My Take on the Leica MEV-1 Electronic Viewfinder — A Letdown?

[un-342]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’ve been using the Leica MEV-1 for a while now, and honestly, I’m pretty disappointed. The 60 fps refresh rate feels dated, especially once you’re used to smoother EVFs. Compared to the Q3’s 120 fps, the MEV-1 feels laggy and less responsive.In low light, it’s even worse. The image gets muddy, judging focus and exposure becomes difficult, and it’s just not pleasant to work with. On top of that, the resolution seems surprisingly low — far from what I’d expect at this level.

There’s also a very pronounced banding effect that looks genuinely awful in use. What makes it even more frustrating is that I never experienced anything like this on my Q2 — and that’s a significantly older camera.

So I’m wondering: am I missing some critical settings, or is this simply a weak EVF by today’s standards? Compared to modern Leica bodies like the Q3, the MEV-1 feels clearly behind. Curious if others feel the same or have found ways to improve it.

[jaapv]

What you are missing is that this camera is a solution for those who can’t or won’t use the rangefinder but insist on staying within the M system. It is not meant as any kind of challenge to a modern mirrorless camera, it is a variation on the M11 based on the request of a limited group of customers. The EVF is obviously limited by the electronics and CPU that are slanted towards the donor camera and certainly improved over the Visoflex. If it suits your requirements it is an excellent solution, if your expectations are different, well, due diligence rules. 

[un-342]

I understand the positioning and the intent behind the camera, and I agree it’s not meant to compete with modern mirrorless systems. That said, being a niche solution doesn’t automatically justify strongly visible banding, poor low-light usability, or an EVF that feels three generations behind.

What makes this harder to reconcile is that the Q2 — which is significantly older — didn’t show these issues at all, so it’s difficult to explain this purely as a “different use case.” Saying it’s not a mirrorless challenger explains the concept, but it doesn’t really address the technical shortcomings that are clearly visible in use.

I’m still genuinely wondering whether there’s some setting I’m overlooking that could improve this, or if this is simply the harsh reality of the MEV-1.

[jaapv]

Banding should not occur, I agree,  but it should not occur on an EVF “three generations behind” either. The problem almost certainly originates in electronics that were not designed for an EVF (or rather only for the less demanding Visoflex) which cannot cope with a more sophisticated demand. I expect/hope that can fix the banding problem in an update. The Q was designed for EVF  from the ground up, a completely different proposition, so a comparison is not very valid.

[lct]

Got a couple flickering and banding issues with the MEV1 recently. Setting Exposure preview to Off or Shutter Button Half-Pressed did fix the issue apparently. Since then, my MEV1 works as well as does my M11 with Visoflex 2. Still the best mirrorless and rangefinder cameras for M lenses respectively, so nothing new since this thread AFAIC.

[jaapv]

You are clearly a target customer. Congratulations.😄

[M Street Photographer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Basically, apart from the viewfinder, we have an M11, so both are identical in terms of quality. The EVF resolution is comparable to that of the Q3/43, with almost 6 MP. I recommend first testing a Q3/43 and changing the refresh rate from 120 to 60; you'll then find there's practically no difference. I don't know to what extent this affects low-light performance. You describe "stripes"—what exactly do you mean by that? Or do you mean the rolling shutter?