Preparing for the M

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My feelings probably mirrored yours when my M8 got completely swamped by a wave. Fortunately I was able to dry it out quickly and it survived. Better protection will, as I said, add several levels of safety.

Jaap,

 

What I am looking for is water resistance to the extent that when you get caught out in an unexpected heavy thunderstorm with no shelter nearby and no camera bag, you will not end up with a damaged camera. If my wife had not spotted a rubbish bin after 5 minutes of torrential rain from which we tore off a piece of black plastic to protect my M9, I suspect even more damage might have occurred.

 

Wilson

 

Jeff, fortunately my post bears no resemblance to your interpretation...

[Jeff S]

Jeff, fortunately my post bears no resemblance to your interpretation...

 

 

Here's what I said above.."And how many others have avoided taking their digital Ms out in hard rain or snow (sometimes unavoidable if out on a long shoot, without cover, under changing weather conditions)?"

 

This is the same concern expressed by Wilson.

 

My other posts were directly in response to your various statements, one of which was that the M8 and M9 will be fine in the rain ( You said, "So the M will surely by fine in the rain; but so are the M8 and M9")

 

Now I suppose you want to parse words about hard versus soft rain. Surely the only known problem you referred to was in hard rain.

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

The M will certainly be a or several levels of safety better

....

[eudemian]

There is one case of an M8 being damaged by being caught out in a shower whilst on the beach, the camera malfuntioned to the point of being useless and was sent to Leica who classified it as water damage and repaired at my expense. The shower was sharp and did not last long, but long enough to cost me hundreds.

I know Jaapv knows about this case because I fequently remind him of it when he so optimistically rates the Digital M as splash proof.

[jonoslack]

There is one case of an M8 being damaged by being caught out in a shower whilst on the beach, the camera malfuntioned to the point of being useless and was sent to Leica who classified it as water damage and repaired at my expense. The shower was sharp and did not last long, but long enough to cost me hundreds.

I know Jaapv knows about this case because I fequently remind him of it when he so optimistically rates the Digital M as splash proof.

 

Hi Tom

I remember your story vividly - I thought of it every time I shot in the rain with one of my M9s, but they did survive.

 

The difference is that the old M's resistance to water was based on tight tolerances . . . The new M (so I understand) is based on rubber o rings. Of course, the lenses aren't sealed, but they are greased, and, more to the point, they have no electronics. It's hard to think of enough water coming through the mount to damage the camera.

[Jeff S]

The M will be several levels of safety better

 

That was my clearly stated hope in the first place...before you chimed in with all the other unnecessary nonsense, including that the M8 and M9 were fine in the rain already, and only one known case otherwise.

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know Jaapv knows about this case because I fequently remind him of it when he so optimistically rates the Digital M as splash proof.

 

3 and counting...just in today's comments.

 

Jeff

[thrid]

Regarding weather sealing in the 240 and condensation.

 

It would be interesting to know if Leica took the same step Nikon supposedly took with the F3. Apparently the circuit boards in the F3 were sprayed with a sealant to protect them from moisture formed by condensation. The F3 only had minimal sealing (there was a F3-P variant that was more heavily sealed).

 

There are many weather sealed DSLR bodies on the market and personally I have never heard or read about one that fried itself due to condensation. Maybe that is because the sealing also prevents warmer, more humid air from being able to readily enter the body and form large quantities of condensation on the electronics. That is a question for a product engineer.

 

But regardless I always felt that shooting with the M8/M9 in the rain or very moist or even dusty environments was and is something of a game of Russian roulette. I don't care how tight fitting a body is, water and moisture will work its way inside eventually. And that's not counting the gaping hole that is the threaded shutter release.

 

The analogue bodies are very tightly constructed and all of my 6 bodies have fogged up at one point or another in the rain or in humid environments. The saving grace of course is that they are either fully mechanical or contain few electronics.

 

I don't recall my D700 fogging up, even when taking it inside on a winter day and it's body is sealed.

[lct]

Do we really need elaborations to explain that a non-waterproof watch is not waterproof?

[marknorton]

I think Leica will have gained sealing experience from the S where I noticed the back of the lenses has the same sort of rubber gasket running around the lens mount that the more expensive Nikon lenses have had for years.

 

In the M8 (and M9), as Jono mentions, any water resistance comes from tightly fitting top and base plates rather than a more pro-active method of using o-rings.

 

Water ingress through the shutter speed dial and (especially) the shutter release/mode switch is a problem. There's no sealing at all just some mechanical barriers which may help to keep the dust out.

 

Once my dismantled M8 had lost the uneven struggle of staying working, I immersed it in water and this is where the bubbles of trapped air came out...

[marknorton]

As for IQ, it will certainly be a shot in Leica's foot if the IQ of the M 240 is declared to be inferior to the M9 in spite of its firmware-tamed imaging nasties.

 

We can look forward to endless M9/M240 comparisons here. It's going to be a busy Spring, or should that be Summer?

[thrid]

It's going to be a busy Spring, or should that be Summer?

 

Just another reason for sticking with Tri-X...

[jaapv]

3 and counting...just in today's comments.

 

Jeff

OK. Guilty of imprecision. One known (onthis forum) to have died ( you guys haven't even found it yet) A number, at least five that I know of damaged ( Plus two of those on RFF). (but there might - will- be some more)

Pretty good for the type of camera don't you think?

And that was all I was saying, gentlemen.

[holgerf]

I recently picked an APO 180/3.4 Telyt-R near the high end of your price range in very good condition. It's smallish size is what has impressed me. Have been playing around with it +22228 on my GXR to see how well I can focus it on that A12 Mount. Seems OK, but the white shimmering for my eyes is not as good as I remember the red shimmering on the M at Photokina.

 

Frankly at under 1 lb it feels like my APO 135/3.4 M lens on the camera even with the adapter.

 

I was wondering if anyone has experience with the 3.4 versus the 2.8 APO? What is the quality difference? Substantial?

 

"Preparing for the M" I also got a APO-Telyt-R 3.4/180. Together with the 2xExtender I payed 650 € (830 $) and am now looking forward to mix it up with my APO-Telyt 3.4/135 -

 

Best

Holger

[jaapv]

That is a steal..

[jonoslack]

On a whim, and because I had the adapter, I just bought two mint condition OM lenses:

135 f3.5 €25

200 f4 €149

 

They probably aren't up to R lens standards, but they seem pretty good on the OMD, and of course, they're extremely small, and beautifully made.

 

all the best

[wlaidlaw]

On a whim, and because I had the adapter, I just bought two mint condition OM lenses:

135 f3.5 €25

200 f4 €149

 

They probably aren't up to R lens standards, but they seem pretty good on the OMD, and of course, they're extremely small, and beautifully made.

 

all the best

 

What??? At a boot sale in Norwich Jono? Incredibly good prices.

 

Wilson

[chris_tribble]

Well done Jono - I'd looked at Olymous lenses and some were interesting - but too expensive. As for my own preparations, at last a Canon FD 300 L F/4 came through on ebay and is now on its way. This is likely to complete the lens purchase (unless I can get a PC lens like the Nikon 28 f/3.5 for an acceptable price).

 

Then all I have to do is wait + complete selling off some Canon stuff + earn a bit to reduce the hit of what will eventually be 2 M-240 bodies... oh - and sell the M9/s (I can't see myself holding on to the M9 - two battery chargers / file size differences etc won't be helpful for my kind of work...)

[jaapv]

I used to own that 135 - long ago. As I recall it was as good or better than the Super Takumar. Another one to look at is the 75-150 4.0 An excellent lens, sharp and contrasty - unique amongst the zooms of the time, but with strong distortion. Which is no problem in these Photoshop days.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wlaidlaw]

Jaap,

 

I think there is a mis-type in your motto

 

It reads: Die Leica is nun einmal kein Ersatz für eine Atelierkamera, nie hat sie daran gedacht es sein zu wollen

 

I think it should read: Die Leica ist nun einmal kein Ersatz für eine Atelierkamera, nie hat sie daran gedacht es sein zu wollen

 

Here is another good one

 

Die Leica ist kein Ersatz für einen Hammer, obwohl es, wie es sich anfühlt, wenn Sie es ablegen auf Ihre Zehen.

 

Wilson