Survey: Leica M EV1 – Future or mistake?

[JNK100]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, dbeids said:

How about simply buying a more capable Sony and an M Mount adapter?

More capable in what way and which model do you have in mind?

[Virtus]

37 minutes ago, Crem said:

This is the problem with the EV1. It's basically a non-tilting, higher megapixel Visoflex that is built into the body. All for a very high price tag. Nothing technically innovative, but marketed as a technical innovation. If you have a M11 + Visoflex then you already have this camera with a hump on the top. The EV1 makes sense for M11 + Visoflex owners that never use the OVF (and are willing to give up the tilt). The shooting experience will be the same with a few extra megapixels in the viewfinder.

So, if I have Visoflex 2 - as an alternative to RF option - on an M11, and I can be happy with the "hump" (giving that it has the advantage of being removable, so I can always choose the shoot in a "purist" mode), and a smaller viewer - I have all I need, in a "changeable" mode and for a lesser price.

[BWColor]

2 hours ago, rjhringmer said:

I do a lot of various format film copying using a copystand and dedicated lightbox on a darkroom bench. The new M EVF1 offers no easy way of using my optical or electronic Visoflex attachments to perform camera scans; not even a flip screen.

Lightroom will tether to some Leica cameras.

[Martin B]

None of the options in section one fit my thinking of the EV1. Missing is "Interested in the EV1 but too expensive for me to buy". This is the truth for me. 

Section two I marked and submitted option 2: "Good alternative to the rangefinder, more choice doesn't hurt."

I would get the EV1 complementary to my six other rangefinder M cameras I own. In-camera EVF makes lots of sense for my personal usage with ultrawide lenses and for close-up work. 

[BWColor]

The use of the Maestro 3 tells me all that I need to know.  To do something innovative with manual focus verification will require processing power.

[Martin B]

1 hour ago, dbeids said:

How about simply buying a more capable Sony and an M Mount adapter?

I have used this combination of M lenses on my Sony A7R for many years before actually getting my first digital M. This approach works well for lenses 35 mm and longer. But with wider lenses, I spent too much time correcting purple corner casts in photos due to the thicker sensor array. The adapter worked fine, but it is nicer to have a direct lens mount on the camera as the EV1 provides. 

[cwcltd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@LUF Admin I’m visiting Wetzlar in two weeks, if you’re around I’d be delighted to buy you a beer/coffee/cake in recognition of your fortitude and patience. 

[snooper]

To avoid endless discussions, they should rename it QI as in « interchangeable lens » and nobody would complain. Of course they would need an IBIS, but they know how to make these. 

[jaapv]

37 minutes ago, S Maclean said:

Basically they should have kept it at a Q with M lens coupling in function. IBIS, different framing lines option etc.

How? If you remove the imaging module from the Q you are left with a box and some electronics. Without lens -yes- but also without shutter, sensor, etc.

[Bart Hamming]

Interesting development. But don't name it a new Leica M - because it isn't.

Name it e.g. Leica EVF1 and start a new line, just like Leica started the Q line, and the D-Lux line, etc.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, dbeids said:

How about simply buying a more capable Sony and an M Mount adapter?

Good idea - if you do not plan on using a wideangle lens, ever.

[S Maclean]

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

How? If you remove the imaging module from the Q you are left with a box and some electronics. Without lens -yes- but also without shutter, sensor, etc.

I’m talking function…. Not so much engineering. I’m not qualified to even venture that conversation.  I guess amore specific way to say it would be. A camera with the evf function of a Q, ibis of a Q, lens of an M

[Marcial]

The questions in the survey are not adequate for feedback thus my response as follows.  I recently purchased an M11-P funded in part with a M10 and a CL with 3 L lenses. The CL was purchased as a alternate body for the several M lenses I have and as a camera for DW's use. Initially I was going to wait for the M EV-1 but when further details were revealed- no IBIS, fixed rear screen and no hybrid VF- it seemed that it would not be all that different than using the CL with M lenses. Neither DW or I found that method effective (thus the L lenses) thus I went ahead with the M11-P and a Fuji XE-5 (has the size and technology we're looking for in a M alternative). I stay with the M system for its compact size and because it's easier to focus (even with eyeglass wearing 71 y.o. eyes and glaucoma) compared to manual focus in an EVF screen; that EVFs with focus peaking and magnification as aids would be better for older eyes has not been my experience. Now, given the current state of AI/digital technology, I would think that an EVF with a digital RF (a red dot in the center in lieu of the RF patch or something similar) that is sufficiently sensitive to confirm at smaller apertures is feasible if not now, then in the near future. That would obviate the need for the bulk and expense of AF lenses and allow the computer b/w our ears to set focus point (it's much better than the camera at determining hyperfocal distance).  IBIS is also useful technology for an M camera as would be a movable rear screen, although the latter is less so.

[Beewacker]

I bought the Visoflex 2 for my M11 last year. I've used it twice and still can't stand it. The focusing just isn't as fast as a rangefinder, but to each their own.

[Olaf_ZG]

Though I am interested (and answered as such), I might not buy. But I guess the reason why not doesn’t matter. 

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, dbeids said:

How about simply buying a more capable Sony and an M Mount adapter?

Yuck!

[algrove]

2 hours ago, Edward Schwartzreich said:

I was a beta tester.  The camera is good at what it is supposed to do, but for me, almost entirely superfluous.   I have a 20-year old Sony A7-R which will do the same thing, less well but adequately.  

The only advantages of this camera, for me, would be hitting focus with a Noctilux, hitting focus’s in close up or with long tele’s.   Also, being able to look through the viewfinder for a picture at dusk and being able to close down the diaphragm and actually see the result.  So if you want a twilight image, you can see exactly what you’ve got.   But M10s and M11s can do this with a Viso attached.

If M lenses accepted autofocus, if the camera had IBIS, then maybe.

But I can see this as a very popular item for people whose eyesight won’t allow them to do rangefinder adequately, or who came from SLRs or other cameras with an EV and who own M lenses. 

For me, the use of rangefinder Ms is instinctive and this is a distraction. 

I mainly agree especially with the Nikon Zf comment. When Leica initially took a survey I voted to have it developed.

HOWEVER, at the time of the last survey the Nikon Zf gave an excellent focus confirmation even with M lenses and as such many of us thought Leica was talking about implementing something like that with an EVF, not just a simple Viso2-like EVF into an M11.

So Leica asked, but did not get specific and M users who knew about the Nikon focus conformation on the Zf wrongly assumed Leica would offer some of the latest technology in this new camera. Sadly we were both talking on different planes.

[Susapix]

Drawbacks for me include: 1. Lack of focus confirmation,  2. Absurd price, 3. All the great camera stores in my area closed down long ago so I can’t easily get a sense of what the actual experience of the camera is like. What I would really love is a camera that will produce Leica quality images that doesn’t require me to take my graduated focus eyeglasses on and off and on and off…. The iphone just isn’t cutting it. And even with removing my glasses I really need a diopter beyond what is currently available. And no, I don’t want a Q. Lovely camera but too wide angle for my shooting style.

[JHPINLA]

Terrible survey questions.  No option for "I am not interested" that allows a "why" response.  The only not interested option requires one to say stick with classic M. and no other reason.  Leica would be better off bringing out an improved CL as many others have said on the forum.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[ramarren]

There is no answer to either Q1 or Q2 that reflects my thoughts accurately on the "Leica M EV1" so I cannot answer either. Re-writing the responses: 

1. How interested are you personally in the Leica M EV1?

• I'm not interested in the Leica M EV1. I might be interested in an EVF-only camera like it a little further along in development and with more clarity in defining what it is supposed to be. 

2. What do you think on Leica's decision to dispense with the rangefinder with the M EV1?

• I think the decision to call this a "Leica M" is an error, and the question is asking me if I agree with a negative thing. I see nothing wrong with a Leica EVF-only camera ... I've owned and happily used two of them ... but assigning this EVF camera the name Leica M is problematic since it eliminates the essential thing other than the lens mount and styling that characterize a Leica M. I think the better question is a positive one:

"What do you think of Leica's decision to produce an EVF camera with the styling, lens mount, and overall design of a Leica M?" 

To that, I'd say, "I think it's a good decision and provides more options for Leica M lens owners/users."

The M EV1 doesn't capitalize on other capabilities/benefits that could be had with an EVF-only camera design, and the name presents confusing notions of whom you are trying to appeal to with what it actually is. 

G