bwcolor wrote:
I’m old, my eyesight isn’t bad, but my reaction time is diminished. I think that the best tool for those with reduced eyesight is a great autofocus system, such as what Sony offers. There are so many great small lenses, fast lenses and high optical quality lenses in the Sony lineup. Why bother with manual focus at all with poor eyesight. If you must go manual focus, try the Loxia series of lenses on an A7Rv. These are all great alternatives for those with poor eyesight.
Loved the loxia line, but there were no fast primes. The A7C comes close with Voigtlander glass.
Oct 23, 2025 at 12:41 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
old-gregg wrote:
Steven, I hear what you're saying. But it doesn't land on a personal level. I own two film Ms and as my vision had been getting worse, I was hoping that this camera would be for me. I've been waiting for it, sold some equipment to beef up my budget. But now I can tell that the Nikon Zf with a Voigtlander is a better camera for "this type of a shooter".
Yes, the Nikon Zf will be a compelling product for such a shooter, but it is bigger, has a noticeably smaller EVF, and a much lower resolution sensor. Plus you either have a pretty small set of Voigtlander lenses or you have to deal with lenses not optimized for the sensor. It will still be an option some will choose.
I am one of these types of shooter and I have switched to a Fuji X-T5 with Voigtlander lenses. I like that setup, but it has a smaller sensor and a smaller EVF and a smaller selection of lenses.
The EV1 is a bit unique in having such a large EVF in such a small package with such a great high resolution FF sensor, and it will work without sensor modification with almost all M mount lenses.
bwcolor wrote:
Unrealistic expectations are on you and me.. not Leica. We were not the target audience. They produced a camera without spending much money on development and I suspect that they are looking for a very small niche audience.
M12 without innovation will be a big disappointment and would be Leica’s fault.
I consider myself the target audience. They missed by a wide margin.
Oct 23, 2025 at 12:57 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
rscheffler wrote:
So why not use a PD capable sensor? It could have been as 'simple' as using the one from the a7RIV/V, which already exists. They've had a couple years or so since the M11 to figure this out.
I disagree. A good MF implementation with PD assist can make MF very fast (certainly often fast enough) and as accurate as AF (somewhat dependent on user reflexes, skill and coordination), while providing the photographer more control over focus. It would have made the EV1 usable for dynamic situations where focus peaking is too imprecise (especially with 60MP) and magnified view far too slow. It's basically Leica pre-deciding for users that this camera should primarily be used for 'considered' shooting. Yet the M has traditionally been a camera for spontaneity. I used the M frequently in highly dynamic situations and MF with the rangefinder was eminently usable. I now primarily use AF cameras in such situations and there are more than a handful of times when the very fast AF still messes up and I could have done the job just as well with a good MF implementation.
It will find an audience and once the initial release disappointment settles, it will probably end up being better accepted than the initial responses here suggest. Leica certainly knows their customers and apparently this is precisely what some requested, as much as it baffles/disappoints me.
Wow, the LSI folks have really low expectations!
Leica can take my feature request now, based on today's release:
M12 with PD capable sensor that has focus confirmation integrated with the optical viewfinder. Usable e-shutter (at least 1/60 readout/scan speed). EFCS.
I think the simple reason to not use an PD capable sensor is they want to use the same sensor as the M11. Leica doesn't use a lot of different sensors. They of course could have done so, but it doesn't surprise me that they didn't.
Oct 23, 2025 at 01:01 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
rscheffler wrote:
So why not use a PD capable sensor? It could have been as 'simple' as using the one from the a7RIV/V, which already exists. They've had a couple years or so since the M11 to figure this out.
I disagree. A good MF implementation with PD assist can make MF very fast (certainly often fast enough) and as accurate as AF (somewhat dependent on user reflexes, skill and coordination), while providing the photographer more control over focus. It would have made the EV1 usable for dynamic situations where focus peaking is too imprecise (especially with 60MP) and magnified view far too slow. It's basically Leica pre-deciding for users that this camera should primarily be used for 'considered' shooting. Yet the M has traditionally been a camera for spontaneity. I used the M frequently in highly dynamic situations and MF with the rangefinder was eminently usable. I now primarily use AF cameras in such situations and there are more than a handful of times when the very fast AF still messes up and I could have done the job just as well with a good MF implementation.
It will find an audience and once the initial release disappointment settles, it will probably end up being better accepted than the initial responses here suggest. Leica certainly knows their customers and apparently this is precisely what some requested, as much as it baffles/disappoints me.
Wow, the LSI folks have really low expectations!
Leica can take my feature request now, based on today's release:
M12 with PD capable sensor that has focus confirmation integrated with the optical viewfinder. Usable e-shutter (at least 1/60 readout/scan speed). EFCS.
I agree that PD assist can make focus very fast even in dynamic situations, I just don't see many people who want that and not prefer AF. I think in dynamic situations most people want really good AF, and are happy with just that. Maybe I am wrong, however.
crazeazn wrote:
I have a question for those in this thread. How quickly can you focus an M9/10/11 etc. on a non-centered subject wide open with a fast prime such as a 35/50 f/1.4? How does this time compare to using an m-lens adapted to an SL/RF/ZF, etc. in the same scenario? For me, it's roughly about the same time, and given the fact that the megapixel count is so high, there isn't much forgiveness when I miss focus. This product is precisely what I want for my poor eyesight: a compact camera (no EVF hump) to use natively with M lenses and an EVF in low-light situations. There really isn't an alternative....Show more →
For portraits on Nikon, I set a large focus box with eye focus and shoot while checking composition and background. I get 100% in-focus images instantly, every time I press the shutter. It doesn’t matter, within limits, whether the subject is stationary or moving. It even focuses on the eyes of a dancer leaping through the air, which is good enough for me. But if I had M camera, I would not shoot jumping dancers with it on purpose if I had something more suitable. M camera would be edc/travel camera where fast focus does not matter much.
This is basically the same user experience as putting the EVF on the M11, which to be honest is pretty bad. I couldn't get rid of my Visoflex fast enough. Ive actually started buying Voigtlander glass in Z mount when I want to use small manual focus glass because the user experience is so much better. Focus confirmation without zooming, including eye-detection is light years ahead of moving a focus point around with a D-pad and pressing a button to zoom in then back out.
One serious advantage of using a regular M w the added EVF, is that EVF can provide for low/different angle shooting as it pivots.
The new M EVF has a fixed screen so you cannot do that.
fleeja wrote:
This is basically the same user experience as putting the EVF on the M11, which to be honest is pretty bad. I couldn't get rid of my Visoflex fast enough. Ive actually started buying Voigtlander glass in Z mount when I want to use small manual focus glass because the user experience is so much better. Focus confirmation without zooming, including eye-detection is light years ahead of moving a focus point around with a D-pad and pressing a button to zoom in then back out.
It'll be in the M EV2 (M12 variant).
It should have less lag than the Visoflex 2 and of course better clarity when zoomed. Most of us have been plodding along without Zf-style manual focus for years, so this is no big deal for those of us tired of the rangefinder and lens alignment BS.
olegkin wrote:
For portraits on Nikon, I set a large focus box with eye focus and shoot while checking composition and background. I get 100% in-focus images instantly, every time I press the shutter. It doesn’t matter, within limits, whether the subject is stationary or moving. It even focuses on the eyes of a dancer leaping through the air, which is good enough for me. But if I had M camera, I would not shoot jumping dancers with it on purpose if I has something more suitable. It would be edc/travel camera where fast focus does not matter much.
I was watching YouTube reviews stating that using OVF would be faster than using the EVF on this M EV1, so I just wanted to point out my particular scenario.
For giggles, I just looked at the dimensions between the Voigtlander 35 1.4 Sony and M-Mount, the dimensions and weight are not even close:
M: ø: 2.2 x L: 1.1" / ø: 55 x L: 28.5 mm / 6.67 oz / 189 g
Sony: ø: 2.64 x L: 1.56" / ø: 67 x L: 39.6 mm / 9.24 oz / 262 g
I think this may be the weird scenario, where I am the target audience. I want a small + compact manual focus only setup where I can use fairly small lenses near wide open. If I want AF, I will use a different system/brand.
crazeazn wrote:
I was watching YouTube reviews stating that using OVF would be faster than using the EVF on this M EV1, so I just wanted to point out my particular scenario.
For giggles, I just looked at the dimensions between the Voigtlander 35 1.4 Sony and M-Mount, the dimensions and weight are not even close:
M: ø: 2.2 x L: 1.1" / ø: 55 x L: 28.5 mm / 6.67 oz / 189 g
Sony: ø: 2.64 x L: 1.56" / ø: 67 x L: 39.6 mm / 9.24 oz / 262 g
I think this may be the weird scenario, where I am the target audience. I want a small + compact manual focus only setup where I can use fairly small lenses near wide open. If I want AF, I will use a different system/brand.
NJPhotographer wrote:
The SL series offers interchangeable AF lenses, with an option to use M lenses, but the SL bodies and their AF lenses are giants compared to the M series. Wouldn't it make sense to create an autofocus M-size & style camera, just like the Q/Q2/Q3, but with interchangeable AF lenses? (And I don't mean APS-C, like the TL and CL.)
It would make sense in theory - and it could happen if the SL was high in demand and selling well - which is not the case. Leica committed to the L-mount in the past, and it will hold this up until it can no longer sustain. An autofocus M-size & style camera with AF capability and using smaller lenses would definitely bite deeply into the SL sales. Therefore it won't be happening.
You can see already just by reading this thread and others how protective Leica was with the EV1 to avoid any kind of in-house competition with other cameras (M, Q, SL). It is very obvious.
Everything is about what I expected, but the FPS for the EVF is too low. 60fps is really choppy so that is really the dealbreaker. Everything else is okay, not horrible, not great.
For my use, I find the downside of the Visoflex 2 to be more acceptable than the downside of an external LCD screen that doesn’t tilt. I often shoot with my VF2 tilted 90 degrees when shooting in some candid situations.
SlowDriver wrote: rscheffler wrote:
especially at a price point that is $1,600 higher than the Hasselblad X2Dii...
I applaud the idea and the fact that the camera is lighter (484g) but that is about it.
The size difference is not inconsequential. I carried an X2D and a small P series lens for a walkabout day with family. The next day I switch to my M10R. Riding shotgun in my truck the X2D size difference is no biggie. But, out for an all day carry, it's heft was differentiated by quite a bit (imo).
How does that play into value proposition, etc. ... not defending it, just saying the apples and oranges felt more like cherries and grapefruits, in practice.
