douglasf13 Posted March 7, 2013 Share #21 Posted March 7, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Compared to the move to full frame? Are you serious? Your comment is certainly outside the mainstream. Whether Leica, Canon or Nikon, the first full frame sensor on a proven technology was more significant than the first (oftem problematic) CMOS sensor. Initial implementations of Live View and video have more often than not been a curiousity, and it's taken a few generations to get it right. There's a first generation feel to the announced M feature set in these bolt-ons. I was listening to a radio interview with Constantine Manos the other day (he switched from Kodachrome to the M8 to the M9,) and he talked about when a Leica rep came to a Magnum meeting with the the new M8 at the time, and Manos said that the first question out of everyone's mouths was "Is it full frame?" When the answer was "No," he said the whole room of 40 Magnum photographers just turned off to the presentation. Of course, Manos used the M8, and even mixed M8 results with Kodachrome results in his American Color II book with great effect, but I don't think that the move to the larger format of the M9 can be underestimated. All that I ever really wanted was a Leica digital M with a FF sensor that still behaved somewhat like a film M, and the M9 does a pretty good job. The M 240 looks nice, but it doesn't feel like a necessary upgrade at this point, to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 7, 2013 Posted March 7, 2013 Hi douglasf13, Take a look here A little disappointed. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
photomeme Posted March 7, 2013 Share #22 Posted March 7, 2013 Whilst noiseless images at 128000iso, 100 megapixels, 30 frames per second continuous shooting Oh come on. People were expecting a greater than 1.3 stop ISO improvement over the M9, with the migration to CMOS, and Leica didn't deliver that, period. Nikon did significantly better than that with it's first foray into CMOS from CCD, and that was years ago. They are two generations beyond that performance now. After the amazing ISO performance of the MM CCD solution, not only measured noise but 'look' and utility of incredibly high ISOs, it's hard to call the M anything but a disappointment. We're hearing that there's no proper color profile yet, to explain some of the odd color rendition we're seeing (with noteworthy exceptions). The damp squib is what Leica delivered, in one part, whether they were ready, in another, and how they're presenting it, in another. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 7, 2013 Share #23 Posted March 7, 2013 I think to expect the M to meet or exceed the performance of the MM was always unrealistic. The increased pixel count, the need to retain the colour filter array, the move from CCD to CMOS all count against the qualities you seek. Leica may sadly need to face up to the difficult news that you may not be buying one of their cameras, news that is tempered by the fact the camera is sold out for months. Time will tell how important the M is. For me, it's a game changer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 7, 2013 Share #24 Posted March 7, 2013 Having additionally LiveView is the game changer for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1JB Posted March 7, 2013 Share #25 Posted March 7, 2013 Personally I think Leica is moving into areas with the M that are too easily accomplished by other means. I would have been interested in the camera if they had come up with a sensor that offered signifcant improvements in dynamic range, noise and a real jump in pixels that were cleaner at higher isos. Live view really is only of use on the M for macro work. Leica makes one kind of odd macro M lens and if I was still into macro work I wouldn't have picked the M to begin with even with live view. As far as making the 135 more easily used without image stabilization live view is a real pain in the neck when zooming in focus. The image just bobs around on the screen as you press a button to zoom in, struggle to focus manually and then try to keep the image framed. All the while you could use the rangefinder to focus and the DoF provided by a reasonable f/stop to focus and get your shot much more quickly and efficiently For video it's all manual focus so its utility on moving subjects is again quite limited and I still don't know how well exposure is controlled with the metering available on the M where the f/stop is also controlled manually. The added features added up to more opportunities for frustation for things I can easily do to my satisfaction with my little Sony RX100. So for me, and I respect the love of other's for these new features, the choice was between keeping an M9 with 18mp ccd sensor and M with a 24mp cmos sensor. I'm just not into serious macro work or video work and if I were I wouldn't do either with the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted March 7, 2013 Share #26 Posted March 7, 2013 Well I finally got to handle the new M the other day and I will be buying one as I can see that it is a great all rounder BUT and I say again BUT I think the M9 is probably the last purist rangefinder that leica will make and I will certainly be keeping one as my back up and maybe more. What I found in the short time that I handled the M is that not only has it become slightly bigger and heavier but more importantly it has lost the Zen like simplicity of the M9 and that the added features in some way actually detract from the pure and simple joy of a digital RF only camera. It is as if the extra added options actually get in the way giving you to many choices. So I was surprised by this reaction that I had. Anyway as I said at the beginning I will still buy the M240 as it is in fact a more capable camera but and again a big BUT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 7, 2013 Share #27 Posted March 7, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Let's not forget that one now can also use long teles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macjonny1 Posted March 7, 2013 Share #28 Posted March 7, 2013 Live view really is only of use on the M for macro work. I . Live view is nice for framing wide angle shots and not having to use a finder Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 7, 2013 Share #29 Posted March 7, 2013 Indeed, I was out with my WATE today which ordinarily would required the FF. With the M, focus through the viewfinder and use the LCD or EVF for accurate framing. No more dedicated viewfinders at £500 a pop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted March 7, 2013 Share #30 Posted March 7, 2013 David -- I tried the M240 at the photoexpo in NY last fall and came away with the same impression. Leica, to give them credit, is bending the M experience to meet up with those that want the M to offer what Nikon/Canon offer. It is a bend I can understand and appreciate if I was running the firm. By pushing the M towards the center of what the greater population wants in a professional level camera the monetary rewards to Leica should be great -- and all to the better for that. For me, I am happy with the M9, still awed by many of the great photos Magnum photographers and others have created with, and have no need for movies or clunky ev attachments to use telephotos or macro, I have no personal inventory of R lenses, and when I do shoot at night there is plenty of light to pick up what I am trying to capture (if I want everything to look like daytime I can always use a flash ) So, to sum up, I hope the camera is a huge success. Me, I am sticking with M9, enjoying film more with my M4, and keeping the cash in the bank earning zero. At some point one should off the upgrade merry-go-round unless, of course, you are using the camera to earn a living. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Mandeville Posted March 7, 2013 Share #31 Posted March 7, 2013 I haven't felt the same about the M. There hasn't been much of a build up and it's felt like a bit of damp squib now it's here. There has been the odd bit of purchasing justification from the new owners but no great excitement as in the advent of the M9. It feels, to me and maybe only to me, like this version is a beta version for the next big thing, and that the next big thing will be big. Maybe similar to the M8 to M9 transition. With that in mind I am going to wait for the next big thing and in the interim I'm sure that my M9 (along with my OMD) will provide first class service. Not sure where you have been over the past few months, but I have seen a lot of build up toward this release, on this forum, as well as on other sites. If what you say is true and there has been no build up of anticipation for this camera, what is up with the recent run on old R lenses? I have seen lots of excitement from prospective purchasers as well as new owners, and also lots of consternation from those who don't think it will be better than the M9 for the money. Interestingly, this is the same diversity of attitudes I saw in relation to the release of the MM. Most that got them were excited and love the camera. And plenty of others who didn't purchase it spent their time criticizing it and justifying their decision not to purchase. Honestly, just about every camera put out is a "beta" version of the next big thing. Major technological advances come slowly, and camera producers are expected to upgrade their models every two to three years. So it stands to reason that not every model is going to bring breakthrough technological advancements. The M-240 is a solid next step for the M camera line. Leica transitioned to full frame with the M9, and now they have transitioned to CMOS with the M-240, and added some great features in the process, such as better high ISO performance, live view, focus peaking, video, et cetera. Lots of upgrades to the body itself as well, which makes it in my mind a much more finished and polished camera than the M9. In fact, some aspects of the M9 were ridiculously outdated and/or poorly executed at the time they were introduced (such as the LCD screen, shutter cocking mechanism, menu system, etc.). The M-240 brings the camera much closer in line to the technology of other current cameras. For me, I have an M9 and love much about it. Takes gorgeous images. But I am very excited about the features I will be getting with the new M. It fixes most of the issues that I have with the M9. I could skip this iteration and wait for the next, but I have decided not to. I do, however agree with others that I am really interested in seeing some better technology to improve the imaging, like greater dynamic range in the sensor, lower noise levels, and higher resolution to do justice to the Leica glass. All of that will come, I expect. But it won't all come at once in one major upgrade, I promise you that. It will be a little bit at a time, with each new model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
photomeme Posted March 7, 2013 Share #32 Posted March 7, 2013 Leica may sadly need to face up to the difficult news that you may not be buying one of their cameras. Oh goodness grief. Purile much? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 7, 2013 Share #33 Posted March 7, 2013 Oh goodness grief. Purile much? Just so that you know for future use, "puerile" is spelt with an extra "e". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
platel Posted March 7, 2013 Share #34 Posted March 7, 2013 Being in Vienna for work I visited the Leica shop here this afternoon and spent some time with the M. Image quality aside (this I could not judge), I do feel that the camera has some significant improvements over the M9(P). The build quality feels solid, the weather sealing is a great addition, button placement feels right and I like the new button design on the back. I love the "thumbs up"-like bump. The screen is a big improvement. And I still feel that the camera does not have too many bells and whistles. I don't believe that the new functions such as video get in the way of using the camera as a pure range finder. I also love the faster processor. So in my opinion it is a big step forward from the M9. What I could not judge is image quality. I am curious to see the results. CMOSIS is a small company and I can't imagine that they could make a sensor that would beat what Canon, Nikon or Sony have been developing for decades. I can't believe that image quality will match up to the new 5D mk III or D800E, but then again it is not the same type of camera. I love the process of shooting with a Leica, and no other camera gives me that same feeling. Of course there is still more to wish for. Why not a thinner body, it would be great if we could have something the size of an M6. Japanese companies don't seem to have much trouble fitting all their electronics in a small package. But then again, they are Japanese, cramming as much as possible in a small as possible space is what they are great at ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted March 7, 2013 Share #35 Posted March 7, 2013 When the M9's IQ was as good and probably better than Canon and Nikon everyone compared them. Now the IQ may not keep up with Canon and Nikon and people say it can't be compared because it's a different camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macjonny1 Posted March 7, 2013 Share #36 Posted March 7, 2013 When the M9's IQ was as good and probably better than Canon and Nikon everyone compared them. Now the IQ may not keep up with Canon and Nikon and people say it can't be compared because it's a different camera. From someone who has a D800E and zeiss/Nikon primes I think the marginal IQ differences are just silly to talk about. In fact I often like my M9 images more. Buy cameras based on features, style, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
platel Posted March 7, 2013 Share #37 Posted March 7, 2013 When the M9's IQ was as good and probably better than Canon and Nikon everyone compared them. Now the IQ may not keep up with Canon and Nikon and people say it can't be compared because it's a different camera. It would be great if they could manage, but I just don't think they did. That surely is a pity for such an expensive camera, But what I wanted to say is that even if the IQ is not on par with what Canon or Nikon offers, it is still an interesting camera for people that enjoy shooting with a digital rangefinder camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 7, 2013 Share #38 Posted March 7, 2013 A digital M is never going to be as thin as an M6 because of the amount of "stuff" which has to sit behind the focal plane. The sensor, its circuit board, the DSP board, the LCD display, the cover glass together make a package which can never be as thin as a strip of film and a pressure plate. Leica disguise the additional depth required by extending the lens mount forwards and the display bezel backwards but the body is still some 4mm thicker than a film M. So you can wish for a thinner digital M, you can stamp your feet until your toes hurt but it's not going to happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted March 7, 2013 Share #39 Posted March 7, 2013 A digital M is never going to be as thin as an M6 because of the amount of "stuff" which has to sit behind the focal plane. The sensor, its circuit board, the DSP board, the LCD display, the cover glass together make a package which can never be as thin as a strip of film and a pressure plate. Leica disguise the additional depth required by extending the lens mount forwards and the display bezel backwards but the body is still some 4mm thicker than a film M. So you can wish for a thinner digital M, you can stamp your feet until your toes hurt but it's not going to happen. Surely they could split the difference though, if they made a digital M without an LCD...not that I think that'll happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert-gregory Posted March 7, 2013 Share #40 Posted March 7, 2013 An off-note to the M introduction I'll be interested to see its the effect on availability of Leica lenses. When the M9 was introduced and everyone was jumping to buy the new FF Leica, it seemed to have caught Leica and Lens Production short handed. Only in the past year or so have factory new lenses like the 50 Summilux ASPH became easy to find and buy, used prices seem to have actually gotten 'reasonable.' Will the new M have the same effect with new (not folks that already have an M-digital) users adding to the Leica fold? Or are the new M buyers established users 'upgrading' and have their lens selection already in their kit? Seems like a good time also for Leica to introduce a couple new lenses like the rumoured 28 Summilux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.