I think a 1:1 finder is just the magnification size of the EVF viewfinder image, and bigger is always better. It just reveals the TTL image - whether wide angle, or telephoto - larger and more clearly - just like an SLR. It has no relation to the magnification of optical rangefinder windows, which have to be optimised for wider or narrower fields of view, and involves a choice of implementation.
retrofocus wrote:
I own the M3, and yes, it is best for 50 and 90 mm lenses. But the 0.91x viewfinder is not great for wider lenses - I personally wouldn't like to be limited to 1:1 for this reason. I often use wide angle lenses in my photography, therefore I would actually prefer the opposite and more a 0.58x finder for example which still has space around the 28 mm frame lines.
Yes, but of course a 1x M EVF would eliminate all of these drawbacks with wide angle lenses! Obviously, one of the downsides to an EVF is that you would not be able to see what lays outside of the lenses view through the finder unless Leica pulled off some magic in the implementation as has been suggested (additional separate small sensor/ lens for wider view or Hybrid finder, etc.).
My main point was that the optical finder of the M3 was astonishingly ground breaking at the time and is even impressive by today's standards. It seems like to me that the first M with an EVF should offer something similarly impressive through either it's magnification vs size of camera OR through some other unique twist and user benefit in how the EVF is implemented.
You cannot have a fixed magnification of the finder with TTL viewing. Leica did the M3 finder like that because the finder shows you what the finder wants, even without a lens attached.
Voigtlander did a 1x finder with the R3a. That was great. You could shoot with both eyes open. You could also only get 40mm framelines as the widest.
The EVF can be 1x with a certain lens. Hasselblad specifies that the X2d is 1x with a 65mm lens. Longer is higher magnification and wider is lower. You cannot have a fixed magnification if you're taking a view and magnifying or shrinking it to fit a fixed eyepiece.
Depending on the size of the EVF and eyepiece optics the best they can do is 1x with a lens around 50mm.
The point of a 1x finder is that things appear as big as they are in real life.
The magnification focusing aids people talk about EVFs are basically showing >1x to help focusing. So you can zoom in to 2,5,10x whatever. But when you do that you cannot see the whole picture.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yes, but of course a 1x M EVF would eliminate all of these drawbacks with wide angle lenses! Obviously, one of the downsides to an EVF is that you would not be able to see what lays outside of the lenses view through the finder unless Leica pulled off some magic in the implementation as has been suggested (additional separate small sensor/ lens for wider view or Hybrid finder, etc.).
My main point was that the optical finder of the M3 was astonishingly ground breaking at the time and is even impressive by today's standards. It seems like to me that the first M with an EVF should offer something similarly impressive through either it's magnification vs size of camera OR through some other unique twist and user benefit in how the EVF is implemented.
It would be nice if Leica would find its way back to its original with the M system and the M3. But Leica today is far away from what Leica was in the 50s. Leica is still riding on the marketing to make German quality products, but the truth is that they survive by keeping supply limited with high price tags plus riding well on the luxury brand label. Therefore I don't think that we can expect something extraordinary from the M11-V - it will simply be a M11 sensor with SL-based EVF and traditional M-mount. Including some bells and whistles in menu options with touch display for about $9K. If we are lucky, we get a more modern focus aid system, but I wouldn't bet for it. Pretty much a M11 where the rangefinder system is replaced by internal Visoflex viewfinder. With the M3, Leica wanted to release the best possible rangefinder camera at the time. Now Leica simply wants to test the water with the M11-V without vesting too much in its development.
This said, I think it is the right and overdue step for Leica to do. The M11-V will fill a nice niche, and I am very optimistic it will do well in sales especially if the price point isn't too crazy. For a price tag of $3-4K, I would seriously consider getting one!
panos.v wrote:
You cannot have a fixed magnification of the finder with TTL viewing. Leica did the M3 finder like that because the finder shows you what the finder wants, even without a lens attached.
Voigtlander did a 1x finder with the R3a. That was great. You could shoot with both eyes open. You could also only get 40mm framelines as the widest.
The EVF can be 1x with a certain lens. Hasselblad specifies that the X2d is 1x with a 65mm lens. Longer is higher magnification and wider is lower. You cannot have a fixed magnification if you're taking a view and magnifying or shrinking it to fit a fixed eyepiece.
Depending on the size of the EVF and eyepiece optics the best they can do is 1x with a lens around 50mm.
The point of a 1x finder is that things appear as big as they are in real life.
The magnification focusing aids people talk about EVFs are basically showing >1x to help focusing. So you can zoom in to 2,5,10x whatever. But when you do that you cannot see the whole picture....Show more →
Yes. The magnification spec is typically specified at the normal focal length of a specific format as you state. I don't know of a downside - regardless of focal length used - with an EVF that has a higher magnification vs lower magnification but there certainly is with an optical rangefinder (which is why there is an M3 and M2 for instance) unless I'm missing something?
retrofocus wrote:
It would be nice if Leica would find its way back to its original with the M system and the M3. But Leica today is far away from what Leica was in the 50s. Leica is still riding on the marketing to make German quality products, but the truth is that they survive by keeping supply limited with high price tags plus riding well on the luxury brand label. Therefore I don't think that we can expect something extraordinary from the M11-V - it will simply be a M11 sensor with SL-based EVF and traditional M-mount. Including some bells and whistles in menu options with touch display for about $9K. If we are lucky, we get a more modern focus aid system, but I wouldn't bet for it. Pretty much a M11 where the rangefinder system is replaced by internal Visoflex viewfinder. With the M3, Leica wanted to release the best possible rangefinder camera at the time. Now Leica simply wants to test the water with the M11-V without vesting too much in its development.
This said, I think it is the right and overdue step for Leica to do. The M11-V will fill a nice niche, and I am very optimistic it will do well in sales especially if the price point isn't too crazy. For a price tag of $3-4K, I would seriously consider getting one!...Show more →
I would buy one at that price point without much thought (as long as the EVF is around the SL2 quality level that I have) but I'm afraid it will be 2x this price AND with a lower quality EVF which is what you have stated. I suppose Leica would not name this EVF-based camera using the current "M11" name if the camera is truly groundbreaking in the EVF department. This is somewhat disappointing since I'm guessing Leica's key market is the one that would most appreciate a super high quality, high magnification EVF finder in a relatively light and compact package. Leica's technical partner, Panasonic, almost certainly has the know-how to make this happen.
retrofocus wrote:
It would be nice if Leica would find its way back to its original with the M system and the M3. But Leica today is far away from what Leica was in the 50s. Leica is still riding on the marketing to make German quality products, but the truth is that they survive by keeping supply limited with high price tags plus riding well on the luxury brand label. Therefore I don't think that we can expect something extraordinary from the M11-V - it will simply be a M11 sensor with SL-based EVF and traditional M-mount. Including some bells and whistles in menu options with touch display for about $9K. If we are lucky, we get a more modern focus aid system, but I wouldn't bet for it. Pretty much a M11 where the rangefinder system is replaced by internal Visoflex viewfinder. With the M3, Leica wanted to release the best possible rangefinder camera at the time. Now Leica simply wants to test the water with the M11-V without vesting too much in its development.
This said, I think it is the right and overdue step for Leica to do. The M11-V will fill a nice niche, and I am very optimistic it will do well in sales especially if the price point isn't too crazy. For a price tag of $3-4K, I would seriously consider getting one!...Show more →
As a current SL3 owner I wouldn't do it, myself, if it was just the same implementation of the EVF as the SL system. If, however, they were able to emulate manual focus confirmation as in the Nikon zf or introduce a similar confirmation system I would seriously consider it.
retrofocus wrote:
It would be nice if Leica would find its way back to its original with the M system and the M3. But Leica today is far away from what Leica was in the 50s. Leica is still riding on the marketing to make German quality products, but the truth is that they survive by keeping supply limited with high price tags plus riding well on the luxury brand label. Therefore I don't think that we can expect something extraordinary from the M11-V - it will simply be a M11 sensor with SL-based EVF and traditional M-mount. Including some bells and whistles in menu options with touch display for about $9K. If we are lucky, we get a more modern focus aid system, but I wouldn't bet for it. Pretty much a M11 where the rangefinder system is replaced by internal Visoflex viewfinder. With the M3, Leica wanted to release the best possible rangefinder camera at the time. Now Leica simply wants to test the water with the M11-V without vesting too much in its development.
This said, I think it is the right and overdue step for Leica to do. The M11-V will fill a nice niche, and I am very optimistic it will do well in sales especially if the price point isn't too crazy. For a price tag of $3-4K, I would seriously consider getting one!...Show more →
I don't quite share your somewhat pessimistic view about Leica's intentions in general and specifically with respect to an EVF-M camera. They have a business to sustain and they have found a way of doing so, currently. That's not to say I like everything they do. But it has kept them above water since the uncertainty they faced during the M8 period (and prior).
The whole "focus" of an EVF-M camera will literally be the manual focus experience. If it is sub-par (meaning worse/slower than the optical rangefinder focusing experience), the Leica M faithful will shred it apart. Therefore, IMO, Leica must provide a relatively innovative focusing aid and pleasing EVF experience.
I don't know how the current SL cameras stack up but do recall back around 2015 when I first tried an SL at a Leica store that up to that point, it was the best EVF I had tried. Given the technology available now, 10 years later, I suspect it wouldn't be too difficult for Leica to improve on it. That said, I feel a lot of what dictates the EVF experience is the sensor itself - how many fps it can feed to the EVF. And here it would seem that the faster stacked sensors have an advantage. Currently, I would say the best EVF I have tried is Canon's R1, which has a very fast stacked sensor. Does the EVF-M have to match that? Probably not, but I fear a bit if they're still using the same 60MP Sony sensor with super slow readout. But perhaps there are some tricks at speeding up at least EVF readout given it only needs a fraction of the 60MP resolution...
$3-4K is literally dreaming. What FF Leica has ever cost that much (little)? It will never happen; it would too significantly undercut everything else in Leica's catalog and leave money on the table, because Leica does not cater to the price sensitive mass-market. This is a realistic price point for the used value of the camera in 6-8 years, perhaps. Even upstart Pixii is closer to $5K, new. It would probably take something like DJI or someone else out of China sweeping in out of the blue with a competitor camera based on the M mount and 'virtual RF' experience to significantly undermine Leica's pricing. Who knows... it could happen. Until then, I'm afraid we're stuck with Leica.
rscheffler wrote:
While I would not want to rely on a solution that converts mechanical RF cam position into electronic information about focus distance for use as a critical focus aid, an advantage it would have over the traditional mechanical RF mechanism would be the potential ability for the user to 'dial in' focus corrections akin to mechanical RF calibration. And a correction for each lens could be saved in-camera and automatically activated based on the 6-bit code. BUT, this is an unnecessarily complex solution. The simplest solution is to take focus information directly off the sensor.
I’ve brought up this calibration idea before. I agree it would be complex but if they did this with a hybrid OVF/EVF it would be a killer feature. Best of all worlds.
I don’t see anyone else picking up on this as a good thing so maybe we I’m way off base!
If Leica wants to maximize profit while offering an M camera with an EVF, they could simply use the existing Q3 EVF in the M11-V. It may not be the best on the market, but given the limited internal space available, it seems like the most practical choice.
That said, since the M11-V will be manual focus only, Leica (with the help of Panasonic) could take the opportunity to refine the manual focusing experience, making it more intuitive and enjoyable with modern technology.
Fred Miranda wrote:
If Leica wants to maximize profit while offering an M camera with an EVF, they could simply use the existing Q3 EVF in the M11-V. It may not be the best on the market, but given the limited internal space available, it seems like the most practical choice.
That said, since the M11-V will be manual focus only, Leica (with the help of Panasonic) could take the opportunity to refine the manual focusing experience, making it more intuitive and enjoyable with modern technology.
They have to!!!
This camera is 100% dead on arrival for me if they don't.
I already know I don't like manual lenses on Nikons/Canons for everyday shooting. I love the RF experience. Leica has to do something new and make the manual focus lens experience revolutionary just like they did with the RF patch-
Who knows if they will succeed but that is what I hope was on the Product Managers notes to engineering-
I find the EVF of my CL, together with the implementation of focus peeking when looking through the EVF, makes it easy to focus M lenses on the CL. If the M11-V works the same, I could be interested, unless a rumor surfaces that the M12 will be release in 2026 in which case I'd skip the M11-V and wait for the M12.
This camera is 100% dead on arrival for me if they don't.
I already know I don't like manual lenses on Nikons/Canons for everyday shooting. I love the RF experience. Leica has to do something new and make the manual focus lens experience revolutionary just like they did with the RF patch-
Who knows if they will succeed but that is what I hope was on the Product Managers notes to engineering-
I see what you're saying and hope Leica delivers something amazing. However, I think my point was valid since it wouldn't require much R&D, just a Frankenstein M-mount camera with a Q EVF. Simple and effective.
Keep in mind, this isn't the mighty M12, just an M with an EVF, so to me it makes sense, not that I'd ever buy one.
Erich6_ wrote:
I’ve brought up this calibration idea before. I agree it would be complex but if they did this with a hybrid OVF/EVF it would be a killer feature. Best of all worlds.
I don’t see anyone else picking up on this as a good thing so maybe we I’m way off base!
Yeah, I think it would be cool, but it would be mechanically more complex than 'just' an EVF and focus/depth information taken from PD pixels on the sensor. If PD focus information is sufficient for a virtual RF patch then reading lens focus position off the cam would be overkill.
At least for me, and perhaps others, after many headaches with mechanical M system calibration, the more that can be done electronically, without mechanical parts, the better. Just imagine if they used the a1's stacked sensor. It theoretically wouldn't need a physical shutter either. So, without the complex optical-mechanical rangefinder and without a physical shutter, it would really just be a very nicely made box that houses a sensor, solid state storage, fancy electronics and viewfinder optics. So much less to go out of calibration and so much less that would require service support. But it being a Leica, there will certainly be early bugs of some sort...
That all said, I don't think I would like it better than the traditional M optical viewfinder experience... it'll just be somewhat different, with different strengths and weaknesses.
Currently the best EVF on the market is in the GFX100ii. Spectacular.
Mostly the optics in front of the panel are most important and that's Leicas biggest challenge. It's not a huge space. They can put in the SL3 EVF, which is excellent, but they'll then need to match the SL3 optics t omake it work. I doubt in that space they can do a !x magnification like the X2D or GFX100ii. But if the optics are really good then even 0.8x is perfectly usable. Bigger is better but only if the optics in front of the panel are good.
All I really want is PiP focusing. Like Fuji offers already, for years. About the size of the RF patch in the M11. I don't like having the entire EVF magnified. It distracts from the image. That's why I don't like using Leicas with manua lenses, mostly. I'd be thrilled with eye confirmation, ala Nikon, but I don't need it.
rscheffler wrote:
I don't quite share your somewhat pessimistic view about Leica's intentions in general and specifically with respect to an EVF-M camera. They have a business to sustain and they have found a way of doing so, currently. That's not to say I like everything they do. But it has kept them above water since the uncertainty they faced during the M8 period (and prior).
The whole "focus" of an EVF-M camera will literally be the manual focus experience. If it is sub-par (meaning worse/slower than the optical rangefinder focusing experience), the Leica M faithful will shred it apart. Therefore, IMO, Leica must provide a relatively innovative focusing aid and pleasing EVF experience. ...Show more →
I am a Leica user but certainly not a fan of the brand itself. I agree that Leica found its market niche and method to create revenue to survive well. But IMO it comes to a significant cost increase for the regular amateur using Leica gear after Leica went all in with the luxury brand focus. Few might be willing to pay it to support the brand, most others try to find better deals in the used market - now even more than ever before I believe when it comes to Leica. We all can see a significant uptick for used Leica gear since which is all due to higher demand.
I agree that the manual focus with EVF has to be good. To which degree better, I am not sure. I personally haven't had any experience yet with more modern EVF and focus tools therein since I am still using as only EVF-based camera so far my Sony A7R from 2014.
Does the EVF-M have to match that? Probably not, but I fear a bit if they're still using the same 60MP Sony sensor with super slow readout. But perhaps there are some tricks at speeding up at least EVF readout given it only needs a fraction of the 60MP resolution...
I am pretty sure it will be exactly the same sensor as in the M11. But the change from M10 to M10-R also showed one time that Leica might update the sensor in the same camera series. Will it happen with the M11-V? IMO only if Leica feels significant pressure to do so. And I don't think they do honestly if it comes to this sensor.
$3-4K is literally dreaming. What FF Leica has ever cost that much (little)? It will never happen; it would too significantly undercut everything else in Leica's catalog and leave money on the table, because Leica does not cater to the price sensitive mass-market. This is a realistic price point for the used value of the camera in 6-8 years, perhaps. Even upstart Pixii is closer to $5K, new. It would probably take something like DJI or someone else out of China sweeping in out of the blue with a competitor camera based on the M mount and 'virtual RF' experience to significantly undermine Leica's pricing. Who knows... it could happen. Until then, I'm afraid we're stuck with Leica....Show more →
I agree that the camera will be offered at a much higher price point - as in one of my earlier comments I expressed an estimate around $9K to match the M11 in general. I still would only pay max. $3K for it - used of course. I have never bought anything from Leica brand-new! And this is just personal preference since I don't see for my usage the value paying the new prices Leica is asking for. If someone has e. g. a photo business and is able to write it off from taxes in years to come with revenue created from the business, very different situation indeed. I likely have to wait at least 3 years after the M11-V release to have the camera at a used price point which I would consider. Since it is all electronics, I expect it to drop in value faster than for example the M10-R which is still on a quite high pricing as used model after 5 years from its release date (in this case likely related that many prefer the more reliable M10-R over the M11 which arrived with several - now mostly fixed - flaws).
rscheffler wrote:
Yeah, I think it would be cool, but it would be mechanically more complex than 'just' an EVF and focus/depth information taken from PD pixels on the sensor. If PD focus information is sufficient for a virtual RF patch then reading lens focus position off the cam would be overkill.
At least for me, and perhaps others, after many headaches with mechanical M system calibration, the more that can be done electronically, without mechanical parts, the better. Just imagine if they used the a1's stacked sensor. It theoretically wouldn't need a physical shutter either. So, without the complex optical-mechanical rangefinder and without a physical shutter, it would really just be a very nicely made box that houses a sensor, solid state storage, fancy electronics and viewfinder optics. So much less to go out of calibration and so much less that would require service support. But it being a Leica, there will certainly be early bugs of some sort...
That all said, I don't think I would like it better than the traditional M optical viewfinder experience... it'll just be somewhat different, with different strengths and weaknesses....Show more →
I see what you are saying—all valid points I agree with. That said, the joy of using an OVF with an RF patch is not a rational one. Would be great if M12 would find a way to offer both. If nothing else, it can be a mechanical backup for when those pesky firmware/electronics bugs rear their ugly heads.
(I agree with Fred it is highly unlikely we will see more than reuse of existing tech in M11-V.)
Erich6_ wrote:
Would be great if M12 would find a way to offer both.
Highly unlikely - with a combined OVF/EVF approach in the M12, Leica would automatically cut into sales for the new M11-V. Rather Leica wants customers to vest into a pure rangefinder one and/or in the EVF-based one. I believe most M users will see the M11-V as addition to existing rangefinder M cameras but not as replacement. This makes them having two M cameras doubling the vestment into the M series. A combined viewfinder approach would shrink this in half again.
I could see this being logical for a focus on the focal length used. M11-V highlighted as the solution for wide (24mm and wider) and long (75mm and longer) where the rangefinder is more difficult to focus and compose.
retrofocus wrote:
Highly unlikely - with a combined OVF/EVF approach in the M12, Leica would automatically cut into sales for the new M11-V. Rather Leica wants customers to vest into a pure rangefinder one and/or in the EVF-based one. I believe most M users will see the M11-V as addition to existing rangefinder M cameras but not as replacement. This makes them having two M cameras doubling the vestment into the M series. A combined viewfinder approach would shrink this in half again.
Just imagine if they used the a1's stacked sensor. It theoretically wouldn't need a physical shutter either. So, without the complex optical-mechanical rangefinder and without a physical shutter, it would really just be a very nicely made box that houses a sensor, solid state storage, fancy electronics and viewfinder optics. So much less to go out of calibration and so much less that would require service support. But it being a Leica, there will certainly be early bugs of some sort...