edwardkaraa wrote:
The hybrid viewfinder is impossible to make for non fixed lens cameras. However I have been the advocate of a 2 camera solution, one classic M and one with an EVF, sort of like a Q with interchangeable lenses. I know I would use the M 90% of the time but there is always a place for an EVF based camera, especially for wides (though manually focusing wides with EVF even with magnification isn't very practical either) macro shots and long lenses. The A7 doesn't do the trick for me because of the thick sensor glass, posterization issues, loud shutter, and general body design that doesn't appeal to me. ...Show more →
The Fuji X-Pro 1 has a hybrid viewfinder and is not fixed lens. So it can and has been done.
Arka wrote:
Too bad for Lloyd, but I totally disagree with him on this point;
That's a feature to me, and quite the opposite of "appalling." I can't recall how many times I've left the set the self timer, and then forgotten to turn it off! I found myself wishing that the camera would just force me to set the damn thing, rather than stay on until I remember to turn it off (usually at the expense of an image or two).
I guess it just goes to show how personal everyone's view of "real photography" is.
There at the very least should be a menu option to avoid this "feature". I can't imagine dealing with this for every shot in those situations where I might use the self timer for a large series of shots. Is this the behavior with all Leica's, including the S?
rattymouse wrote:
The Fuji X-Pro 1 has a hybrid viewfinder and is not fixed lens. So it can and has been done.
Have you tried the x-pro 1? I'm asking because I have no first hand experience but from my readings I understand the viewfinder is very poor compared to the x100 and has a few problems especially with non Fuji lenses.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Have you tried the x-pro 1? I'm asking because I have no first hand experience but from my readings I understand the viewfinder is very poor compared to the x100 and has a few problems especially with non Fuji lenses.
Thre X Pro-1 suffers from 2 issues with its hybrid finder.
1. It's lower magnification than the X100 because it's got to fit 27mm-e framelines (for the 18/2) vs 35mm-e framelines.
2. That also negatively impacts the EVF since the optics are shared, and it already shares the X100's less than stellar EVF implementation.
Hybrid finders are quite doable if you're willing to invest in the requisite optics to do them right. Fuji has not as of yet, which is why the X100 series finder is adequate at best (seriously, for a camera which costs on par with a Zeiss Ikon, the finder is a crying shame in comparison on the X100/s/t) and the X Pro-1's finder is even weaker.
An X Pro-2 will benefit from the significant improvments that have occured in the X100 series development, but will also suffer if it has to offer framelines wider than 35mm-e. I frankly expect it to either have 35mm-e as the widest framelines (for the 23/1.4) or 24mm-e as the widest (for the new 16/1.4). I don't see Fuji having the less than popular 18 as the widest supported lens for the optical finder.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Have you tried the x-pro 1? I'm asking because I have no first hand experience but from my readings I understand the viewfinder is very poor compared to the x100 and has a few problems especially with non Fuji lenses.
I have, but that was back when it first came out. I didnt think it was any poorer than the X100, just different because the field of view changes once you change lens. The 60mm field of view is quite tiny compared to wide angle lenses. I've never used a Leica before so I cannot compare the experience between two cameras.
Nor did I try the camera with any non Fuji lenses.
There seems to be a lot of fans of the X Pro 1, who are suffering a lot because that camera is now 3+ years old without an update. They desperately want to get something new, specifically because that model has the hybrid viewfinder. I think their loyalty to this camera shows how positive the feeling is towards the hybrid viewfinder.
Mawz, RM, I have no doubt it's possible. When I said impossible, I mean in Leica standards. All OVF I have seen in smaller cameras have a low viewing quality, tunnel vision, distortion, CA. The OVF is like a lens, it consists of several glass elements and requires a minimum length to be effective.
I know all cameras have various ergonomic and menu system foibles like this, but with all the talking about Leica's prices being partially justified by the clean elegant control systems, I have to post http://diglloyd.com/blog/2015/20150711_1806-LeicaQ-AF-files.html
I should probably post all of his pieces about how many times his M240 has crashed, too...
Lee Saxon wrote:
I know all cameras have various ergonomic and menu system foibles like this, but with all the talking about Leica's prices being partially justified by the clean elegant control systems, I have to post http://diglloyd.com/blog/2015/20150711_1806-LeicaQ-AF-files.html
I should probably post all of his pieces about how many times his M240 has crashed, too...
Sorry, I have to poke the Leica fans a little
So, if I'm following Lloyd, the camera AF did not in fact fail or malfunction, he just did not bother to read how the camera operates (even if it is unintuitive)?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
So, if I'm following Lloyd, the camera AF did not in fact fail or malfunction, he just did not bother to read how the camera operates (even if it is unintuitive)?
Yeah, I wasn't referring to the initial problem, I was referring to the convoluted resolution.
One should certainly not believe everything they read - especially from Lloyd. I honestly don't think he has a clue when it comes to all things Leica....
Lee Saxon wrote:
I know all cameras have various ergonomic and menu system foibles like this, but with all the talking about Leica's prices being partially justified by the clean elegant control systems, I have to post http://diglloyd.com/blog/2015/20150711_1806-LeicaQ-AF-files.html
I should probably post all of his pieces about how many times his M240 has crashed, too...
Sorry, I have to poke the Leica fans a little
Well, my M240 crashed a lot too until the most recent software update. I would say that update reduced crashes by at least 90%, though I can still cause the camera to have issues when using live view.
About Lloyd, I didn't comment because I knew that's what he had done. The second I read that it still focused manually (keep in mind this is a fly by wire MF camera).. I though he should check his settings.
I've had AF fail on me from a lens (85L mk1 and nothing worked, fixed by Canon CA in three days w/no charge BTW), but I've not had AF fail on a body to the point where it wouldn't drive the lens. So my understanding of him being able to MF w/FBY working and camera not working, was that the settings were off.
Admittedly, my AF settings went wonky this morning. I noticed the camera had magically set itself to AF-C + FaceDetect. And I was scratching my head for three seconds before I decided to do the first thing one does when AF doesn't work, check settings! (I generally keep it on AF-S + CenterPoint.)
I've had M240 cameras reset on me a few times back to standard settings.. Which is why I HATE that default on the M is JPG mode
Arka wrote:
Well, my M240 crashed a lot too until the most recent software update. I would say that update reduced crashes by at least 90%, though I can still cause the camera to have issues when using live view.
I won't get into details, but let's just say I've had a LOT of M240/M-P cameras for various reasons.. Most were incredibly stable. But I did have a few problems here and there so I feel your pain.
So far, the Q has been stable.. I think the AF thing is weird, since nothing else got changed setting wise, just AF.
Haha come on guys you're taking my post way too seriously. Surely we're not too proud to admit that although he should've read the manual the way he eventually found the system to work is pretty crazy.
Lee Saxon wrote:
Haha come on guys you're taking my post way too seriously. Surely we're not too proud to admit that although he should've read the manual the way he eventually found the system to work is pretty crazy.
Given Lloyd's more prominent position as a paid camera reviewer that runs a site based on a subscription fee model, I do think he should be held to a higher standard and at least read the manual, particularly before he quite publicly denounces a camera as a POS.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Mawz, RM, I have no doubt it's possible. When I said impossible, I mean in Leica standards. All OVF I have seen in smaller cameras have a low viewing quality, tunnel vision, distortion, CA. The OVF is like a lens, it consists of several glass elements and requires a minimum length to be effective.
It's quite possible to do to Leica standards. I'd rate the X100 & X-Pro1's OVF as comparable to a .58 finder on an M7. Not as bright and easy to focus with as the higher-magnification finders, but optically quite good.
