it takes time. Focusing takes longer than with the rangefinder. With the rangefinder, I'm very quick: possibly a brief shift of the camera to the focus point; focussing the lens; possibly adjusting the framing; then shooting. The viewfinder magnifier, on the other hand, must first be activated. Automatic activation is sluggish, as mentioned above, and manual activation requires pressing a function button. Finding the focus point is often more challenging than with the rangefinder, as you have to shift the highly magnified image section or move the magnifier. Actual focusing isn't as quick as with the rangefinder because assessing sharpness isn't as intuitive as aligning the two rangefinder images. After focusing, you must press the shutter to return to the full view, then possibly adjust the framing again before shooting. This procedure initially annoyed me. I found it too slow. Perhaps this was because it involved an extra step (activating and deactivating the magnifier) that wasn’t necessary with the rangefinder. I generally dislike overly complicated operations. Over time and with more practice, I became faster and got used to the different workflow. Even quick street portraits, which I occasionally took, worked quite well. I can now recognize and use the focusing advantages of the M EV1 for myself and my aging eyes, even though I still prefer the rangefinder. Many people won’t understand my reservations about the magnifier workflow, or it may be irrelevant to them. They take their time preparing and capturing each image, especially with an M. However, those who, like me, prefer to work quickly—whether out of necessity or preference—must carefully weigh this disadvantage against the camera's advantages. For who? Who is the M EV1 suitable for? First, it should be said that even people like me, who love and are used to rangefinders, will find the M EV1 to be a good, fully capable camera. However, in my view, it is particularly suitable for specific target groups: Photographers who are accustomed to an EVF but have never used a rangefinder will find it an easier entry into the M system. Photographers who place great value on image control and viewfinder clarity. Photographers who prefer shooting with 75 mm (or longer) or 28 mm (or shorter) lenses. Photographers who like to utilize the close focus range (under 0.7 m) of modern Leica lenses or many Voigtländer lenses. Eyeglass wearers. Photographers who can no longer manage with the rangefinder; this especially includes older individuals with declining eyesight. Photographers who do not like the rangefinder but do appreciate the M system. In many of these cases, one could argue that the corresponding need or interest is similarly met with the Visoflex2 on an M11, which is technically not much inferior to the EVF of the M EV1. However, this overlooks the fact that the Visoflex2 makes the M11 larger, considerably heavier, and less aesthetically pleasing. Additionally, my nose touches the viewfinder eyepiece of the M11 and smudges it with nose grease when I use the Visoflex. Or one might ask: Why not an SL? Many photographers love (older) M lenses and have been using them with an SL. The M EV1 is the more beautiful, compact, lighter, and equally fast alternative (only the rangefinder is faster when using M lenses). The M EV1 is the best camera for M lenses without having to use a rangefinder, if you want to use M lenses with an EVF in a compact, lightweight, M-like body. The form factor of the M should not be underestimated. Next Level M What defines an M? This question has occupied my mind a lot. Is it the rangefinder? Is it the manual focusing? Is it the appearance, the design? Is it the handling? In my opinion, it is above all the idea of a specific type of photography that is embodied in the M. The M makes few decisions for the photographer; the essential elements for image composition must be consciously set. It’s not the camera that makes the picture, but the photographer. While most cameras suggest, “I’ll take the picture for you,” the M suggests, “Set me up correctly.” Of course, this mostly happens in the mind, but with the always necessary choice of aperture and distance, it also has a real background, not just one based on the camera’s aura. Additionally, the M is simple and easy to use; it doesn’t do much, it’s not overloaded, and the controls are directly accessible. The camera and lenses are compact and therefore unobtrusive. The familiar shape that has persisted for decades adds to this. As I wrote above: one should not underestimate the M’s form factor. The failure of the M5 made this very clear. And what about the rangefinder? Does a true M need a rangefinder? Yes and no, I would say. The rangefinder stands for simple and quick manual focusing. It has existed for decades, but it wasn’t always there. It took from the Leica I in 1925 to the Leica M3 in 1954 for the rangefinder to find its current form and function. Were the screw-mount Leicas not real Leicas? Hardly! Changes, even to the rangefinder, are possible without betraying the essence of the M. The key is to preserve or improve the rangefinder’s function. So far, I don’t see this with the M EV1. As I tried to show above, the M EV1 offers advantages over the rangefinder in image control, which some may not need but are undeniable. However, the M EV1 also has the disadvantages in focusing as outlined; there is no innovation in this area. Thus, the M EV1 is, for me, a borderline case, perhaps a first step towards a different type of M. An M EV2 should have something comparable to the optical rangefinder, especially concerning focusing. For many years, I’ve read that an electronic rangefinder based on the triangulation principle, which also governs the optical rangefinder and requires overlaying two images to focus, is technically possible. I can’t judge that. But such a concept, or one equally effective, would make for a fully-fledged M with an electronic viewfinder. That would be the Next Level M—a step similar to the transition from the screw-mount Leica to the M-Leica. Such a camera should not replace the M with an optical rangefinder. Rather, two genuine M lines could coexist, using the same amazing M lenses. My conclusion: The Leica M EV1 is a very good camera that will find many fans. But it’s not a revolution; it’s more of a directional test. Leica should boldly continue this path and create something truly new with an M EV2. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/424883-elmar-leica-m-ev1-%E2%80%93-next-level-m/?do=findComment&comment=5878531'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago Hi elmars, Take a look here Elmar: Leica M EV1 – Next Level M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pedaes Posted 9 hours ago Share #2 Posted 9 hours ago (edited) Superb images and comprehensive review, thanks. It is certainly a Leica, but seems closer to a Q with a M mount. For new entrants to the M system the lack of both AF and IBIS are surely big facts to rationalise. Edited 9 hours ago by pedaes 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplicity Posted 9 hours ago Share #3 Posted 9 hours ago I initially now thought: for me this is a "Leica Q-M" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jps1 Posted 8 hours ago Share #4 Posted 8 hours ago Very good analysis. I resold my Q3 for my M11-M and I find through the story the use of the Q3. I'm not a fan of an EVF. I remain perplexed by this MEV1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted 7 hours ago Share #5 Posted 7 hours ago (edited) Thank you Elmar, it was an interesting analysis. I did not have much interest in an EVF M, though I do use the EVF a lot on my M10M and also have an SL2. The main thing I was curious about is whether they would come up with some novel solution to make the focus quicker and more accurate without full magnification, which for me (and it seems, you) is the biggest hurdle to using an EVF with M lenses. I am honestly a bit surprised they did not implement any kind of focus confirmation. I actually expected them to repurpose the metering cues (right facing arrow, dot, left facing arrow), only for focus. I think that would have been a very elegant way to do it. But I guess it was not feasible for some reason. Instead we are left with the same methods that are available in the Visoflex and SL cameras. While I am sure people will buy this, to me it seems a noticeable step down from either the standard M with added Visoflex (so you always have an option for the rangefinder), or the SL cameras, which add a lot more capability, including stabilization, video and access to AF lenses when needed. I know the camera is not for me, but I wonder who is going to really claim that this is the perfect solution for them. I am happy for them in theory, I am just curious how many of them are out there... Edited 7 hours ago by Stuart Richardson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted 7 hours ago Share #6 Posted 7 hours ago vor 2 Stunden schrieb elmars: Who is the M EV1 suitable for? It's for those who don't like a rangefinder. A rangefinder's most decisive property is: It connects the photographer to the subject ... and hence leaves the visualisation of the picture-to-be to the photographer. An SLR or electronic viewfinder does the opposite: It connects the photographer to the image but disconnects the photographer from the subject. It releaves the mental toil of pre-visualisation ... at the price of erecting a wall between subject and photographer. That's why some love the rangefinder principle while others just cannot get along with it. The M EV1 is for the latter. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted 6 hours ago Share #7 Posted 6 hours ago Advertisement (gone after registration) 34 minutes ago, 01af said: It's for those who don't like a rangefinder. A rangefinder's most decisive property is: It connects the photographer to the subject ... and hence leaves the visualisation of the picture-to-be to the photographer. An SLR or electronic viewfinder does the opposite: It connects the photographer to the image but disconnects the photographer from the subject. It releaves the mental toil of pre-visualisation ... at the price of erecting a wall between subject and photographer. That's why some love the rangefinder principle while others just cannot get along with it. The M EV1 is for the latter. It also might be for the people who like the rangefinder for part of their work and other finders for other work. I have pruned my (excessive) digital camera fleet to just two cameras: an Epson R-D1 for the intuitive "work" (when I'm connected to the subject, as you call it) and a Leica CL for precision work such as architecture or still lives (when I'm connected to the resulting image, as you call it). Some of the time I use the same lenses on both and most of those are by Leica. Using both an Mn and an M-EVFn would be bliss, I imagine. Same sensor stack, hence same work flow, and same user interface of the gear when in the field. What's not to like, excepting the price tag, of course? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DadDadDaddyo Posted 6 hours ago Share #8 Posted 6 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, 01af said: A rangefinder's most decisive property is: It connects the photographer to the subject ... and hence leaves the visualisation of the picture-to-be to the photographer. An SLR or electronic viewfinder does the opposite: It connects the photographer to the image but disconnects the photographer from the subject. It releaves the mental toil of pre-visualisation ... at the price of erecting a wall between subject and photographer. An interesting and appropriate analysis. One looks through an optical viewfinder, but at an electronic viewfinder. Thank you for your work on this! Edited 6 hours ago by DadDadDaddyo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApoVision Posted 6 hours ago Share #9 Posted 6 hours ago Bought it today. Battery wasn't charged (as opposed to Apple products). Small nuisance, though. Had to delete my Leica FOTOS app to be able to pair the M EV1 (and set up my other three Leicas again ...), not a big deal, as I also did all the firmware updates. Image count started at 8k (why?). Magenta shift lower than M11 and M11P (ca 23 vs 6 tint in ACR). Firmware change to adjust WB seems like a very good answer to all the issues I have had in the past - but will to check in more detail. Lack of ISO dial no issue for me. EVF is very nice (quantum leap from Visoflex 2, haptics remain great) - to realize it only has 60fps, you have to dig deeper into the Leica website (why not just lay this in the open more prominently?). Although bought Leica gear for almost CHF40k in the last 12months from Leica Switzerland (=ZRH and BSL), didin't get an invite for today from Leica shop BSL (just an email last week whether I wanted to join a "masterclass" for a CHF1.5k bucks), so made sure I bought from another dealer (one who cares more for his customers). Despite all the complaints, I am VERY happy with the new camera - time will tell to what extent I will prefer EVF over FR. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scroy Posted 6 hours ago Share #10 Posted 6 hours ago Thank you so much for the review and insights! 1) Do you know if leica improved the weather sealing on the mount? 2) Does the EVF allow for B&W only viewing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mboerma Posted 6 hours ago Share #11 Posted 6 hours ago Thank you, @elmars, for this positive, critical and open review. I’m happy to see that you really thought this through and were able to write this. I often see people using their back screen instead of the OVF or EVF of their cameras. It seems that the addition of this model is a bit superfluous for people with screens on the back of their cameras. I like to use viewfinders, but deliberately switched from and M11 to an M11-D. This new M EV1 might be a good addition to the M11-D for certain situations. PS love your photos and wonder how much time your were laying on your back in churches and other old buildings. 😉 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted 6 hours ago Share #12 Posted 6 hours ago Love this Elmar - great words - and all the wonderful ceilings - excellent 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApoVision Posted 6 hours ago Share #13 Posted 6 hours ago 4 minutes ago, scroy said: Thank you so much for the review and insights! 1) Do you know if leica improved the weather sealing on the mount? 2) Does the EVF allow for B&W only viewing? 1) no idea 2) yes - you have to set "JPG Settings" to a B&W mode Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriseto Posted 3 hours ago Share #14 Posted 3 hours ago Very interesting review, and great pictures. Bravo! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmars Posted 1 hour ago Author Share #15 Posted 1 hour ago vor 4 Stunden schrieb mboerma: PS love your photos and wonder how much time your were laying on your back in churches and other old buildings. It's more my neck that has suffered. Thank you for your sympathy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmars Posted 1 hour ago Author Share #16 Posted 1 hour ago vor 4 Stunden schrieb scroy: Thank you so much for the review and insights! 1) Do you know if leica improved the weather sealing on the mount? 2) Does the EVF allow for B&W only viewing? 1. No 2. Yes, You have to set the JPG to Monochrom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmars Posted 1 hour ago Author Share #17 Posted 1 hour ago vor 6 Stunden schrieb Stuart Richardson: Thank you Elmar, it was an interesting analysis. I did not have much interest in an EVF M, though I do use the EVF a lot on my M10M and also have an SL2. The main thing I was curious about is whether they would come up with some novel solution to make the focus quicker and more accurate without full magnification, which for me (and it seems, you) is the biggest hurdle to using an EVF with M lenses. I am honestly a bit surprised they did not implement any kind of focus confirmation. I actually expected them to repurpose the metering cues (right facing arrow, dot, left facing arrow), only for focus. I think that would have been a very elegant way to do it. But I guess it was not feasible for some reason. Instead we are left with the same methods that are available in the Visoflex and SL cameras. While I am sure people will buy this, to me it seems a noticeable step down from either the standard M with added Visoflex (so you always have an option for the rangefinder), or the SL cameras, which add a lot more capability, including stabilization, video and access to AF lenses when needed. I know the camera is not for me, but I wonder who is going to really claim that this is the perfect solution for them. I am happy for them in theory, I am just curious how many of them are out there... I think it's a kind of market research for Leica. The investment in the EV1 was probably limited. If the market accepts it, Leica will invest more and there will be innovations. At least, that's what I hope. 2 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