Why an M 240 as rangefinder?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hence, why I think the Leica S system is doomed to fail. The high end 35mm systems are pushing the envelope in terms of resolution etc..

 

The medium format digital systems are already a decade or so ahead of Leica in market penetration. Leica S is a "me too" product in that market.

 

Not to mention they already have a complete system with a full range lenses etc..

 

Don't understand why Leica got into that market really.

 

It is even stranger- the S system has been selling well above expectations since the introduction and turns a good profit. Maybe Leica knows something

[Guest tanks]

Well, they must be exceeding their expectations for sure as most of the S system lenses seem to be unavailable.

 

I wonder what percent of the professional market was their goal. Just about all of the demos seem to be in fashion.

 

As far as pricing goes they are about 30-50% more than the Pentax, Mamiya, Hasslelblad and some digital backs that are in the same resolution range.

 

So, what advantage would they provide to a professional photographer that the other systems do not, as a business decision?

[jaapv]

Their expectation was 1000 per year. Advantage : Mid Format in a DSLR-sized package. Highly attractive for pro photographers like for instance fashion.

But I suggest you take these questions into the S2 forum.

[jonoslack]

 

So, what advantage would they provide to a professional photographer that the other systems do not, as a business decision?

 

Well it isn't really me-too. It's weather sealed and so are the lenses (which are excellent), and it doesn't need much fiddling about with, or technical knowledge. Most other MF systems seem complex and intimidating in comparison. Nikon may be close in terms of resolution, but not in terms of lenses.

 

I don't shoot MF, but if I did I would do my best to get into the S system.

[haroldp]

apart from the enjoyment/pleasure/history/fine pictures and deliciousness they bring of course.

 

That seems like quite lot of reasons to me.

 

Regards .... Harold

[1JB]

I believe Leica added the features of live view and video to the M because it was a cost effective way to "update" the M lineup. As far as practical applications these features are of limited use and Leica will never compete in these areas unless it develops autofocus lenses to use with the evf. I can't imagine what the development cost and size of those lenses would be but I don't see them moving in that direction.

 

What sells the M series are: simplicity of use, size and image quality. So with the M Leica took the easy, lower cost path of putting a 24mp cmos sensor in the M9 and threw in live view, evf and video all of which are seriously handicapped by the lack of autofocus. If Leica is going to continue to compete based on image quality it's going to have to make a step change in image quality from a sensor and I don't see that happening. They don't have the money and they don't want to spend the money.

 

Whether it was merited or not the ccd sensor brought a certain allure with it and reinforced the mantra of a "Leica Look." From what I've read and seen the cmos sensor is no better and maybe no worse than what is otherwise already available in the dslr market. Leica is resting on the laurels of its M lens lineup which remains unsurpassed in quality and size. What Leica needs to survive is a sensor that lives up to its lenses, not live view, evf and video.

[Lindolfi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What Leica needs to survive is a sensor that lives up to its lenses

 

I have used Leica lenses with the M4-P, M6 and M9. With the M9, my Leica lenses have shown more than before. With the M 240 there is a small step forward compared to the M9. Next to that, some more great manual focus lenses can be used, that were not usable on the M9. Looks to me Leica made an excellent move to survive.

[viramati]

Apart from the size of the camera, the leica lenses and a quitter shutter the whole rational for me is RF. Only with this style of camera can you see what is coming into frame while looking through the finder. Only with the a RF do you have an undistorted window of the world and can you choose how what is in the frame and see what is going on outside the frame at the same time. A leica M without a RF makes absolutely no sense to me, I might as well but a Canon or a Nikon.

[lct]

We will see an M sans M when pig can fly hopefully.

[drdannn]

Well it isn't really me-too. It's weather sealed and so are the lenses (which are excellent), and it doesn't need much fiddling about with, or technical knowledge. Most other MF systems seem complex and intimidating in comparison. Nikon may be close in terms of resolution, but not in terms of lenses.

 

I don't shoot MF, but if I did I would do my best to get into the S system.

The camera body may be weather sealed, BUT if there is no rubber ring at the lens mount then the lens where is attaches to the lens body simply CANNOT be weather sealed. Correct me if I'm wrong. I have 2 weather sealed cameras and both have the rubber ring either on the lens or on the camera body.

[pico]

I have used Leica lenses with the M4-P, M6 and M9. With the M9, my Leica lenses have shown more than before. [...]

 

They have shown more what?

[Jeff S]

The camera body may be weather sealed, BUT if there is no rubber ring at the lens mount then the lens where is attaches to the lens body simply CANNOT be weather sealed. Correct me if I'm wrong. I have 2 weather sealed cameras and both have the rubber ring either on the lens or on the camera body.

 

Leica, i.e., Stefan Daniel, says that tests showed the current level of weather sealing is sufficient. We'll see, of course, as real life experience reveals.

 

Jeff

[Lindolfi]

They have shown more what?

 

More presence, touchability, of the things I photograph. And still the limits of these lenses have not been reached. The projected image on the sensor is so much richer than what you get out of it. Yet with the M9, I rediscovered my M lenses.

 

To get closer to topic: I would not buy an M 240 without a rangefinder. A rangefinder Is great for most of my photography. With the M 240 I can use the same small body for more of my photography.

[1JB]

I have used Leica lenses with the M4-P, M6 and M9. With the M9, my Leica lenses have shown more than before. With the M 240 there is a small step forward compared to the M9. Next to that, some more great manual focus lenses can be used, that were not usable on the M9. Looks to me Leica made an excellent move to survive.

 

Ah, but you left off the last part of the sentence in your quotation: "What Leica needs to survive is a sensor that lives up to its lenses, not live view, evf and video."

 

The thread is about why the M 240 is a rangefinder. It's a rangefinder because that machanism along with the superiority of the Leica lenses are unsurpassed when it comes to manual focus and image quality.

 

Now imagine the M 240 with just live vew and evf. It's a complete dud. Game over, bye-bye Leica. EVF and live view are so much more cumbersome to focus a manual focus lens than the brilliant rangefinder mechanim. I have absolutely no doubt that a compact camera wth it's own autofocus lenses, evf, live view and system that used the same sensor as the M240 and could take the M lens lineup with an adaptor just as the 4/3rds market can now would spell the end of the M 240 without a rangefinder mechanism. I used a 4/3rds system in just this manner before getting the M9. The M lenses were wasted on the smaller sensor but if that camera had the sensor of the M 240 which will soon happen I would not buy an M 240 without a rangefinder. I'd put up with the lousy manual focusing using my M lenses and evf then put on the autofocus lenses that come with that system when I wanted speed, just as I did with the m4/3rds format.

 

That's why I view live view, evf and video in the M 240 as toss ins. The real issue on the M 240 for me is how good is that sensor. Leica will never compete in the areas of live view and evf with manual focus lenses. If they want to stand apart and survive they must keep the rangefinder system or develop autofocus lenses of the size and quality of the M lineup and come up with an autofocus system. They're years behind in those areas.

 

The M 240 is already old in terms of evf, live view and the sensor. I don't seriously see Leica ever making any use of evf and live view for focusing auto focus lenses. 3 years from now imagine where Leica will be if the M 240 did not have a rangefinder. What Leica needs to survive is a sensor that lives up to its lenses, not live view, evf and video.

[Lindolfi]

There are four statements coming up in this thread

 

1] an M needs a rangefinder.

2] an M needs an EVF.

3] an M needs autofocus.

4] an M needs a sensor to match the quality of Leica lenses

 

My position: 1] true, 2] sometimes true 3] not true, 4] true

 

And what do you see in the M 240? So, not a bad camera in my opinion.

[jonoslack]

There are four statements coming up in this thread

 

1] an M needs a rangefinder.

2] an M needs an EVF.

3] an M needs autofocus.

4] an M needs a sensor to match the quality of Leica lenses

 

My position: 1] true, 2] sometimes true 3] not true, 4] true

 

And what do you see in the M 240? So, not a bad camera in my opinion.

 

Perfect Bert

nailed.

all the best

[jonoslack]

The camera body may be weather sealed, BUT if there is no rubber ring at the lens mount then the lens where is attaches to the lens body simply CANNOT be weather sealed. Correct me if I'm wrong. I have 2 weather sealed cameras and both have the rubber ring either on the lens or on the camera body.

 

I'm an expert at this - having had 3 cameras die on me due to wet weather. Water never came in through the lens mount - even in small quantities. Of course, it's possible, but a couple of drops wouldn't do any harm anyway (there's no electronics in there until you get to the sensor, and you'd need a lot of water for that.

 

Cameras die when their LCD's get wet - or water gets into the electronics around a button or more commonly through the shutter release. The M is sealed in all these areas.

 

I've used one in really heavy rain, and it's been fine. When it's wet, one tends to point the camera downward anyway (not much point in shooting with a lens covered in raindrops) this also makes it much less likely that water would get in around the lens mount.

 

All the best