neekon Posted December 31, 2014 Share #1 Posted December 31, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Forgive my maybe odd question, but I got into Leica with digital, first with the M8.2, then briefly the M9 then for a lil while to the M240 then back to the ME because I preferred the looked and feel of it over the M240, and recently added a M Monochrom to the collection, I love my current set up. The files from the Monochrom amaze me every time I see them. Sorry I will get to the question. The question is, I read a lot of these forums and have heard and noticed that people talk bout the digital Leicas as not being as compact or bigger than the film versions. A post I read tonight compared it to an M5 in size. However when I look at the specs of all these cameras digital vs film Ms are all virtually identical, with th exception of the M5. Is there something I'm missing? Should I go hold on one in a store to truly understand what I'm missing? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 31, 2014 Posted December 31, 2014 Hi neekon, Take a look here Digital vs Film Leica M size question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jeff S Posted December 31, 2014 Share #2 Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) …..then briefly the M9 then for a lil while to the M240 then back to the ME because I preferred the looked and feel of it over the M240….. …. when I look at the specs of all these cameras digital vs film Ms are all virtually identical... The M240 is almost the same size as the M9/ME (1mm), only heavier due mostly to the battery. Yet for some reason you liked the 'feel' of the M9 better. Yes, film Ms are generally somewhat slimmer. A 'little' for some people is a 'lot' for others. Preferences vary. Not much more to it than that. And some like to complain about thickness….and then put a case on their camera. Jeff Edited December 31, 2014 by Jeff S 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neekon Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share #3 Posted December 31, 2014 The M240 is almost the same size as the M9/ME (1mm), only heavier due mostly to the battery. Yet for some reason you liked the 'feel' of the M9 better. Yes, film Ms are generally somewhat slimmer. A 'little' for some people is a 'lot' for others. Preferences vary. Not much more to it than that. And some like to complain about thickness….and then put a case on their camera. Jeff Should've clarified, I preferred the look of the images over the M240, never found the M240 too big or heavy, comparatively. I am just going buy the specs and dimensions I read online, it's late here, so I might go check a store tomorrow and see them in person Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 31, 2014 Share #4 Posted December 31, 2014 …. never found the M240 too big or heavy, comparatively. Some do, as many forum posts attest. The fact that you don't suggests that you're not particularly sensitive to the size or weight differences. Only way to know is to try…but if you're not going to shoot film, it obviously doesn't matter anyway. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neekon Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share #5 Posted December 31, 2014 Some do, as many forum posts attest. The fact that you don't suggests that you're not particularly sensitive to the size or weight differences. Only way to know is to try…but if you're not going to shoot film, it obviously doesn't matter anyway. Jeff Wasn't planning on shooting film, mostly just a curiousity. The size wasn't a big deal as I'm often using heavy SLR or medium format cameras or cinema cameras for work, so used to heavier cameras Thank you for all the responses so far Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 31, 2014 Share #6 Posted December 31, 2014 Should I go hold on one in a store to truly understand what I'm missing? Yes, hold a film M, then for good measure hold an LTM camera as well, say a IIIf. You will see why some people think of a millimetre increase in size here or there is a slippery slope to go down, especially when articles in LFI magazine indicate things like hybrid viewfinders in a digital M body would make the camera even bigger than an M240. Steve 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 31, 2014 Share #7 Posted December 31, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Some do, as many forum posts attest. The fact that you don't suggests that you're not particularly sensitive to the size or weight differences. Only way to know is to try…but if you're not going to shoot film, it obviously doesn't matter anyway. Jeff You know, I am sensitive to size differences (less to wieght, because the weight of lenses varies so much), and I would have agreed with those who find the film Ms with their lesser thickness more comfortable to hold for the first year of M8 use or so. But after that, nowadays I find a film M awkwardly thin and it gives me finger cramp in the long run. It is just what one is used to, I guess. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted December 31, 2014 Share #8 Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) Forgive my maybe odd question, but I got into Leica with digital, first with the M8.2, then briefly the M9 then for a lil while to the M240 then back to the ME because I preferred the looked and feel of it over the M240, and recently added a M Monochrom to the collection, I love my current set up. The files from the Monochrom amaze me every time I see them. Sorry I will get to the question. The question is, I read a lot of these forums and have heard and noticed that people talk bout the digital Leicas as not being as compact or bigger than the film versions. A post I read tonight compared it to an M5 in size. However when I look at the specs of all these cameras digital vs film Ms are all virtually identical, with th exception of the M5. Is there something I'm missing? Should I go hold on one in a store to truly understand what I'm missing? Neekon, look at post 68 for your question http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m7-mp-film-m/345620-i-love-my-m7-4.html Congratulations for your equipment For my part and after 5 years of M digital exclusively Leica I only shoot now film with my 2 M7, for the beauty, faithful color , picture with "a soul" with no "smooth" edges and seeing certain "synthetic" images ! http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/286747-i-like-film-open-thread-123.html Best wishes and Good Photographic Year to All Henry Edited December 31, 2014 by Doc Henry 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 31, 2014 Share #9 Posted December 31, 2014 You know, I am sensitive to size differences (less to wieght, because the weight of lenses varies so much), and I would have agreed with those who find the film Ms with their lesser thickness more comfortable to hold for the first year of M8 use or so. But after that, nowadays I find a film M awkwardly thin and it gives me finger cramp in the long run. It is just what one is used to, I guess. You and I have covered this elsewhere. I've posted more than a few times that I now find my prior film Ms too skinny compared to my digital Ms, which I now prefer size-wise. Not a majority opinion around here. Over time, though, I think one adjusts, mentally and physically, to the tool….assuming it warrants long term use for other good reasons. Jeff 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted December 31, 2014 Share #10 Posted December 31, 2014 Over time, though, I think one adjusts, mentally and physically, to the tool….assuming it warrants long term use for other good reasons. Jeff I agree with this statement. You'll get used to whatever. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neekon Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share #11 Posted December 31, 2014 Thank you for all for the replies. It sounds to me that just going by the numbers which don't look like there is any size difference is flawed and I really need to hold a film M for myself. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted January 2, 2015 Share #12 Posted January 2, 2015 The numbers don't really tell the whole story. A few millimetres here and there do make a haptic difference. I thought the M9 was fine until I held the M6 and M7, and discovered that those few millimetres made for a very different feel. It's enough to make me wish the digital versions were as slim as the film ones. You feel it even with a leather half case. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted January 2, 2015 Share #13 Posted January 2, 2015 The numbers don't really tell the whole story. A few millimetres here and there do make a haptic difference. I thought the M9 was fine until I held the M6 and M7, and discovered that those few millimetres made for a very different feel. It's enough to make me wish the digital versions were as slim as the film ones. You feel it even with a leather half case. Exactly - a bit like examining the tiny crumb that felt like a boulder when it was stuck between your teeth. I guess it also depends on the size of your hands - I like the slimness and heft of the earlier Ms the most. The digital versions feel bloated to me. But they are nicer in the hand than a DSLR. First World problem in many ways. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicaphilia Posted January 2, 2015 Share #14 Posted January 2, 2015 I think for many its also a matter of aesthetics. To me, the digital Ms just "don't look right." Maybe just a tad too chunky, The film M's, perfect. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJH Posted January 2, 2015 Share #15 Posted January 2, 2015 I don't have a problem with how the digital Ms look but I have small hands and for me an M6 with my thumb hooked in between the wind on lever and body just feels perfect. Even just the extra height and 80g of the M7 0.85 I had was to much. I got so comfortable holding the M6 I ditched using either a neck or wrist strap, first camera I have done that with. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted January 12, 2015 Share #16 Posted January 12, 2015 I don't think a few mm make any difference. The M7 and M6 TTL feel the same as the M to me. The M6 classic and M4 feel thinner but there is no electronics in the M4 and hardly anything in the M6. However i doubt that digital Ms will ever be the same depth. That is because of the registry distance required by the M mount. The film can be right at the back of the camera, however the sensor can't be due to it electronics. Maybe in the future it can be made thinner but I doubt we will ever see M4 widths from a digital camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp995 Posted January 12, 2015 Share #17 Posted January 12, 2015 Have a look here: Compare camera dimensions side by side Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted January 12, 2015 Share #18 Posted January 12, 2015 Have a look here: Compare camera dimensions side by side Quite, it's mostly perception: Leica M6 TTL is 1% (1 mm) narrower and 4% (3 mm) shorter than Leica M9. Leica M6 TTL is 3% (1 mm) thicker than Leica M9. Both Leica M6 TTL and Leica M9 weigh the same (585 grams). Leica M6 TTL dimensions: 138x77x38 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion) Leica M9 dimensions: 139x80x37 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion) - See more at: Compare camera dimensions side by side 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 12, 2015 Share #19 Posted January 12, 2015 Perception is the only thing it is about. Measurements mean almost nothing in this context. Previous posts, I think, clearly illustrate that. Personal dimensions, phsychy, even what you are shooting plays a real part in how the camera affects you. I own and use 111f, M6, M7, M8, M9. All have a different effect on me. All are good, but different. Head and shoulders, the 111f is the lightest, most compact, but also (mostly) the slowest to use. The M9 is (mostly) the fastest to use but also the fattest and heaviest. I adapt within seconds to each. How? I centre my attention on the job in hand, not the gear. Make of that what you will. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted January 12, 2015 Share #20 Posted January 12, 2015 after years of using M8 and then M240, if I take on my M4 I feel distinctly the thinner body... but can't say that it was "better" and anyway now I use digital M, period : the attitude to handle M gives my the feel of a toy if I put my hands on cameras like Nex or similar... . The "ideal" for me, is still the Barnack size... taking on my IIIf really makes me to feel to have the perfestly sized tool to act with agility... but feel becomes different when looking through the viewfinder... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.