I would consider a camera like this for wide angle lenses if:
1. The startup was instantaneous;
2. Had better focus aids than what's already available in the M11 live view;
3. Leica makes a silver version with a brass top plate.
Hi,
Not interested because the camera cannot control the diaphragm of M lenses and does not bring any new photographic capability.
I would instantly buy an improved visoflex for M11 and following, a version of M11 (or 12 ?) with optical visor with greater enlargement, similar to M3 etc...
Offer for much more convenient electronic visor cameras exists already, made by Leica or other manufacturers at lower cost...
They have ibis, autofocus, nice lenses and for some allowing pictures not really easily made before (Sony A1)
I think Leica engineers where not convinced themselves of the pertinence of this new offer.
I can’t see what an M EV-1 offers that I don’t already have with an M11 and visoflex. And my visoflex flips up allowing me to focus with the camera held low.
As much as I like the visoflex, I do not and would not want to use it as the primary way of focusing. Over 50 or when using a Noctilux wide open the visoflex (or an EVF) works great. From 28-50, rangefinder all the way.
I want to like this but other than the form factor, given that they have the same sensor, I'm struggling with why one would not just by an SL3 with an adapter for M lenses. It's weather sealed, it focuses the same, and it has more features with a longer-lasting battery. It's also significantly less expensive, particularly on the used market.
BlueSkiesAbove wrote:
I want to like this but other than the form factor, given that they have the same sensor, I'm struggling with why one would not just by an SL3 with an adapter for M lenses. It's weather sealed, it focuses the same, and it has more features with a longer-lasting battery. It's also significantly less expensive, particularly on the used market.
Well that is what I settled on for my solution.
When I want AF I have the amazing APO-SL 3 primes set for when I want the absolute best IQ possible.
The ability to use long FL Zooms with AF when I need those.
I have adapted M lenses when I want the smaller size and near perfect ergonomics in MF lenses available, with options for near perfection to high character lenses.
When coupled with a standard M It makes for a uniquely powerful option filled system.
I bought 100% of my SL system and a significant number of my M system used, so pricing was much more reasonable as well.
I can do everything I want with those two options except really fast action. For that I have the Sony A1 and GM Zooms. But honestly I am down to using that just a few times a year.
What I might describe as close-up look of the new M EV1. I enjoyed the video but also feel a bit better acquainted with what the M EV1 is all about with the different perspectives presented:
Bigheadtaco : "The New Leica M EV1: The Friendlier Rangefinder-less M Camera?"
Joel Cahane wrote:
Hi,
Not interested because the camera cannot control the diaphragm of M lenses and does not bring any new photographic capability.
I would instantly buy an improved visoflex for M11 and following, a version of M11 (or 12 ?) with optical visor with greater enlargement, similar to M3 etc...
Offer for much more convenient electronic visor cameras exists already, made by Leica or other manufacturers at lower cost...
They have ibis, autofocus, nice lenses and for some allowing pictures not really easily made before (Sony A1)
I think Leica engineers where not convinced themselves of the pertinence of this new offer.
All true, but as an enthusiastic A1 user I have to say that the Leica M usage experience is easily distinguished by its simplicity. Is that difference worth the money Leica is charging for the EV1? Well, that's really for individual consumers to decide (I'd say no), but I don't think a spec-sheet-to-spec-sheet feature comparison accurately captures the type of user whose cross-shopping list will include an M EV1.
Does anyone else have an easier time with a rangefinder than using focus aids on an EVF? I find every time I shoot manual on my fuji gfx or xh2s focus peaking really just doesn't get me tac sharp photos. The only time it works for manual focus is if I punch in to 5x or 10x zoom. I don't really enjoy shooting like that. On my old xpro2 I would go ovf and have the sub display set to 5x for focus confirmation, this was a pretty good solution but the m evf1 doesn't have an optical window at all.
I pick mine up today. I’ll use it for where my M11 isn’t ideal. Ultra wide, the 135APO, close up and my CV 50mm 1.0. I’m not a massive fan of the Visoflex or the size of an SL3 when using M lenses. I don’t like adaptors.
I really like the 135 APO but haven’t used it much because it’s a PITA on the RF. Should be a breeze on the EV1.
flash wrote:
I pick mine up today. I’ll use it for where my M11 isn’t ideal. Ultra wide, the 135APO, close up and my CV 50mm 1.0. I’m not a massive fan of the Visoflex or the size of an SL3 when using M lenses. I don’t like adaptors.
I really like the 135 APO but haven’t used it much because it’s a PITA on the RF. Should be a breeze on the EV1.
Gordon
Congratulations on the new camera. I am confident that you will enjoy this one very much. I look forward to reading about your experiences with it.
Makten wrote:
I'm one of those that have lusted for an M camera with EVF, but I don't see the point of making it as large (yes, large) as the rangefinder models when there is no rangefinder to take up space. I also don't understand the pricing when an EVF is extremely less expensive than a rangefinder to produce.
I would probably get one if the price was reasonable. Which will never happen with Leica.
It does not add anything unique or interesting to the shooting experience, maybe a bit of suffering, and OOF images if you got used to get everything sharp. There is nothing there for a new user if they have any other modern camera. From this point of view M11 is clearly a better choice just because of optical viewfinder and rangefinder.
zConcept wrote:
Does anyone else have an easier time with a rangefinder than using focus aids on an EVF? I find every time I shoot manual on my fuji gfx or xh2s focus peaking really just doesn't get me tac sharp photos. The only time it works for manual focus is if I punch in to 5x or 10x zoom. I don't really enjoy shooting like that. On my old xpro2 I would go ovf and have the sub display set to 5x for focus confirmation, this was a pretty good solution but the m evf1 doesn't have an optical window at all. ...Show more →
If you think about it, focus peaking is not designed for razor sharp focusing. It is more to get you into the range of acceptable focus, and it does a good job at it. Rangefinder can get sharper focus, but it comes with a lot of fine print.
I briefly thought that maybe it could be an eventual buy for studio work but I doubt it would ever get down to a price that makes sense for buying it over a SL body for paid/studio work. For event/wedding work I would love it but that isn't as huge portion of my work these days. I use a rangefinder for my personal work/walk around because I don't want much camera input so outside of the price dropping dramatically I think I'll keep looking at used M10 prices for my M240 upgrade
shotbytherobot wrote:
I briefly thought that maybe it could be an eventual buy for studio work but I doubt it would ever get down to a price that makes sense for buying it over a SL body for paid/studio work. For event/wedding work I would love it but that isn't as huge portion of my work these days. I use a rangefinder for my personal work/walk around because I don't want much camera input so outside of the price dropping dramatically I think I'll keep looking at used M10 prices for my M240 upgrade
At any price an M will never match the IQ of an SL3 and APO-SL primes for studio work. No full frame camera currently available does.
The best news is that used SL prices for both bodies and lenses are low enough to make sense.
flash wrote:
I pick mine up today. I’ll use it for where my M11 isn’t ideal. Ultra wide, the 135APO, close up and my CV 50mm 1.0. I’m not a massive fan of the Visoflex or the size of an SL3 when using M lenses. I don’t like adaptors.
I really like the 135 APO but haven’t used it much because it’s a PITA on the RF. Should be a breeze on the EV1.
Gordon
+1 for 135 APO. If I'm shooting mine on an M, it's either stopped down to f8 or so for RF focusing, or LCD for focusing at wider apertures. Hyperfocal with f/8 makes for a good pano stitch, too.
I like it too but I'm not using it that much. When I need a tele, I prefer an AF/IBIS camera and regret that except for Micro 43, there are no compact high-quality solutions.
And I've noticed that 99% of my M pictures I like are shot between 28mm and 90mm. No surprise here. I've also known for decades that having less lenses with me leads to better pictures.
But the dark side of the GAS is very strong.
But of course your mileage may vary. For someone who uses 90mm and 135mm or very wide-angles and wants a FF compact system, the EV1 makes sense if one does not need stabilization, AF and is ready to pay the full price.
zConcept wrote:
Does anyone else have an easier time with a rangefinder than using focus aids on an EVF? I find every time I shoot manual on my fuji gfx or xh2s focus peaking really just doesn't get me tac sharp photos. The only time it works for manual focus is if I punch in to 5x or 10x zoom. I don't really enjoy shooting like that. On my old xpro2 I would go ovf and have the sub display set to 5x for focus confirmation, this was a pretty good solution but the m evf1 doesn't have an optical window at all. ...Show more →
I prefer a rangefinder over peaking or magnification in an EVF.
olegkin wrote:
It does not add anything unique or interesting to the shooting experience, maybe a bit of suffering, and OOF images if you got used to get everything sharp. There is nothing there for a new user if they have any other modern camera. From this point of view M11 is clearly a better choice just because of optical viewfinder and rangefinder.
It adds the possibility to use M lenses without crappy image quality, because the sensor stack is made for those lenses. Personally I don't want a rangefinder camera since much of what I do is about very precise composition.
If they didn't reduce the size significantly, nor did they add IBIS then I don't get why they didn't include the EVF as an additional option to using the range finder - other than technical ability/strategy for a future release.
With the x100vi you just hold down this button and it switches from optical to digital viewfinder.
If they're not making it compact nor adding in tonnes of high end features, I think they should go the dual route if possible.
That would make me more comfortable picking one so I don't have to also worry about calibration as strictly. Lenses here are difficult enought to return for being decentered.
.. If they also add in ibis and make it a little smaller :chefs_kiss:
Fujifilm has patents on the dual finder. And really, it’s only OK quality. Lower resolution, low magnification and the EVF part is quite poor for focusing manually. Even the larger XPro cameras don’t wow most people with their finder quality. The PiP tech is great but really not good enough yet. I don’t think anything below 5MP is good enough.
I’m happy with the EVF only route. The M11 still allows the Visoflex if you want both. With the limitations of that approach. They’ll need to do some serious battery management tricks to get a more powerful processor and EVF in the M body.
