I just went down the rabbit hole of researching the Leica's portfolio of technologies/capabilities. And after ~20 minutes, it looks like the EV1 is handicapped by the M11 tech. The most notable is that the Maestro IV SoC wasn't ready for the M11, and is not used in the EV1. Implementing the Nikon-style manual focus assist without this chip would have been difficult. The PDAF integration and AI subject detection are not available in Maestro III.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Maybe it could have been even easier for Leica to just use the Q3 sensor as it is a hybrid phase detect sensor?
But if they were doing that I think this would have been marketed as an interchangeable lens Q rather than an EVF M. Leica wants to market this as an M not a Q, so to me it isn't surprising that they used the M sensor and not the Q sensor. They could have used the Q sensor, but they chose not to do so. One thing that they get from not having PDAF sensors is they avoid some of the questions of why this camera doesn't have an L mount. It is a camera for M lenses not a camera for L lenses.
Steve Spencer wrote:
But if they were doing that I think this would have been marketed as an interchangeable lens Q rather than an EVF M. Leica wants to market this as an M not a Q, so to me it isn't surprising that they used the M sensor and not the Q sensor.
Makes one wonder why Leica actually went with the Q style body covering vs traditional M pattern. They seem to be conflicted a bit. Maybe this camera was designed by committee!
Oct 23, 2025 at 02:45 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
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.
Well one important difference is that the EV1 has a much bigger and nicer EVF than the Visoflex, so I don't think it will be the same user experience. I agree with demolicious that the tilt feature of the Visoflex is nice, but I am quite sure the bigger EVF in the EV1 will also be nice.
I managed to spend some time with the EV1 last night. I used Nick Rains’ camera and asked the appropriate questions.
1. The AF aids are due to the processor. Leica considered more advanced focus aids but the Maestro 3 can’t handle them.
2. The focus experience is somewhat better than the Q3. There’s something about the purely mechanical lenses that really helps.
3. The EVF is vastly better than the Visoflex.
4. It’s much faster to focus with longer lenses and slower with wider lenses than the M11.
5. 64GB of memory disappoints.
6. The peaking has been tweaked for improved performance.
I was using the camera in a dimly lit bar. Focusing, for me, was pretty easy, even without focusing aids. Similar to my experience with the X2D2 and V lenses, but smaller. I don’t think this camera is for everyone but if you like M’s but your eyes say no to the RF, this is the best option. Sure the Zf has better mf aids but there’s a reason people still use Q’s and M’s over those larger cameras.
My thoughts exactly... But I think it's safe to say, despite having the same battery as an M11, the EV1's battery life will be worse than the M11, but slightly better than the M10 (which wasn't good to begin with).
Desmolicious wrote:
Who here is going to talk about battery life?
flash wrote:
1. The AF aids are due to the processor. Leica considered more advanced focus aids but the Maestro 3 can’t handle them.
That is disappointing that Leica didn't upgrade the processor power for what is effectively a totally digital camera body. It would seem the processor is the most important part of ensuring a good experience there. If Fuji and Nikon are able to do it, for Leica's price, you'd assume they would be able to figure it out as well. The lack of innovation in focusing is disappointing and probably the reason why I'll skip this generation, though I am generally interested in an EV-based M as a companion to my M11.
TheEyesHaveIt wrote:
That is disappointing that Leica didn't upgrade the processor power for what is effectively a totally digital camera body. It would seem the processor is the most important part of ensuring a good experience there. If Fuji and Nikon are able to do it, for Leica's price, you'd assume they would be able to figure it out as well. The lack of innovation in focusing is disappointing and probably the reason why I'll skip this generation, though I am generally interested in an EV-based M as a companion to my M11.
Of course they CAN do it. Why WOULD they when they don't and still charge over $9000?
Today was a great day for me. I got a new update (WB) for my M11-D and the new EV-1 just reinforced how much I enjoy the range finder experience. Even if my eyesight was failing me today, the EV-1 would not fill that need w/ its exisitng offering and go to market price point. Honestly, if I needed an EVF camera to solely shoot my M mount lenses, I would buy a leica SL Typ 601.
Today, I kept $8900 in my pocket, hell I may treat myself to a new lens. j/k
RustyBug wrote:
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.
I wasn't directly trying to compare both cameras or both experiences, just saying that I find it rather mind blowing that the M EV1 costs $1,600 more than the X2Dii (and $1,500 more than the SL3 for that matter) for a lot less camera. That being said, I do believe there is an audience for an EVF-based M-mount camera and as this is the only show in town it most certainly will find an audience.
Checking out some of the reviews on YT, now I'm really scratching my head why Leica wouldn't put a Maestro IV processor in the new/latest product line to get better startup time and the ability to add better manual focus assist options, etc.
But I guess we'll get a green Safari version of the M-EV1 before we get a new processor...
old-gregg wrote:
Because when looking at Canon's and Nikon's manual focus assist implementations, we probably have assumed that Leica, being the stallward guardian of the manual focusing experience, will release something even more advanced. If you follow Leicarumors site, you probably have seen various mockups of what that could have been.
Instead, they released the laziest MF assist implementation imaginable: a magnifier+edge highlighting. This turns the EV1 into, literally, the worst focusing camera in the world. It doesn't autofocus, and its manual focus is of the most basic type.
I follow Leicarumors and they said it was based on the Maestro III processor (which means M11) for a while. The moment they released that tidbit - it was very clear it's going to be a minimally viable product release. Anything beyond that was wishful thinking. None of the functionality that people are dreaming for exists on the Q3 or SL3 either, which is one generation ahead.
This is clearly a testing the waters release for the M12 variant of this at some future point. Leica is not known to take big bold risks as a business - they are a test and iterate business - every release is incrementally better in one dimension but that's it.
As for the Nikon manual focus implementation- it's great and I enjoyed using it on the Nikon ZF. However, I would take a Leica M11 over it any day.
This is perhaps a goofy perspective, but if I were satisfied with zoom and focus peaking, I'd still be using a Fuji X-Pro3.
I use an M over the X-Pro3 mainly to achieve compactness, not (mainly) because of FF vs. APS-C, or because I prefer the M lenses. APS-C is honestly enough for me most of the time, and Voigt's X mount lenses are good to great.
The X-Pro gave me roughly the body I wanted (compact, physical controls, left viewfinder). But the fast, high-quality Fuji lenses aren't compact. To get fast, high-quality, compact lenses, I had to use MF lenses. And I found it too cumbersome to MF with the X-Pro3's EVF and zoom+peak.
The Zf's EVF MF aids might have worked for me, but it was too big and heavy for me. That left the M, not because I'm wedded to the rangefinder's heritage, but because I don't like zoom+peaking MF-on-EVF. Some novel focus assist here might have created some interesting middle ground. I do think I'd prefer the Zf's solution if I could get it in a smaller form factor—exposure/DoF preview is valuable to me.
TheEyesHaveIt wrote:
That is disappointing that Leica didn't upgrade the processor power for what is effectively a totally digital camera body. It would seem the processor is the most important part of ensuring a good experience there. If Fuji and Nikon are able to do it, for Leica's price, you'd assume they would be able to figure it out as well. The lack of innovation in focusing is disappointing and probably the reason why I'll skip this generation, though I am generally interested in an EV-based M as a companion to my M11.
I see it differently. I think that they are already fixed on the feature set and technologies needed in the next generation’M’. This camera uses the last bit of M11 marketing life. It will be, in part, what the Leica marketeers use as an example of old inferior technology.
bwcolor wrote:
I see it differently. I think that they are already fixed on the feature set and technologies needed in the next generation’M’. This camera uses the last bit of M11 marketing life. It will be, in part, what the Leica marketeers use as an example of old inferior technology.
I think it is very clear that there is zero innovation and (given the price also) zero risk that went into the M EV1.
Leica used the tools it had already available in the M11 and the SL3, that way also preventing cannibalization of those product lines.
I think it is also safe to say that very few people will sell their M11 and/or SL3 to get an M EV1.
If the M12 and the SL4 have new features they will also end up in the M EV2 (if there ever is one).
As others have said, lack of innovation is disappointing, but this is targeted to the high-end consumer buying a Leica to go with their Rolex. It is a natural step from the Q3, since it has (almost) the same EVF and can use the legendary M lenses. After using only my M10 years ago, I switched to using Sony and Hasselblad autofocus and it has been hard to go back to getting good focus on the M10. Instead, I've been using the SL2 with M lenses and get much better focus with the EVF, better grip, and IBIS.
I understand the marketing they are doing with the M EV1. In order to maintain the same form factor as the M11, they sacrificed a super high resolution EVF (compare the Sony A1 ii 9.44 million dots), an articulating screen, better sensor for focus assist, IBIS, and potentially a different, more modern form factor.
Using the Q3 form factor could have resulted in a much better camera and even could have allowed both M and L lenses. They could have even come out with lenses specifically for that Q3 form factor, like variations on the Q 43mm, 28mm and other lenses that aren't huge like the SL lenses. This is similar to how Sony has created amazing small form factor lenses for the A7cr and A7cii. Even though I've been trying to go back to my Leica gear, it is so much easier for me to get great shots with the A7cr and I can even use an adapter to use autofocus on M lenses. This is another feature Leica could offer - wouldn't that be great, a Leica branded autofocus adapter for M lenses. Nevertheless, the look of the Q is not the same as the M. The M is the equivalent of the 911 for Porsche. The marketing makes sense, even if the specs don't.
andymatuschak wrote:
This is perhaps a goofy perspective, but if I were satisfied with zoom and focus peaking, I'd still be using a Fuji X-Pro3.
I use an M over the X-Pro3 mainly to achieve compactness, not (mainly) because of FF vs. APS-C, or because I prefer the M lenses. APS-C is honestly enough for me most of the time, and Voigt's X mount lenses are good to great.
The X-Pro gave me roughly the body I wanted (compact, physical controls, left viewfinder). But the fast, high-quality Fuji lenses aren't compact. To get fast, high-quality, compact lenses, I had to use MF lenses. And I found it too cumbersome to MF with the X-Pro3's EVF and zoom+peak.
The Zf's EVF MF aids might have worked for me, but it was too big and heavy for me. That left the M, not because I'm wedded to the rangefinder's heritage, but because I don't like zoom+peaking MF-on-EVF. Some novel focus assist here might have created some interesting middle ground. I do think I'd prefer the Zf's solution if I could get it in a smaller form factor—exposure/DoF preview is valuable to me....Show more →
Very similar paths, I enjoyed the Xpro3 for many years using small vintage or M glass (cropped). I loved the compactness that it gave me and the image quality/output was good for me. The problem was that I hated using "cropped" M lenses on it since the latest Voigt's were not out yet.
I rented a M10 one weekend and well, the rest of history. If I wanted the focus peaking experience w/ punch in to check focus, the X-pro3 could satisfy that need I suppose (w/ a fold down screen that sits very well at waist level). However, I don't want to load up on Fuji X lenses, I rather use my fav M lenses on a SL type 601 if I wanted an EVF experience.
flash wrote:
I managed to spend some time with the EV1 last night. I used Nick Rains’ camera and asked the appropriate questions.
1. The AF aids are due to the processor. Leica considered more advanced focus aids but the Maestro 3 can’t handle them.
2. The focus experience is somewhat better than the Q3. There’s something about the purely mechanical lenses that really helps.
3. The EVF is vastly better than the Visoflex.
4. It’s much faster to focus with longer lenses and slower with wider lenses than the M11.
5. 64GB of memory disappoints.
6. The peaking has been tweaked for improved performance.
I was using the camera in a dimly lit bar. Focusing, for me, was pretty easy, even without focusing aids. Similar to my experience with the X2D2 and V lenses, but smaller. I don’t think this camera is for everyone but if you like M’s but your eyes say no to the RF, this is the best option. Sure the Zf has better mf aids but there’s a reason people still use Q’s and M’s over those larger cameras.
