How long before Leica dumps the RF in favour of an EVF?

[GaryLH]

I don't think Leica will ever do away with an optical rf design unless they get bought by some investment group that is clueless about the Leica heritage or there is no profit in it any longer.

As others have said, it doesn't mean Leica will never do an evf only m mount. It could be that the T is a test vehicle for things to come and it is being used to gage acceptability of an evf only solution just as Fuji used the X100 to gage whether they should do a xp1.

The T has a pretty good solution for manually focusing the 28mm lens. It would be nice IMHO if they had the Fuji split image focusing aid.

Reality though..it is probably more likely that the T is followed by other T variations then a m mount version in the foreseeable future though. If they ever make a T in a 40f2, I am going to sorely tempted to say the least 🙁

Gary

 

[GaryLH]

That's not much of an endorsement. I tossed the Sony A7 because I didn't like the clumsy controls, chaotic menus, poor workflow, and mediocre ergonomics. Good sensor, however, and a decent viewfinder ... But working those two against all the other negatives produced nowhere near as nice a camera to work with as the Olympus E-M1 or Leica M-P.
G

Feel basically about the same...but i have enough legacy lenses to keep it around. I find it is better than the a6000 or rx100 though. A much better than the nex menus.

Gary

 

[honozooloo]

I've got an A7R, and just purchased jsrockit's M9 in the classifieds (thanks again John, loving it!). I own and use the A7R and X-T1, both considered some of the best EVF one can hope for at the moment. And neither the Sony nor the Fuji matches the precision of the optical RF patch on a real Leica M. I've found focus peaking to be unreliable at wide aperture, and the fine control over DOF/focus point that's easy on an M's optical VF is simply not there yet on EVFs. If I'm shooting a 1.4/f2 lens on the A7R, the ONLY way I can reliably verify my exact focal point on a subject is to zoom in and adjust fine focus for the eyes. Same for the X-T1. Peaking seems to have a 1-2 inch margin of error the way I use it. And part of me doubts that it'll ever get more accurate than that, as Sony and Fuji both have a vested interest in improving their user's AF experience, as both cameras' native lenses are AF. So why would they put intense effort into improving MF performance?

While passably usable, no EVF I've yet used manages to "get out of the way" when I'm shooting with adapted MF glass; in fact I'm constantly reminded of the fact I'm using an EVF because of all the zooming in to confirm focus, and the total lack of confidence in using an EVF with a lens at wide aperture. The exact opposite can be said of using a dead-on optical RF.

Haven't used the Q yet but I'd guess in MF mode, it's going to have the same issues other EVF based systems have. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. One doesn't design bodies for AF and then prioritize MF focus performance, and EVF is nothing if not a technology intended for bodies with AF lenses and modern mirrorless systems.

One interesting thought: Doesn't Live View in the M240 effectively "close the loop" in the RF's "open loop" focusing design? Imagine if Leica developed a hybrid system that let you focus on an object at min distance, infinity, and medium distance using Live View, and somehow figured out a way to then automatically make RF mechanism adjustments to match the confirmed focus in Live View? You'd then be able to make custom adjustments to fine tune each lens/body pairing, or save profiles for each lens to maximize accuracy of the optical RF patch? Or maybe I'm just dreaming of a day I don't need to ship my cameras halfway across the world for RF alignment...

 

[airfrogusmc]

Never I hope. For street shooting a true rangefinder is for many like me the best option.

 

[GaryLH]

Honozooloo,

Have u tried the split image focusing on the xt1 instead of focusing peaking or are u referring to only the Sony focusing peaking here?

Gary

 

[f16sunshine]

EVF's are great for autofucus or afl type manual focus.
I like the exposure preview of many cameras and find that feature combined with AF indisposable for paid shoots.
Let's just all admit it guys. When you see a pre-view of what you are going to get, it's much easier to bank on than inaccurate frame lines and hoping you have predicted curvature of field and other anomalies correctly.
Still.... I would love to use a Rangefinder any day for my own work 😛
Horses for courses. I hope we will always have a rangefinder option.
My favorite RF for the last year has been a Fuji GF670 not a Leica.
Probably for next year as well 😀

 

[lucasjld]

I had a Sony A7s with a M Mount adapter. It was a great travel kit, tiny and light, ISO, price, AF possibility, etc.
But it wasn't close to the simplicity of my Bessa R2M.

The main reason I got a M240 was to have a decent Digital Rangefinder.

One thing that I find utterly annoying is the image review INSIDE the EVF. Both Sony A7S and Fuji X100T do that. You can't set "SHOOT WITH EVF, REVIEW WITH SCREEN".
You just use that eye sensor that keeps switching stuff on and off.

 

[Kate-the-Great]

I wonder if Leica might offer a choice of finder as an "ala carte" option with future bodies, like the choice of .85/.72/.58 finders they offer currently?

Give customers a choice of .72 fully optical finder, .72 optical/electronic hybrid, or full-on EVF.

That seems like the way to go. The clip-on EVF for the M240 has always seemed like an awkward afterthought to me, especially as it appears to just be a re-branded Olympus VF-2 for double the price. Not to say it's not a nice finder- the Oly VF2 was the first EVF I actually liked using- but the whole solution seems to be lacking the "Leica elegance".

 

[jsrockit]

I've got an A7R, and just purchased jsrockit's M9 in the classifieds (thanks again John, loving it!).

You're welcome Aaron. Now, I'm waiting for my EVF having Leica Q!

 

[jaapv]

I wonder if Leica might offer a choice of finder as an "ala carte" option with future bodies, like the choice of .85/.72/.58 finders they offer currently?

Give customers a choice of .72 fully optical finder, .72 optical/electronic hybrid, or full-on EVF.

That seems like the way to go. The clip-on EVF for the M240 has always seemed like an awkward afterthought to me, especially as it appears to just be a re-branded Olympus VF-2 for double the price. Not to say it's not a nice finder- the Oly VF2 was the first EVF I actually liked using- but the whole solution seems to be lacking the "Leica elegance".

It is not a rebranded Olympus finder. Both Leica and Olympus get it from a generic manufacturer: Epson.
At least part of the price difference is a matter of scale, where Olympus maybe orders 100.000, Leica can order only 5000....

 

[Keith]

It is not a rebranded Olympus finder. Both Leica and Olympus get it from a generic manufacturer: Epson.

So obviously this generic manufacturer charges Leica at least double what they are charging Olympus .... or maybe that Leica Logo is done in pearl paint by virgins, with brushes made from the mane of a unicorn?

:angel:

 

[willie_901]

EVF technology is relatively new and undeveloped. By technology I don't mean the quality of the display hardware or even the refresh rate. The software is equally important. And the software's potential depends on the camera's CPU speed. These functions are programmed in Assembly language. Writing and optimizing low-level code is difficult. We are not even close to experiencing the full potential for EVF focusing aids.

Focus peaking depends on subject contrast. In some cases FP is extremely useful. In other cases it is not. FP can be quite confusing in some circumstances. Deep DOF, curved focus planes and differences in subject contrast within the DOF can cause confusion and frustration. FP is not the only option for EVF focusing, but it is the most common.

Optical rangefinders have issues as well. These are well known. How many optical RFs will focus to better than the 1-2 inch margin mentioned in an earlier post? Is accuracy the same for all lenses? Without recalibration, how long can one expect this sort of performance over the life of the camera. Is focusing to better than the 1-2 inch margin possible at different ambient temperatures (winter outdoors to indoor focusing)? Then there's unavoidable focus shift with some optical designs.

The SLR/DSLR is affected by different issues. But there's a reason why higher-end bodies have the ability to store different AF calibrations for different lenses.

Critical focusing accuracy can be wasted without tripod usage.

Critical focusing is difficult.

 

[jaapv]

So obviously this generic manufacturer charges Leica at least double what they are charging Olympus .... or maybe that Leica Logo is done in pearl paint by virgins, with brushes made from the mane of a unicorn?

:angel:

Try buying five bottles of beer or five thousand. I bet you can get the five thousand at half-price.

 

[Huss]

Try buying five bottles of beer or five thousand. I bet you can get the five thousand at half-price.

Yes but the customer, not the middle man, can go drink the exact same beer for half price if he does not mind the label.

Would you pay double for the same beer?

 

[jsrockit]

Yes but the customer, not the middle man, can go drink the exact same beer for half price if he does not mind the label.

Would you pay double for the same beer?

Which beer is exactly the same as another, at twice the price, with the only difference being a label?

 

[Kwesi]

Lets not kid ourselves here.
Leica does have a healthy upcharge when they rebrand 3rd party items.
On the other hand i think Leica should be applauded for doing what they can recently to keep their prices affordable in the USA at least. eg. Exchange rate savings, thant have gone on since the beginning of the year and the very negligible markup on the latest DLux camera, not to mention the M Safari Kit

 

[jaapv]

Let's look at it from the other end. After being technically bankrupt in 2006, and expensive even then, they are a healthy company now, but they are certainly not raking in money by the bucketload. I doubt that they could lower their prices significantly without ending up in the red again.

 

[Lss]

Would you pay double for the same beer?

Often have, often will. Beer price greatly depends on the location.

 

[ian_watts]

but they are certainly not raking in money by the bucketload. I doubt that they could lower their prices significantly without ending up in the red again.

The company are almost certainly back in the red and, far from "raking in money by the bucketload", are bleeding it. It is a good job that they made hay while the sun shone during the M9 halcyon days and that they are (at least still half) owned by the enthusiastic and wealthy Dr K. It will be interesting to see what happens when Blackstone manage to divest themselves of their unhappy investment.

 

[Kwesi]

So the question is if Leica were to lower its prices, would the increase in sales revenue more than make up for the price cut, or would there be less demand because it's now considered affordable by all?