Where to invest, new M240 or used Noctilux 0.95?

[digitalfx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you have one single piece of objective confirmation from Leica I stand corrected. Forum posts and "I heard it from my Leica dealer" does not apply.

 

Leica would not improve something and not advertise it. Logically that doesn't make sense. Granted Leica is not always logical. There's lots of discussion but no actual written objective proof.

 

By the way, my new MM must have a better RF mech than my old M9P cuz it feels like it. I think I have a late batch with the improved mech.

 

My point is that neither one of us can claim this is a fact, since neither of us have inside knowledge.

 

Regardless,I feel like there is something different. I sent my M9 and Summilux to Leica twice to calibrate them together, and I never nailed 100% focus with the combo on a regular basis.

 

With the M and both the Noctilux and Summilux I hit 100% focus 99% of the time. Its clearly more accurate for me. Maybe I had a bad M9...although two trips to Solms makes me believe not. Then you look at the vast majority of M users saying the same thing...and it points to some kind of improvement. I agree its odd that Leica doesnt publish this if its truly the case. But to claim its a fact that they are exactly the same is a stretch being that you have no way to prove this statement, especially since you dont own the camera.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[macjonny1]

 

My point is that neither one of us can claim this is a fact' date=' since neither of us have inside knowledge.

 

Regardless,I feel like there is something different. I sent my M9 and Summilux to Leica twice to calibrate them together, and I never nailed 100% focus with the combo on a regular basis.

 

With the M and both the Noctilux and Summilux I hit 100% focus 99% of the time. Its clearly more accurate for me. Maybe I had a bad M9...although two trips to Solms makes me believe not. Then you look at the vast majority of M users saying the same thing...and it points to some kind of improvement. I agree its odd that Leica doesnt publish this if its truly the case. But to claim its a fact that they are exactly the same is a stretch being that you have no way to prove this statement, especially since you dont own the camera.[/quote']

 

All true. Sometimes it's fun to proclaim a fact even when you don't have proof, which is why I did! Anyway, there was some thought that maybe because of lack of stray light from the frame line illumination results in increased contrast in the RF patch, from the other thread.

 

So, in other words, if the RF mech remains the same there could be an improvement in the overall experience to result in improved focus accuracy. Glad you are enjoying your new M, I'm sure i will have one or the next version someday

[digitalfx]

All true. Sometimes it's fun to proclaim a fact even when you don't have proof, which is why I did! Anyway, there was some thought that maybe because of lack of stray light from the frame line illumination results in increased contrast in the RF patch, from the other thread.

 

So, in other words, if the RF mech remains the same there could be an improvement in the overall experience to result in improved focus accuracy. Glad you are enjoying your new M, I'm sure i will have one or the next version someday

 

Yea, I saw those posts. I wonder why Leica is silent.

Ive been using M cameras since I was 17...my first M was the M2. But my first Leica was a IIIf and I can tell you that the rangefinder has evolved since then

[sunil]

Hello Dirk,

 

you're right, the show must go on, in fact I consider M9 one of the best Leica ever albeit I'm still in love with film. Fact is that I couldn't take pictures with a Leica camera which has movie abilities. I love movies, I love cinemas, I love taking pictures and printing them but I don't like multifunction tools, to me photography and movies need specific tools. I won't be surprised if in the near future Mr. Kaufmann will present a digital M-P with pictures-only functionality, maybe in a limited edition :-)

 

Bye, Sara.

 

There was a time when Leica first put a light meter into their cameras. The hue and cry about it not being a true Leica was deafening. If Leica were to remove the light meter now, the hue and cry would be deafening again. Time will tell if this is a feature that gets truly integrated or not. I suspect it will become a requirement and we will see it as a true Leica.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

What I did like about it was it's color rendition and the fantastic pictures one could occasionally take with it. Note the word "occasionally": yes, the Noctilux can be used as an all around lens; but a lens like the Summilux-50 pre-ASPH is better for that purpose.

 

Yes, Virginia, there is no such thing as "the best lens".

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Bangkok Hysteria (download link for book project)

But the Summilux can NEVER capture that same picture that like you say you can occasionally get with the Noctilux.............so it's a no brainier .......get the Noctilux it's the best:D:D

[sblutter]

If you're itching to expand your gear, get a few focal lengths you've never tried - used or Voigtlander new

 

I had the same itch not long ago and picked up a new Voigt 75 - never had that length and promptly fell in love with it for street. Tack sharp, easily manageable size...

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you're itching to expand your gear, get a few focal lengths you've never tried - used or Voigtlander new

 

I had the same itch not long ago and picked up a new Voigt 75 - never had that length and promptly fell in love with it for street. Tack sharp, easily manageable size...

Wow 75 mm for street .........I would have thought 35 best 50 max

[Broadoaker]

Buy both. You will eventually and the sooner you do the longer you will benefit from them. Just don't tell the wife.

[Guest WPalank]

Not sure if it was said earlier, buy the Noctilux immediately as it is a special kind of beast. Coming from a guy that has worked with the 50 Summilux for over 7 years and bought the Nocti just last summer.

 

Then put your name on the list for the M240. At current shipments, you'll be lucky to receive it a year from now when you possibly have some spare cash laying around and you will have enjoyed this magnificent lens on your M9P during the wait.

[erl]

Wow 75 mm for street .........I would have thought 35 best 50 max

Neil, I am record elsewhere repeating this mantra, "All lenses CAN be used for ALL genre of situations."

 

I understand what you mean when you say 35 and 50 for 'street', and they are good. But I also frequently use my 75 cron in some of my favourite locations, for specific reasons. Because of where I shoot a lot, the Noct f1.0 also gets plenty of use, not because it is 50mm but because it is f1.

 

It's like saying "which lens should I take to ......... for my trip?"

It is entirely dependent on the individual. None of us are the same. Shooting 'street' is no different, IMO.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

My point is that neither one of us can claim this is a fact, since neither of us have inside knowledge.

 

Regardless,I feel like there is something different. I sent my M9 and Summilux to Leica twice to calibrate them together, and I never nailed 100% focus with the combo on a regular basis.

 

With the M and both the Noctilux and Summilux I hit 100% focus 99% of the time. Its clearly more accurate for me. Maybe I had a bad M9...although two trips to Solms makes me believe not. Then you look at the vast majority of M users saying the same thing...and it points to some kind of improvement. I agree its odd that Leica doesnt publish this if its truly the case. But to claim its a fact that they are exactly the same is a stretch being that you have no way to prove this statement, especially since you dont own the camera.

 

It may be that the M9 rangefinder is different to the M240. I wouldn't know. It does have a difference in the frame line accuracy (1m vs 2m). So there may be other slight differences as well.

 

But... I have two M9's and both were not perfectly calibrated from the factory. One has been back for warranty repair and the rangefinder was out when it returned. The other is away now and I think it will be out when I get it back. How can I be sure it's out. I can't. But I have 3 Leica lenses, purchased new and four CV lenses. After I finally got the guts to calibrate one of my camera myself they're ALL spot on. This includes the 135mm APO and a CV 50mm 1.1. Not much room for error with those two.

 

It may just be that Leica is able to deliver a tighter tolerance for error on the M240 than the M9. Their ability to get a really accurate calibration may have improved with the new model. After all it was Leica that recommended that the 135 be stopped down on the M9 and didn't even code new lenses. This has changed with the 240.

 

Speculation, of course. But an improvement in calibration seems to be the simplest, most logical explanation for the various people who see a real world improvement in focus accuracy. Especially considering the numbers who reported, like me, that their new M9's had focusing issues out of the box.

 

Gordon

[jaques]

John, take two aspirins and get a Summilux-50 pre-ASPH. If the aspirins don't work, get an M-Monochrom. And, oh, don't use the word "investment" when considering photographic equipment.

 

—Mitch/Potomac/MD

 

while I certainly agree with digital camera bodies- I cannot agree with lenses- and especially vintage and second hand glass. My own lens collection has increased in value predictably and continuously- more so than bank interest would have and with seemingly less risk than the stock market

[erl]

If you want to invest in '$' value, play the stock market! Stupis IMO.

Investing in camera gear is NOT a '$' pursuit by design, but may be by accident. For me, I have spent a life 'investing'(using) camera gear and the returns have been tremendous, but not necessarily in '$'s'.

 

I can't put a value on the pleasure and companionship etc I have derived from cameras, other than to say considerable. Financially I have been lucky in that my cameras have put food and wine on my table, put both my daughters through private schooling and paid my mortgage. I don't think they they 'owe' me a cent. What a great investment!

 

Oh, by the way, I actually enjoy having and using them. Next best thing to having ..........

[MRJohn]

This is an old thread by now. As mentioned a few pages earlier, I did get a used Noctilux and it is a terrific lens to complement my gear. No regrets so far.

 

The title of the thread was a bit misleading "where to invest" - mea culpa. I did not mean it in a sense as "commit (money or capital) in order to gain a financial return", but rather in a sense as "to spend or devote for future advantage or benefit", which is not financial but meant to ask what will benefit or advance my photography. - Most recommendations in the responses went for the Noct.

 

I did have an opportunity to try an M240 during a recent Leica academy workshop for 3 days. It is a great Leica. Very good dynamic range, subjectively better than my M9. And I also like the LV capability when working with a tripod. But I will skip this camera body. The incremental benefit is just too small for what I use the camera mostly for (portraits). It will be interesting to see what the upcoming Sony Nex FF will deliver with Leica lenses...

[Shade]

If INVEST is the keyword, it's always the lens, never the camera body. 10 years from now your lens would probably stay at the same price (if you buy it used), but m240? Probably less than you'd imagine.

[Nliusvia]

See my post on "High ISO issue?" I think you're better off paying for the lense than the new M.

[StephenPatterson]

If INVEST is the keyword, it's always the lens, never the camera body. 10 years from now your lens would probably stay at the same price (if you buy it used), but m240? Probably less than you'd imagine.

 

18 months ago a new Noctilux was selling for around $13,000 USD in Hong Kong. Today they are selling for $9,000. The belief that new Leica lenses hold their value and appreciate over time is just no longer true. At present there is more Leica new lens inventory than ever, and dealers are dumping lenses in order to maintain inventory turns and keep in Leica's good graces. Buy what you need (or just desire) and forget all the rest.

[Nliusvia]

That's true you should not see it as an investment per se...However if you were to look at it based on value retention and "liquidity wise" it's still easier to resale lense within a reasonable price than the body. So my vote would still be the lense.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Paul J]

It is an investment. In your work.

[erl]

+1

... and your sensory appreciation.