Leica M EV1: The first M with EVF instead of Rangefinder

[padam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've complained how fiddly it is to quickly and accurately focus on my SL2 (or most other mirrorless cameras, and it's just poor software implementation).
With a lesser viewfinder and no joystick in a light, less stable body, this seems far worse.
From my understanding, an SL3 can quickly jump back from magnification with the joystick, so it should work way better than this.

Once they make a mirrorless camera, people will start comparing it against all other mirrorless cameras...
And this manages to combine all the bad aspects in one:
- High resolution
- Low weight
- Inferior handling (maybe not a factor with a better EVF)
- Shutter shock, lag (no EFCS)
- No IBIS

(I could add more, but I won't...)
Hopefully with the M12 they will take into consideration that some of these have to be fixed in a premium product, albeit it seems that most users won't care.

[Advertisement]

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

[perfect1964]

You’d have thought Leica would’ve worked out how Fujifilm has successfully implemented a hybrid viewfinder and gone on to improve on it to enhance the M experience. Bolting on the Q series EVF seems a tad tired and lazy. Nowhere near as exciting as the announcement by Lomo of the new film point and shoot camera.

Edited yesterday at 02:56 PM by perfect1964

[Big Dave]

I see the reviews say focusing with this evf is a slower process than a trad M. Unless i missed it, surprised the rangefinder patch way of focusing has not been recreated to work digitally? I wonder if this will be addressed in firmware?

[IkarusJohn]

Tough crowd!

[hexx]

Just now, Big Dave said:

I see the reviews say focusing with this evf is a slower process than a trad M. Unless i missed it, surprised the rangefinder patch way of focusing has not been recreated to work digitally? I wonder if this will be addressed in firmware?

how? how can firmware add missing hardware?

[Big Dave]

Or i agree as above, a hybrid switch like the xpro to offer best of both worlds

[Kay P]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With this camera it takes longer to read the light and focus, aside from being a distraction during the shot.
They point out that it's a demand from younger people, but you don't see many young people with a modern M, to be honest, and the few that do exist shoot from the screen in live view most of the time.
They also haven't solved that unfortunate way of measuring light from the sensor, like in the M11, with the shooting cycle being absolutely absurd and feeling awkward in the hands.
I hope that with this new model, it's like in the M240 video—another "brilliant" idea—and the joke doesn't last too long.

Why not a QM with M mount?
 

In this forum, by number of entries, the M beats the rest by an overwhelming majority, and I doubt the company would make any sense today if it weren't for this model, so

[FrozenInTime]

3 minutes ago, perfect1964 said:

You’d have thought Leica would’ve worked out how Fujifilm has successfully implemented a hybrid viewfinder and gone on to improve on it to enhance the M experience. Bolting on the Q series EVF seems a tad tired and lazy. Nowhere near as exciting as the announcement by Lomo of the new film point and shoot camera.

Yes, the Lomo seems to be everything the Pentax 17 should have been. 

[andybarton]

If I had this kind of money to spend on a camera, I'd take an SL3 every day, given how much more versatile it is. 

TBH, I think that this is a bit pointless. 

[DrM]

IMHO weird design choice to go for EVF only. Slower, sub-optimal low light performance, not an M. If you want to add something innovative, I would have opted for a hybrid solution, auto lens calibration, IBIS, global shutter, etc.. 

I'll stick to the M11

 

Edited yesterday at 03:05 PM by DrM

[musers]

What I think is one potential is now being able to use any M mount lens with the M ergonomics. For example, they are making cinema lenses now in M mount because the flange distance is so short, you can adapt them to any camera

[Mark Fisher]

Leica people are a strange crew: the company offers an alternative (not replacement) that allows people to easily use an M system and use a wide array of lenses easily and at close focus yet they hate it before even trying it.  I've used M cameras (film and digital) for 20-ish years so I am used to and appreciate rangefinder focussing, but realistically, this glasses-wearing photographer is limited to 35 and 50mm lenses.  Sure, I can use the rear screen for my 21 and try to use the tiny frame lines for a 75 or 90mm, but that is a pretty terrible user experience.  Those who say this is terrible shouldn't buy it.  I thought the CL system and M8 made little sense and I didn't buy them and they went away.  If the market hates this one, it will go away too and the rangefinder remains.  I will likely buy one after I have a chance to play with it.  It is still the nice, compact, manual focus system that attracted me in the first place without the rangefinder limitations.  

Edited yesterday at 03:08 PM by Mark Fisher
wording

[TheEyesHaveIt]

Lack of innovative focusing aids is disappointing. Something akin to what Fuji has done previously would've been nice.

[maxpower]

I tried it, works pretty well (although I kept moving the focus point with my face or nose - probably would change some settings compared to the demo unit I had in hand). It's interesting to have the two additional fn buttons from the frame line selector, also configurable by holding like all other fn buttons. The EVF quality seems fine to me, definitely feels better than the Visoflex 2 when I had it (which I didn't like and returned). But for me, I'll stick to the rangefinder - for me the main reason I'm using digital Leica cameras. 

There's clearly been demand for it, I think it's good that they separate it from the M11 line. Will it have enough interest to keep making them in the future? Time will tell. 

A new/different focusing aid would have been fun, but I never expected this from Leica to be honest.. but maybe/hopefully if there is enough interest they can think about that for the next version?

Edited yesterday at 03:14 PM by maxpower

[rxj]

Cue people hurt on the forum that it's not purist (now that the camera has finally been confirmed and they can't say it's just a rumour) and it's not a true Leica and it shouldn't wear the M name or it makes no sense.

Leica is a lifestyle company that's just diversified their portfolio and Q users who maybe want a M but feel the rangefinder is too challenging will lap this up.

It's a new camera that will sell regardless, its not that serious.

[rtai]

So then why not have IBIS? Why go half way? Any mirrorless can do what this high hurdle can and with IBIS and AF with 3rd party mount adapter.

[JHPINLA]

1 hour ago, OfeyKalakar said:

it’s a really sh*tty idea.

They should release an updated Leica CL with a global stacked shutter with the L mount and better video specs, like the recent Nikon / RED camera. Leica can use their recent cinema lens lineup to promote both. The size and format of the Leica CL camera is a better format as it will not cannibalize the other camera offerings, Q, M, SL. 

Updated CL is a much better idea!

[LocalHero1953]

Good to see the Leica forum reverting to type with a GHF-GHE* quotient well into negative territory.
I expect this camera to sell well well, but probably not to most of those who have posted here. I won't be buying one, but that doesn't stop me recognising its qualities.

 

 

 

*Glass-Half-Full minus Glass-Half-Empty. This is zero in the population at large.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Genoweffa]

3 minutes ago, rtai said:

So then why not have IBIS? Why go half way? Any mirrorless can do what this high hurdle can and with IBIS and AF with 3rd party mount adapter.

so they can put it later and call it EV1bis

 

[LD_50]

4 minutes ago, rtai said:

So then why not have IBIS? Why go half way? Any mirrorless can do what this high hurdle can and with IBIS and AF with 3rd party mount adapter.

You can’t have the functionality of an SL in the size of an M, at least not at a price point they’re going for. 

AF at the mount negates the floating elements in modern M lens design, making for a sub-optimal result.