My private review of M240

[keithlaban.co.uk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No

 

Precisely!

[colonel]

I'm a colour pics person, so richer colour is a welcome feature for me. Besides I can more easier create more depth through more tone in post processing.

 

.....

 

I can be happy with Sony RX1 if I only require 1 lens.

I can be happy with Leica M9 if I ony need M lenses.

But,...I wanted more. Therefore I've gotten the M240.

 

 

thanks for the review

 

The RX1 has devastatingly neutral colours so requires workflow and/or profile work in LR to vivid up.

I am split between the advantages of warm colours (e.g. Canon, Leica M240, etc.) for those that like them, over neutral, which allows more scope for the user (and less detail damage if you need to 'de-warm') but also requires more work finding your favorite profile.

 

I'll probably get the M240 in addition to my RX1 as my M lenses are getting lonely but also due to being a kleptomanic (a condition I share with at least some here!)

[wattsy]

but also due to being a kleptomanic (a condition I share with at least some here!)

 

Are you going to steal a new M?

[billo101]

I really appreciated to read your review, very nice hands-on report!

That's much more useful than some other reviews discussed these days

 

*huff* steve...*huff*

 

+1!

 

b

[colonel]

Are you going to steal a new M?

 

Noun 1. kleptomaniac - someone with an irrational urge to steal in the absence of an economic motive

oh damn, I thought it was a rabid collector

 

probably meant compulsive horders syndrome

[sillbeers15]

The only potential benefit I can see offered by live view is to be able to obtain accurate focus off centre without doing the focus and recompose routine (an obvious example is if you are doing a portrait wide open and you want to absolutely nail the focus on the eyes). If you have to focus in the centre with LV you might as well use the RF patch.

 

That was my biggest strugle with M8 & M9 as I cannot accurately get the 'eye' in focus using the OVF due to the small size of the eye compared to the patch and the tolerence of the OVF focusing accuracy vs the shallow DOF of fast lens.

Else I can consider LV redundent feature if I could get focus accuracy with OVF.

[mblaze]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We're quite used to focussing an M camera in the centre of the frame - we've been doing it for 50+ years - so it's no great hardship you can't scroll around the Live View window to take a peek.

 

It's not "no great hardship" if you had hoped to be able to use the M240 with a tilting lens.

[Jeff S]

The only potential benefit I can see offered by live view is to be able to obtain accurate focus off centre without doing the focus and recompose routine (an obvious example is if you are doing a portrait wide open and you want to absolutely nail the focus on the eyes). If you have to focus in the centre with LV you might as well use the RF patch.

 

But LV will reveal whether or not your VF focus is working as intended, in conjunction with the lens.

 

Jeff

[CheshireCat]

As I understand it this is really not possible - I think it's to do with processor power, but it was discussed at some length during the testing. Sadly it was made pretty clear that it wouldn't happen.

 

Processor power is not a problem. Smells like poor firmware implementation, same cause as most usability issues of the M9.

[marknorton]

As I have said elsewhere, the EVF/Live View are excellent for those situations where the OVF all too readily lets you down. Close up, wide open, wide angle, longer lens, T&S, zoom, macro. The OVF seems to be an improvement over the M9 but the combination of the two has allowed me to identify whether the OVF is correctly aligned (it is, or at least was until it went back to Solms to have that screw replaced) and which of my lenses are off, about 20%.

 

When out shooting, my instinct will be to use the OVF and LV for those situations in the past where I have tended to focus-bracket being unable to trust the OVF.

[Dan Bachmann]

As I have said elsewhere, the EVF/Live View are excellent for those situations where the OVF all too readily lets you down. Close up, wide open, wide angle, longer lens, T&S, zoom, macro. The OVF seems to be an improvement over the M9 but the combination of the two has allowed me to identify whether the OVF is correctly aligned (it is, or at least was until it went back to Solms to have that screw replaced) and which of my lenses are off, about 20%.

 

When out shooting, my instinct will be to use the OVF and LV for those situations in the past where I have tended to focus-bracket being unable to trust the OVF.

 

My interest of LV on a rangefinder is different than everyone else here. For me, I'm fine with the focusing with the OVF; however, I'd like to be able to use polarizers and grad filters easily. I wouldn't need to consider SLR vs Leica for a trip that will have some landscapes.

[MarkP]

My interest of LV on a rangefinder is different than everyone else here. For me, I'm fine with the focusing with the OVF; however, I'd like to be able to use polarizers and grad filters easily. I wouldn't need to consider SLR vs Leica for a trip that will have some landscapes.

 

Jaap has written on using PL filters on rangefinders before in the Forum

 

I just travelled to central Australia where a PL is very useful for the harsh light, both for the skies and scattered landscape light in colour (M9) and B&W (Monochrom). In fact I needed to be quite careful not to over-darken the skies.

 

I have scored the filter rims to mark the position of rotation for maximum polarization. If in doubt I have a 30.5mm B+W filter (from my old Contax T3 days) in my pocket with the max PL position also scored on the rim. I can then coincide the optimal angle of scoring on the hand filter with that on the PL filter fitted to the lens.

 

Not ideal but although it sounds fiddly it is actually very quick and easy. Will be easier with the M

[Dan Bachmann]

Jaap has written on using PL filters on rangefinders before in the Forum

 

I just travelled to central Australia where a PL is very useful for the harsh light, both for the skies and scattered landscape light in colour (M9) and B&W (Monochrom). In fact I needed to be quite careful not to over-darken the skies.

 

I have scored the filter rims to mark the position of rotation for maximum polarization. If in doubt I have a 30.5mm B+W filter (from my old Contax T3 days) in my pocket with the max PL position also scored on the rim. I can then coincide the optimal angle of scoring on the hand filter with that on the PL filter fitted to the lens.

 

Not ideal but although it sounds fiddly it is actually very quick and easy. Will be easier with the M

 

Thanks for this. Funny enough, just before you posted this I bought 39mm and 46mm Heliopan linear polarizer filters that are already marked. I'll try using them over the Easter break. Last year I had the Leica polarizing kit and found it to be optically excellent and well made, but clumsy for me both in my small bag and on the camera. I'm used to being able to slide in a filter into a Cokin/Lee filter holder.

 

If the two filter trick doesn't work for me, I'll try using a larger filter and drill a hole into a stepup ring to see though the filter via the viewfinder to see if that works for me.