R3D-D0T Posted August 30, 2016 Share #1 Posted August 30, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Something about the 240's sensor nowadays doesn't seem very state of the art these days. Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 30, 2016 Posted August 30, 2016 Hi R3D-D0T, Take a look here M240 or Film Leica?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
madNbad Posted August 30, 2016 Share #2 Posted August 30, 2016 Only you can decide on workflow and post processing. If you would like to work with a purely digital image, view results immediately and have a camera that has both good optical focusing as well as the ability to use an electronic viewfinder, then get the M240. If you aren't in a hurry, don't mind either processing the film yourself or sending it to a lab for processing plus digital conversion or spend time scanning it yourself, then get an analog M body. Film will be with us but as more of a boutique item like vinyl records. Both have their fans and many own both. Look through the gallery and you will see many amazing images produced with not only the M240 but the M8 and M9 as well. I like film and haven't made the transition to digital but stating that, I have a DLux 4 which is amazingly handy. Current prices for analog M bodies is not outrageous and you could find any number of M2 through M7's for anything within your budget. Don't depend on sensor upgrade to decide if you want digital or film. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted August 30, 2016 Share #3 Posted August 30, 2016 Is state of the art a condition of "timeless"? What do you mean by state of the art? If the M240 sensor isn't state of the art at the moment, then 35mm film hasn't ever been state of the art - it's always been a compromise. What do you mean by "timeless"? Is a great image only timeless if it's shot on film? Or are great images only timeless after a certain period of time, where by default all the timeless images were shot on film? Are you planning on making timeless images? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted August 30, 2016 Share #4 Posted August 30, 2016 I think a main problem with digital is the angst it (or rather the manufacturers, the sellers and the reviewers) gives its users that the quality of the result is dependent upon having the latest and best technology. It's hilariously, imho, and I smile every time I meet someone who agonises over camera or lens specs. The equipment doesn't make the photo so your idea about timelessness is beside the point. Brilliant images are being created right now with old digital equipment, just have a look at the Digilux 2 and M8 threads in this forum. Just as an example, a used M240 can be found for 3800 Eur. For that money you could buy (assuming you don't have a lens): M6 - 800 Eur 50 Summicron v3 - 700 Eur Plustek 8200 scanner - 400 Eur 100 rolls of Tri-X - 500 Eur Film developing kit and chemicals - 150 Eur (probably a lot less) ..and have 1250 Eur left for more film such as colour negative film and developing or another lens. You'd have more left if you shop around and also choose another film (and why not in bulk with a bulk loader - much cheaper and many more interesting emulsions for a lot less than Tri-X). Film photography has never in the history of humankind been better than it is today. True, the number of available emulsions is shrinking, but never have lenses been better, nor have the cameras been more advanced than the most recently-sold models. Not that you need one of the most recent models, like an F6 or a 1V, but if you do want autofocus and electronic wizardry on your film camera you could find an amazing Canon 1N or Nikon F100 with several lenses for the cost of the M6 and the Summicron alone. It is a great time to shoot film. Philip Something about the 240's sensor nowadays doesn't seem very state of the art these days. Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? 12 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2016 Share #5 Posted August 30, 2016 Something about the 240's sensor nowadays doesn't seem very state of the art these days. Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? Nothing to do with Leica.First decide whether you want to shoot film or digital and then decide on a camera. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted August 30, 2016 Share #6 Posted August 30, 2016 Why not Pentax? As if Timeless was a matter of a brand... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spydrxx Posted August 30, 2016 Share #7 Posted August 30, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) "Timeless" , shmimeliness - false superlatives by self styled experts eager to show their "mastery" of the lingo seem to be all too prevalent these days. How about a little humility and seriously seeking knowledge? Rant over. Nothing personal. It just seems more informative info via "collective wisdom" of longtime users is garnered by thoughtful inquiry. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2016 Share #8 Posted August 30, 2016 I like to think that I am a decent photographer, both film and digital, yet after over sixty years and many, many photographs I yet have to take my timeless one.... 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted August 30, 2016 Share #9 Posted August 30, 2016 Whatever medium wins the coin toss for you, i dont think that sinking hard-earned money into an end-of-cycle digital product is wise. If you think you may have a bug for digital, buy a cheap film camera now and have fun with it and wait until the next digital M is released and then see where you are. 10 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted August 30, 2016 Share #10 Posted August 30, 2016 Something about the 240's sensor nowadays doesn't seem very state of the art these days. Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? A film Leica can't create anything, nor can a digital Leica. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted August 30, 2016 Share #11 Posted August 30, 2016 Something about the 240's sensor nowadays doesn't seem very state of the art these days. Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? The M240 sensor is great, it just lacks a stop or two of ISO performance compared to the latest sensors Film is completely different and not comparable. I shoot both digital and film. You need a film and digital Leica Timeless images are you to you, the photographer, and independent of the camera ... 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belle123 Posted August 30, 2016 Share #12 Posted August 30, 2016 Something about the 240's sensor nowadays doesn't seem very state of the art these days. Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? No, I would say a film Leica is no more able to create timeless images than an IPhone. Timeless images come from being in the right place at the right time, an 'eye' for composition, and many other factors. Has nothing to do with the camera you use. If instead you mean that "Leica look", that is debatable. I have read some people attribute it to older lenses. I don't think working with a film vs digital has any factor in that. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted August 30, 2016 Share #13 Posted August 30, 2016 Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? If you are referring to the nature of images made fifty or more years ago on 35mm film, then recreating the 'look' will be difficult even with film because much of it has changed. For example, Tri-X is long gone, although the brand-type remains. But using a slower, old school film with a developer like Rodinal can help. Also accept early lenses which are prone to flare, lower resolution, aberration. And do not scan the negatives. Make prints and scan them if necessary. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 30, 2016 Share #14 Posted August 30, 2016 There are some films that specialize in the "classic" look, like Rollei Agfa Retro. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted August 30, 2016 Share #15 Posted August 30, 2016 "Timeless" ... it's all about what you mean... if is like Pico suggests above ("timeless"="old fashion") imho, unless one is already an expert on chemical workflow, is better to understand well the many possibilities coming from digital PP (and digital printing, too...) than to chase for solutions about film + developers + papers etc... which are nowadys more and more difficult to find and manage (unless, as I said, one already masters this workflow... film people still displays superb outputs) 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted August 30, 2016 Share #16 Posted August 30, 2016 After 40 years with film Leicas I added the M9 when it came out, and the convenience is nice. I also really like the image quality. Of course, the M9 is even less state of the art than the typ 240, but I don't care - it does what I want. However, for the last few years I've shot much more on film than digital, and am back to processing B&W after a couple decade lapse. Newest doesn't mean best in cameras, just more features that don't matter much. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted September 1, 2016 Share #17 Posted September 1, 2016 Something about the 240's sensor nowadays doesn't seem very state of the art these days. Would a film leica be able to create more "timeless" images? Is the 240 just more digital convenience? I'm sorry to say that in my opinion you are asking us (and, presumably, yourself) the wrong question. Any camera can make a "timeless" image. Skill and good fortune have more to do with that than the film, sensor, camera, lens and post-processing in the darkroom or on the computer. The right question is to ask yourself (we cannot answer this one) how you best enjoy making photographs. Answer that and carry on making them. If you want, you may cross your fingers and toes that one of them will be "timeless", but one should never set out in the morning with that as one's first priority! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted September 2, 2016 Share #18 Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) I think a main problem with digital is the angst it (or rather the manufacturers, the sellers and the reviewers) gives its users that the quality of the result is dependent upon having the latest and best technology. It's hilariously, imho, and I smile every time I meet someone who agonises over camera or lens specs. The equipment doesn't make the photo so your idea about timelessness is beside the point. Brilliant images are being created right now with old digital equipment, just have a look at the Digilux 2 and M8 threads in this forum. Just as an example, a used M240 can be found for 3800 Eur. For that money you could buy (assuming you don't have a lens): M6 - 800 Eur 50 Summicron v3 - 700 Eur Plustek 8200 scanner - 400 Eur 100 rolls of Tri-X - 500 Eur Film developing kit and chemicals - 150 Eur (probably a lot less) ..and have 1250 Eur left for more film such as colour negative film and developing or another lens. You'd have more left if you shop around and also choose another film (and why not in bulk with a bulk loader - much cheaper and many more interesting emulsions for a lot less than Tri-X). Film photography has never in the history of humankind been better than it is today. True, the number of available emulsions is shrinking, but never have lenses been better, nor have the cameras been more advanced than the most recently-sold models. Not that you need one of the most recent models, like an F6 or a 1V, but if you do want autofocus and electronic wizardry on your film camera you could find an amazing Canon 1N or Nikon F100 with several lenses for the cost of the M6 and the Summicron alone. It is a great time to shoot film. Philip Phillip is right in his assertions. I have an M-P 240. I am extremely happy with it and have no intention of trading it in for peanuts against the purchase of its successor to the M throne when it arrives. It will not get worse with the arrival of its successor and I suspect that the image quality of the latest, greatest M will not be significantly better than that of the M-P 240. The new M will probably have a higher maximum ISO, but the M-P 240's maximum ISO of 6400 does not leave me between a rock and a hard place, even though the maximum ISO I ever use is 3200. If I were in your shoes, I would get a nice clean (9 to 9+) used film M (M3, M4-P, M5 or M6) in the $1000-1300 range and clean used 50/2 Summicron for about $1000-1200 (and/or maybe a used 35/2 Summicron) and use that for a while. When the M-P 240's successor arrives, you can either buy it or get a nice used M-P 240 at a bargain basement price. Then you will have the best of both worlds, film and digital. Edited September 2, 2016 by Carlos Danger 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EoinC Posted September 3, 2016 Share #19 Posted September 3, 2016 (edited) I agree with the many contributions above. I use both film and digital M's, and enjoy both. In terms of "timeless", if the meaning is long-lasting sense-arousing capacity (or something like that), my 3 most timeless images were made by a Kodak Retina IIIC, a Kowa 6, and an original Canon 5D respectively, none of which are technically great cameras by today's standards. It is most definitely not about the equipment, so don't sweat it too much. I use my current suite of Canon, Hasselblad, Leica, and Sony cameras because I enjoy them each for their own properties and foibles. it's a time-worn cliche, but the best camera for capturing timeless images is the one you are carrying on the day. Enjoy your photography. Edited September 3, 2016 by EoinC 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kivis Posted September 8, 2016 Share #20 Posted September 8, 2016 Went jeep trekking in the Negev desert in Southern Israel. Took me a film camera and a digital one. Really was psyched. Got a timeless shot, too. Only it was taken with my iPhone. Oh well. 1 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.