Leica Viewfinder Improvements

digitalintrigue said:
The expert is the customer of course. Leica has always gone their own way regardless; case in point: baseplate removal on digital Ms. 🙂
Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean. Are you intending to say that "the expert is the customer" is in opposition to what Leica is doing?

Leica's customers buy Leica cameras because the cameras work well for them. That's why I buy a Leica camera, far as I can tell that's why all my Leica owning friends bought theirs too. And over the years, Leica has indeed improved their cameras based on customer feedback many many times.

Whatever Leica is doing is inspiring lots of people to buy their products, and the incorporation of customer feedback is part of that. They wouldn't have the legendary reputation they have if they didn't keep improving the products. Good products create a good reputation, not the other way around.

They might not do exactly what any specific one person outside the company wants. No company does.
 
I'm staying that Leica doesn't always care what others think, including their customers.

Otherwise the removable baseplate would not exist on digital Ms. It's nothing more than an irritant; simply a design throwback. Just one example. Yes, Leica has improved their products but on their own timetable, sometimes with delays of years, or even decades. They haven't seen fit to improve the viewfinder; if anything, cost cutting measures actually took things in the opposite direction. This isn't to say the viewfinder is unacceptable. It's just not the best one on the market.
 
As a glass wearer, after switching from ZI to a .72 MP finder I always found my eyes on the verge of popping out when staring at the 35mm and (unusable) 28mm frame lines.

Eye relief, eye relief. A .58 one had the problem solved, however at the cost of EFB and the ability to focus longer lenses. Meanwhile, the .74 one on the ZI has no problem at all - a constant good experience all the way from 28 to 85.

Maybe Father Leitz consider it unworthy of putting effort into improving its backbone .72 finder, as Roger stated - and yes it's not something electronic that updates several times a year - but the design of one we have in the latest M7 and MPs are 55 years old now. 55 years, during which only notable pennies spent are popping the 28mm frame line into the old finder, and the eye relief remains the same.

How much R&D money was spent into the ZI finder? Surely a lot, but I doubt if that's an amount Leica can't afford with half a century's worth of expertise and capital.
 
The ZI viewfinder was designed in the late 1990s. A very nice design, yes.

I've been tempted to buy a ZI many times. However, every time I hold one, I find I don't like it much. The controls are subtly in the wrong places for me.

In truth, my favorite M-mount body is the CL. The ergonomics are just right and I like the bright, clear view with the (lower accuracy, shorter baseline) viewfinder and exposure metering indicator. It only has framelines for 40, 50, and 90 focal lengths, which is fine by me as I just fit an accessory viewfinder for 21 or 28mm.

Now if only they'd make a CL Digital.
 
digitalintrigue said:
I'm staying that Leica doesn't always care what others think, including their customers.
Click to expand...

No manufacturer always cares what everyone thinks. That is impossible. And no manufacturer cares what anyone other than their customers and stockholder think anyway.

Enough of this for me. It seems every time there's any thread on Leica, all the Leica bashers have to get their oar in.

Leica cameras aren't perfect, but at least they are continuing to develop and produce them, which is more than can be said for the Zeiss Ikon or any other RF camera at the present time. Keep that in mind while you bash away.
 
digitalintrigue said:
Otherwise the removable baseplate would not exist on digital Ms. It's nothing more than an irritant
Click to expand...
I never understood the dislike of the baseplate. It never irritated me. I actually liked it very much from the start for its simple usability, partly because I use so many cameras. On most cameras, I need to start looking for the door when I am changing either the memory card or the battery. My M8 is the simplest in this regard; just take off the baseplate and the location of both memory card and battery is pretty obvious. Both are easy to access. It also looks elegant and has proven durable (while funnily being the only part on my M8 that has broken, due to very hard impact). Perhaps it isn't the most durable construction for tripod use, though. I hope it won't be a problem on the new M, when people start using it with heavy adapted lenses. (They should attach the lens to the tripod anyway, but you never know.)

The one other camera I use and like in this respect is the 1-series Canon and its huge battery. Again, simple and perfectly usable, no guessing or wondering where that stupid little door is on this particular camera. But it is ridiculously huge.

I have never owned a film M body. Perhaps the baseplate is more irritating there, but it sure rocks on the digital M.
 
Lss said:
I never understood the dislike of the baseplate. It never irritated me. I actually liked it very much from the start for its simple usability, partly because I use so many cameras. On most cameras, I need to start looking for the door when I am changing either the memory card or the battery. My M8 is the simplest in this regard; just take off the baseplate and the location of both memory card and battery is pretty obvious. Both are easy to access. It also looks elegant and has proven durable (while funnily being the only part on my M8 that has broken, due to very hard impact). Perhaps it isn't the most durable construction for tripod use, though. I hope it won't be a problem on the new M, when people start using it with heavy adapted lenses. (They should attach the lens to the tripod anyway, but you never know.)

The one other camera I use and like in this respect is the 1-series Canon and its huge battery. Again, simple and perfectly usable, no guessing or wondering where that stupid little door is on this particular camera. But it is ridiculously huge.

I have never owned a film M body. Perhaps the baseplate is more irritating there, but it sure rocks on the digital M.
Click to expand...
It works fine on film Leicas as well. It's just that some people are utterly convinced that theirs is the only possible view that could be right, to the extent that they want to screw things up for people who don't want bland me-too generic designs.

There are an awful lot of fantasist, amateur camera designers out there too-- and a lot of awful fantasist, amateur camera designers, for that matter. Godfrey sums it up very well. No-one can please everyone, but Leica does pretty well at pleasing a lot of people.

Cheers,

R.
 
Godfrey said:
No manufacturer always cares what everyone thinks. That is impossible. And no manufacturer cares what anyone other than their customers and stockholder think anyway.

Enough of this for me. It seems every time there's any thread on Leica, all the Leica bashers have to get their oar in.

Leica cameras aren't perfect, but at least they are continuing to develop and produce them, which is more than can be said for the Zeiss Ikon or any other RF camera at the present time. Keep that in mind while you bash away.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that Leica NEVER listens to their customers, I said they don't always care what they think. Sometimes -- just not always -- they *do* care what their customers think. 🙂 So before you get your knickers in a twist you should perhaps read a little more closely.

I'm not bashing, I'm just presenting my opinion, sorry if you can't handle that. I own lots of Leica cameras...for what it is worth.

The baseplate is an irritant to me, and many others. It bugged me so much I went so far as to design a replacement baseplate that allows much faster, easier access to SD card and battery, without requiring three hands -- sold the design to Luigi if you want to buy one. I guess that means I'm no amateur. 🙂
 
Regarding the viewfinder of the Mamiya 7II, the rangefinder patch is polarized. This is a problem if you wear polarized sunglasses as it completely disappears and you must take them off in order to focus. This was a surprise to me, and frankly pretty annoying.
 
I have a 7 and 7II and they changed the viewfinder. I think that the polarization was the improvement. I never use polarized glasses because I hate the polycarbonate laminate distortion. The 7II seems to be the better viewfinder.

I started this thread because viewfinders and focusing modalities are not trivial, or unimportant. I found this out when I purchased and have subsequently had a love/hate relationship with my NEX-7's EVF. It was mentioned on the previous page that a ZI purchase had been of interest, but the camera just didn't feel right. I must say that I have two ZIs and as much as I love the camera, I use my M3/M6TTL more. It is the feel, weight.. something, but I miss the clear, open view of the ZI viewfinder. I'm going to assume that the new 'M' will be fast and produce stunning files. All I'm suggesting is that Leica might consider improving the viewfinder experience. Sure it would take some R&D, but I doubt that Zeiss/CV put much money into the ZI's viewfinder. It might slightly change the weight, appearance and size of the body, but for $7000 and years of future 'M' rangefinder production, I think they can and should at least investigate this small design change. How about a one-off camera with improved VF at the next Photokina and judge customer reaction? Yes, a bit expensive, but car companies do this all of the time... This is a better option than producing an M5 and then finding a cool reception. This discussion is relevant to me on another level. I'll need to sell a ton of equipment to finance an 'M'. I'm back to using my ZIs. I'll need to decide if I should sell my right, or left kidney.... Leica, or Zeiss..
 
It is my guess that they would have far more backlash with a new view finder than if they left it the same. It does have live view so there is that. 🙂
 
Yes, as seen on this thread, rejection would be the purist reaction, but would they reject the reality? I don't know, but I do know that any suggestion of change is met with negativity. I think that this change to CMOS will be approached much the same way. Leica is betting that the results will overcome the objections. The real purists are still shooting film.. right?
 
match-to-needle.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom