johnvanr wrote:
I'm not asking about the overall experience, but wondering about the experience you based this comment on: "None MILC other than Leica are truely compatible with M glass."
Everybody keeps saying that M glass is horrible on other sensors, but I've found that generally it can be fine.
Depends on the lens, but as can be seen from many of Fred's M lens tests on Sony bodies, there can be significant impacts to IQ in the corners and/or midframe on an unmodified Sony sensor (or any other non-M sensor). If you're just shooting portraits wide open with the subject's eyes in the center of the frame, then yeah, you'll see little impact.
I'm pretty happy with M lenses on my X-M5, though, since problematic corners are cropped out.
johnvanr wrote:
Everybody keeps saying that M glass is horrible on other sensors, but I've found that generally it can be fine.
Not me - I stated it here earlier that I have used M lenses adapted on the Sony A7R for many years before getting my first digital M. Reason why I moved is that I often use wide and ultrawide M lenses which caused purple color cast in the corners of the frame with wider than 35 mm lenses. It required a more tedious PP of RAW image files to correct with support of third party software like CornerFix etc. Since 2019 - after I got my digital M - the world moved on, and manufacturers offered thinner FF sensor stacks where adapting a wider array of M lenses was more feasible than with MLCs made years earlier. Kolari additionally offered sensor modification with this sensor glass which also worked. Panasonic SR series and Nikon Zf are worthwhile mentioning here in positive context even I have no personal experience with them.
It is a grey zone what someone accepts as being a good enough image quality from an adapted M lens or rejects as insufficient. One big advantage of Leica M camera bodies is that it ensured to use >95% of M and LTM lenses without problems - for 50 mm and longer, this can also be achieved with third party MLCs, but wider than 35 mm crosses the it-might-work-well-or-not terrain.
Desmolicious wrote:
LLL started out with the 35mm F2 8 Elements copy, not the cine lens. That came out several lens releases later.
Yes I stand corrected and I should know since I own that lens also.
So I guess the Elcan 50 copy was next and then the SPII? I have them all and like using them too with the exception of the black brass Rigid copy which I have sitting in my dry cabinet for many months. Why? I seem to like using the X2Dii more than any camera in many, many years.
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.
Yeah the purity snobs often disappear when a newer, "heretical" revision of a long-standing luxury/performance oriented heritage product is perfectly executed. Until recently, another German luxury brand (Porsche) has been able to nail the execution of more modern technology (e.g., water cooling, hybrid powertrains, turbochargers) that supplants tech that the purists love (e.g., air cooling, naturally aspirated engines). It's a shame that Leica couldn't have done that here. Now the purists can yammer on about the death of RF and others can complain about how the digital features aren't incorporated in a very modern or competitive way.
dumplinknet wrote:
Any real world reviews on the battery life for this new EV1? No one seems to be talking about it.
Not that good. Like less than 300 shots whereas the M11 is over 800 if I recall.
Many comments, but the one that most seem to miss is that the Viso2 has some form of IBIS it uses, but for sure no mention of any use of IBIS in this Q3 EVF M EV1 camera.
stgrove wrote:
Not that good. Like less than 300 shots whereas the M11 is over 800 if I recall.
Many comments, but the one that most seem to miss is that the Viso2 has some form of IBIS it uses, but for sure no mention of any use of IBIS in this Q3 EVF M EV1 camera.
The Leica M EV1 will no doubt consume battery moreso than the M11, due to the EVF. Now if one uses the Viso 2, then the M11 battery life will also go down accordingly.
However, the battery ratings for any camera tend to understate its real world usage, and so I would expect the M EV1 to do pretty well. Most who have tried the camera say it may help to take an extra battery if you are doing a lot of shooting.
As for the Viso 2 having IBIS: it does not. No EVF does. Leica designed it such that the camera gives you a more stabilized live view feed, which will help. It does this through digital means, not mechanical or optical.
So you do have a form of digital live view stabilization with the Viso 2, but not true IBIS.
stgrove wrote:
Did you buy one after your side-by-side?
No, as I said my reaction was luke warm because I am satisfied with my current Leica kit M11/SL3/D-Lux 8 and didn't feel that the EV-1 offered me something I didn't already have the capability of handling. The EV-1 didn't offer any exciting new technology for me.
That said, if the only platform I had available to shoot my M mount lenses on was the EV-1 I be happy. I would likely get every image that I am getting today, and probably have better framing, and fewer misses than on my M11. The EV-1 is a competent and enjoyable camera to use. In many cases focusing will be meaningfully faster and easier on the EV-1. I think when you are able to try it out yourself you will be in agreement on the competence, and enjoyable shooting experience it offers.
For new users the learning curve to an M system is now greatly reduced. I think most could learn in get reliable focus using this camera very quickly. I know that we were hoping that Leica would come up with some new or leading edge focus aids for this camera. They didn't. But they did produce an elegant, functional, and capable camera to shoot M lenses on natively.
1bwana1 wrote:
No, as I said my reaction was luke warm because I am satisfied with my current Leica kit M11/SL3/D-Lux 8 and didn't feel that the EV-1 offered me something I didn't already have the capability of handling. The EV-1 didn't offer any exciting new technology for me.
That said, if the only platform I had available to shoot my M mount lenses on was the EV-1 I be happy. I would likely get every image that I am getting today, and probably have better framing, and fewer misses than on my M11. The EV-1 is a competent and enjoyable camera to use. In many cases focusing will be meaningfully faster and easier on the EV-1. I think when you are able to try it out yourself you will be in agreement on the competence, and enjoyable shooting experience it offers.
For new users the learning curve to an M system is now greatly reduced. I think most could learn in get reliable focus using this camera very quickly. I know that we were hoping that Leica would come up with some new or leading edge focus aids for this camera. They didn't. But they did produce an elegant, functional, and capable camera to shoot M lenses on natively....Show more →
I think the problem is not that the EV-1 has an EVF, but us seasoned M users were expecting a more state of the art EVF experience.
Our POV is most probably completely different from that of someone who is just entering the Leica ecosystem.
stgrove wrote:
Yes I stand corrected and I should know since I own that lens also.
So I guess the Elcan 50 copy was next and then the SPII? I have them all and like using them too with the exception of the black brass Rigid copy which I have sitting in my dry cabinet for many months. Why? I seem to like using the X2Dii more than any camera in many, many years.
Yeah I think that was the order - 35 8 E, then the collapsible 8E, Elcan, SPII etc
highdesertmesa wrote:
Other cameras with IBIS have the sensor pushed to the front and the IBIS mech pushed rearward, then the M adapter makes the lens poke quite far forward. The thinner the flange distance, the more the M lens protrudes forward from the front of the mount. Even if you mod the sensor of another camera so that the cover glass thickness matches the M sensor, you're still left with a longer overall setup. The exception would be cameras that don't have IBIS like the Sigma fp, Fujifilm X-M5, etc., which can be as small as or smaller than the M.
9K *is* an insane price to pay to keep film M body thickness on a sensor optimized for M lenses, but there's nothing in the Leica ecosystem that is a sensible purchase anyway, so I'm not sure how this differs much in that respect....Show more →
My comment was purely a reaction to the statement that we’re making statements about a camera we have not handled as if that camera offers any new tech that we are not yet familiar with.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Depends on the lens, but as can be seen from many of Fred's M lens tests on Sony bodies, there can be significant impacts to IQ in the corners and/or midframe on an unmodified Sony sensor (or any other non-M sensor). If you're just shooting portraits wide open with the subject's eyes in the center of the frame, then yeah, you'll see little impact.
I'm pretty happy with M lenses on my X-M5, though, since problematic corners are cropped out.
And my experience with Canon and Nikon bodies is that it’s often not a problem.
1bwana1 wrote:
No, as I said my reaction was luke warm because I am satisfied with my current Leica kit M11/SL3/D-Lux 8 and didn't feel that the EV-1 offered me something I didn't already have the capability of handling. The EV-1 didn't offer any exciting new technology for me.
That said, if the only platform I had available to shoot my M mount lenses on was the EV-1 I be happy. I would likely get every image that I am getting today, and probably have better framing, and fewer misses than on my M11. The EV-1 is a competent and enjoyable camera to use. In many cases focusing will be meaningfully faster and easier on the EV-1. I think when you are able to try it out yourself you will be in agreement on the competence, and enjoyable shooting experience it offers.
For new users the learning curve to an M system is now greatly reduced. I think most could learn in get reliable focus using this camera very quickly. I know that we were hoping that Leica would come up with some new or leading edge focus aids for this camera. They didn't. But they did produce an elegant, functional, and capable camera to shoot M lenses on natively....Show more →
You also mentioned of the handful that tested the new EV1 alongside you, not one bought the new camera, whereas one bought an M11 if I recall correctly. That speaks volumes about how non-pluses they also were about buying one. I guess they were all current M users?
1bwana1 wrote:
No, as I said my reaction was luke warm because I am satisfied with my current Leica kit M11/SL3/D-Lux 8 and didn't feel that the EV-1 offered me something I didn't already have the capability of handling. The EV-1 didn't offer any exciting new technology for me.
It definitely depends where you are coming from. You mention the D-Lux 8. That is also rather old technology paired for the first time with the familiar Leica interface. People who got in with the D-Lux 8 tend to like it I have the impression but a lot of other people did not upgrade and were rather angry that Leica removed certain features. So it is all relative...
Desmolicious wrote:
You also mentioned of the handful that tested the new EV1 alongside you, not one bought the new camera, whereas one bought an M11 if I recall correctly. That speaks volumes about how non-pluses they also were about buying one. I guess they were all current M users?
Yes, I found that an interesting thing about the group I was with. Especially the one guy who was totally unable to use the RangeFinder and shot his M11 full time with the Visoflex. I thought he would be the perfect target for this camera. Still, he didn't buy because he also always used the tilt capability of the Visoflex.
Everyone liked the new camera, but nobody enough to swap it out for what they already enjoyed using. It was a small sample though for sure.
'TTartsan or 7art M camera? What are we talking about?'
Perpetual innovator DJI is best positioned. They focus on modularization and miniaturisation and 'own' the consumer drone market (90%). Action cams, gimbals and the masterful Ronin 4D. An M-mount EVF camera would be a walk in the park for their engineers. That would get a lot of talking about, even just an announcement of intent would set the hares running.
1bwana1 wrote:
Yes, I found that an interesting thing about the group I was with. Especially the one guy who was totally unable to use the RangeFinder and shot his M11 full time with the Visoflex. I thought he would be the perfect target for this camera. Still, he didn't buy because he also always used the tilt capability of the Visoflex.
Everyone liked the new camera, but nobody enough to swap it out for what they already enjoyed using. It was a small sample though for sure.
Thanks for your input. As for the small sample size, it is certainly bigger than in all of the US at the moment!
stgrove wrote:
Not that good. Like less than 300 shots whereas the M11 is over 800 if I recall.
Many comments, but the one that most seem to miss is that the Viso2 has some form of IBIS it uses, but for sure no mention of any use of IBIS in this Q3 EVF M EV1 camera.
I'd be inclined to believe the 300-ish number. The Leica CL had a 1200 mAh battery, and the M11 is an 1800 mAh battery. Double the MP and more powerful processor, and I'd be surprised if you have a battery experience any different than the CL was. Folks mentioned the refresh rate being low in the EVF, likely a battery management strategy.
I suspect that this will be the Achilles Heel of the experience for folks. Of course, it just means carrying spare batteries and / or topping off more often with the USB-C port. I wouldn't be surprised if we get reports of 200 - 300 from folks, in actual use (triple res / raw + JPG 14 bit, 5 FPS, etc.), while others figure out strategies (like jpg only) that have a more meager consumption of juice.
I know that with the CL ... it could range a bit, but certainly nothing in the 500+ territory. I'd be very surprised if this one is much different from the CL experience.
philip_pj wrote:
'TTartsan or 7art M camera? What are we talking about?'
Perpetual innovator DJI is best positioned. They focus on modularization and miniaturisation and 'own' the consumer drone market (90%). Action cams, gimbals and the masterful Ronin 4D. An M-mount EVF camera would be a walk in the park for their engineers. That would get a lot of talking about, even just an announcement of intent would set the hares running.
Keep in mind DJI is now part of the L Mount Alliance. There is still hope for a new CL from China.
stgrove wrote:
Not that good. Like less than 300 shots whereas the M11 is over 800 if I recall.
Many comments, but the one that most seem to miss is that the Viso2 has some form of IBIS it uses, but for sure no mention of any use of IBIS in this Q3 EVF M EV1 camera.
I went out today with a full battery charge on my M10r. Shot 45 snaps (two keepers woo-hoo!), battery charge showed 95% left.
So extrapolating that means about 900 shots per charge. Not sure what people actually get.
Less than 300 per charge on the EV1 would be weak.
