taffy
Well-known
Also considering the Visoflex for my 21mm, 25mm and C-Sonnar
robert blu
quiet photographer
I had the M10 overheating only in summer, very hot day, outdoor. Which is strange because I usually switch off the camera when walking around and only switch on when I approach something interesting, which could be a building, a group of people or other. So the camera was not continuosly on. But it happened!
Recently I used it inside home with the CV 75/2.5 and did not have any problem. I guess in Florida you have high temperature most of time.
But it is different if you drive somewhere, get off the car a short time to take a few pictures and than back in it or if you walk half a day around to take pictures. This is something you know better.
If you plan to use it only as additional finder to experience different lenses I would go for it!
Keep in mind batteries: it is better to have one spared fully charged: consumption is higher!
PS: interesting, I learned I could focus the 75/2.5 with the RF exactly as with the EVF ! Both gave me in focus pictures, but this is a different story
mcfingon
Western Australia
I don't know if it is still possible to use Olympus viewfinders with the M10 Raid. I have used the VF4 on an Olympus m43 camera for years with no problems. If that will fit the M10 maybe it's at least a cheaper option.
John Mc
https://asia.olympus-imaging.com/product/dslr/accessory/optical/vf4.html
John Mc
https://asia.olympus-imaging.com/product/dslr/accessory/optical/vf4.html
Vince Lupo
Whatever
I had the Olympus finder and used it from time to time on my 246. Honestly I didn't really find it of much use -- I thought it was going to be a benefit for use with the Noctilux or 50 Summilux but it didn't really help. Problem for me was that you can't adjust the focus point in the finder -- it's in the center. So if you're using a wider aperture and you focus on a point and then recompose the image, that initial focus point is likely to be out of focus. Guess I'm a bit spoiled now with mirrorless cameras (like the Nikon Z7) that have a jillion focusing points and you can really lock in the focus in a corner of the frame, for example.
I didn't find it to be 'bulky' as such, as it only weighs like maybe 2 oz if that. But it did take up real estate on top of the camera and in the end I didn't find it to be of any great advantage. Here again though, this was just my personal experience, yet I could see how this EVF (and in turn the 020 version) would be advantageous to others, particularly for use with adapted lenses.
As an aside, someone here mentioned the other Visoflex (the old one!) -- I did have a version of it, which was the Camcraft Z-Housing that Norman Goldberg (Don's father) created back in the 1960's to go along with his motorized M2 camera setup. Don told me that his Dad made less than 10 of this version. The wonderful thing about that particular Visoflex was that it had a pellicle mirror, so no moving parts, no release arm and no image blackout. That was a really amazing piece of kit and used it with a number of old lenses (65, 400, 560), but I ended up selling it a little while ago along with all my other Leica stuff. Of the two Visoflexes (the new one and the old one), this one was actually fun to use.
I didn't find it to be 'bulky' as such, as it only weighs like maybe 2 oz if that. But it did take up real estate on top of the camera and in the end I didn't find it to be of any great advantage. Here again though, this was just my personal experience, yet I could see how this EVF (and in turn the 020 version) would be advantageous to others, particularly for use with adapted lenses.
As an aside, someone here mentioned the other Visoflex (the old one!) -- I did have a version of it, which was the Camcraft Z-Housing that Norman Goldberg (Don's father) created back in the 1960's to go along with his motorized M2 camera setup. Don told me that his Dad made less than 10 of this version. The wonderful thing about that particular Visoflex was that it had a pellicle mirror, so no moving parts, no release arm and no image blackout. That was a really amazing piece of kit and used it with a number of old lenses (65, 400, 560), but I ended up selling it a little while ago along with all my other Leica stuff. Of the two Visoflexes (the new one and the old one), this one was actually fun to use.
raid
Dad Photographer
I have an Olympus VF-2, but it does not fit the M10.
raid
Dad Photographer
When I posted this thread I also posted a thread on the Rollei mount Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 QBM.
https://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=173907
I was undecided between getting a Visoflex for the M10 or getting my 50mm lens converted to Leica M mount (for $1000).
I now begin to think that neither expense is really needed.
https://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=173907
I was undecided between getting a Visoflex for the M10 or getting my 50mm lens converted to Leica M mount (for $1000).
I now begin to think that neither expense is really needed.
View Range
Well-known
The PLOOT/Visoflex I/Visoflex II/Visoflex III were mechanical devices that used a mirror like an SLR. All of them were simple, robust and easily repaired. Some Visoflex' were used extensively and can be well worn. But I never heard of one that be tuned up to work perfectly even though not beautiful.
Raid is asking about the current electronic viewfinder. Why marketing people aren't cleaver enough think of new trademarks for new items, and have to use 35 year old trademarks, is beyond me.
ellisson
Well-known
Coming back to the original question, "is it worth the high cost"?, ask yourself "What would I use it for?" "What am I missing now that the finder would provide?"
If you need/want to use non-RF-coupled lens with adapters, then it would be useful.
If you want to use it for extreme focal lengths on either end (wide or tele) rather than optical external viewfinder options, then it would be useful.
Otherwise, probably not worth it. Regarding reliability: If you drop it with significant impact on a hard surface or get it soaked with water, don't expect much. But if you treat it with reasonable care, it will be reliable as about anything Leica.
If you need/want to use non-RF-coupled lens with adapters, then it would be useful.
If you want to use it for extreme focal lengths on either end (wide or tele) rather than optical external viewfinder options, then it would be useful.
Otherwise, probably not worth it. Regarding reliability: If you drop it with significant impact on a hard surface or get it soaked with water, don't expect much. But if you treat it with reasonable care, it will be reliable as about anything Leica.
raid
Dad Photographer
These are good questions. So, what would I get out of having such a finder? I have many lenses that have been adapter to ltm or M by some people in the past years. I have more good lenses than I could ever really use or need. On the other hand, there are some very good SLR lenses that I have not been able to adapt to Leica mount.
(1) I could finally use my Zeiss 35/1.4 Distagon, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 Planar QBM lenses on my Leica M cameras with the help of an inexpensive QBM-M adapter without RF coupling and such an e-finder that would work with the M10's LiveView.
I could use my Canon FD 50/1.2 L and 85/1.2 L with a cheap FD-M adapter, if it exists. I have a FD-ltm Adapter B. Both lenses are superb.
(2) I could even try using my Canon 500/4.5 L lens with my M10. Could be cool. The other extreme could be the Canon FD 7.5mm or FD 17mm.
I have some wide angle lenses that are non-retrofocus lenses, and their rear glass would hit the sensor, so they cannot be used with the M8, M9, or M10. Is there a way by which they could be used with digital cameras without hitting the sensors?
It may be useful to try out such an e-finder to be able to enjoy such lenses with an M10 camera.
Mackinaw
Think Different
I have an M240 and the Olympus electric viewfinder (not sure which model). This is exactly how I use this finder, for use with my Canon FL-F 500/5.6 telephoto. The finder, with live-view and focus peaking, makes focusing and composition quick, accurate and easy. I'd think you'd find the same.
Jim B.
raid
Dad Photographer
Hi Jim,
Leica changed things on the M10 so that the Olympus style finders cannot be used on the M10. I hope that I am wrong here!
KismetSky
Established
The Olympus VF-2 and the Leica EVF2 are one and the same and both are for use on the M240 line and the Leica X-Vario, X-E and X2. Out of production (I'm in the market for one!)
The newer Leica Visoflex (Typ 020) works with the Leica T/TL, Leica X (Typ 113), and Leica M10 line. Much more expensive but reportedly better in use.
The newer Leica Visoflex (Typ 020) works with the Leica T/TL, Leica X (Typ 113), and Leica M10 line. Much more expensive but reportedly better in use.
Mackinaw
Think Different
I can't tell you anything about that, but using an EV (whoever makes it) with your Leica will open up a lot of new photographic possibilities. It's indispensable for long telephoto work, plus I like using my old FD lenses on a modern digital camera.
Jim B.
tightsqueez
Well-known
I’ve used the 020 visoflex. For real time M kinda photography, it’s horrible. For everything else, it’s indispensable. I loved it with third party lenses.
I can’t comment on value when it comes to Leica gear, sorry.
I can’t comment on value when it comes to Leica gear, sorry.
Mackinaw
Think Different
I bought my Olympus finder from KEH. Not sure about availability now, but back when i bought mine, there were a few on their website.
Jim B.
raid
Dad Photographer
I doubt it that any would fit the M10.
KismetSky
Established
Thanks Jim. I looked and they're currently all sold out - I know their inventory can churn fairly quickly on more popular items so I'll check back now and then.
raid
Dad Photographer
raid
Dad Photographer
OK, let's talk about money. The finder costs $635 plus shipping from NYC, whereas it costs less than $500 shipped from Hong Kong. Both in new condition.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
That sounds right. I paid $400 for mine in HK.
Just a side note, there are many more options for using classic lenses on a mirrorless body like a Sony etc than on an M. It’s fine if you only want to adapt SLR lenses.