Considering M 262 or M-D, but will my lenses work on it?

[ncpaladin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A bit of background-

I started shooting with the Leica R4 in about 1993, but was always drawn toward the M system.  Then in 1999... I purchased a new M6 TTL.

 I have a mild variety of lenses for it:

 

Leica-

35/1.4 Summilux M S/N 30814xx vintage 1980 (Canadian)

50/2  Summicron M S/N 39260xx vintage 2001

90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit M S/N 27277xx vintage 1974 (Canadian)

 

Zeiss-

21/2.8 Biogon ZM S/N 156780xx (Japan)

 

Voigtländer-

12/5.6 Ultra-Wide Heliar S/N 90509xx (Japan)

 

I have digital point and shoot cameras but have shied away from a digital body for my lenses for a few reasons:

1) High cost of entry followed by wicked depreciation.  This could be less of an issue with the 262 and M-D.  The M8 and 8.2 probably took the worst of it.  While I make a decent living, throwing thousands of dollars at a camera body only to be laughed at (not really, but you understand my meaning) a few years on because of supposedly outdated equipment.  

2) Excess complication.  Most digital bodies are full of modes, scenes, video crap, and a bunch of things I have not used on my existing digitals.  Too many buttons.  Paying for things I and most shooters don't even want.  

3) Questionable long term reliability.  There always seems to be plenty of horror stories of equipment failure followed up by costly and/or poor repair service, the poor service being related to Sony!

 

The problems with shooting film I have:

1) Access to film.  Even with a Leica dealer just 50 miles away, they have a poor film inventory.  Ordering in Velvia when it's almost 100 degrees outside is not a good idea.  Film baking in a box on the porch when I get home is not optimum, especially considering...

2) Development cost.  I now send film to North Coast Photographic Service, not a cheap thing to do, but great results, as long as the film has not been harmed.  Which leads me to...

3) Traveling with film.  Why is it that every TSA screener is old enough to know what film is, but they act like they've never seen it before?  I've had film fogged by the carry on screening scanner before.  And I'll put a halt to anyone saying that's not possible- B.S.  When they decide they'll just leave my bag in their scanner view for a minute while they screw around, it cooks it.  So I put the film in a Zip-Loc bag and had them hand inspect it, now they think I'm a bad guy trying to pull something over on them.  When in Munich, I can buy film, but it's really expensive and developing time there is slowwwwww.  I'm sick enough of the aggravation, that the past 2 years I've flown out of the country, I've just brought my cheap Lumix point and shoot.  But this makes me sick.  For so many years, My M6 was always by my side when I went anywhere.

 

So would I sell my M6 TTL?  No.  What I wanted was a simple, digital answer.  As others have stated in the past, Leica should have made a digital back for the M film cameras!  

A few years ago in Munich, I popped into the Leica store off of Maximillian Straß.   I told my sad sap story about digital woes to the salesman there, and he went behind the register and brought out his camera- a Sony A7 with a Leica lens.  Wow.  Metal body.  Impressive feel.  Much lower cost.  So I decided to research them more thoroughly when back home.  Then I found out about the A7S.  Even better.  Ultra low light capability.  But it's a Sony product, and something I've learned over the years with Sony- they do not stand behind their products once the warranty is over.  Sony would prefer you throw the camera away and buy another if it fails outside the warranty period.

 

Then I found out about the M 262 and M-D.  They really look like the kind of critter I'm after.  The M-D could be my M6 TTL with a digital back!

 

So here's the questions:

 

1) I've read that the Summilux 35/1.4 may not fit the digital M cameras without modification.  Any knowledge out there of the actual clearance issues with the back of the lens, i.e. M 262 mounting ring to shutter depth, etc.?

 

2) If the Summilux needs modifying, any idea of the cost? (CLA, modify, code marking.)

 

3) Do lenses like the Zeiss 21mm and Voigtländer 12mm physically fit on the 262 / M-D?  And if they do, is there excess edge issues with super and ultra wide angles?  Any pictures demonstrating the problems?

 

It would be sad to find out that only 2 of my 5 lenses are compatible with the digital M, but I'd rather know at the front end of the deal.

 

4) Since most all of my digital shooting has been with point and shoot, I've no experience with raw.  Do I have to spend a small fortune on software to make use of raw?

 

Thanks in advance for the advice of the digitally experienced!

Edited July 18, 2016 by ncpaladin

[jim0266]

From the M262 manual:

 

Some versions of the Summilux-M 1.4/35mm (not aspherical, manufactured from 1961-1995, Made in Canada) cannot be fitted to the camera or will not focus to infinity. The Leica Customer Care department can modify these lenses so that they can be used on the camera. 

 

I would give Don Goldberg a call and discuss the cost.

Edited July 18, 2016 by jim0266

[Advertisement]

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

[gpwhite]

Leica M digital in the past came with Lightroom, which will allow you to work perfectly well with RAW files in ways you never could have dreamed about with film.

 

The Biogon should work well on the 262 sensor, although do not be surprised if you wind up wanting to take more advantage of the corner crispness one can enjoy on true wides with the M digital. The Biogons are good, but you will become more critical of your work on digital because it is cleaner looking than film usually is (IMHO).

 

The 12mm will be an experiment for sure, and the Summicron will snap beautifully. 

 

Re digital rot, which underlies the rapid depreciation you rightfully wonder about, is certainly part of any M 240/ 262. But I find that 24MP is sufficient to make A2 or 17 x 22 prints with wides, where resolution is critical (at least for my compositions). I think an M 262 variant should satisfy for a long, long time. ISO 1600 is rather remarkable, if you are just jumping from ISO 100, 

[menos I M6]

A bit of background-

I started shooting with the Leica R4 in about 1993, but was always drawn toward the M system.  Then in 1999... I purchased a new M6 TTL.

 I have a mild variety of lenses for it:

 

Leica-

35/1.4 Summilux M S/N 30814xx vintage 1980 (Canadian)

50/2  Summicron M S/N 39260xx vintage 2001

90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit M S/N 27277xx vintage 1974 (Canadian)

 

Zeiss-

21/2.8 Biogon ZM S/N 156780xx (Japan)

 

Voigtländer-

12/5.6 Ultra-Wide Heliar S/N 90509xx (Japan)

Your lenses will work. You might find though that especially the 90/2.8 might need a calibration, you might be lucky not to need it though.

Depending on where you are there are decent shops all around the world which can do the work. It is not a Wetzlar only thing.

If you should see any mismatch in focussing - first and foremost make sure the camera body is not the culprit (I have yet to have seen a single digital M body that arrived with perfect calibration).

Best practice is to hand in the entire gear to a specialist, discuss how you want to use each lens and have the entire kit adjusted to fit your use best.

 

 

1) High cost of entry followed by wicked depreciation.  This could be less of an issue with the 262 and M-D.  The M8 and 8.2 probably took the worst of it.  While I make a decent living, throwing thousands of dollars at a camera body only to be laughed at (not really, but you understand my meaning) a few years on because of supposedly outdated equipment.  

 

 

 

Leica is no different in this.

If you decide to buy a new digital M body you will suffer from a loss in depreciation.

This is inevitable.

 

In some high cost Leica M bodies this depreciation will easily be several thousand USD within just a few years of use.

Your only option to reduce that financial cost is to buy second hand which is perfectly fine.

You can pick up a second hand M9 or M240 which has taken a few thousand USD hit in depreciation already and worry less.

 

 

2) Excess complication.  Most digital bodies are full of modes, scenes, video crap, and a bunch of things I have not used on my existing digitals.  Too many buttons.  Paying for things I and most shooters don't even want.  

 

Get a Leica M9 or MM (v1) and use it for a few years. You have the best in price and simplicity and a very capable digital M to boot.

Leica's M240 generation of cameras have largely complicated things in favor of functionality.

If that is something you don't like, the older generation bodies are still working great.

 

3) Questionable long term reliability.  There always seems to be plenty of horror stories of equipment failure followed up by costly and/or poor repair service, the poor service being related to Sony!

 

Leica provides some the greatest service experiences with their products in my own experience. The key is you have to be patient.

Do not expect one week turnarounds, especially when exotic parts are involved.

The catch is (as Leica has proven several times through history) that once a technology is obsolete, parts can be difficult to source and products will be phased out.

This is how digital works - don't expect your digital M to hold up as many decades as your film bodies.

Leica has always tried to offer reasonable solutions when a camera cannot be serviced any longer - these solutions though may be priced often outside of the budget of some.

Be prepared for that and enter digital imaging with two open eyes.

 

 

1) - 3) Traveling with film

Digital will solve those for you.

 

1) I've read that the Summilux 35/1.4 may not fit the digital M cameras without modification.  Any knowledge out there of the actual clearance issues with the back of the lens, i.e. M 262 mounting ring to shutter depth, etc.?

 

Some samples do have a slightly longer rear lens shroud that will not clear the digital M internal baffling when focussed at infinity.

The cure is very simple: disassemble the focussing mount, remove the shroud, machine the shroud to proper dimension, repaint the shroud, assemble the lens, finished.

Any competent camera repair person can do this job and it should not be expensive or difficult. It is best though to have this done by a Leica related specialist, as the lens might need other attention (CLA related).

I wouldn't code the lens (can only be done by physically milling the mount as of the construction of this lens - Leica will not do this but some independent specialist can offer this should you insist).

NEVER mount a unknown pre ASPH Summilux 35 to a digital body with the focus set to infinity (you may damage the lens/ digital body light baffling).

If you are not sure if a lens works or not, focus the lens to close focus first, THEN mount it to the body and CAREFULLY focus it to infinity. If you feel any resistance towards infinity, DO NOT force it, unmount the lens and have it checked by a specialist.

Most samples I have tried have worked just fine - only one single example from about a dozen lenses (late 60's to late 80's according to SN) did need the modification.

 

3) Do lenses like the Zeiss 21mm and Voigtländer 12mm physically fit on the 262 / M-D?  And if they do, is there excess edge issues with super and ultra wide angles?  Any pictures demonstrating the problems?

 

They fit. I don't know about the edge rendering (have not tried them).

 

4) Since most all of my digital shooting has been with point and shoot, I've no experience with raw.  Do I have to spend a small fortune on software to make use of raw?

 

You don't have to spend a fortune.

There are many different RAW converters available, the most capable to deal with Leica M DNG files can be had in the ~100 EUR range if you have to pay for them.

I suggest to download several options and try them (workflow can be quite different).

Stick with the one you feel most comfortable learning.

 

A good raw converter vs using the JPG files out of camera is a bit like printing/ scanning your own film vs having a lab make you decent 8x10 prints. Best quality is had when you are in full control, hence shooting RAW with digital Leica M is a route you should do once you feel comfortable with the whole digital workflow.

JPGs are ok for quick use but do not touch the potential the raw files provide.

[jonathanccwong]

I think you'll be happy with the Leica M262 or M-D. 
I briefly owned an M9 and felt that the shutter sound was too awkward to use on the street for me.

Then I got the M262 and now am loving it.

 

For the lenses, i don't have experience with the 35mm 1.4 Summilux

But i have the 50mm 2.0 rigid, the 90 2.8, and the Voigtlander 12mm just like you, and all of them works wonderfully with the M 262. 

the 12mm is tricky since the 262 (or MD) does not have live-view (nor do i want it) but without an external finder, it's somewhat a guessing game.

 

I also own a M3, and while the M262 is great, especially for things where i know i don't want to miss a shot, i must say that it can't compare to the experience shooting film (maybe the MD is better in that regard?)

One thing i noticed about shooting digital RAW vs film, for digital you'd want to underexpose to prevent blown highlights so you can try to recover it in post.
in film, and i'm still learning as i go, i have to overexpose or else the film grain becomes unmanageable and details are gone.
 

I would agree with getting the M9 first so u can try your way into digital and see if you like it, but for me it didn't work too well.
The restrictions on what SD cards to use, write speed, loud shutter was really a problem.
If a reasoning is that you don't want to spend thousands just to have people ridicule you, honestly the M9 won't help (it's still old technology, and the curtain rewind does not sound like film as much as everyone tries to claim it does....)

In terms of traveling with film, have you looked at the Hama Film-Safe X? It's a box (i think lead lined) specifically made so film can go through X-ray machines unharmed. (so far my film seems fine).

[ncpaladin]

Thanks all for the replies!

 

I'm glad to know that even the 12mm works on the camera.  I have the viewfinder that came with the lens along with the hot-shoe adapter with the sight level.  So not seeing (via the camera itself) what is being shot is not a problem.  I was wanting to be sure that the lens itself would actually fit on the camera (considering the issue with the 35/1.4 mounting depth), and that the digital image result was good.  The ultra and super wide angle lenses are handy for interior architectural shots.

 

I have one of those lead lined film travel bags.  Then the TSA gets upset if they can't see what's inside.  Oh, well.

 

I need to rephrase what I mean about being laughed at for older digital equipment.  I don't care if some random individual thinks it's funny or I'm not with the times, etc.   It's more of a point of contention with the manufacturers and retailers who act like if you do not buy their newest tech, you're a bloody nuisance.  I'm sure many folks feel the same way.  The integration of the computer world with photography and home entertainment electronics may be great for some, and it definitely has it's place, but the "space race" to the next big thing has worn out the bulk of the general public.  HDTV! 3D HDTV! 4K HDTV! 7 channel surround!  9 channel surround!  and on and on.  Manufacturers keep trying to not only one-up their competitors, but get the consumer to replace things that should last for a rather long time.  Could you imagine buying a new refrigerator every 18 month to get the latest tech?  TV's used to last for a couple of decades (and be technically viable.)  So when it comes to camera equipment of Leica caliber, I think the company should slow down on new model introduction, or change the way they do it.  Perhaps keep offering 1 to 2 generation old models alongside the current generation, but with ever improved basic updates.  Or as many people have stated, make a modular M, so the camera body would be viable for a minimum of 20 years with easily replaced components.  "New 50 meg CMOS?  Send us your modular M and we'll upgrade it for you in a week for $xxx!"  Ah, I'm probably crazy... :-)  Either way, as long as I can get the M-D (less stuff to break) serviced and repaired when needed for a couple of decades, I should be fine!

 

Thanks again all!

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

More like $xxxxx

[TomB_tx]

Also an old film guy, using M4 and M6 since they first came out, so have a similar set of lenses. The M9 came out just after I retired, so there went my "please leave" bonus. My old lenses never looked better on film, but on digital you can zoom in to ridiculous level, and my '69 Summicon 35 v2 was a bit lacking by that standard, so I now use a 35 Summarit 2.5 as my main lens on the M9.

For all the M9 problems you read on-line, mine has been perfect, and never in for service. I still use older firmware where "discrete mode" works so the shutter noise doesn't bother me. And being used to film, the ISO range is fine too.

I did add a Sony A7 as my digital solution for my Leica R and other orphaned SLR lenses, and that works fine for me too.

However, the M-D is the design I really wanted when I bought the M9, so who knows...?

[menos I M6]

…

It's more of a point of contention with the manufacturers and retailers who act like if you do not buy their newest tech, you're a bloody nuisance.  I'm sure many folks feel the same way.

You have to understand that when you were buying a digital Leica M at any given time up to now, the brand new camera in your shopping bag was already obsolete by current standards of the digital imaging world the moment you would leave the shop.

 

Curiously though the Leica M (digital or film) was the very camera system that completely (and I truly mean COMPLETELY) has cured any GAS or curiosity in the ever evolving digital imaging world for me.

 

I still use my Leica M8.2 from time to time. I am fine using my M9 that I have bought new and I was the happiest guy in the world with my ancient Leica MM until it broke (by which time it too was ancient tech in digital camera terms).

 

Since I am using mainly a Leica M I am not subscribing to any digital imaging product newsletters. News about this new high res sensor or that super high ISO or that new camera line leave me completely cold and uninterested.

 

 

The reason is pretty simple: once you use a Leica M (any Leica M or similar cameras) you get used to think in photography important values as shutter speed, aperture, focus, ISO and slowly realize that all that nonsense about moving a button here or there, program modes and all the gimmicks, manufacturers had to come up with over time to keep in business, selling cameras is so utterly unimportant …

 

Get a digital Leica M - any really (that is in good order with a solid warranty) and just use it. These are great cameras (albeit the nitpicking you can find on the internet.

 

My Nikon cameras have faster focussing systems (on paper), have a larger variety of lenses and surely have higher specced sensor technology. My film medium format gear has more resolution and higher dynamic range. The Leica S2 I still have somewhere is a technical marvel, but still, I grab any Leica M any day over the other gear and simply enjoy it.

 

If my wife would nail me to the wall one day and let me only keep one single camera with one single lens of all that gear, it would be a Leica M with a 35/2 lens - the essential photography gear to end all discussions about photography gear.

[bocaburger]

I have a couple dozen lenses including some LTM and 3rd-party (105mm Nikkor, and numerous CV), the newest of which is a type IV 28 Elmarit.  Of those, all but two focused perfectly on all the digital M-mount bodies I've owned (Epson, M8, M9 and 2x M240's).  Those were a tabbed 50 Summicron which I sent for calibration, and a 135 T-E which I machined myself to perfection. 

 

I have the LTM version of the CV 12mm, which I bought when I had the Epson, due to the crop factor.  Later I used it on the M8.  It has its issues especially on the full-frame bodies, but nothing a little PP can't handle, and it's not much of a bother because I hardly shoot with it on those bodies.  I have the finder for it and the 15mm, but prefer the EVF on the M240 for the convenience of only needing to carry the one finder for 12, 15 and 21mm.

 

When I had the M8 and M9, shooting RAW was a necessity due to inconsistency in JPEG quality.  Since the M240 I shoot mainly JPEG and find it entirely adequate for my needs 99% of the time.  If I'm shooting something where I feel I'm going to need to do a lot of tweaking, then I switch to DNG+JPEG large, just in case.  Even then, half the time I find the JPEG is okay.