Do you use a Leica Digital Visoflex finder?

I live here so don’t have experience with which one does mail order. I can say I paid cash so the price was low. For mail order after factoring in PP fees, exchange rate and shipping, $500 is good actually. You should be ok if you buy from an eBay power seller.


I sent you a PM for a shop I normally use. I don’t want to promote someone’s business unnecessarily.
 
View Range said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes I know. I have a 1,2,2A. and two 3`s. + black 65, 90 2.8, 125 2.5, 135 4.0 , 200 4.0 , 280 4.8. 400 6.8 and 560 . The one 3 plus black 65 (improved over the chrome) was the Leica rep`s sample when they were discontinued. Remember when we had reps? He knew me by name. The biggest dealer in the country was local to me and I stopped in twice a week. I could find anything.
Guess GAS is still with me, but has subsided.

During that time most dealers put adds in a plain photo advertising newspaper. We could subscribe to it. Colonial Camera had “double truck” ads. Forget the name.

Camera shows were monthly with 20/30 dealers and customers were elbow to elbow. Shows still exist every three months, but with 15 dealers and 10 customers. The major dealers have passed on and gen two has taken over or not, mostly not. Adorama even sent reps to some. But we have the internet. Life moves on.
 
Horses for course but i always found having an optional evf is antiquated for the m system, which is most notable for its rangefinder experience. I mean you purchased an m for the rangefinder then use the evf , which makes the m rangefinder useless; itll be just like another mirrorless body. The previous film implementation was one that the rangefinder focuses and the other viewfinder for framing. The digital implementation makes the rangefinder redundant excess. It was poor implementation on leicas part and now requires a hybrid experience for new and old technologies to come together. Much like the fuji x pro series.
Some argue about the incompatibility, but the necessity is the mother of invention and im sure leica engineers can come up with a solution. Or did i put too much faith. The hybrid system is an elegant way of those m shooters who wanted to have their cake and eat it too. Nevertheless the visoflex is outdated as much as the leica x it was originally designed for....

The only time when an attachable evf was truly needed was in the x and tl series. Leica has been taking their consumers for granted with an outdated evf

My opinion & 2c rant...others however hold onto the rangefinder integrity to keep things the same. Though i remind people the rangefinder window to highlight the framelines has been replaced by a digital one and they put a damn lcd on the back...so much on integrity eh...lol
 
The digital M bodies are expensive because they are Leicas. Getting pass that if possible I would be interested to know how much the rangefinder contributes to the cost and if it would be reasonable to say a future M with an EVF sans RF would be less expensive? The SL2 is a lot less expensive than the M10R.
 
cboy said:
Horses for course but i always found having an optional evf is antiquated for the m system, which is most notable for its rangefinder experience. I mean you purchased an m for the rangefinder then use the evf , which makes the m rangefinder useless; itll be just like another mirrorless body. The previous film implementation was one that the rangefinder focuses and the other viewfinder for framing. The digital implementation makes the rangefinder redundant excess. It was poor implementation on leicas part and now requires a hybrid experience for new and old technologies to come together. Much like the fuji x pro series.
Some argue about the incompatibility, but the necessity is the mother of invention and im sure leica engineers can come up with a solution. Or did i put too much faith. The hybrid system is an elegant way of those m shooters who wanted to have their cake and eat it too. Nevertheless the visoflex is outdated as much as the leica x it was originally designed for....

The only time when an attachable evf was truly needed was in the x and tl series. Leica has been taking their consumers for granted with an outdated evf

My opinion & 2c rant...others however hold onto the rangefinder integrity to keep things the same. Though i remind people the rangefinder window to highlight the framelines has been replaced by a digital one and they put a damn lcd on the back...so much on integrity eh...lol
Click to expand...

All that aside, some go for M cameras (including digital) for more than the experience of putting two vertical lines together. How one sees and focuses on the image one wants to photograph does not have to be "PURE" by only using an RF viewfinder. Its one option. The basic simplicity of the camera, the haptics, and the big one.....the glass on M cameras... keep many of us enjoying the M-camera experience. The more options for lenses, the better IMO. Buy another camera....for some that's an option for using M, R, and other lenses. For others, we like the option of an EVF, imperfect as it may be, for using a wide variety of lenses on the M10 and other cameras.

Des gouts et des couleurs on ne discute pas.
 
“Only a Leica M is a real Leica “
Someone told me so.
I then bought a Leica M10.

Is there some truth to it!
 
View Range said:
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.
Click to expand...

I agree completely, these old names won't mean anything to a younger camera buying clientele.

I just wonder what today's most popular dog's name is in Wetzlar?
 
The investors in Leica may be of the old school. They saved Leica from dying. It is a luxury company in the end.
 
Back to original question...
I have a couple of the old visoflexes, and the digital visoflex for the M240.
I like and use them all. I find the viso for M240 makes the camera much more versatile. Now I occasionally just bring the M240 on a shooting trip instead of bringing both the M240 and a (D)SLR. So nice :)
 
There are rumors of a new high res Visoflex.

If the past repeats itself, the new improved Visoflex will not be backwardly compatible with the previous M10 family. :bang:
 
CameraQuest said:
There are rumors of a new high res Visoflex.

If the past repeats itself, the new improved Visoflex will not be backwardly compatible with the previous M10 family. :bang:
Click to expand...

Such an act may be linked to marketing, Stephen. It is "unfriendly" to current customers, is the least I can say here. The new EVF will most likely only work with the M10-R or next generation of cameras. Leica will be similar to Microsoft; a computer/software company. Where are the Leica Traditions? :confused::cool::eek:
 
CameraQuest said:
There are rumors of a new high res Visoflex.

If the past repeats itself, the new improved Visoflex will not be backwardly compatible with the previous M10 family. :bang:
Click to expand...

That would come as a surprise. The M10-P and M10-R share the same Maestro 2 processor and flash shoe contact inputs. Unless the R includes new input hardware under the hood, it should be possible to update the firmware to recognize a new finder in such similar models.

On a related note, the original M10 lacked hardware for the live-view spirit level feature. That was brought back for the P.

I'd welcome a better Visoflex for the M10. I had an SL and loved the viewfinder and all the benefits it brought to shooting with long and wide lenses. In comparison, the current Visoflex isn't compelling enough a design to justify the expense. At least for me.
 
I have one for my M10-P, but I've only used it once. I bought it specifically to replace my accessory optical finders, but I've since abandoned that idea.

I actually thought it was pretty clear (but I had the benefit of having experienced the really crappy one Leica had for the M240 cameras). I only quit using it on the M10 because it seemed to literally suck the life out of the battery! Frankly, I doubt I'll ever use it again.
 
raid said:
....What has been your experience with the finder?
...... high cost?
Click to expand...

Raid,

I got to this thread a bit late. If it helps; I used an 020 EVF for all my M10 work, and will use it for all my M10R work. I focus by rangefinder, compose with the EVF.

I only have 40 years experience of working seriously with rangefinder cameras and find the EVF a welcome relief from the permanent distraction of never wanted rectangles for 'twinned' framelines. I make most of my pictures at below eye level and the tilting EVF facilitates that. An EVF camera without a tilting viewfinder [not tilting screen] is no use to me whatsoever.

I make tightly constructed pictures, parallax inaccuracy from rangefinder-only picture construction makes that way of photographing far too uncertain, it demands live-view.

In general I try to switch the live-view off as soon as possible. I find the image quality of the 020 EVF quite useable, it's price is a typical Leica tax, but there's a big BUT coming.

Boy oh boy the EVF implementation of the Level and the live Histogram in the EVF could not be crappier if the 'designers' had gone down to the pub and left the Village Idiot to finish off their brilliant work.

I require the use of the Histogram, and the Level for every picture I make. To access each requires acceptance of one's EVF live image being cropped top, and bottom, with [in my case] never ever wanted camera settings [called, I understand, Header and Footer settings]. The default EVF implementation for use of the Level, and the live Histogram comes with a live view crop which cannot be switched out! Presumably because a different pub celebration had been planned, the M10R team lazily cut and pasted this same ridiculous implementation into the M10R! Shame on them.

I use the M10R only because it has a tilting EVF. I curse the pathetic implementation of the live-Histogram and Level in Live View/EVF every time I use the camera. And yes, Leica have known for a long time they are cropping Live View picture constructions when using Level and/or Histogram; I don't think they care.

........ Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom