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

[Strmbrg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

But when zooming, there is just the same red-illuminated pixels just magnified, I suppose. The same distance-tolerances for focus-peak-indikation as when zooming out. The rangefinder (if adjusted and with adjusted lens) have nearly zero tolerances for depth. Either there is a split-image or it is aligned. No matter lens, aperture or focal length. I had to find the right diopter-correction for my eye, but when that problem was solved I have no issues with focusing. Maybe other people have more problematic sight-errors and maybe then, the M EV-1 is a good solution. But then I think that I should consider something with auto-focus instead, maybe not a Leica at all.

Edited Saturday at 05:50 PM by Strmbrg

[algrove]

28 minutes ago, SrMi said:

I find Q3's MF more accurate than AF, and also more flexible, as I cannot do BBF with Q3.

While I always focused wide open with my Rodenstock and M lenses, I decided to start focusing M-EV1 at working aperture, unless I cannot discern the point of sharpness. While I know that I get more precise focusing wide open and magnified (more accurate than with a rangefinder as well), I am finding that I can get well-focused images with a 28mm and up to f/5.6 (did not try more closed). The main drawback is the slight delay when going from magnified to an unmagnified view.

I think one can adapt one's own shooting technique to M-EV1 to be efficient.

M-EV1 is certainly no rangefinder camera, but I do not feel it is in the way of creativity. 

So do you own an EV1? The way you explain using it it seems like you do. Lucky you.😉

[SrMi]

1 minute ago, algrove said:

So do you own an EV1? The way you explain using it it seems like you do. Lucky you.😉

Yes, I do. I already replied to your question in this post:

 

[Strmbrg]

Discuss the aspects of the camera, do not focus on socializing. Please. 🙂

[algrove]

40 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Yes, I do. I already replied to your question in this post:

 

Thanks. Never saw where you actually said you bought one. I understand you demo one in London. Congrats!

[Alexander108]

vor 48 Minuten schrieb SrMi:

Yes, I do. I already replied to your question in this post:

 

Sorry, there is so much going on here. Maybe I have missed it. Did you use the Visoflex 2 before? And most important: what difference do you see in using the M-EVF 1 compared to the Visoflex?

We don't need to discuss bulkiness of the VF2. I would be interested in how big a difference is the quality of the display and if focusing is actually much better, better or roughly the same when comparing the VF2 with the EV1.

I mainly use the Visoflex whenever it is mounted. Also for exposure and composition. Not so much for focusing where I often reassure with the RF that I am spot on. But with my street photography I also use zone focusing quite a bit. But when I want to have a deliberate DoF with rather wide open aperture I use the RF like in this picture (M10-M, 35 Summicron, wide open).

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!

BTW that wasn't easy to focus as I did not want to draw much attention. I was sitting at the next table. I focused quickly, put the camera down again an then took the shot w/o looking through the VF.

I am still torn between selling my M11+VF2 to get the EV1. But that would still cost me more than I hope for. Also: hoch much do I lose with giving up in the RF?

[FrankGosebruch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 29 Minuten schrieb Alexander108:

Sorry, there is so much going on here. Maybe I have missed it. Did you use the Visoflex 2 before? And most important: what difference do you see in using the M-EVF 1 compared to the Visoflex?

The EVF built into the Leica M EV1 is slightly brighter and sharper than the Visoflex 2. Furthermore, the image doesn't stutter as much when panning the camera (though I rarely do that anyway).

The biggest drawback of the viewfinder in the M EV1 is that it can't be tilted upwards (like the VF2). Therefore, it's impossible to use near ground level, for macro photography, or with a microscope. A pointless, useless product. In direct comparison, I'd rather keep my M11 P and VF2 and wait for the successor to the M EV1.

[SrMi]

53 minutes ago, algrove said:

Thanks. Never saw where you actually said you bought one. I understand you demo one in London. Congrats!

Thank you.

[SrMi]

32 minutes ago, Alexander108 said:

Sorry, there is so much going on here. Maybe I have missed it. Did you use the Visoflex 2 before? And most important: what difference do you see in using the M-EVF 1 compared to the Visoflex?

We don't need to discuss bulkiness of the VF2. I would be interested in how big a difference is the quality of the display and if focusing is actually much better, better or roughly the same when comparing the VF2 with the EV1.

I mainly use the Visoflex whenever it is mounted. Also for exposure and composition. Not so much for focusing where I often reassure with the RF that I am spot on. But with my street photography I also use zone focusing quite a bit. But when I want to have a deliberate DoF with rather wide open aperture I use the RF like in this picture (M10-M, 35 Summicron, wide open).

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!

BTW that wasn't easy to focus as I did not want to draw much attention. I was sitting at the next table. I focused quickly, put the camera down again an then took the shot w/o looking through the VF.

I have and use the Visoflex 2 with my M11-series cameras. I do not have access to the Visoflex 2 at the moment (still traveling), but I feel the M-EV1's EVF works better. It should be the same experience as with the Q3, except "only" 60Hz (I always use 60Hz with EVFs).

I use Visoflex 2 on M11 for composition (wide or long lenses), exposure (blinkies), and framing with LPC on. I use it tilted when on a tripod, which is very rare. I use Visoflex 2 for focusing when I use it anyway for framing, except for very wide lenses, where I find it easier to focus with RF. I have not tried those lenses with M-EV1 yet. However, I have increasingly started leaving the Visoflex 2 behind (bulk) and using external optical viewfinders for wide lenses (I prefer OVF to EVF). 

41 minutes ago, Alexander108 said:

I am still torn between selling my M11+VF2 to get the EV1. But that would still cost me more than I hope for. Also: hoch much do I lose with giving up in the RF?

Choosing between M11 + VF2 and M-EV1 is not something that I have an answer for yet. With M11, I could shoot with LCD where warranted and avoid the bulk of VF2. But M-EV1's shooting with EVF is nicer than using an LCD.

[lct]

1 hour ago, Alexander108 said:

We don't need to discuss bulkiness of the VF2. I would be interested in how big a difference is the quality of the display and if focusing is actually much better, better or roughly the same when comparing the VF2 with the EV1.

Roughly the same, to me. Except that the MEV1's EVF has no tilting capabilities. The forte of the MEV1's EVF is that it is built into the body instead of being a "hump" like the Visoflex 2. It is a matter of bulkiness but also handiness of a body you can use without the hassle of an accessory finder. Now if you need a rangefinder for your photography, the MEV1 won't give you this experience obviously. It is basically a mirrorless camera dedicated to M lenses, not a rangefinder.

[LarryLeica]

14 hours ago, lct said:

Other methods could be simpler and faster.
For instance with autozoom and focus peaking:
1. Focus at working aperture;
2. Recompose if needed;
3. Shoot.

Yeah, how well does this work for shooting dynamic scenes? Everyone says that focus peaking is terrible when stopped down but is that really true? 

[Strmbrg]

I try to value things beyond comparing them. My take on the “speed” discussion regarding EV-1 and Rangefinder:

When I say that the rangefinder is faster to focus than the EV-1, yes — I’ve made a ranking. But what I’m really comparing is not measurable speed, it’s mental flow.

It’s not about how many seconds it takes to focus, but about how naturally the camera lets me stay in a creative mindset. If a camera requires magnifying, adjusting, re-checking, taking it from the eye — it may not just be slower, but more importantly, it breaks continuity.

Frustration then isn’t caused by delay itself, but by the shift of focus — from seeing images to operating machinery. The rangefinder, for me, stays transparent. The EV-1, as I suspect, risks becoming self-conscious.

So I’m not contradicting myself when I question whether speed matters; I’m just refining the question. The relevant “speed” is not mechanical, it’s psychological.

A camera doesn’t have to be fast — it just needs to avoid slowing down the way you see.

[FrozenInTime]

1 hour ago, LarryLeica said:

Yeah, how well does this work for shooting dynamic scenes? Everyone says that focus peaking is terrible when stopped down but is that really true? 

This is the same with all cameras with through the lens viewing  i.e. EVFs are no different from SLRs with ground glass screens; focus gets more difficult when stopped down. All TTL focus systems ended up with auto-iris that closed the aperture down only when the shutter button was pressed ( or DOF preview enabled ). With M lenses the iris is always at working aperture; isn't the rangefinder system genius 🙂 

Edited 23 hours ago by FrozenInTime

[SrMi]

58 minutes ago, Strmbrg said:

 

I try to value things beyond comparing them. My take on the “speed” discussion regarding EV-1 and Rangefinder:

When I say that the rangefinder is faster to focus than the EV-1, yes — I’ve made a ranking. But what I’m really comparing is not measurable speed, it’s mental flow.

It’s not about how many seconds it takes to focus, but about how naturally the camera lets me stay in a creative mindset. If a camera requires magnifying, adjusting, re-checking, taking it from the eye — it may not just be slower, but more importantly, it breaks continuity.

Frustration then isn’t caused by delay itself, but by the shift of focus — from seeing images to operating machinery. The rangefinder, for me, stays transparent. The EV-1, as I suspect, risks becoming self-conscious.

So I’m not contradicting myself when I question whether speed matters; I’m just refining the question. The relevant “speed” is not mechanical, it’s psychological.

A camera doesn’t have to be fast — it just needs to avoid slowing down the way you see.

I follow what you are saying. However, people can adjust their workflow if they want/need it. I do not think that shooting with a technical camera (slow process) implies reduced creative mindset, but it may be a problem for some.

[Strmbrg]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

I follow what you are saying. However, people can adjust their workflow if they want/need it. I do not think that shooting with a technical camera (slow process) implies reduced creative mindset, but it may be a problem for some.

I guess that you take it way too far when mentioning ”Technical cameras”. I think of distracting aspects rather than time consuming aspects, i.e. such things that bends my focus from image-ideas to handling of the camera.

 

[lct]

4 hours ago, LarryLeica said:

Yeah, how well does this work for shooting dynamic scenes? Everyone says that focus peaking is terrible when stopped down but is that really true? 

Not everyone thinks of peaking used together with magnification. It is my favorite method based on autozoom both M11 and MEV1 have. My moving subjects are my grand children now but as restless they are, it works on them as well. It is a personal thing though so the best is to try it yourself if you have an MEV1 or an M11 with Visoflex2 on hand.

[algrove]

17 hours ago, FrankGosebruch said:

The EVF built into the Leica M EV1 is slightly brighter and sharper than the Visoflex 2. Furthermore, the image doesn't stutter as much when panning the camera (though I rarely do that anyway).

The biggest drawback of the viewfinder in the M EV1 is that it can't be tilted upwards (like the VF2). Therefore, it's impossible to use near ground level, for macro photography, or with a microscope. A pointless, useless product. In direct comparison, I'd rather keep my M11 P and VF2 and wait for the successor to the M EV1.

If only Leica had kept going with th rear-like of the Q3 then we would have a tilt LCD which would truly make the EV1 more useful and a better replacement to the Viso2 which will tilt up.

[algrove]

17 hours ago, SrMi said:

I have and use the Visoflex 2 with my M11-series cameras. I do not have access to the Visoflex 2 at the moment (still traveling), but I feel the M-EV1's EVF works better. It should be the same experience as with the Q3, except "only" 60Hz (I always use 60Hz with EVFs).

 

For me switching to 120Hz on my SL3 with adapted lenses I find it smooths out the experience with less jittery movements due to my hand movements, most probably due to IBIS. 

This got me to thinking that the EV1 might not help me that much with the above movements.