Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About freecitizen

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Country
  1. Yes, I agree .... I have to think about the M8 too ..... but the M8 is worth less than half the second hand price of the M9, is still a very good camera ( at low ISO ), at least as sharp ( or sharper ) as the M9 and is a brilliant Infrared camera ....... it also has a relatively new 1/8000 shutter in it. Decisions, decisions .............................
  2. Thanks for the replies ............. I'll think about what to do next over Easter, but I think I should probably sell the M9 ........ even though it is a great camera .... Thankyou for your responses .. much appreciated.
  3. Hello Everyone I have just had a new replacement sensor installed in my M9. The camera was an early m odel and the sensor which was replaced was one of the early ones. I am tempted to sell this camera, exactly as it has come back from Leica, without using it - which I hope will give me the best price. The camera otherwise is in excellent condition. I have the M240 and an M8, and could use some cash at the moment. I was always very happy with the output of the M9. I seem to recall the original sensor was made by Kodak, but I think the new sensors are made by someone else. Be
  4. Perhaps I have been thinking about this in the wrong way ............. I still think the case should be better ergonomically ..... but ... Perhaps the eveready case is not meant to be something to be helpful in the taking of photographs ( it isn't ). Maybe its sole function is protection. It could be seen as a substitute for a small camera bag ............... Its primary purpose being to protect the camera ......... A much more sturdy version of the Leica neoprene protector ( which is very good ). So if I think of it as something to encase and protect the M 240 when I want to just sli
  5. The M240 eveready case front cover does indeed separate from the main part which contains the camera body. The attachment clip ( stainless steel ) which connects the two pieces is extremely well made and looks like it will last many years - it is rather elegant in my opinion. Generally speaking, the eveready case is particularly well made with high quality leather and beautiful stitching. My problem with the both the halfcase and the eveready is that they turn an already slippy body into something even more awkward - they make holding and using the camera a more clumsy experience for me. T
  6. I am in the same quandary with my new M 240. With both Leica cases - the halfcase and the eveready case - I find the leather to be very slippery ..... not grippy at all. The protrusion for the fingers to grip at the front of these Leica cases is far too shallow and not in the right place - and it moves my fingers too close to the lens release button........ Also the covering on the camera body itself is slippy, so using it naked is not fantastic either. The thumb grip on the rear of the camera is too small for a good but relaxed, secure hold of the camera. The aftermarket Thumbsup he
  7. Received replacement spare battery yesterday in time for my trip ( it was a relief ) ........ it charges up and seems OK. I plan to charge and allow to discharge a few times before travelling with it. On the plus side, the M 240 appears to be an extremely fine camera. I am looking forward to learning how to get the best from it.
  8. Let's not assume the Leica battery for the M240 is without fault. Really ..... let's not ........ I just paid a lot of money for a brand new Leica battery in sealed box which was absolutely faulty. No new replacement available where I am at the moment, and nobody seems to know when one will be available. For me, another failure of a brand new Leica product .............
  9. It has occurred to me that the corrections applied for each individual lens, as identified by the 6 bit coding, might be a modification done in-camera and the resultant modified DNG file then saved to card. Perhaps this is what the manual meant ................
  10. On page 164, the M240 manual states : " The available compression for DNG format .... retains all of the post-editing performed on the image data ..... " I don't understand this ............ I thought RAW meant direct recording of the sensor readout without alteration. Does the M 240 process/edit the DNG files in some way before writing to the card ? Does anyone know what is done in-camera to the DNG files ? Hoping someone can enlighten me please .... Many Thanks.
  11. My M240 arrived yesterday at my dealer, and as I have a really good trip coming up next month - I bit the bullet and bought it. A difficult decision financially, but the best decision for photography and lifestyle. No point buying it after the trip. It boiled down to a matter of priorities. I have kept the M8 ...... mostly for IR - and because it seems I can't get much money for it these days, even though it recently had a shutter replacement and has done very few shots since. It is still a fine camera and sometimes even appears sharper than the M9. Ditto the M9. I found a small sensor
  12. After the problems with the M8 - I also assumed Leica would have increased blocking filtration of IR in the M 240 as they did in the M9. Then I came across this on the internet - Leica M (240) IR Test #2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! ..........which gave me hope that the M 240 might work well at IR photography...... Has anyone tried putting an R72 filter in front of any lens on an M 240 to see what happens ? ........ I would dearly love to hear about it ...................
  13. Hello Everyone I have an M8 and M9. I use the M8 mainly for infrared and as a backup when travelling. I want to buy the M 240 for all sorts of reasons ..... but money is a little tight and I would benefit from trading in either the M8 or M9 ( or both ). I have found the M9 to be very poor as an IR camera, but the M8 is superb. I think I want to end up with the M 240 and the M9 - but I don't want to give up shooting infrared photos. Can anyone please tell me how the M 240 performs as an IR camera. If I could get really good IR from the M 240, I could let the M8 go more easil
  14. I do not have the M yet ..... but surely the EVF will be better than the RF on lenses with bad focus shift - like the first version 35 Lux Asph and the f1 noctilux ? These lenses by definition will not work reliably with the RF as the aperture is changed. Has anyone experience in using the EVF to say if it overcomes this problem please ?
  • Create New...