jaques Posted January 31, 2013 Share #21 Posted January 31, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) as someone else noted- the new camera is not so much an R solution- as an 'practically any old SLR lens' solution camera. You can get a very good Rokkor 50 1.4 for $40- or a Konica 40mm pancake for 20$- not to mention a world of Takumar glass for peanuts... and all those old Zeiss lenses to boot... Indeed some of the really old lenses- that have two aperture dials (one with stops one without) and no auto-aperture connections- would probably be more well suited to the M camera than most R lenses (functionally speaking). The lens adaptor ring people are going to have a field day... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 31, 2013 Posted January 31, 2013 Hi jaques, Take a look here The M240 is really taking a toll.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Lax Jought Posted January 31, 2013 Share #22 Posted January 31, 2013 I have a Red Scarlet which I'm trying to buy lenses for too. Wish I could just have the one set for both the Leica M and the Scarlet, it would make things so much easier and cheaper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted January 31, 2013 Share #23 Posted January 31, 2013 Hahahaha...holy smokes. That's pretty crazy, but it seems to work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
urs0polar Posted January 31, 2013 Share #24 Posted January 31, 2013 Wow, $8k. Well this just spells the end of my Leica R acquisitions. I managed to get some really nice stuff before the M240 was announced... 35/2, 50/1.4, 60/2.8, 135/2.8, and 180/3.4 with a SL, R3 and R8. Now even the old 50 Summicrons are ridiculously priced. I always wanted an 80/1.4 and a 100/2.8; I passed when they were both $1400 a while back; now they are completely out of reach. By the way, this M240 as the R solution is really stupid in my opinion. Sorry, but it is. No EVF is going to be as good as an analog SLR for tracking motion and what have you. And the form factor is all off. And even if the EVF ends up being great, it's still not the same. The real "Digital R" solution still is one of the Canon FF DSLRs with manual focusing screen and an adapter (Leitaxing means you can't use it on a real R body and is therefore limiting IMO, even though I agree that Nikon's ergonomics are way better:)). The newer Canons have live view as well if you're into that aspect of it. The M240 is stop down metering anyways with R lenses, no? All the M240 did was get a lot of people who don't do their research excited enough to price those of us who shoot film R's out of the market. When they realize they basically bought a NEX for $7000 to shoot now astronomically expensive R lenses, and that it's unergonomic as hell, I hope they will be kind enough to sell me their 80/1.4 or 100/2.8 for a reasonable, pre-bubble price. Buy the new M for what it was designed for: shooting M lenses at higher ISOs than was previously possible. Geez. /rant Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 31, 2013 Share #25 Posted January 31, 2013 Hi urs0polar, That sounds like sour grapes. I agree lenses got very expensive. But with regards to your technical statements, they show that you don't seem to have any hands on experience with these new technologies. Sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted January 31, 2013 Share #26 Posted January 31, 2013 As yet I hav'nt ordered the M240, but eagerly waiting to see it. I am mainly an R user the cost of the M240 might be a little high once you have added the adapter, EVF And the hand grip this will push the price close to 10,000 AUS Dollars. I only have two M lenses, the 35 mm f2 asph and the 50mm1.4 asph, so will the Leica M be worth it.?? Must admit, I am very impressed with my cheap Canon DSLR. I am sure this combo didn't cost me 10.000. Ken. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/197238-the-m240-is-really-taking-a-toll/?do=findComment&comment=2229525'>More sharing options...
Ecar Posted January 31, 2013 Share #27 Posted January 31, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) The big price hike already happened several years ago, when the film school crowd started buying R lenses to shoot movies on the Canon 7D with adapters. I thought for a second about buying some R lenses. Then I realized that I really have all focal lengths covered and I got into the M because I didn't want to carry around these big hunkin' lenses in the first place. I mean a Noctilux is pretty big on an M. So I decided I wouldn't go down the R path. Leave the adapter to people who already own them and buy M glass. Thanks. Exactly my thoughts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted January 31, 2013 Share #28 Posted January 31, 2013 Yes, I completely agree. As I have no interest in long lenses, and only occasionally use the M 90mm and 135mm lenses, I was only interested in the 28-PC (which I've already bought) and the 2.8/28-90 for the occasions when I might have wanted a zoom - but no longer considering its stratospheric price. Otherwise I can see no reason for buying large, heavy, and now expensive R-lenses in the range of 18 to 135mm. I understand they are not not of superior quality to the M-lenses of which I have all that I want in that range of focal lengths. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billo101 Posted January 31, 2013 Share #29 Posted January 31, 2013 Why Leica does not start to produce the R lens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted January 31, 2013 Share #30 Posted January 31, 2013 Wow, $8k. Well this just spells the end of my Leica R acquisitions. I managed to get some really nice stuff before the M240 was announced... 35/2, 50/1.4, 60/2.8, 135/2.8, and 180/3.4 with a SL, R3 and R8. Now even the old 50 Summicrons are ridiculously priced. I always wanted an 80/1.4 and a 100/2.8; I passed when they were both $1400 a while back; now they are completely out of reach. You can get the 28-90 for much less than that - even from dealers in the UK with warranties. By the way, this M240 as the R solution is really stupid in my opinion. Sorry, but it is. No EVF is going to be as good as an analog SLR for tracking motion and what have you. And the form factor is all off. No - you're right - it's not going to be anything like as good for tracking motion. Partly because of the slow refresh rate. But it's going to be much better for critical focusing for macro/landscape and wildlife (unless it's flying!). The form factor is not all off - even with long lenses it handles very nicely with a grip and the EVF And even if the EVF ends up being great, it's still not the same. The real "Digital R" solution still is one of the Canon FF DSLRs with manual focusing screen and an adapter (Leitaxing means you can't use it on a real R body and is therefore limiting IMO, even though I agree that Nikon's ergonomics are way better:)). The newer Canons have live view as well if you're into that aspect of it. The M240 is stop down metering anyways with R lenses, no?. I quite agree with you about Canon vs Nikon and Leitaxing. However - as I said above, the optical viewfinder is only better for motion. . . . in which case you're probably going to be better off with an AF lens anyway. For still subjects the EVF is really excellent for critical focusing - even at smaller apertures -you don't need to stop down meter, because the EVF gains up to view, and shows a proper representation of the exposure when half pressed; which means you can do your focusing at the aperture you want to use - much quicker than stop down metering. All the M240 did was get a lot of people who don't do their research excited enough to price those of us who shoot film R's out of the market. When they realize they basically bought a NEX for $7000 to shoot now astronomically expensive R lenses, and that it's unergonomic as hell, I hope they will be kind enough to sell me their 80/1.4 or 100/2.8 for a reasonable, pre-bubble price. With the already made caveat about action photography (and surely manual focus lenses aren't the answer here anyway). I think you're quite wrong, and that the 24mp FF M(240) with no AA filter is absolutely the best way to make use of the expensive R lenses. ....and I don't think it's even remotely unergonomic with the grip either, Let's face it, an M with the GPS grip and an EVF is only a little smaller than a 5DIII anyway. Buy the new M for what it was designed for: shooting M lenses at higher ISOs than was previously possible. Geez. /rant Buy it for that indeed (and don't buy it if you don't want it for that) - but if you have occasional need for macro and telephoto then I think you'll find it does an excellent job. . . . . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted January 31, 2013 Share #31 Posted January 31, 2013 Why Leica does not start to produce the R lens? I guess because they'd be better occupied producing similar lenses for the M mount directly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted January 31, 2013 Share #32 Posted January 31, 2013 Yes, R lenses have risen in price but any new lenses which push the M envelope (long, zoom, macro, tilt and shift) are going to be expensive and Leica has the problem they will likely only suit M240 and follow on users. M8, M9, ME, MM not to mention film users are going to be out in the cold. A business case for such lenses will hinge on how big the target market is. That's why I have bought a selection of R glass - 6 lenses and a tele-converter - to let me play while Leica are deciding what to do about new lenses for the M. I liked the idea of a 28-90 zoom with click stops to bring up the framelines for optical finder users until someone pointed out it will completely obscure the optical viewfinder... People tell me the 28-90 R lens is quite a lump on the M240; maybe so but hardly bigger than the Nikon 24-70 I might otherwise put on it, lighter too, though I haven't compared the R-M and F-M adapter sizes. A further issue with lenses without an aperture ring is that even if you have an adapter which allows the aperture to be partially closed, it's not very repeatable. My Novoflex F-M adapter has no markings to act as a guide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 31, 2013 Share #33 Posted January 31, 2013 Mark, On your last point. I use the light meter of the camera to make it repeatable. Point the camera, start either on the fully open or stopped down end. Then count the stops as you change the aperture with an adapter. That seems to work for me, especially on a tripod. Of course, you are right that the available adapters have no aperture markings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted January 31, 2013 Share #34 Posted January 31, 2013 That's a good method, and probably close enough. At least the latest generation of adapters have this facility, the first one I have leaves the lens completely stopped down unless it has an aperture ring. Focussing of course has always been a problem but I have enjoyed the results from the 14/2.8 and the wider end of the 17-35/f2.8 where of course depth of field is your friend. Using thiese lenses on an M240 is going to open up all kinds of possibilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 31, 2013 Share #35 Posted January 31, 2013 I do not buy the lump viewpoint. After handling the new M with 28-90 at Photokina, I decided that was the first R lens to buy prior to crazy pricing. It was nicely balanced to me who had never held an R lens on an M body. Stop these unbalanced comments until you actually have one in hand to know for yourself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonki-M Posted January 31, 2013 Share #36 Posted January 31, 2013 holy smoke! i never imagine the M9 could look like that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 31, 2013 Share #37 Posted January 31, 2013 I may well buy a new M once I've had a good chance to look at the output, but the thought of sticking a huge great zoom lens on an M camera is anathema to me. Peter - I agree with you and I suspect that I will continue to be happy with the RF and a couple of prime M lenses in my pocket for everything. That is what drew me to the system in the first place and that is still what I love about it - the freedom to have a small body with superb small optics that produce excellent images. But, I like having the option to use zooms greater than 90mm (i.e. 105-280) on the camera. Just not sure how much I'll use it because I don't seem to have the need or desire now with the M9. I'm not a bird and bugs kind of photographer. Who knows, I'll keep an open mind... Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4X5B&W Posted January 31, 2013 Share #38 Posted January 31, 2013 I have held onto my 100 Macro Apo, and 180 Apo-telyt (two stunning lenses BTW), as well as a 2x converter. Don't expect to use any of these unless the camera is on a tripod, so for me I think this is a very good "R solution"......liveview with this set-up will work for me. Combine that with the use of M lenses for normal hand held shooting, and to me this looks like a very attractive kit. I'm sure I'm not the only person who is thinking this way Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted February 1, 2013 Share #39 Posted February 1, 2013 I have held onto my 100 Macro Apo, and 180 Apo-telyt (two stunning lenses BTW), as well as a 2x converter.Don't expect to use any of these unless the camera is on a tripod, so for me I think this is a very good "R solution"......liveview with this set-up will work for me. Combine that with the use of M lenses for normal hand held shooting, and to me this looks like a very attractive kit. I'm sure I'm not the only person who is thinking this way Yup.... The 100 macro and 80-200/4 are my only acqusitions..... and thats it. I can see myself using them at home for stuff in the garden but I won't be lugging them about on the off chance I might need them..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted February 1, 2013 Share #40 Posted February 1, 2013 I do think that especially the longer focal lengths and macro lenses will be more in demand. Maybe zoom lenses will appeal to some people but IMO if you want/need to have zoom in shorter range, you will want to have autofocus as well. For anything between 28 and 135 mm I think I would stick with M lenses and use the M240 viewfinder to focus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.