M240 owner (never M8/9). Buy MM?

[Winedemonium]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

I switched to Leica via film well into the digital age with an M3 and an M6. I then bought an M240 as my first digital M, so I have never experienced the M8 or M9.

 

I am considering buying an M Monochrom.

 

I have read a lot about that camera, and the technical comparisons and so on with the M240. It seems the MM has its pluses and minuses in the M240 age from a technical point of view.

 

My question though is this: has anyone made the same migration path as me - ie M240 first, and then MM? Did you find the M9-type camera frustrating? Did you regret the big outlay? Also, in a similar vein, are there MM users who have bought the M240 camera as a companion for colour to your MM?

 

From what I have read the main reason to buy the MM today is the discipline/freedom to see potential compositions in terms of luminance instead of colour. The same, it might be said, takes place when I load TMax, Delta, Acros and so on in my film Ms. Bring able to do this at high ISO values might unlock more potential to develop B&W work.

 

But I am concerned if the M240 experience has spoiled me too much for the M9-type hap tics, screen, and so on of the MM.

 

I'd be grateful for any experiences of using both that you may care to share please.

 

Thanks.

[jaapv]

The advantages of the M240 are not the disadvantages of the Monochrom, if you follow my meaning. It is simply a different camera.

Don’t buy it if a large battery, video and extensive chimping on a large and detailed screen are essentials for you.

Do buy it if getting back to basics and taking the best digital B&W you have ever seen are your motivations.

Or have both.

Edited April 20, 2014 by jaapv

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Winedemonium]

Good points. Do you use both?

[jaapv]

Yes.

[panoreserve]

The advantages of the M240 are not the disadvantages of the Monochrom, if you follow my meaning. It is simply a different camera.

Don’t buy it if a large battery, video and extensive chimping on a large and detailed screen are essentials for you.

Do buy it if getting back to basics and taking the best digital B&W you have ever seen are your motivations.

Or have both.

 

 

Jaapv,

please, would you explain your statement "the (MM is) the best digital B&W you have ever seen"?

What exactly are the advantages over the M 240 - files (convertet in B&W)?

 

All the best

panoreserve

[dant]

MM is 15% to 20% sharper than M240. But don't hold me to it. I bought both around the same time. Never had a digital Leica. Just film Leica.

 

I love them both. After buying a M240 and MM I bought another pair.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jaapv,

please, would you explain your statement "the (MM is) the best digital B&W you have ever seen"?

What exactly are the advantages over the M 240 - files (convertet in B&W)?

 

All the best

panoreserve

Well, maybe you should read the relevant threads in this forum (and elsewhere for that matter). The gain in acuity and tonal range by removing the Bayer filter and interpolation/conversion steps are well documented. Not to mention the more pleasing noise behavior and sensitivity gain. Edited April 21, 2014 by jaapv

[Winedemonium]

Dant, that's useful feedback. Thanks

[jcraf]

?...Do you use both?

 

Yes, I do. But I use the MM 95% of the time.

 

Of course, its all down to personal taste, and B&W is my main passion. If my (probably excessive) Leica kit ever had to be slimmed down, I'd choose to keep the MM and my 35 Lux FLE.

 

The MM is the best camera I have owned (with the emphasis on 'I'). Amongst a whole host of other 'decent' digital cameras, I have owned all digital Ms (except the M-E)

 

Good luck in your choice.

 

Regards

[hkgmatt]

The M240 was my first digital Leica, and I had the same concerns and initial reaction when I got the MM. Like Jaap says though, it's simply a different camera. I like the clearer framelines, LV, ability to use EVF etc on the M240, but I don't miss those features on the MM. It's a tool for a different purpose. If you have the means to buy both, you won't regret it.

[MarkP]

I have both cameras. They are indeed very different tools. If I could only keep one of my Leica cameras it would still be the Monochrom as the final prints are just so spectacular. In the end thats why I 'm taking my photographs.

 

1. I still primarily shoot for B&W. I can live without colour in my photography. For years (up until 2010 when I went digital) when I took my film cameras out they were only loaded with B&W.

 

2. It really brings out the best in both new and legacy lenses.

 

2. The tonal range is spectacular.

 

3. The detail and resolution is spectacular (dare I say like medium format). Calling it an18MP sensor does not do it justice. When I've used both cameras together and look at the results the M240 files

 

3. The noise is spectacular. reminiscent of grain - a lovely filmic look.

 

4. Increased dynamic range, even compared with the M240, although blown highlights are gone so the white holes in the image need to be filled with Gausian noise in PS or with a grain emulation programme - fine by me as I always put some 'texture' back into my digital files.

 

5.The files often come out very flat but are very malleable in post processing.

 

6. I can make most of the luminance adjustments I need in Photoshop in post-processing (LR just doesn't give enough subtlty of control), so I really don't miss three colour channels in post.

 

7. The smaller LCD screen also really doesn't bother me as I only use it for camera

settings and histogram (oh I forgot to mention - how good is the Monochrom histogram?)

 

 

but:

1. No colour (and there are times when I need to shoot colour) and the M240 still produces outstanding B&W conversions.

2. I'd really like an hybrid Monochrom with the VF and shutter of the M240, and the option of an EVF for focusing fast lenses wide open in low light.

 

 

Spectacular camera

Edited April 24, 2014 by MarkP

[Jeff S]

2. I'd really like an hybrid Monochrom with the VF and shutter of the M240, and the option of an EVF for focusing fast lenses wide open in low light.

 

And bigger battery, Maestro processor, weather sealing, 2m frame lines and improved RF focusing. Plus live view, at a minimum, eases camera/lens focus calibration checks.

 

Stefan Daniel has given indications (last Photokina) of an MM based on the new M. If so, I'm sure the forum will have various threads debating CMOS vs CCD as well as other changes.

 

As for the OP's question, I went from the M8.2 to the M 240, skipping the M9 and MM. Now spoiled by some of the M 240 characteristics mentioned above, I would definitely test and compare a new MM against the M 240 for my b/w printing. The M8.2 (still my back-up), btw, is a terrific b/w camera.

 

Jeff

[MarkP]

2m frame lines and improved RF focusing.

 

...is what I meant about the M240s VF.

 

 

 

I agree with the rest such as weathersealing, processor speed and battery but not a deal-breaker. I have previously avoided the CCD vs CMOS debate of the M9 vs M240 but I must say that I like the Monochrom sensor just as it is, and liveview etc requires a CMOS sensor.

[Jeff S]

I have previously avoided the CCD vs CMOS debate of the M9 vs M240 but I must say that I like the Monochrom sensor just as it is, and liveview etc requires a CMOS sensor.

 

Well, there will be the megapixel debate, too.

 

I also don't debate the tech aspects, leaving my opinions and purchase decisions to actual testing and printing. That's why I skipped the M9, which showed no advantages over the M8.2 in my prints, and some disadvantages.

 

But the forum sure is good, and predictable, entertainment…often from those who never test or own the gear, let alone make prints.

 

Jeff

[B-A-C]

Why not just buy the next generation Monochrom? You can have your cake and eat it too.

[MarkP]

Why not just buy the next generation Monochrom? You can have your cake and eat it too.

 

First - there is no M240 Monochrom. It has been mooted.

 

Second - because the next generation of anything is always just around the corner and in the meantime photo opportunities pass by……..

[Winedemonium]

All very helpful posts - thank you all so much for that.

 

I popped into a local dealer with a demo, and when I used the camera I felt very spoiled by the M240. It was the screen - very, um, retro early 2000s! Haha!

 

But no one buying a $8000 camera for B&W is really buying it for the quality of the rear screen. And when I (happily) use my M3 and M6, there is no screen. And I'm still happy.

 

At least the MM will give me good histogram info. It's just a pity my impression is that I won't be able to check focus accuracy in the way that I have been able to do with the M240. But I think that is about my only complaint having handled the camera. The M240's superior rear controls (IMHO), the improved frame lines, live view, focus peaking, video, etc, I can live without all of that quite happily. In fact, its a joy to have a camera unladen with gadgets and widgets and wow-never-noticed-that-button-before-wonder-what-it-does.

 

One of the reasons I have gone so far down the M rabbit hole in the first place is that the M becomes so intuitive, you only control the three things you really need to, and take pictures.

 

Oh, and I like the matt black, and total no logo stealthiness.

 

I think this is going to be a "yes".

 

As you can see from my low post-count, I have mainly just lurked here for several months. But I have enjoyed this forum, and look forward - I hope - to contributing a little more here as time goes by.

 

I am from NZ/UK, but I live in Hong Kong.

[geoffreyg]

Had an M8 from the beginning and while initially fond of it, grew disenchanted. The limited ISO, smallish files, crop line difficulties, and cumbersome software/filter issue just made it not so fun. Yes, its BW files were lovely, very nice, but for larger prints (A3 or larger, or with any cropping), just not big enough files.

 

The MM has several advantages: simpler software, higher resolution, the BW sensor punches much above its weight class, practically in MF size). It also has good high ISO capabilities, and extends its usefulness into arenas the M8 just can't go. So its a no-brainer, if BW is the primary mode of work. Especially if prints are part of the picture.

 

The M240 has its advantages (color), but the rest of the bells/whistles were not of interest, and its increased weight and size a bit off-putting. As was the complexity.

[mca]

If money is no problem, and considering everyone praises the Monochrom so much, I guess if you're into black and white then it is THE camera to have.

 

On the other hand I would have trouble justifying the investment if money was indeed scarce, because the M(240) is so much more than either an M9 or an MM and it does fantastic black and white too. So good that you wouldn't need any other camera.

 

So I would always choose an M(240) over an MM and having the first I wouldn't spend all that money again to have an MM.

 

I guess it comes down to how important money is to you. Desirable? Yes. But not economically smart if you already have the M, in my humble opinion.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Winedemonium]

I bought the camera today. I was offered a silver one or a black one. I think I preferred the silver one actually, but the price difference was US$900! So that money is in my pocket, and I am the proud owner of a brand new black Monochrom.

 

I can't wait to get some use out of it!

 

Thanks again to everyone who contributed above.