FIRST IMPRESSIONS — LEICA EV-1 M

[AlanJW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, pgk said:

Firstly I would defy anyone to consistently identify photographs from various cameras and lenses if they are similarly specified. Secondly, its not actually about whether photographs look different, its about the capabilities to take the photograph.

I shoot one a variety of cameras and lenses. Depending on my output needs the results can vary from indistinguishable to unique depending on subject matter and how an image is shot. Technical quality can be surprisingly good from many different (sometimes very old) combinations. Aesthetic quality is always subjective and some lovely photographs can be taken on ancient lenses or indeed the latest state-of-the-art lenses. But the ability to use a specific camera to take these infers little about its general viability other than that it can, in certain ircumstances, with a photographer who understands what he/she is doing, work effectively. Which is surely the point of this thread?

 

Yes indeed. It simply cannot be true that only a camera like a rangefinder allows the photographer to be "involved" (whatever that means) and take great photos.  To me the "involvement" piece happens in the photographer's head, whether he or she is seeing through an optical viewfinder or off a mirror or off a sensor or any other way.

 

[ravinj]

On 11/13/2025 at 2:33 AM, Irakly Shanidze said:

It's quite logical indeed: the smaller the file size, the less work for the processor, the less load on the buffer.

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!

Your photographs are some of the best I have seen on this forum.  I remember your earlier photographs from dpreview days, always a pleasure to see your work. Thanks for sharing.

[Irakly Shanidze]

 

Yes indeed. It simply cannot be true that only a camera like a rangefinder allows the photographer to be "involved" (whatever that means) and take great photos.  To me the "involvement" piece happens in the photographer's head, whether he or she is seeing through an optical viewfinder or off a mirror or off a sensor or any other way.

 

There are two real differences in the rangefinder that make the experience different:
1. not seeing the lens perspective distortion, which is relevant for lenses shorter or longer than 50mm (43 to be exact), and other effects of the lens (flare, CA, glow, etc.)
2. no blackout

The former made me learn how each of my lenses behaves, which is, indeed, an involved process. It makes life harder, but also isolates from the visual effects of the lens, which, in turn, results in more meaningful images.

The latter enables me to see if I missed the shot at the moment of capture. This is indeed superior to a photo review option in the EVF because the review temporarily makes one blind to the environment.

[pgk]

12 hours ago, AlanJW said:

Yes indeed. It simply cannot be true that only a camera like a rangefinder allows the photographer to be "involved" (whatever that means) and take great photos.  To me the "involvement" piece happens in the photographer's head, whether he or she is seeing through an optical viewfinder or off a mirror or off a sensor or any other way.

Interestingly I have found that different types of camera can be more effective when used in certain ways. So for example I find that underwater an EVF camera is great for wide-angle work using the rear screen, especially angled where it allows for low shots. I'm not so keen on an EVF underwater for macro although obviously it works. dSLRs work well for both wide-angle or macro underwater, but sometimes the wide-angle view is a little darker than ideal whilst macro is somehow easier to judge (for me) underwater and of course illumination with an appropriate light helps immensely. I suspect that using an EVF sufferes from distracting light spill for me shooting macro. 

Using an EVF camera as a 'digital back' on a medium/large format camera works best using the rear screen as a compositional aid but then checking everything through the viewfinder which reduces distractions. For general photography I much prefer using a Leica M.

Just my observations though. No doubt others will find different solutions works best for them.

Edited November 23 by pgk

[CaliforniTexican]

On 11/22/2025 at 1:30 PM, AlanJW said:

Yes indeed. It simply cannot be true that only a camera like a rangefinder allows the photographer to be "involved" (whatever that means) and take great photos.  To me the "involvement" piece happens in the photographer's head, whether he or she is seeing through an optical viewfinder or off a mirror or off a sensor or any other way.

 

I agree with this.

Some may find they get more "involved" in a scene by looking thru an optical RF. I do not pretend to understand it, or how it can happen, but if you love shooting thru an RF and find it works best for you, then go for it.

I am the opposite. What "involves" me in shooting a scene is knowing I am seeing the exact image (or at least 90+% of it) that, to me, is the goal of the whole process. And knowing I can change lenses and my view will change with it. And knowing I can shoot really wide lenses and really long lenses without fussing with added external magnifiers, viewfinders, "googles," or a Visoflex. And knowing I can count on the viewfinder for precise focus because I didn't need to send my camera off for a months-long CLA to adjust the RF.

I always have seen the attraction of M cameras' size, weight, robustness, simplicity, and access to small, light, robust, outstanding glass. So, to me, by launching an M camera that offers all those benefits plus a modern EV in place of the RF, Leica has started down the path toward developing what may become the world's best camera. The EV1 may not be there yet, but the next round can be spectacular if Leica delivers some EV innovation, particularly around focus aids and focus confirmation.

[newtoleica]

23 minutes ago, CaliforniTexican said:

am the opposite. What "involves" me in shooting a scene is knowing I am seeing the exact image (or at least 90+% of it)

I agree that the RF sweet spot is 35/50mm. You can learn to use 24 and 90mm but framing the 24 precisely and focussing the 90 is a bit variable. That may or may not matter. Beyond that an EVF is needed. The question is a very personal one as to what to prioritise, the superb RF experience or the use of wider/longer lenses. Whether to add in a visioflex or an extra EV body is a trade off on cost/carrying etc. In an ideal world we would all likely get an EV body for the relevant use cases, but for me the Monochrom is my additional body and I can’t justify a third one. Maybe in future when a decent used market develops…. It’s very much a good thing though for Leica to offer the camera, and I hope future developments to extend the usability of the M range. 
 

Why not just get an additional system alongside? No thanks. I want to use my M lenses, that I know and understand on a body designed for them, not some lashed together haptic and optical compromise. 

[Irakly Shanidze]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

On 11/24/2025 at 9:07 AM, newtoleica said:

I agree that the RF sweet spot is 35/50mm. You can learn to use 24 and 90mm but framing the 24 precisely and focussing the 90 is a bit variable. That may or may not matter. Beyond that an EVF is needed. The question is a very personal one as to what to prioritise, the superb RF experience or the use of wider/longer lenses. Whether to add in a visioflex or an extra EV body is a trade off on cost/carrying etc. In an ideal world we would all likely get an EV body for the relevant use cases, but for me the Monochrom is my additional body and I can’t justify a third one. Maybe in future when a decent used market develops…. It’s very much a good thing though for Leica to offer the camera, and I hope future developments to extend the usability of the M range. 
 

Why not just get an additional system alongside? No thanks. I want to use my M lenses, that I know and understand on a body designed for them, not some lashed together haptic and optical compromise. 

I agree, M EV1, depending on the photographer's preferences, can be used either as a full rangefinder replacement or as a specialty tool better suited to situations where RF meets its limitations, such as wide and tele lenses, as well as zooms. Speaking of which, some R zooms are so invidiously excellent that it's a sin not to use them in such a convenient way.

[charlesphoto99]

I finally got a chance to try the EV-1 yesterday, just in the store briefly. I think there was something wrong with the dealer's demo - I couldn't seem to get a sharp image through the viewfinder no matter what I tried. The file would be sharp, just not the view. Or was that just me? 

Anyway, my first impression is that they tore the soul and being out of the M. There's really nothing else like looking at the world through that optical viewfinder (and not just any optical finder, the M one is special). Now it's like looking through any mid-range Sony/Nikon/Canon/Fuji. Yawn. I'd spend (a lot less) money elsewhere if that was what I was after or needed. YMMV of course. 

[pgk]

1 hour ago, Irakly Shanidze said:

 

I agree, M EV1, depending on the photographer's preferences, can be used either as a full rangefinder replacement or as a specialty tool better suited to situations where RF meets its limitations, such as wide ...

Accuracy of wide-angle focus is anything but a limitation as it is highly accurate precisely because the rangefinder is independent of viewing through the lens. Longer lenses are another story but then again they work well with other cameras.

[jdlaing]

6 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

I finally got a chance to try the EV-1 yesterday, just in the store briefly. I think there was something wrong with the dealer's demo - I couldn't seem to get a sharp image through the viewfinder no matter what I tried. The file would be sharp, just not the view. Or was that just me? 

Anyway, my first impression is that they tore the soul and being out of the M. There's really nothing else like looking at the world through that optical viewfinder (and not just any optical finder, the M one is special). Now it's like looking through any mid-range Sony/Nikon/Canon/Fuji. Yawn. I'd spend (a lot less) money elsewhere if that was what I was after or needed. YMMV of course. 

Did you adjust the diopter?

[charlesphoto99]

Just now, jdlaing said:

Did you adjust the diopter?

 

Just now, jdlaing said:

Did you adjust the diopter?

Yes. Maybe I was just expecting too much as far as what the clarity would be (it was dark in the dealer's as well). 

[newtoleica]

21 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Yes. Maybe I was just expecting too much as far as what the clarity would be (it was dark in the dealer's as well).

Likely a lot of noise in the EVF then. Another RF advantage! 

[Smudgerer]

1 hour ago, newtoleica said:

Likely a lot of noise in the EVF then. Another RF advantage! 

Good point............Just one more reason why I dislike EVF's. not just the M EV-i, they tend to break up within the conditions I favour for my images, ie; darkness.........( M EV1?  To be fair I have not seen or tried it, but I have yet to use an EVF that I do like, stills and high end movie cameras alike ).

[charlesphoto99]

1 hour ago, newtoleica said:

Likely a lot of noise in the EVF then. Another RF advantage! 

Yeah, probably it. In the same dim- ish environment, the dealer tried it and couldn't get the focus peaking to peak on what he was trying to focus on. Strange beast. I didn't have time or energy to monkey with settings other than the diopter. It had a 50mm Summicron on it. 

Edited December 5 by charlesphoto99

[charlesphoto99]

46 minutes ago, Smudgerer said:

Good point............Just one more reason why I dislike EVF's. not just the M EV-i, they tend to break up within the conditions I favour for my images, ie; darkness.........( M EV1?  To be fair I have not seen or tried it, but I have yet to use an EVF that I do like, stills and high end movie cameras alike ).

Seriously. Now that I think about it, it was like looking through an old cheap SLR with a 3.5 lens attached. Way easier to focus a contrast patch through the bright clear window - just need to make sure the windows don't get smudged (probably a large source of some people not being able to see the rf patch). 

[AlanJW]

4 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

I finally got a chance to try the EV-1 yesterday, just in the store briefly. I think there was something wrong with the dealer's demo - I couldn't seem to get a sharp image through the viewfinder no matter what I tried. The file would be sharp, just not the view. Or was that just me? 

Anyway, my first impression is that they tore the soul and being out of the M. There's really nothing else like looking at the world through that optical viewfinder (and not just any optical finder, the M one is special). Now it's like looking through any mid-range Sony/Nikon/Canon/Fuji. Yawn. I'd spend (a lot less) money elsewhere if that was what I was after or needed. YMMV of course. 

They did NOT tear the soul and being out of the M.  Nobody has said the evf is a replacement for the rangefinder.  It remains secure within all the other M's.  I happen to like having an alternative way to do things.  Maybe it is my aged and glaucoma damaged eyes.  Maybe I also like using some lenses that don't do so well with the RF.   It just works for me.

[lct]

Glad i kept a good sight after cataract surgery but in the dark, the EVF sees better than i do. Here at night, no focusing issue.
MEV1, Summicron 50/2 v4, f/2, 6400 iso

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!

[charlesphoto99]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Glad i kept a good sight after cataract surgery but in the dark, the EVF sees better than i do. Here at night, no focusing issue.
MEV1, Summicron 50/2 v4, f/2, 6400 iso

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!

Nice tone and mood - better if the bar thing on the right wasn't in the shot - easily removed with AI though - see I'm not a total Luddite.

Depends where you wanted your focus though, I guess. I would have put it on the closer curtain. And done so easily with an RF and these soon to be 62 eyes. I have yet to see a shot (here) that couldn't have been focused and composed just as easily with the RF. But it's also not my money, and the dealer said they sold out their first batch. I can see the occasional usefulness, It's just that $9k doesn't cut it - for me. That's what the sub-$300 used 020 Visoflex is in the bag for. 

Edited December 5 by charlesphoto99

[charlesphoto99]

2 hours ago, AlanJW said:

They did NOT tear the soul and being out of the M.  Nobody has said the evf is a replacement for the rangefinder.  It remains secure within all the other M's.  I happen to like having an alternative way to do things.  Maybe it is my aged and glaucoma damaged eyes.  Maybe I also like using some lenses that don't do so well with the RF.   It just works for me.

For me it felt soulless and like shooting underwater. A lot like the other rows of cabinets of new cameras that all now have mini-TV's in them. But I'm glad it works for you. Truly. I will have to see if I can give it more time - a dealer hovering over you, knowing you have zero interest in purchasing, in a dimly lit camera store, is not the best test condition. 

I do think a lot of the whining about this and that with the classic viewfinder has more to do with GAS over wanting to get the EV1 (or whatever else is the latest from Leica) than anything. The M rangefinder is not easy to master without lots of practice, yet the M is coveted by so many as the end all, be all, until they actually try and use it. And then want to start throwing edge cases at it like close up and superwide and long lenses and get frustrated (no kidding).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lct]

5 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Nice tone and mood - better if the bar thing on the right wasn't in the shot - easily removed with AI though - see I'm not a total Luddite. Depends where you wanted your focus though, I guess. I would have put it on the closer curtain. And done so easily with an RF and these soon to be 62 eyes. [...]

That would not be my photo then but i'm not sure what AI, age and RFs have to do with this snap i shot to show what the MEV1 can do. I guess i could do the same with my M11 but i would have used the Visoflex 2 since i was in perspective control mode. No RF then anyway sorry.