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

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

47 minutes ago, Planetwide said:

This is at best disingenuous. How do you know what Leica wanted? Are you on the design team? No manufacturer "promises" new features in an, as of yet, unannounced camera.

If we assume that the current M - EVF1 is what they wanted, then they set a very low standard, and consequently, failed to make even an equivalent product to the M11. Just lacking the Visoflex compatibility proves this. They are marketing this camera as an upgrade path from the Q, where they have again failed to include the Q's tilt screen. Designing an EVF into an M sized body, well Sony, Fuji and many others have successfully done it. So, personally, there isn't much "to like", and frankly, I expected more. Other users will feel differently, of that I am sure. I could have skipped the IBIS, but not incorporating existing technologies such as a tilt screen and/or the Visoflex like they have done, really makes no sense to me in 2025.

Due to these oversights, many users are now noting the deficiencies of the design vis a vis existing equipment. These users represent potential customers, something Leica's marketing should have considered. They had the opportunity to do something very good here, and they didn't. A new camera introduction should showcase new technologies and design, if only to drive demand...

To carry this point even further, when Leica asked us if we would buy an M with a built-in EVF many said yes, including myself.

 

However, in 2022 when asked many of us imagined an M with built-in EVF would at least offer some of the technology available on other EVF cameras offering manual focus features. Especially that new features were available on the Nikon Xf at the time with an adapter that offered a green square over the focus area. Many at least thought Leica would offer that since it was readily available.

So buyers assumed too much and Leica offered too little, thus to many they went soft on technology. The seller and buyer were talking on different planes without even noticing the error of their ways. Buyers should have asked specific questions and the sellers should have talked basic EVF no different than the Viso2. OK so they decided to go with the Q3 EVF, but as now many have pointed out how about adding the tilt LCD like the Q3 has so that 90 degree heads down photography is possible with the EV1 like on the Viso2. I personally use the Viso2 more with it at 90 degrees than any other way.  BTW why did not Leica ask Viso2 users how they use them to get a better understanding on owner usage of the M EVF available at marketing research collection.?

Edited November 3 by algrove

[lct]

41 minutes ago, Planetwide said:

This is at best disingenuous [...]

I beg your pardon? I'm not interested in little insults. I rest my point if you don't mind. For historical considerations, the last Macfilos bulletin could perhaps interest you.

[jonoslack]

2 hours ago, Planetwide said:

This is at best disingenuous. How do you know what Leica wanted? Are you on the design team? No manufacturer "promises" new features in an, as of yet, unannounced camera.

If we assume that the current M - EVF1 is what they wanted, then they set a very low standard, and consequently, failed to make even an equivalent product to the M11. Just lacking the Visoflex compatibility proves this. They are marketing this camera as an upgrade path from the Q, where they have again failed to include the Q's tilt screen. Designing an EVF into an M sized body, well Sony, Fuji and many others have successfully done it. So, personally, there isn't much "to like", and frankly, I expected more. Other users will feel differently, of that I am sure. I could have skipped the IBIS, but not incorporating existing technologies such as a tilt screen and/or the Visoflex like they have done, really makes no sense to me in 2025.

Due to these oversights, many users are now noting the deficiencies of the design vis a vis existing equipment. These users represent potential customers, something Leica's marketing should have considered. They had the opportunity to do something very good here, and they didn't. A new camera introduction should showcase new technologies and design, if only to drive demand...

….. and it would appear that lots of users got what they asked for and are buying it!  

[jonoslack]

2 hours ago, algrove said:

To carry this point even further, when Leica asked us if we would buy an M with a built-in EVF many said yes, including myself.

 

However, in 2022 when asked many of us imagined an M with built-in EVF would at least offer some of the technology available on other EVF cameras offering manual focus features. Especially that new features were available on the Nikon Xf at the time with an adapter that offered a green square over the focus area. Many at least thought Leica would offer that since it was readily available.

So buyers assumed too much and Leica offered too little, thus to many they went soft on technology. The seller and buyer were talking on different planes without even noticing the error of their ways. Buyers should have asked specific questions and the sellers should have talked basic EVF no different than the Viso2. OK so they decided to go with the Q3 EVF, but as now many have pointed out how about adding the tilt LCD like the Q3 has so that 90 degree heads down photography is possible with the EV1 like on the Viso2. I personally use the Viso2 more with it at 90 degrees than any other way.  BTW why did not Leica ask Viso2 users how they use them to get a better understanding on owner usage of the M EVF available at marketing research collection.?

Hi there

i was at the much documented meeting in Dublin (the interview with Stefan Daniel refers to this). 
I thought it was made pretty clear that this would just be an M11 body with an EVF. Indeed, I assumed it would be the EVF from the Visoflex2, not the better unit from the Q3. 
focus confirmation (like the Nikon XF) requires autofocus technology - which no M camera has, and there has been lots of discussion about tilting screens making the M fatter (which nobody wants)

My point is that in the original discussions it was made really clear that it would just be an M11 body with an EVF. If it sells (I think it will) then perhaps there will be more exciting features. 
 

but in the context of your message the seller certainly did say ‘basic EVF no different from the Viso2’

The two things you mention: 

focus confirmation and

flipping LCD

would have meant a complete camera redesign, and the whole point of the M EV1 was not to do that!

[jaapv]

I completely fail to see the point of these if only and why did they not type of discussions. If a product does not live up to your expectations there is a very simple remedy: don’t buy it. What is the sense of going onto the Internet posting aggrieved posts? It is not what you expected or wanted. So what? Endof. 

[algrove]

Got it thanks so very much. I did not have the facts correct.

 

BTW, can one assume the EV1 does have the same electronic stabilization that the Viso2 has? Thanks Jono.

[Succisa75]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As someone who has spent some time with the MEV1 the biggest challenge is the 60fps in the EVF vs 120fps in Q3 and SL3 and the lack of sharpness in the EVF upon magnification. This issue has carried over from the SL3 and not sure why. Leica had a very accurate EVF in the SL and SL2 systems but reverted to a less than accurate result for the SL3. 
 

Would it be nice to have subject detection in manual focus like the Nikon Zf? Yes, but the Maestro 3 Processor probably isn’t capable of such technology. Even the Maestro 4 has some hints of it on the SL3 but far from accurate.  

My recommendation is to use Panasonics’s Picture in Picture manual focus system (since they work with each other on the tech) as this gives you the best of both worlds, magnification in the center of the frame by default, but you can move the box around while still seeing your entire frame.  In addition the focus peaking is more accurate  all of this is possible with firmware, just if Leica wants to implement it.  

 

 

Edited November 4 by Succisa75

[Derbyshire Man]

1 hour ago, Succisa75 said:

 all of this is possible with firmware, just if Leica wants to implement it.  

 

 

That's a pretty bold statement. How do you know the processor is up to it?

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

all of this is possible with firmware

Are you a software designer with Leica? If so, they are probably printing your dismissal notice right now. 

[Wipeout]

4 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

This issue has carried over from the SL3 and not sure why. Leica had a very accurate EVF in the SL and SL2 systems but reverted to a less than accurate result for the SL3. 

I've got an SL2 and the EVF with M lenses is great. I expected the same / similar in the M EV1 and was disappointed, it's laggy and unclear. 

[JNK100]

4 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

As someone who has spent some time with the MEV1 the biggest challenge is the 60fps in the EVF vs 120fps in Q3 and SL3 and the lack of sharpness in the EVF upon magnification. This issue has carried over from the SL3 and not sure why. Leica had a very accurate EVF in the SL and SL2 systems but reverted to a less than accurate result for the SL3. 
 

Would it be nice to have subject detection in manual focus like the Nikon Zf? Yes, but the Maestro 3 Processor probably isn’t capable of such technology. Even the Maestro 4 has some hints of it on the SL3 but far from accurate.  

My recommendation is to use Panasonics’s Picture in Picture manual focus system (since they work with each other on the tech) as this gives you the best of both worlds, magnification in the center of the frame by default, but you can move the box around while still seeing your entire frame.  In addition the focus peaking is more accurate  all of this is possible with firmware, just if Leica wants to implement it.  

 

 

😂

[Stephen.s1]

And the good news is Leica did not drop the M11 variations.  

It ain't a Leica without a rangefinder and none of us is gonna change that.

[SrMi]

On 10/25/2025 at 10:12 AM, lct said:

Strange. No such issue on M11 with legacy Leica lenses, or Cosina made ZM and VM lenses. I have no experience with CF lenses but the WATE allows for autozoom closer than 0.7m too. Not a deal breaker but my MEV1 will work the same way as the M11 hopefully. Thanks for sharing anyway.

Verified that autozoom does not work at distances closer than 0.7m with WATE, CV, or Leica CF lenses, both with M11 and M-EV1. 

[Succisa75]

15 hours ago, Derbyshire Man said:

That's a pretty bold statement. How do you know the processor is up to it?

This technology isn’t new. It was around for the S1 and S1R systems that Panasonic has had which predates the M11 release in 2022. 
 

 

[lct]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

Verified that autozoom does not work at distances closer than 0.7m with WATE, CV, or Leica CF lenses, both with M11 and M-EV1. 

I have no experience with CF lenses but it works on both Summmicron 50/2 DR and CV 50/2.2. Pretty sure it works on other lenses too. Just checked with M11 on S-A 21/3.4, ZM 21/4.5, CV 75/1.9. The opposite would be strange if the roller cam follows the whole focus cam of lenses. Or perhaps it stops following on some lenses and not on others? I will check on the MEV1 tomorrow.

[SrMi]

54 minutes ago, lct said:

I have no experience with CF lenses but it works on both Summmicron 50/2 DR and CV 50/2.2. Pretty sure it works on other lenses too. Just checked with M11 on S-A 21/3.4, ZM 21/4.5, CV 75/1.9. The opposite would be strange if the roller cam follows the whole focus cam of lenses. Or perhaps it stops following on some lenses and not on others? I will check on the MEV1 tomorrow.

The CF lenses stop giving feedback to the cam below 0.7m, while WATE and CV affect the rangefinder split down to 0.6m. Below 0.6m, the rangefinder remains static, meaning the cam is not receiving any information about focus position. 

[CDodkin]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

Verified that autozoom does not work at distances closer than 0.7m with WATE, CV, or Leica CF lenses, both with M11 and M-EV1. 

Yep, we'll have to use the optional lever trigger for Zoom for close focus on lenses where the auto zoom doesn't;t kick-in.

[CDodkin]

On 11/3/2025 at 1:01 PM, algrove said:

So buyers assumed too much and Leica offered too little...

This is a sweeping generalization - for myself, the M EV1 is exactly what I expected it to be.

An M11, with no rangefinder mech, and an EVF instead.

This is exactly what I wanted - and if it had been available at the same time as the M11, I would have purchased the M EV1.

As it is, Leica got an M11, and now an M EV1 out of me. I'm not upset about that - the M11 had been an excellent camera for 3 years.

I doubt I'll use it much more after today - time will tell.

Actually I'll retract some of my initial statement - The M EV1 is not exactly what I expected - It's lighter than I expected, and cheaper than I expected - so +2 points to Leica.

[lct]

•

Edited November 5 by lct

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lct]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

[...] Below 0.6m, the rangefinder remains static, meaning the cam is not receiving any information about focus position. 

Not with the Summicron 50/2 DR i have with me here. The roller cam continues to follow the focus cam of the lens apparently since it still triggers magnification below 0.6m, don't ask me why 🤷‍♂️

Edited November 5 by lct