gammarART wrote:
In my opinion, the Q3(43) EVF is nothing special in practice. More like just okay. The SL2/3 models, on the other hand, are much, much better. But it’s unlikely to find much space in an M body.
I'm curious if Leica is using the exact same 5,760,000 Dot OLED panel for all of these models and the only difference between the implementation in these cameras are the optics. If so, that might suggest we will also see this panel in the upcoming EVF M.
1bwana1 wrote:
How are they going to implement touch AF? M mount lenses have neither electronic communication with the camera, nor motors with which to do AF. The M platform is manual focus and always will be. The Q line is fixed lens, and always will be. The SL line is about build, weather sealing, and a lens line that is entirely image quality orientated. Size, weight, and form factor is not a priority for SL.
It will take an entirely new line of both bodies, and lenses for Leica to have a small form factor, interchangeable lens, auto focus camera line. The M platform is Leica's unique point of difference. It will never have AF....Show more →
It would be smart for Leica to reissue all lens with a chip to report lens id, aperture, and distance, like Voigtlander does with Nikon cameras. This will help with focus assist, and with exif data, and probably with flash.
olegkin wrote:
It would be smart for Leica to reissue all lens with a chip to report lens id, aperture, and distance, like Voigtlander does with Nikon cameras. This will help with focus assist, and with exif data, and probably with flash.
Agreed, many advanced feature like IBIS and focus confirmations require this. There is also precedence for such a change. 6 Bit encoding was instituted to enable modern corrections, and EXIF reporting. The next step is electronic communications. It will require both new cameras and lenses to take advantage of what this offers. But maybe the time has come. It should be possible to do this without compromising compatibility with legacy camera and lenses just like 6 Bit encoding.
joakim wrote:
So isn't this the L-mount you are talking about now?
No, the L mount is auto focus orientated, has a different diameter, distance to the sensor, and is focus by wire. The electronic communication enabled M mount will remain manual focus, have the same diameter, distance to the sensor, and remain driven mechanically for focus. Very different mounts.
Jul 07, 2025 at 02:26 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
joakim wrote:
So isn't this the L-mount you are talking about now?
To add to what 1bwana1 wrote there are two mounts for current Leica cameras. Leica M cameras have the Leica M mount which as he described does not have electrical contacts, but does have a reader on some cameras that reads a code of black and white oval on the lens to identify some lenses (these are called 6-bit coded lenses). This mount sits 27.8mm from the sensor or film.
L-mount is a much newer mount and although I am sure the L is meant to be an allusion to Leica it is actually specified by a consortium of camera and lens makers--the L mount alliance, which include Leica, Panasonic, and Sigma most prominently. L mount cameras from all three manufacturers have full electronic contacts and support AF. The L-mount sits 20mm from the sensor. Leica SL cameras all have an L mount (so of course can use L mount lenses), but can also use M mount lenses with an adapter. M mount cameras cannot use L mount lenses.
The rumor is that the new Leica M11V, if that is what it is called, will have an M mount. It would be the first M mount camera with a built-in EVF, although the last three generations of Leica M cameras have had an optional attachable external EVF.
Fred Miranda wrote:
IMO, the most important aspect of an EVF is magnification because it directly affects how "immersive" the experience feels. Second is resolution, which brings clarity to fine detail and helps with focus precision, which is crucial with manual lenses.
I second this statement from my own experience - I am still using a now outdated EVF of my original Sony A7R in combination with attached manual focus lenses. The magnification is the most critical for me when using EVF - very important especially when using it for close-up and macro photography which I often do with the A7R. The resolution is by far less critical.
I continue to keep carefully optimistic about this M-V. I don't expect too perfect specs since this is the first in line for Leica of this type of camera model. Leica wants to test the waters with it, and if it holds up to the interest raised by many customers to have such model including myself. Only one thing is 100% sure with the M-V - it will be outrageously expensive for an EVF-based camera.
Steve Spencer wrote:
L-mount is a much newer mount and although I am sure the L is meant to be an allusion to Leica it is actually specified by a consortium of camera and lens makers--the L mount alliance, which include Leica, Panasonic, and Sigma most prominently. L mount cameras from all three manufacturers have full electronic contacts and support AF. The L-mount sits 20mm from the sensor. Leica SL cameras all have an L mount (so of course can use L mount lenses), but can also use M mount lenses with an adapter. M mount cameras cannot use L mount lenses.
The rumor is that the new Leica M11V, if that is what it is called, will have an M mount. It would be the first M mount camera with a built-in EVF, although the last three generations of Leica M cameras have had an optional attachable external EVF....Show more →
The thing that is very interesting about the L-mount is that it was initially developed by Leica for it's own cameras - the APS Leica T when it was first called the Leica T-mount and then the full frame Leica SL when Leica changed the name to Leica L-mount. Only later was the L-mount alliance announced with Panasonic and Sigma.
Even for Leica, it might be extremely "niche" to create and release all new versions of manual focus M-mount lenses with electronic contacts with the ability to relay aperture info, particularly when you already have the L-mount. I would imagine (and maybe I'm wrong) that to do so would involve a major re-engineering of the lens. My guess would be that we are more likely to see future EVF M mount cameras as very niche on their own (like Monochom M's) rather than see an entirely new generation of electronic M lenses created.
retrofocus wrote:
Only one thing is 100% sure with the M-V - it will be outrageously expensive for an EVF-based camera.
Since Leica M's are already outrageously expensive, for the first time since the M9, I might find myself passing on this model.
Just to say the Hasselblad X2D, MF nonetheless, is $8200 with many bells a whistles we want in an M, like nice EVF and IBIS (7stops here), ignoring AF ,etc,etc. and $99 3400 mAh battery
It has been some years since Leica offered any M camera for that price, even without bells and whistles.
stgrove wrote:
Since Leica M's are already outrageously expensive, for the first time since the M9, I might find myself passing on this model.
Just to say the Hasselblad X2D, MF nonetheless, is $8200 with many bells a whistles we want in an M, like nice EVF and IBIS (7stops here), ignoring AF ,etc,etc. and $99 3400 mAh battery
It has been some years since Leica offered any M camera for that price, even without bells and whistles.
Yes, the recent Hasselblad offerings are attractive for many reasons. But they do not provide a similar form factor, shooting experience, or lens and body ecosystem of the Leica M. I see them as more closely as an alternative to Leica SL where cost is actually a bit in Leica's favor new, and strongly so used.
Reasonable photographers will tilt in either direction.
1bwana1 wrote:
Yes, the recent Hasselblad offerings are attractive for many reasons. But they do not provide a similar form factor, shooting experience, or lens and body ecosystem of the Leica M. I see them as more closely as an alternative to Leica SL where cost is actually a bit in Leica's favor new, and strongly so used.
Reasonable photographers will tilt in either direction.
Agreed.. X2D vs SL-3.
The A7CR is competition for the M-V in that most people will go with the A7CR, but these aren’t the customers that Leica is targeting. The A7CR is a quite capable camera, but when Sony used a low resolution viewfinder they made this camera far less fun to use. Is there anything shot on the M11 that can’t be duplicated using the A7CR.. not much. Even the amazing Zeiss Loxia lenses are available and manual focusing is easy using the A7Rv.. easy but not as pleasant to use on the A7CR. Leica must use a great EVF to make this new camera successful.
I must admit I tried Sony way back when they started with the mirrorless, but never felt ay one with the camera. Do standard Sonys utilize M lenses well or are conversions necessary?
stgrove wrote:
I must admit I tried Sony way back when they started with the mirrorless, but never felt ay one with the camera. Do standard Sonys utilize M lenses well or are conversions necessary?
I am okay using Sony E-mount cameras - I only use less than 10% of its electronic functions it offers (AF is one of them since I mostly use it with manual focus lenses). In 2014 it was one of the most feasible EVF-based cameras to be used with rangefinder M lenses, but its bit thicker sensor glass caused some issues with wide and ultra-wide lenses in the corners. I used it well with CornerFix software for five years until I jumped into my first digital M. At this point, I read Nikon Zf is probably one of the best third party camera alternatives to Leica M due to its similar sensor glass thickness.
Regarding the M-V, I am interested in it but not for the original price it will cost - my suspicion is it will be more than the Hasselblad due to luxury brand pricing. I might have to wait > 3-4 years to get the M-V for a more reasonable price used depending on initial test results.
The magnification is the most critical for me when using EVF - very important especially when using it for close-up and macro photography which I often do with the A7R. The resolution is by far less critical.
It is certainly the most reliable way to confirm correct focus, unfortunately, it is a slow process - framing, magnifying, framing again, and on moving subjects, perhaps repeating a few times.
Picture in picture, once you are used to it, can be much faster and just as reliable. A small extra evf portion in one corner with 10X central area magnification (or perhaps user set for anywhere in the screen), allows an overall framing view and a clear magnification view. Easy. The best of both worlds.
There are lots of cameras that can produce images similar to those produced on Leica cameras. Especially true when sharing digitally. But none offer an M shooting or ownership experience for many reasons. Almost any car will get you from point A to point B. But there is a special experience when driving a Porsche 911 to get there. Experiences cost more than either images, or transportation.
The massive advantage of the M system over Hasselblad, is the potential for using exquisitely small lenses, making the overall package so much smaller, and so portable.
wolfloid wrote:
The massive advantage of the M system over Hasselblad, is the potential for using exquisitely small lenses, making the overall package so much smaller, and so portable.
Agree, I carry my M11 with three M lenses and supporting equipment for cleaning, spare battery, and filter set, in a very small bag designed to hold just a Q3. So nice and portable I carry it almost everywhere I go. Not going to do that with the Hasselblad.
