That old M-E / M9 or M240 question

[richj_gsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

OK. So there are loads of threads about this already, but I thought I'd add to the clutter. I currently have an M8 which I use with a 35mm f1.4 Voigtlander and f2.0 Summicron. I want to upgrade soon, mostly because I want full frame, and am trying to decide between the M240 and the M-E. If I buy an M240, it'll be some time before I can buy any more lenses. Buying the M-E will allow me to get a new Leica lens, probably a 35mm Summicron. I'm swaying towards this option, but am worried about investing in 'old' technology. Any thoughts?

[wattsy]

M240 (and M-P) is not exactly bleeding edge (uses a Maestro processor from around 2008 and has limited EVF capability, etc.). I wouldn't worry about the M-E being "old technology" – it's just a little older.

Edited September 16, 2014 by wattsy

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

The age of the technology is completely irrelevant. What matters is whether the tool will work the way you want it too.

If you are happy with your M8 and just want to go for full frame, the ME is an excellent option. If you want/need the extra features and improvements the 240 offers, that is clearly the way to go.

[dkCambridgeshire]

You might also consider a low mileage s/h M9.

 

dunk

[sblutter]

I love & have both an M9 & an M-E. Have been a Leica shooter for decades - they are both fabulous, render beautifully.

 

I can buy a 240 but see no reason. I've have prints made up to 84" long side with no pixilization (learning photoshop is very important).

 

One knock is low light. You'll find a thread on shooting @ 640 ISO and then pushing up to 5 stops. That knocks out that argument.

 

The slow buffer is annoying once in a great while but you get used to it. It is not a sports or video camera, thank heavens.

 

Get either one low mileage and you'll be very happy for years. Spend the extra money on a lens you might use a lot. You mention a 2.0 Summicron. If its the 50, you're good to go, fabulous lens. If not, that's where I'd go next. If it is, I'd think about a 75 (the Voight 2.5 is great) or a used 90 (Tele-Elmarit or even the C-90 are fine). Mini-tele's come in handy.

 

PS: I got the M-E as a back up for the 9, they're identical as far as I'm concerned. I've never had any performance issue with either.

 

Go for it!!

[richj_gsy]

Thanks for the input everyone. So I can get an M9 with sub 4000 actuations or an M-E with sub 500. Price difference is around £500. Is it worth paying the extra for the M-E? Both are mint condition.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There is really no essential difference. Everything being equal, I personally would opt for the M9, as I am no fan of the colour of the ME.

[tookaphotoof]

M-E, with a light grey leather skin. I would love that!

On the other hand they just take the same photos. Simply pick the less expensive one.

A shutter count of 4.000 is nothing.

[NightSun]

Thanks for the input everyone. So I can get an M9 with sub 4000 actuations or an M-E with sub 500. Price difference is around £500. Is it worth paying the extra for the M-E? Both are mint condition.

 

The only differences between M9 and M-E is that the latter one does not have the frame lever and also lacks the USB port. These are not essential at all, however, at some point I found it useful that I can shoot my M9(P) tethered from a laptop and I also quite much dislike the color of M-E, so from such a perspective I would clearly prefer the M9. But your mileage may vary.

[hoppyman]

The answer is....... it depends

Ask yourself what are your priorities.

The M-E or M9 will produce exactly the same results of course. The M(Typ 240) does bring significant improvements and advantages. Whether or not those are important for you or are you prepared to pay for them is the question!

 

I shall be devil's advocate and say that once you have used the M (Typ 240) you would not want to go back to the M9

[Printmaker]

The answer is....... it depends

Ask yourself what are your priorities.

The M-E or M9 will produce exactly the same results of course. The M(Typ 240) does bring significant improvements and advantages. Whether or not those are important for you or are you prepared to pay for them is the question!

 

I shall be devil's advocate and say that once you have used the M (Typ 240) you would not want to go back to the M9

 

I've heard this over and over. While I love my M9, the only two reasons why the 240 might interest me is: the quiet shutter and a stop or two ISO. What exactly do you like better?

Edited September 19, 2014 by Printmaker
added a ,

[hoppyman]

I've heard this over and over. While I love my M9, the only two reasons why the 240 might interest me is: the quiet shutter and a stop or two ISO. What exactly do you like better?

 

The main point of my post was that each individual will have different priorities regarding which features are important to them and whether the changes are worth the extra cost to change to the new M.

The M9 will continue to work as well as it ever did of course.

Personally I value the better noise performance. Where I need higher ISO (and my impression is that it is a least a stop better)

The much quieter shutter operation (or rather the lack of recocking noise) too.

The M feels much more responsive when I am shooting a fast series in a studio environment, specifically I have never saturated the buffer and had to wait, whereas this was easy to do with the M9 in that particular circumstance.

Liveview brought some unexpected benefits too. Specifically I can use it for precise framing where that is critical or where I want to use the camera in an unusual position (not eye to finder) and more importantly I can confirm exactly the focus accuracy (comparing with what the RF and my eyes tell me).

The (not promoted) improved RF accuracy/calibration standard is worthwhile too I think.

[Jeff S]

Not only is the M shutter (re-cock noise, actually) quieter, but the shutter release mechanism is smoother. In addition, I like the longer battery life and 2m frame lines. Although I haven't tested improved weather sealing, I sure don't mind that it's there.

 

Live view also helps to determine if there's a calibration needed for the RF or lens, although not specifically which one.

 

I think it's just a more refined and robust machine. And the files are superb.

 

Jeff

[A miller]

The (not promoted) improved RF accuracy/calibration standard is worthwhile too I think.

 

Can you please elaborate on this more as I am in the dark regarding this? Thank you.

[hoppyman]

As the cameras got into general use a number of users (including me) felt that the focus was easier/more accurate than with the M9 or others that we've used previously. This was an impression of course, not from any comparative testing as far as I know. Since then a couple of comments from Leica people have confirmed that the mechanism or methods for the calibration have been improved.

[Nr90]

As the cameras got into general use a number of users (including me) felt that the focus was easier/more accurate than with the M9 or others that we've used previously. This was an impression of course, not from any comparative testing as far as I know. Since then a couple of comments from Leica people have confirmed that the mechanism or methods for the calibration have been improved.

 

Then if one where to have his M9 recalibrated at the factory, it would be better then new / same as the M?

[jaapv]

No, because the M rangefinder has advantages over the M9, e.g. less flare by eliminating the frame line window and probably a change in the coatings and smaller mechanical tolerances. It is a slightly different design.

[A miller]

very interesting, thanks.

[colonel]

OK. So there are loads of threads about this already, but I thought I'd add to the clutter. I currently have an M8 which I use with a 35mm f1.4 Voigtlander and f2.0 Summicron. I want to upgrade soon, mostly because I want full frame, and am trying to decide between the M240 and the M-E. If I buy an M240, it'll be some time before I can buy any more lenses. Buying the M-E will allow me to get a new Leica lens, probably a 35mm Summicron. I'm swaying towards this option, but am worried about investing in 'old' technology. Any thoughts?

 

IMHO the M240 is superior in every aspect

I think a second hand M240 is going for around 35% more in the UK but this is totally worth it if you are thinking of keeping the camera for at least 2-3 years. Advantages as mentioned above:

1. significantly more battery time (at least 2x)

2. quieter shutter

3. faster operation

4. decent screen

5. Live view & EVF means telephoto is now possible

6. liveview means using wide angle without external VF is possible

7. Two stage shutter button

8. Focus is better in a few aspects including stability

9. Movie mode. i don't use this per se but occasionally its useful to have there if you need to capture a quick clip

 

The M-E, like the M9 takes amazing photos. I just think that now you are upgrading you will want to see some decent bang for your buck

 

If you were coming into Leica M digital new and had a your eye on a cheap M9/M-E secondhand I would have a slightly different answer

 

rgds

Edited September 22, 2014 by colonel

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[drdannn]

In addition to the differences already pointed out, the M240's shutter speed dial has an advantage over the m9: When turning the dial there is a different click when the dial turns to the "A" mode. For lack of a better description it locks in differently and I can always know when I'm in the A mode without having to look. Hope that makes sense. It has been a great improvement for me.