What's the verdict on the M?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A bit bemused - you buy a rangefinder camera, yet complain that the rangefinder is the best option to focus, it is a basically manual camera, yet you do not use the easiest and most reliable option of manual exposure for exposure compensation? Yes, Leica could have made some better choices in implementing the add-ons, I suppose, but is it not a bit like complaining that the manual focus on an AF camera is not of the best?

The needs you have are 100% understandable, but to my mind they are better served with a camera concept that fits them primarily.

tim,

excellent review. it verbalizes my experience with the M much better than i ever could.

today i had another day of M shooting in a challenging environment (a city in saudi arabia) and i came back with a lot of frustrations, mainly caused by the ergonomic nightmares of the camera, all described in your review. after a while trying (stupidly again) LV and the EV i just used the RF. due to the bright sun light and the permanently changing conditions i had to use the awkward non-properly working +/- mechanism often which resulted in many under/overexposed shots. maybe my finger skills?

a few hours ago i started to compare my files to D800 files (taken in parallel today by someone whose photographic skills i trust very much) and.....they beat the M files in resolution (obviously), micro-contrast, dynamic range (even at base iso it seems, very challenging shooting conditions though) and let us not mention iso >= 1200.....just no comparison. the only issue where the M files beat the D800 files is corners of wide angle shots.....

i shall (try to) return the M to the dealer, it is just not worthwhile (for me) and get the MM instead.

i am very disappointed by leica engineering and by those M-style induced/excused compromises.

as an analogy in the automobile world take a look at the porsche 911. it is also somewhat constrained by design and rear engine positioning but nevertheless porsche has managed to recreate it in the 991 series as a super-modern and super-functional sports car which faithfully carries the 911 DNA. contrarily to what porsche did with the 911 it seems to me that the M240 is more backward than forward looking from the design and engineering viewpoints.

all the best, peter

[dant]

Great review! I wanted to highlight one particular paragraph which I think speaks to Leica's great accomplishment with this camera:

 

 

Who has #1 and #2 sensor? Phase One or Nikon?

[dant]

Can you focus the RX1 using a rangefinder? Can you put legacy Leica (or Zeiss) lenses on it? For that matter, can you change lenses at all? If the RX1 used interchangeable lenses, and Zeiss had a stable of superb lenses to go with it, then your comparison might make some sense. But it doesn't.

 

So, in answer to your question, yes, I think it is worth an extra $4300 to be able to use just about any Leica lens ever made (including the superb Noctilux and the new 50 APO Summicron) and focus using a classic rangefinder mechanism. Not to mention the Leica build quality. (I have owned a Sony digital camera, and I can attest that the build quality is nothing to write home about).

 

If a cam does not have shutter speed dial I lose interest. I can't figure out how to chnge my m43 cams so I use them on dummy setting. Those are the worst for me to try and fool with.

 

RD1 + Leica that is what I love, the old school controls.

 

I can only imagine how much improvement there will be going from my 6mp RD1 to the FF24mp M

 

The RD1 can still bang out some nice shots. I don't care about exposure comp. If I want comp I change shutter or F stop.

 

http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv219/keepitlow456/Copyright2012DTJ_zps4c9e6c4b.jpg

[AJB]

I agree, having watched the M threads for a while, that the comparisons with other brands are fruitless. I suspect many enthusiastic photographers will have a variety of equipment. We, for example, have an M9 and we also use a Canon 5DIII with various chunks of L glass, and an old 40D. We haev taken X1 and X2 on recent holidays as well as point and shoot Fuji and have taken lots of shots on iPhones....

 

If we are looking at M240 or M9 money, especially with lenses factored into the equation, then also trialling an X Pro 1 or OMD or whatever is really not a major drain on the budget, especially as such cameras can easily be eBayed at relatively small loss if they do not suit.

 

Surely we can embrace the qualities of different cameras and systems without having to judge which is best all the time?

 

Anyway I look back at books of Newton images etc and reckon a decent photographer will get the shot whatever the gear. Our capabilities are not really diminished by technological change, nor is such change necessarily fundamental to success in my view.

 

Buying an M240 is actually a very low risk decision. I have my name down and when it comes I will complete the transaction without a second thought. The used market will be exceptionally strong and so the purchase risk is minimal. You might lose a small amount, but that can be chalked up to experience.

 

Adrian

[dant]

I agree, having watched the M threads for a while, that the comparisons with other brands are fruitless. I suspect many enthusiastic photographers will have a variety of equipment. We, for example, have an M9 and we also use a Canon 5DIII with various chunks of L glass, and an old 40D. We haev taken X1 and X2 on recent holidays as well as point and shoot Fuji and have taken lots of shots on iPhones....

 

If we are looking at M240 or M9 money, especially with lenses factored into the equation, then also trialling an X Pro 1 or OMD or whatever is really not a major drain on the budget, especially as such cameras can easily be eBayed at relatively small loss if they do not suit.

 

Surely we can embrace the qualities of different cameras and systems without having to judge which is best all the time?

 

Anyway I look back at books of Newton images etc and reckon a decent photographer will get the shot whatever the gear. Our capabilities are not really diminished by technological change, nor is such change necessarily fundamental to success in my view.

 

Buying an M240 is actually a very low risk decision. I have my name down and when it comes I will complete the transaction without a second thought. The used market will be exceptionally strong and so the purchase risk is minimal. You might lose a small amount, but that can be chalked up to experience.

 

Adrian

 

 

Well spoken post.

 

My goal when starting this thread was to find out general satsifation with the M. People have mentioned the + / - exposure adjustment issue. Don't know how the M does it. But Fuji is about as perfect as one could hope for. A simple dial on top. Only issue is I sometimes jar it off 0.

[anupmc]

Well spoken post.

 

My goal when starting this thread was to find out general satsifation with the M. People have mentioned the + / - exposure adjustment issue. Don't know how the M does it. But Fuji is about as perfect as one could hope for. A simple dial on top. Only issue is I sometimes jar it off 0.

 

I don't get this whole Exposure Compensation "issue"... Why aren't people exposing each shot in absolute value, why bother with compensation (unless its a whole series of shots in which case the comp controls should be similar to ISO control, no?? Especially with an M-any... I don't get it... is it just me?)

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Who has #1 and #2 sensor? Phase One or Nikon?

 

Sony makes all of them(24MP sensors):

 

1. Sony RX1/Nikon D600

2. Nikon D3X

3. Leica M

 

I'd throw the Nikon D800/D800E(36MP) in to the mix as well and it would take the number one spot. The Leica M would still rank 4th and would still beat all Canon cameras ever tested, according to DxO - who we no longer hate and now love.

[Dirk Mandeville]

Any one can set out they're own, very limiting, specific parameters for comparison to skew the results to their favour. It's no less valid either way. I could add "does it have a Red Leica dot centrally located above the lens axis" to further push the result away from even the M9.

 

Point is, people's comparisons are valid to them. Not to you, maybe not to me, but that's not arguable, and no one is right, or wrong. Why must we keep doing it in every thread? It's pointless.

 

For comparisons to have some meaning, they need to at least be of the same class. When comparing cars, trying to compare a luxury car to a sports car is pointless. They are different tools and one doesn't compare to the other for the uses they will be put to.

 

My point was simply that it makes no sense to try to compare a Leica rangefinder camera, which is truly in a class by itself, as there are no other compact digital rangefinder cameras, to a glorified point-and-shoot with a fixed lens. There really is no comparing the two. They have different functionality and will appeal to different market needs.

[jaapv]

I don't get this whole Exposure Compensation "issue"... Why aren't people exposing each shot in absolute value, why bother with compensation (unless its a whole series of shots in which case the comp controls should be similar to ISO control, no?? Especially with an M-any... I don't get it... is it just me?)

This is a carryover from automated exposure systems on DSLRs etc.. The way to compensate exposure since the M6 on Leica cameras for e.g. backlight or snow scenes is to (for AE cameras) set the camera to manual and just turn the aperture ring or shutter speed dial whilst watching the little triangles in the viewfinder. They will indicate the amount of exposure correction. It would have been better imo if Leica had left the whole AE and attendant compensation stuff out and kept the exposure as manual as the focussing.

[Dirk Mandeville]

I don't get this whole Exposure Compensation "issue"... Why aren't people exposing each shot in absolute value, why bother with compensation (unless its a whole series of shots in which case the comp controls should be similar to ISO control, no?? Especially with an M-any... I don't get it... is it just me?)

 

A lot of us like to shoot the M in aperture priority mode, rather than full manual. This way, you set the f/stop (and therefore the depth of field) and the camera chooses the appropriate shutter speed for you according to the meter reading. However, if parts of the the scene are too bright or too dim, you will not want the metered reading. In this case, it is very easy with the M9 (and many other digital cameras) to just turn the exposure compensation dial to compensate for the over or under exposure. If the scene has too much bright sky, for instance, the meter would be fooled into underexposing the foreground. A couple of clicks with a thumb wheel and you can instantly compensate for that. The camera will alter the shutter speed by the amount of compensation you dial in.

 

Bottom line is that it is quicker to shift a wheel with your thumb while framing the picture than it is to reach on top of the camera and change the shutter speed dial in full manual mode. With the new M, Leica has added a step -- you now have to push a button and then turn a dial. This is a needless additional hoop to jump through and hurts the ergonomics of the camera.

[Dirk Mandeville]

The Leica M would still rank 4th and would still beat all Canon cameras ever tested, according to DxO - who we no longer hate and now love.

 

I love your dry wit, Rick.

[jaapv]

So the difference comes down to turning a wheel on the top with your index finger or turning a wheel on the back with your thumb...

[jaapv]

- who we no longer hate and now love.

Speak for yourself - I'm not that easily swayed when offered a sweet by the nice gentleman...

[Dirk Mandeville]

So the difference comes down to turning a wheel on the top with your index finger or turning a wheel on the back with your thumb...

 

In a sense this is true. Although being able to use aperture priority frees you from having to worry about setting shutter speed at all if the meter reading is not being thrown off by the conditions. Then you just concern yourself with setting aperture, focus, and framing the shot. However, if you are using aperture priority and decide to go to full manual for exposure compensation, it will take quite a few clicks with the index finger to get to the appropriate shutter speed. An exposure compensation dial accomplishes that with less clicks, and you don't have to take your index finger off the shutter button to do it. So adjusting for conditions and shooting is faster when that is critical.

 

One more thing: exposure compensation can be done in 1/3 stop increments. Shutter speed can only be changed in full stops.

[PeterSchlicht]

This is a carryover from automated exposure systems on DSLRs etc.. The way to compensate exposure since the M6 on Leica cameras for e.g. backlight or snow scenes is to (for AE cameras) set the camera to manual and just turn the aperture ring or shutter speed dial whilst watching the little triangles in the viewfinder. They will indicate the amount of exposure correction. It would have been better imo if Leica had left the whole AE and attendant compensation stuff out and kept the exposure as manual as the focussing.

 

That's exactly how I expose with my M9 and really don't understand the discussion above.

 

One of the most important characteristics of the M system was and is its restriction to the basic parameters of photography, aperture, speed, ISO and manual focus. And that is - apart from its form factor of course - what I love. And really I set each and every parameter separately. For exposure compensation and ETTR I rely on the arrows. That's it.

 

I thought the simplicity and 'back to basics' approach is why people buy Leica as opposed to the japanese foto-computer systems. It seems I might be wrong...

 

Cheers,

Peter

[Jeff S]

You might find this review I just published (click here) useful... but it may be a lot more information than you're looking for...

 

Well balanced review...thanks, Tim.

 

Any additional comments/insights regarding b/w output in particular? I prefer the M8.2 to the M9 in this regard, and would be interested in your impressions, particularly in print. The magenta-ish bag suggests possibly closer approximation to M9 output.

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

My mind works just the other way around - if you are in AE the centreweighed nature of the exposure meter will cause the exposure to vary as you move the camera, especially in high-contrast situations, which is the most likely scenario for exposure compensation. That makes it too much of a gamble for me. Manual, measuring different parts of the image, if necessary substitute measuring and compensating by varying the exposure parameters is, imo far more precise.

To me EV compensation is only useful if you want to introduce a permanent bias in your measuring.

I don't know about the M, but on many M types the shutterspeed can be set in half-stops. The rest can be done if desired by the aperture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In a sense this is true. Although being able to use aperture priority frees you from having to worry about setting shutter speed at all if the meter reading is not being thrown off by the conditions. Then you just concern yourself with setting aperture, focus, and framing the shot. However, if you are using aperture priority and decide to go to full manual for exposure compensation, it will take quite a few clicks with the index finger to get to the appropriate shutter speed. An exposure compensation dial accomplishes that with less clicks, and you don't have to take your index finger off the shutter button to do it. So adjusting for conditions and shooting is faster when that is critical.

 

One more thing: exposure compensation can be done in 1/3 stop increments. Shutter speed can only be changed in full stops.

[Dirk Mandeville]

My mind works just the other way around - if you are in AE the centreweighed nature of the exposure meter will cause the exposure to vary as you move the camera, especially in high-contrast situations, which is the most likely scenario for exposure compensation. That makes it too much of a gamble for me. Manual, measuring different parts of the image, if necessary substitute measuring and compensating by varying the exposure parameters is, imo far more precise.

To me EV compensation is only useful if you want to introduce a permanent bias in your measuring.

 

I understand your point. Sometimes, I will just point the camera at the area I want to make sure is exposed properly, and push the shutter button halfway, metering and locking the exposure setting. Then recompose and fire the shutter completely, resulting in correct exposure without fiddling with shutter dial.

 

The exposure compensation is just another tool to accomplish this sort of thing in an easy manner. With experience, you just look at a scene and see that the backlight requires a stop or two more exposure than the meter is going to give you, and it is easy to dial this in with exposure compensation. When you get used to shooting this way, it is very quick and easy to control exposure without much fuss. Lots of photographers shoot this way.

[jaapv]

I don't use exposure lock, as I love the soft setting on the shutter. As an old M6 hand, manual compensating is faster and less of a guesstimate in my way of working.

I'm sure many photographers shoot this way. As I said, it is an ingrained habit carried over from the way many other cameras are laid out.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Rick]

If, you think that Leica screwed up in its implementation of the EV compensation, here is the opposite implementation by Sony - it is so well placed and so easy to turn that you find out (much too late) that you shot a bunch of pictures inadvertently with EV compensation!

 

Since, I agree with jaapv that EV compensation is for pussies:p, I solved the problem straight away with gaffer's tape.

 

By the way, the camera that took this photo gets its head handed to it when compared to the camera in this picture (at 35mm FOV). Go figure.

 

 

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!