Give it time. Despite the initial resistance from radiational M RF shooters as it develops and gets improved features I think it has the potential to be a third leg in the M RF, Q, MEV, trilogy. I personally know 6 Q users who have bought one to have the ability to change lenses, and 2 new Leica shooters who have chosen the M11-EV1 as their entry point into Leica. My U.S. friends haven't even had the opportunity to try or buy one yet.
That is good news. Leica has said that M-EV1 needs to sell well for it to be continued in the next M generation.
Leica has the ability to greatly influence acceptance. Imagine if Leica releases a M12 -EV2 with fast boot times, some enhanced focus aids, and IBIS before releasing such features in a traditional RF M. I know there would be one in my bag on day 1.
I do not believe that the M-EV line will deviate from the rangefinder line. M-EV2 will be based on M12. Only if M12 has IBIS (fingers crossed) then M-EV2 will have IBIS.
A great deal remains to be known before we make such statements about Niche product. Heck all M cameras are Niche...
1bwana1 wrote:
Despite the initial resistance from radiational M RF shooters
Funny because this is not what I read here, no resistance at all as most of said RF M shooters also use modern EVF cameras but disappointment to see that the M-EV1 offers very little more than a M11 with the Visoflex and that other brands are more advanced when it comes to shooting MF lenses on a digital platform.
pmeheut wrote:
Funny because this is not what I read here, no resistance at all as most of said RF M shooters also use modern EVF cameras but disappointment to see that the M-EV1 offers very little more than a M11 with the Visoflex and that other brands are more advanced when it comes to shooting MF lenses on a digital platform.
How is shooting Sony with M or CV lenses more advanced? Nikon's and Hasselblad's system works as long as you do not stop down the aperture too much. Nikon Zf's green square is unusable when shooting CV 35 mm at f11 (yes I own the camera and the lens and I have tried it).
SrMi wrote:
I have owned and used one since the launch.
That is good news. Leica has said that M-EV1 needs to sell well for it to be continued in the next M generation.
I do not believe that the M-EV line will deviate from the rangefinder line. M-EV2 will be based on M12. Only if M12 has IBIS (fingers crossed) then M-EV2 will have IBIS.
Well then you see the attraction and bought a M11 EV1. Now I know one more person who bought one. It is being recieved well to some extent.
I haven't said that the EV version should deviate from the rest of the M line at all. Only that since Leica will never release all the variants with the new features simultaneously (they never do) they can add credibility and encourage acceptance by which of the M line gets released first.
SrMi wrote:
How is shooting Sony with M or CV lenses more advanced?
Never talked about Sony.
SrMi wrote:
Nikon's and Hasselblad's system works as long as you do not stop down the aperture too much.
Same with all brands including Leica and exactly what I said above.
This is a problem that has no solution AFAIK but just one use case. When using a longer lens or being mode wide-open, coupling focusing aids with subject detection, having a in-image zoom or a Canon like assist would be interesting.
Right now, the M-EV1 is just a M11 with a slightly better Visoflex instead of the rangefinder. If you are ok with it, fine.
But many said here that they would be interested in such a camera but not in the current execution at the current price because we know perfectly well how limiting it is to focus M lenses with only focus-peaking or full screen zoom but no stabilization.
You wrote that other brands are more advanced in MF shooting and Sony is certainly one of more popular "other brands" that are used for M lenses.
Same with all brands including Leica and exactly what I said above.
This is a problem that has no solution AFAIK but just one use case. When using a longer lens or being mode wide-open, coupling focusing aids with subject detection, having a in-image zoom or a Canon like assist would be interesting.
Right now, the M-EV1 is just a M11 with a slightly better Visoflex instead of the rangefinder. If you are ok with it, fine.
But many said here that they would be interested in such a camera but not in the current execution at the current price because we know perfectly well how limiting it is to focus M lenses with only focus-peaking or full screen zoom but no stabilization.
...Show more →
M11 and M-EV1 Leicas have EVF/LCD stabilization. It helps.
This new release is definitely stirring things up among M shooters... For so long the RF has been the thing that made an M an M, and everyone pretty much agreed on that. With the M EV1, it feels like that definition is shifting. Some folks, especially the ones who lived on the Visoflex, are totally on board. Others are unsure, and a lot of us are just trying to wrap our heads around Leica's change of heart and where they want to take the system.
It's not the end of the world, it's just the M lineup offering something that goes against what Leica has preached for decades, and people are reacting to that.. As for me, I shoot the M for the rangefinder experience, and that's not changing. I will keep enjoying my film and digital M bodies no matter what comes next but at the same time I'm glad to see plenty of photographers enjoying the new EV1.
Fred Miranda wrote:
This new release is definitely stirring things up among M shooters... For so long the RF has been the thing that made an M an M, and everyone pretty much agreed on that. With the M EV1, it feels like that definition is shifting. Some folks, especially the ones who lived on the Visoflex, are totally on board. Others are unsure, and a lot of us are just trying to wrap our heads around Leica's change of heart and where they want to take the system.
It's not the end of the world, it's just the M lineup offering something that goes against what Leica has preached for decades, and people are reacting to that.. As for me, I shoot the M for the rangefinder experience, and that's not changing. I will keep enjoying my film and digital M bodies no matter what comes next but at the same time I'm glad to see plenty of photographers enjoying the new EV1....Show more →
While I'm probably an outlier and folks will dissent ... but, for M, the M is Mechanical. The RF is mechanically connected to the lens, the aperture adjustment is mechanical, the shutter is mechanically controlled, etc. The tactile interface of the mechanical operation is what makes an M an M. While Leica may not have had such notions in their mindset ... it's just how it resonates / differentiates itself (for me) Again, not necessarily a truism, but ... that's the interface response I feel when I use an M vs. other cameras.
The alternate / variant EVF ... isn't what defines the M for me. If the remainder of the camera remains the tactile, interface as we know it, it's still an M in my book, just a variant with an EVF option (compare to -D, as a variant without an LCD). The RF is a longstanding historical attribute of the M, but it isn't what makes an M an M (imo). The RF is just the easiest way to differentiate it from other cameras (but, not necessarily the definition).
SrMi wrote:
I believe M-EV1 is too niche a product to warrant specific lenses.
It's funny, my opinion is exactly the opposite. To me, it is not a question of developing specific lenses for a niche M-EV1 -- rather, a proper M-EV camera will open up the M system to all the types and qualities and brands of lenses that every other mirrorless camera owner has enjoyed for years. And without resorting to all the extraneous trappings Leica had to develop to make the RF as usable as it is.
Just think about the burdens the RF imposes upon an M user:
- limitations on lenses at the wide end and the long end;
- limitations on zoom lenses (and, really, any other lens that fails to match the RF frame lines);
- limitations on using lenses from other brands that aren't calibrated or matched with the RF system;
- the need to buy and add separate viewfinder magnification to focus long lenses;
- the need to buy and add separate, specific viewfinders/goggles for specific lenses;
- the need to send the whole camera off periodically to calibrate the RF system.
And then, when the RF system is simply insufficient to focus a particular lens, an M user must buy and mount a separate EV (a Visoflex). And apparently it is less capable than the EV in the M EV1!
I certainly understand why someone steeped in the M world would call the M EV1 niche -- it is new and different and exists on a different planet. But if you look at the entire camera universe, you might find the traditional M camera is the niche product, principally because of the RF.
I long have loved almost everything about the M: its size, shape, weight, build, simplicity, and access to lenses. By ditching the RF for an EV, I truly believe Leica has freed the M from a huge limitation and started down the path of creating what might become the world's best camera. I don't believe the M EV1 gets there -- we need more creativity in the development of EV focusing aids. But the company has started down the path and I cannot wait to see how it develops!!
Fred Miranda wrote:
This new release is definitely stirring things up among M shooters... For so long the RF has been the thing that made an M an M, and everyone pretty much agreed on that. With the M EV1, it feels like that definition is shifting. Some folks, especially the ones who lived on the Visoflex, are totally on board. Others are unsure, and a lot of us are just trying to wrap our heads around Leica's change of heart and where they want to take the system.
It's not the end of the world, it's just the M lineup offering something that goes against what Leica has preached for decades, and people are reacting to that.. As for me, I shoot the M for the rangefinder experience, and that's not changing. I will keep enjoying my film and digital M bodies no matter what comes next but at the same time I'm glad to see plenty of photographers enjoying the new EV1....Show more →
I think the M-EV1 has been misunderstood. Even though the idea of the M-EV1 has been part of the design of M11, the rangefinder Ms will continue and can never be replaced by an EVF-based M. Those who want an EVF in a Leica have a choice between SL3, Q3, and M-EV1, all covering different preferences. The only reason Leica launched M-EV1 was the pressure from its customers. Nothing has changed in Leica's commitment to the rangefinder.
I believe the adverse reaction to M-EV1 stems mainly from the misinformed fear that it is a first step toward eliminating rangefinders. AFAIK, Leica has said they are working hard to improve the rangefinder in the M12 and that the EVF line will be maintained only with minimal investment or may even be cancelled if the demand is not high enough.
While I enjoy shooting with M-EV1, it cannot replace the rangefinder experience. But not everybody likes the rangefinder experience. M-EV1 is the most compact EVF-based Leica camera.
CaliTexican wrote:
It's funny, my opinion is exactly the opposite. To me, it is not a question of developing specific lenses for a niche M-EV1 -- rather, a proper M-EV camera will open up the M system to all the types and qualities and brands of lenses that every other mirrorless camera owner has enjoyed for years. And without resorting to all the extraneous trappings Leica had to develop to make the RF as usable as it is.
Just think about the burdens the RF imposes upon an M user:
- limitations on lenses at the wide end and the long end;
- limitations on zoom lenses (and, really, any other lens that fails to match the RF frame lines);
- limitations on using lenses from other brands that aren't calibrated or matched with the RF system;
- the need to buy and add separate viewfinder magnification to focus long lenses;
- the need to buy and add separate, specific viewfinders/goggles for specific lenses;
- the need to send the whole camera off periodically to calibrate the RF system.
And then, when the RF system is simply insufficient to focus a particular lens, an M user must buy and mount a separate EV (a Visoflex). And apparently it is less capable than the EV in the M EV1!
I certainly understand why someone steeped in the M world would call the M EV1 niche -- it is new and different and exists on a different planet. But if you look at the entire camera universe, you might find the traditional M camera is the niche product, principally because of the RF.
I long have loved almost everything about the M: its size, shape, weight, build, simplicity, and access to lenses. By ditching the RF for an EV, I truly believe Leica has freed the M from a huge limitation and started down the path of creating what might become the world's best camera. I don't believe the M EV1 gets there -- we need more creativity in the development of EV focusing aids. But the company has started down the path and I cannot wait to see how it develops!!
Leica is not 100% committed to the M-EV1 line, but is doing it as a trial. I wish that they will continue the development.
As long as we do not have lenses with automatic aperture stop down, focusing will always be a pain when using an EVF, but it works great with a rangefinder ... unless Leica invents something completely new.
RustyBug wrote:
While I'm probably an outlier and folks will dissent ... but, for M, the M is Mechanical. The RF is mechanically connected to the lens, the aperture adjustment is mechanical, the shutter is mechanically controlled, etc. The tactile interface of the mechanical operation is what makes an M an M. While Leica may not have had such notions in their mindset ... it's just how it resonates / differentiates itself (for me) Again, not necessarily a truism, but ... that's the interface response I feel when I use an M vs. other cameras.
The alternate / variant EVF ... isn't what defines the M for me. If the remainder of the camera remains the tactile, interface as we know it, it's still an M in my book, just a variant with an EVF option (compare to -D, as a variant without an LCD). The RF is a longstanding historical attribute of the M, but it isn't what makes an M an M (imo). The RF is just the easiest way to differentiate it from other cameras (but, not necessarily the definition).
SrMi wrote:
The only reason Leica launched M-EV1 was the pressure from its customers.
They have responded to much lesser "pressure" from the market (-D variant).
+1 that they can retain the main RF designed unit, and the EV variant is ... well, just that ... a variant offering. Not sure why folks are in such a tizzy about it.
RustyBug wrote:
They have responded to much lesser "pressure" from the market (-D variant).
+1 that they can retain the main RF designed unit, and the EV variant is ... well, just that ... a variant offering. Not sure why folks are in such a tizzy about it. It's not like the sky is falling.
+1
I believe that the -D variant was less controversial within Leica than the M-EV1.
As Stefan Daniel said at the launch, if you do not like it, you do not buy it.
SrMi wrote:
For me, a camera is not mechanical as long as it needs a battery.
Yeah ... about that.
I shot the Nikon FE for that very reason. It used a battery for the electronically controlled shutter. But, my disdain for batteries (even back then) was quelled by the fact that it had a mechanical shutter default of 1/90 sec (iirc). Of course, it was a trivial matter to carry a spare (watch) battery in my bag, or to simply change out the battery every year.
But, I hear ya ... and that in its roots with film, the need for battery for the M was not what it is today. Still, I'd suggest the M is one of the "most mechanical" oriented cameras in the digital camera era ... batteries be darned.
Which, if we're talking about variants ... how about an M11 / M12 with an actual shutter release, re-cock lever. Maybe that whole matrix metering cycle could be over-ridden, so that you could "cock" the shutter after getting a meter reading (static, now), or just incorporate it without metering (i.e. manual setting).
Could you imagine using an M in Manual only, so that your settings are 100% controlled by you, and you have to re-cock it each frame. Talk about harkening back to the old days. (Of course, you could still have the options for matrix metering and that whole sequence / cycle thing, if you like).
I mean, part of the ethos of the M ... is the "slow down" and the "deliberate" mindset. I can't think of anything more "deliberate" than advance the camera to be prepared for the next frame, like stroking that lever. Yeah, that would be a very special tool.
I shot the Nikon FE for that very reason. It used a battery for the electronically controlled shutter. But, my disdain for batteries (even back then) was quelled by the fact that it had a mechanical shutter default of 1/90 sec (iirc). Of course, it was a trivial matter to carry a spare (watch) battery in my bag, or to simply change out the battery every year.
But, I hear ya ... and that in its roots with film, the need for battery for the M was not what it is today. Still, I'd suggest the M is one of the "most mechanical" oriented cameras in the digital camera era ... batteries be darned.
Which, if we're talking about variants ... how about an M11 / M12 with an actual shutter release, re-cock lever. Maybe that whole matrix metering cycle could be over-ridden, so that you could "cock" the shutter after getting a meter reading (static, now), or just incorporate it without metering (i.e. manual setting).
Could you imagine using an M in Manual only, so that your settings are 100% controlled by you, and you have to re-cock it each frame. Talk about harkening back to the old days. (Of course, you could still have the options for matrix metering and that whole sequence / cycle thing, if you like).
I mean, part of the ethos of the M ... is the "slow down" and the "deliberate" mindset. I can't think of anything more "deliberate" than advance the camera to be prepared for the next frame, like stroking that lever. Yeah, that would be a very special tool.
With all the different variants Leica has made with each model of their digital M cameras, especially the D variants without a screen, I always wondered why they hadn't made a variant that incorporated the shutter cocking mechanism like the Epson Rd-1. I would have thought that would have been a given, especially when combined with any number of D variants of M digital cameras.
In fact the M10-D was the perfect candidate, having the pseudo film advance lever combined with a rear dial instead of an LCD screen. Take away the wife fi connection and with no rear LCD screen and a pseudo film advance lever which re-cocked the shutter, I believe it would have been the most analogue of all Leica digital M cameras. I'm perplexed this didn't happen as the technology has been there for ages.
DandA123 wrote:
With all the different variants Leica has made with each model of their digital M cameras, especially the D variants without a screen, I always wondered why they hadn't made a variant that incorporated the shutter cocking mechanism like the Epson Rd-1. I would have thought that would have been a given, especially when combined with any number of D variants of M digital cameras.
In fact the M10-D was the perfect candidate, having the pseudo film advance lever combined with a rear dial instead of an LCD screen. Take away the wife fi connection and with no rear LCD screen and a pseudo film advance lever which re-cocked the shutter, I believe it would have been the most analogue of all Leica digital M cameras. I'm perplexed this didn't happen as the technology has been there for ages.
digital camera era ... batteries be darned. 