Fred Miranda wrote:
Because Leica likely doesn't expect the EV1 to be a high-volume seller. They know there is a loyal group of Leica users who have been asking for this kind of camera and are willing to pay for it. From their perspective, there is little financial risk.
They didn't need to pour major resources into R&D since the EV1 is built on the M11, replacing the RF assembly with the Q3's EVF. That's a relatively straightforward engineering change.
So they can price it at $9K and see how the market reacts. If it sells through, great...it proves the concept. If not, they still recover costs and gain insight into whether a digital M-style camera without a rangefinder has a real future. It's not aimed at the mainstream. The Leica M will remain primarily a rangefinder system.
The M EV1 is more of a trial run for long-time M users who love the classic design but prefer, or now need (due to eyesight issues), to shoot with an EVF instead. ...Show more →
"So they can price it at $9K and see how the market reacts. If it sells through, great...it proves the concept. If not, they still recover costs and gain insight into whether a digital M-style camera without a rangefinder has a real future. "
I think someone mentioned it earlier but to release the EV1 in this handicapped manner (no real development of EVF focus aids nor innovative use of M lens rangefinder coupling to the EVF) could be viewed as damning the concept from the start - not really testing(nor perhaps wanting to see) what the true market reaction to an EVF based M done properly would actually be and what real future it could have.
This has always been my plan of action and I've been following the EV1 initiative since reading about that Dublin LSI conference with Stefan Daniel. I also participated in the LUF surveys.
I like the option to own one rangefinder that I can easily convert RF to EVF and vice versa with a simple accessory. My selfish hopes are the next version of the VisoFlex adapter perhaps version "3" specs will benefit from the EV1's, EVF.
johnvanr wrote:
Doesn’t something like this make you love the brand less? Part of me finds their marketing and pricing for/of this camera condescending.
Unfortunately for me, it just reinforces that I am not the target market for Leica products. This camera is made for the truly wealthy who don't care at all about cost, or for people who absolutely cannot use the rangefinder any more because of vision issues. I am fortunate that my vision is still decent enough to use the M11(though generally poor), and I am unfortunate that my bank account doesn't have a few extra zeros on the end of it.
I think the brand has been a bit condescending for quite a while now. That's why I will continue to buy their products second hand and appreciate them for what they are. I accept that I am not the target audience for this. I can afford it, I'd just like a bit more value and excitement to give me the motivation to drop five figures on a new camera. This isn't it.
johnvanr wrote:
Doesn’t something like this make you love the brand less? Part of me finds their marketing and pricing for/of this camera condescending.
It is what it is aka business. For me not so personal/emotional.
I do however admire Leica for their open-mindedness and frankly taking on some risk with the EV1-1.0. I am not sure Leica expected so many initial emotions from the internet 24 hours in. But, this is the internet and Leica knew this product would be polarizing.
Seems the EV1 is a direct result of fulfilling specific user requests/requirements from the important/well thought of, LSI membership. Not so much of what others might be comparing to Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. I don't think the Leica M is positioned to chase or compete in that market.
LBJ2 wrote:
It is what it is aka business. For me not so personal/emotional.
I do however admire Leica for their open-mindedness and frankly taking on some risk with the EV1-1.0. I am not sure Leica expected so many initial emotions from the internet 24 hours in. But, this is the internet and Leica knew this product would be polarizing.
Seems the EV1 is a direct result of fulfilling specific user requests/requirements from the important/well thought of, LSI membership. Not so much of what others might be comparing to Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. I don't think the Leica M is positioned to chase or compete in that market. ...Show more →
LBJ2 wrote:
This has always been my plan of action and I've been following the EV1 initiative since reading about that Dublin LSI conference with Stefan Daniel. I also participated in the LUF surveys.
I like the option to own one rangefinder that I can easily convert RF to EVF and vice versa with a simple accessory. My selfish hopes are the next version of the VisoFlex adapter perhaps version "3" specs will benefit from the EV1's, EVF.
I think this is a good point. If the M12 offers a Visoflex with no lag, better refresh rate, and generally better, then I'd be pretty happy. I'm still happy with the M11 for now and would have purchased the Visoflex if it was just a bit smoother regarding motion and framerate(I found it too laggy for my taste). A better Visoflex would have greatly diminished my desire for this camera from the start.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
"So they can price it at $9K and see how the market reacts. If it sells through, great...it proves the concept. If not, they still recover costs and gain insight into whether a digital M-style camera without a rangefinder has a real future. "
I think someone mentioned it earlier but to release the EV1 in this handicapped manner (no real development of EVF focus aids nor innovative use of M lens rangefinder coupling to the EVF) could be viewed as damning the concept from the start - not really testing(nor perhaps wanting to see) what the true market reaction to an EVF based M done properly would actually be and what real future it could have.
Or just use the M body for what it's best at: the rangefinder experience. That's what keeps it meaningful in today's market.
If you truly prefer shooting with an EVF, it's perfectly fine to explore other brands. You're not betraying Leica; it's just a camera, not something to worship.
johnvanr wrote:
Maybe I’m a bit more sensitive to marketing BS.
I thought for-sure there would be traditional and much loved rangefinder vs M mount camera with a built in EVF debates/reactions as have been the case on this topic for years frankly.
However now that the M EV1 is here and reading many reactions on this thread and LUF, I was honestly taken by surprise at the amount of emotional reactions pertaining to everything else but the typical "traditional" RF vs EVF debate. Never a dull moment on the threads 😎
retrofocus wrote:
Fear to compromise mainly Q- and SL sales with such camera one way or the other. The result of this fear but willingness to move forward we are seeing in the EV1.
---------------------------------------------
RustyRus wrote:
You keep saying that- I don't think it has anything to do with fear of not selling an SL camera-
I trust what Jono said about it and he probably has a better pulse on it-
If they're concerned about cannibalizing other lines, it seems to me they'd be more likely to control that by feature set and pricing, which it looks like they've done here.
If their idea is "show us some love on this and we'll look at making improvements," that, unfortunately, makes sense. It's just less than I expect from a prestige camera company charging premium prices. I also think he's making RF replication more difficult than it has to be, given that they went with the full EVF. You don't need a small built-in camera to replicate the RF. You need a small built-in camera to replicate the AoV and DoF of the OVF. Using logic and hardware, you overlay the sensor's image within the frame lines. It retains most of what people say they love about OVF (particularly being able to see the world outside the frame lines) and you still get to do matchy-matchy focus thing, only you'll use everything within the frame lines for it. Technically, you could use the full image from the sensor and still do the matchy-matchy focus thing, but you'd have to deal with a cropped image from the EVF's camera. Or you could turn it all off and just use the image from the sensor like every other mirrorless digital available. It would've taken some R&D, sure, and added complexity to the camera, but it would also feel like someone put some thought in making it distinct.
What Stefan Daniel said is that they designed the M11 with the idea to offer eventually also an EVF. Then they skipped the idea, until in Dublin there were people asking for it. Then they started to develop. So no r&d, just doing what they initially planned to do in an already existing and designed for body. In that light I understand they test the waters with little risk and no redesign. Which doesn’t explain the high price though for a concept a few years old, other then to recoup the EVF development.
But it doesn’t give you an insight in what really could have been made and if the EVF could be a worthy alternative. I haven’t tried it myself yet, so have to rely on what others have expressed. Coming from a film M6 and an digital M8, currently using SL, also with my M lenses.
Fred Miranda wrote:
If you truly prefer shooting with an EVF, it's perfectly fine to explore other brands. You're not betraying Leica; it's just a camera, not something to worship.
And that is why I have tried the SL3 and SL3S and the latest Q's, but now find the X2Dii the best EVF and by far the best IBIS I have ever used to date.
LBJ2 wrote:
But, this is the internet and Leica knew this product would be polarizing.
I expected the controversy to be about the purity of having an EVF in the M line coming from RangeFinder lovers. But that is not what I am seeing. Most seem open to the idea of an M with EVF. The controversy seems to come mostly from the low bar Leica appears to have set for itself when making this camera.
Hopefully the camera will gain enough users and the feature dissapointment will not gain enough momentum to tarnish the brand.
I think Nikon and Canon raised the bar for Leica with better MF aids. They also shot themselves in the foot with the awful body design because they're doing the minimum here.
Think a M EVF2 with phase detect AF-based focus aids and better body work - move the logo to the right and maybe stick a flash in the middle, will sell well.
For me the EV2 should have:
-120 refresh rate or better
5.76 EVF or better
Eye focus assist minimum. If Nikon can do it so can Leica.
Cyan focus peaking option.
Priced around the Q3/SL3 or slightly above, but no more.
EchoLocation wrote:
I think this is a good point. If the M12 offers a Visoflex with no lag, better refresh rate, and generally better, then I'd be pretty happy. I'm still happy with the M11 for now and would have purchased the Visoflex if it was just a bit smoother regarding motion and framerate(I found it too laggy for my taste). A better Visoflex would have greatly diminished my desire for this camera from the start.
As the M EV1 motivated me to put the VisoFlex 2 to the test on the M11, I found a few settings recommendations on LUF that might help to improve some of those experiences--still testing. But I'm also okay as-is. I do however much prefer the rangefinder.
Like you wrote M12 is probably not too far off. Better processor could mean "more enhancements" I don't know, but I am sure Leica has more than a few things in mind for what's next.
1bwana1 wrote:
I expected the controversy to be about the purity of having an EVF in the M line coming from RangeFinder lovers. But that is not what I am seeing. Most seem open to the idea of an M with EVF. The controversy seems to come mostly from the low bar Leica appears to have set for itself when making this camera.
Hopefully the camera will gain enough users and the feature dissapointment will not gain enough momentum to tarnish the brand.
Honestly I feel there is way too much emotion over what is probably the last of the very successful since M11 line. Even if the M EV1 doesn't meet everyone's wants or expectations Leica will be just fine. There are those as always that will buy and enjoy. Some will not.
Personally, if I could no longer use the rangefinder effectively, I would be all over the M EV1 for my Leica M lenses if I wanted to remain with that form factor. Also, I'm sure there will be some level of enhancements via firmware updates as Leica is well known to do, repeatedly. But again if someone was expecting Nikon, Canon manual focus aids as a priority, the M EV1 is probably not the camera.
There are Leica M customers who asked for the M EV1 and Leica delivered. As usual some will love it and buy it. Some will not. Leica and the Leica brand will continue to be just fine.
LBJ2 wrote:
As the M EV1 motivated me to put the VisoFlex 2 to the test on the M11, I found a few settings recommendations on LUF that might help to improve some of those experiences--still testing. But I'm also okay as-is. I do however much prefer the rangefinder.
Like you wrote M12 is probably not too far off. Better processor could mean "more enhancements" I don't know, but I am sure Leica has more than a few things in mind for what's next.
When you can share new recommendations that seem to help on using the Viso2 on an M11, I would very much like to hear them. Thanks.
