"i think it's a kind of market research for Leica. The investment in the EV1 was probably limited. If the market accepts it, Leica will invest more and there will be innovations. At least, that's what I hope."
i'm not spending 9k to beta-test a product for them.
i guess there will always be apologists for the brand. i mean, idk. Q is successful, M is successful...all they really need to do is create a combination of what made the 2 lines successful...it's not even that big of a risk if they put a bit more effort.
they way i see it it should have been their iPhone moment. Apple knew it's going to cost iPod sales (which was huge chunk of their revenue) but they went in hard anyway..and it paid off.
RustyBug wrote:
I'll just go back to the "mid-cycle" aspect. I think the true test will be to see what they do in the next iteration.
Of course, they could decide to take it down the path of the CL > CL2 ... oh, wait.
Time will tell.
See, I don’t buy this cycle stuff either. That’s what the Sony crowd kept saying while they paid for each new iteration of the A7 series while their current cameras dropped steeply in value. And if you put out a beta product, don’t charge $9,000 for it.
LBJ2 wrote:
Personally, I’m not exactly sure where I stand on some of the new and popular MF electronic focus aids. Many times I find myself turning all of that off as it can for me actually get in the way /distract in some scenes/scenarios.
I certainly see the need/convenience for many of these new MF aids and maybe one day I’ll need the assistance too.
The main thing I like about my M11 is the combo of excellent IQ, small lenses with DoF scales and a relatively light overall kit. But it falls short for me in being the only camera I want to carry because I can’t really use it reliably when I want to use longer glass or shoot wide open.
There are, however, few systems that allow me to use zone focusing (most lenses don’t have DoF scales anymore). None of them are FF, offer exchangeable lenses and are smallish.
I had hoped this new camera would be the solution, but it’s not because its focus aids are either not reliable enough or too clunky. I also have no expectation of Leica addressing that anytime soon, esp. not at a price I’d be willing to pay.
I’m now considering what I’m going to do, but most likely it involves getting rid of my M11, because I prefer to carry a camera that caters to my needs instead of being limited by said camera.
johnvanr wrote:
See, I don’t buy this cycle stuff either. That’s what the Sony crowd kept saying while they paid for each new iteration of the A7 series while their current cameras dropped steeply in value. And if you put out a beta product, don’t charge $9,000 for it.
The Leica M8 was before my time. I can only imagine the forum turmoil/drama/tantrums/lectures when Leica launched that camera.
I was however around when Sony launched their first mirrorless full frame, the A7r which I bought and used even if it was the loudest shutter shaking camera ever. And in hindsight not a very good camera overall either. So yes. I was a more than willing participant and to this day totally enjoyed, enjoy being part of that revolution.
johnvanr wrote:
The main thing I like about my M11 is the combo of excellent IQ, small lenses with DoF scales and a relatively light overall kit. But it falls short for me in being the only camera I want to carry because I can’t really use it reliably when I want to use longer glass or shoot wide open.
There are, however, few systems that allow me to use zone focusing (most lenses don’t have DoF scales anymore). None of them are FF, offer exchangeable lenses and are smallish.
I had hoped this new camera would be the solution, but it’s not because its focus aids are either not reliable enough or too clunky. I also have no expectation of Leica addressing that anytime soon, esp. not at a price I’d be willing to pay.
I’m now considering what I’m going to do, but most likely it involves getting rid of my M11, because I prefer to carry a camera that caters to my needs instead of being limited by said camera. ...Show more →
We do share common ground regarding the M11. I've loved all the digital rangefinders I've owned M10, M10-R, M11. So unlike my Sony camera experience.
I've yet to find a traditional camera that meets all of my wants so I end up with different tools for the job so-to-speak. I found the Sony A1 comes very close but for me lacks the Leica M shooting experience and feeling ( if that makes any sense).
I suspect I could also be very happy with other mirrorless do-it-all cameras: Canon R5/R3 and probably Nikon Z8 too.
So it’s for people with a lot of expensive M glass whose eyes are getting tired. I have to think that the next version will have some kind of autofocus for M lenses built in. That way you can keep the pure “M” line and the EVF line gets the autofocus it needs. An answer to the issue of “throwing out” a nice lens every time you update to the latest Q? Interesting to see how FUJI responds.
LBJ2 wrote:
We do share common ground regarding the M11. I've loved all the digital rangefinders I've owned M10, M10-R, M11. So unlike my Sony camera experience.
I've yet to find a traditional camera that meets all of my wants so I end up with different tools for the job so-to-speak. I found the Sony A1 comes very close but for me lacks the Leica M shooting experience and feeling ( if that makes any sense).
I suspect I could also be very happy with other mirrorless do-it-all cameras: Canon R5/R3 and probably Nikon Z8 too.
I have the R5, R6II and the Z6III. They have their purposes, but I find them too large and heavy to comfortably carry all the time. I’m trying out the X-E5 and I sometimes use my MFT gear, but on those the small M-mount lenses don’t match their FF coverage. I’m leaning toward selling my M11, though.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I wouldn't hold my breath for lots of innovation in focus aids with the next generation of the Leica M EV. Focus aids require really good software development and that is not Leica's strength. I think it is indeed one of its primary areas of weakness. Maybe they will devote resources to doing something innovative, but personally I just don't expect that to happen.
Me neither, even if the M EV1 is a commercial success, why would Leica dedicate a lot of resources to the M EV2?
There is little incentive for them to do so. They would still be the only show in town...
Jonathan Slack in his review keeps the door open: "There are many things which could be included in such a camera in the future, the obvious thing being some form of focus confirmation. The technology certainly exists for this, but how to do it is much more interesting and complicated. A rectangular section like the existing rangefinder is one possibility, or maybe a confirmation light, or arrows."
He doesn't even mention IBIS, so unless Leica can get IBIS in the M12 it for sure will not be in the M EV2 either. And the price point won't change either.
Perhaps a company like Pixii initially should have chosen an EVF-based M as their project. It would have given them a niche market without directly needing to compete with Leica.
snowboarder wrote:
So how exactly do you focus with this? An extra button to magnify? How many times? Keep pressing for each step? I guess there is no focus peaking at all, right?
There are both focus peaking and magnification. You can use them independently or concurrently. You can configure peaking to be on continuously or only on demand. You can configure magnification to be automatic on focusing or only on demand. You can choose any control including the former frame lines lever to control either of these focus aids.
As far as it goes it is an elegant and effective system.
1bwana1 wrote:
There are both focus peaking and magnification. You can use them independently or concurrently. You can configure peaking to by on continuously or only on demand. You can configure magnification to be automatic on focusing or only on demand. You can choose any control including the former frame lines lever to control either of these focus aids.
As far as it goes it is an elegant and effective system.
Yes - just that this system per se exists since > 10 years in all kind of mirrorless EVF based systems. Nothing new for sure - but established for manual focusing via EVF. I have used focus peaking with magnification tool for many years on my Sony A7R often with adapted M lenses before even getting my first digital M. I likely would still use it if the sensor performed better with wider M lenses at the time. I got tired doing the needed PP to make up for corner color cast etc. Also learned that in some situations rangefinder focusing is faster with M lenses.
I wouldn't mind going back to this kind of focusing in the EV1 without M adapter needed as for the A7R. As you said, it works and is effective. The problem I have is that for such system I won't be paying $7-9K.
I only bought in 2014 the Sony A7R to use it with manual focus. I paid at the time $2500 for the camera. It came with lots of other bells and whistles (including AF option) which I rarely ever used. I photographed tens of thousands of photos with this camera and still use it sporadically to this day. Never upgraded because I didn't like more bulky successor versions in E-mount. I would use the EV1 exactly like I used the A7R - for not more and not less. That's why I would buy an EV1 for the same price now and in the future - $2.5K is my range for it (even I admit I could afford to spend more but won't for such camera).
I had time to spend about 30 minutes with the camera in Porto on family vacation at the Leica ‘flagship’ store. This was the camera I was waiting for a long time. Very lightweight ok e evf but even though after vat would have been 7.7k and in stock decided not to get it. I think around 5k would have been ok. I have the sl3 and think it’s a better option with a bit more weight. For 10k in us u can pick up a hassi x2dii and the new zoom lens much better deal and value. I don’t know why the 9k evf didn’t make it to this camera and I always thought the rangefinder was an expensive piece but I guess not
retrofocus wrote:
R often with adapted M lenses before even getting my first digital M. I likely would still use it if the sensor performed better I would use the EV1 exactly like I used the A7R - for not more and not less. That's why I would buy an EV1 for the same price now and in the future - $2.5K is my range for it (even I admit I could afford to spend more but won't for such camera).
dalegaspi wrote:
"i think it's a kind of market research for Leica. The investment in the EV1 was probably limited. If the market accepts it, Leica will invest more and there will be innovations. At least, that's what I hope."
i'm not spending 9k to beta-test a product for them.
i guess there will always be apologists for the brand. i mean, idk. Q is successful, M is successful...all they really need to do is create a combination of what made the 2 lines successful...it's not even that big of a risk if they put a bit more effort.
they way i see it it should have been their iPhone moment. Apple knew it's going to cost iPod sales (which was huge chunk of their revenue) but they went in hard anyway..and it paid off. ...Show more →
I am old enough to remember what keyboard warriors say when digital M or Q came out, almost the same argument “no innovation, super expensive”.
dalegaspi wrote:
"i think it's a kind of market research for Leica. The investment in the EV1 was probably limited. If the market accepts it, Leica will invest more and there will be innovations. At least, that's what I hope."
i'm not spending 9k to beta-test a product for them.
i guess there will always be apologists for the brand. i mean, idk. Q is successful, M is successful...all they really need to do is create a combination of what made the 2 lines successful...it's not even that big of a risk if they put a bit more effort.
they way i see it it should have been their iPhone moment. Apple knew it's going to cost iPod sales (which was huge chunk of their revenue) but they went in hard anyway..and it paid off. ...Show more →
I am old enough to remember what keyboard warriors say when digital M or Q came out, almost the same argument “no innovation, super expensive”.
