Guest tanks Posted June 16, 2013 Share #21 Posted June 16, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's still crap.If it produces photographs and its what the user wants it is not outmoded. Period. If YOU want the latest and greatest foe whatever reason YOU go get it. Notice that I offered one of his options (, and reason for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 16, 2013 Posted June 16, 2013 Hi Guest tanks, Take a look here What is better choice?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
MirekE Posted June 17, 2013 Share #22 Posted June 17, 2013 If you had to decide between 2 choices, what would you do? 1 - buy Leica M-E and use less expensive lenses for now such as Ziess or 2 - buy 1 Leica M lense and use Bessa film body while saving for M-E please give reason for your choice thanks Dan The Zeiss lenses are not worse, they just have different character. If you are not after the Leica look, I would recommend option 1. With Bessa, you will invest in equipment (camera body, darkroom equipment, scanner + software, consumables), that you can't use with digital. If you get M-E, your investments (Photoshop upgrades, printers, etc.) are more future proof. The same applies to knowledge. Another option is to get the Leica lens(es) and some mirrorless body with adapter for Leica M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted June 17, 2013 Share #23 Posted June 17, 2013 Would you buy a 2009 computer, and pay almost the same retail price as today's model? From an investment standpoint it makes much more sense to go with option B Computers. Investment. Have you considered that photography and photographs might be the more relevant considerations? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tanks Posted June 17, 2013 Share #24 Posted June 17, 2013 Computers. Investment. Have you considered that photography and photographs might be the more relevant considerations? I used the computer analogy as today's digital cameras are computers that lose their value significantly year to year. And just like computers their capabilities increase from generation to generation. Lenses however can be kept much longer if not indefinitely. My 35mm ASPH Summicron, and 90mm APO ASPH Summicron were purchased with my M6, and being used today with my other M cameras. So, the gear is an investment from the sense that one is paying money for it and would like to maximize its use. It is well documented that the M240 is an improvement over the M9/M-E in a variety of areas (IQ, sensor, ISO range, LCD, ergonomics, features etc., etc.). So, if one is going to spend the money for a NEW camera product then it is logical to get the latest generation, especially seeing that the price difference is not that significant. Hence, my recommendation to get the Leica M mount lens (option , and when he has the funds get the latest generation of M. You never know by that time there might not even be a wait . Now, yes he could be very happy with the images off of the M-E as someone mentioned. But, if he is spending the money for a NEW product why buy something that is already a generation behind? From a financial value point it does not make sense to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted June 17, 2013 Share #25 Posted June 17, 2013 Get a good lens you are happy with and can afford. Leicas hold value and cost more. Zeiss cost less, but are very good lenses. If you want a Leica RF camera start with the M8.2 as they have dropped to very affordable levels. Then get the latest M once affordable to you. Another idea, get the RX-1 with a FF 24MP fixed Zeiss 35mm/2.0 and save for an M and M mountable lens. The RX-1 is a venerable camera. If you want a current system, this camera does it all. I have an M9, M and RX-1 (and other cameras) and I can speak with some knowledge about them all. Then again, what type of photographs do you mostly take? We don't know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miatadan Posted June 25, 2013 Author Share #26 Posted June 25, 2013 I did not include the M240 as a option because it is $7095 Canadian without a lens. The film M6 ( $5095 Canadian ) and M7 ( $5471 Canadian ) is also considered by some as obsolete as a Nikon F6 is more modern but it is because all M's are rangefinders with M-E and M240 without competition from anyone other camera, I feel M-E not so obsolete but also now there is limitations due to lower iso compared to other digital cameras. Only interested in focal lengths wide to portrait sizes 24 to 90 as I like landscape, people images etc Dan Also now with X Vario available it is another option as I would have Leica quality lens with their build quality + best manual controls Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nibbler Posted June 25, 2013 Share #27 Posted June 25, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) You don't mention your budget, but film and digital are very different choices, so I would start by making that decision. If you do for digital, a used M9 or an ME is your best option with the best lens you can afford. This may be a Zeiss, but also look at old Leica lenses. They don't have the sharpness of the new ones, but have a certain irresistible character. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted June 25, 2013 Share #28 Posted June 25, 2013 It might depend on how you shoot: Assuming you use a hybrid workflow - shoot, process, scan, digital edit, post or print: 1 roll of film/week @ $5.00 1 roll processing + scan @ $7.00 52 weeks/ year = $624/roll/week per year Lets say you shoot 3 rolls per week or 108 exposures. That would be $1872 per year for film and processing alone. You buy an ME for $5,450. In a year it will be worth around $3,750... Maybe more. The ME is costing you $1,700/yr... less than shooting film if you shoot more than 3 rolls/week. Less than 3 rolls per week - it gets better for film except for the convenience and flexibility (such as multiple ISO at all times and immediate turnaround) of digital. Multiply those costs by about four times here! I love film, but digital is simply more economic and very versatile. A new ME will give you the security of a two-year guarantee. I think Leica's "entry" M looks like a bargain (by Leica standards)! Zeiss lenses are excellent. I have the 2.8/21 ZM which has high contrast and high resolution. Build quality is also of a very high standard. But other focal lengths should be just as good. I concur you might also want to look out for used Leica/Leitz lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tanks Posted June 25, 2013 Share #29 Posted June 25, 2013 ... Also now with X Vario available it is another option as I would have Leica quality lens with their build quality + best manual controls Changing to parameters though. No longer full frame, and very slow lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shade Posted June 25, 2013 Share #30 Posted June 25, 2013 Buy a worthy lens that you like, and then save on the body. The lens is always the better one, it never change despite how many body you may change in the future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marac Posted June 25, 2013 Share #31 Posted June 25, 2013 OK, I'll be the freak and offer the 'weird' alternative. I was always told (by Gramps) that glass will last a lifetime while bodies come & go. I suggest you buy the glass you want (28mm elmarit-M) I would buy a used M8 and shoot B&W (or get a filter for IR/UV). I still have my M8 & it is still amazing. I went with an M8 and a VERY old Leitz 35mm Summaron, I still have both. ETA- I have the Elmarit-M 28mm f2.8 and it is a superb lens it really is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted June 25, 2013 Share #32 Posted June 25, 2013 I was always told (by Gramps) that glass will last a lifetime while bodies come & go. Sound advice but I'd hope Gramps didn't actually say "glass". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marac Posted June 25, 2013 Share #33 Posted June 25, 2013 Sound advice but I'd hope Gramps didn't actually say "glass". He was a 'Tog so I guess to them, it has always been called 'Glass' and now its rubbed off on me too, I call all my lenses 'Glass'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepcat Posted June 25, 2013 Share #34 Posted June 25, 2013 I used the computer analogy as today's digital cameras are computers that lose their value significantly year to year. And just like computers their capabilities increase from generation to generation. So, the gear is an investment from the sense that one is paying money for it and would like to maximize its use. It is well documented that the M240 is an improvement over the M9/M-E in a variety of areas (IQ, sensor, ISO range, LCD, ergonomics, features etc., etc.). So, if one is going to spend the money for a NEW camera product then it is logical to get the latest generation, especially seeing that the price difference is not that significant. Now, yes he could be very happy with the images off of the M-E as someone mentioned. But, if he is spending the money for a NEW product why buy something that is already a generation behind? From a financial value point it does not make sense to me. First, unless you're buying in the collectors' market, photography equipment is NOT an investment. You may try to minimize your depreciation, but that's not the same as investing to appreciate. Photo items are consumer goods that depreciate, some more than others. Leica products hold a better percentage of their value than most others, and are certainly in high demand. Used Leica gear will always sell. Not so, other brands. Second, and even more importantly is this: your argument that the latest and greatest is "better" is repeated over and over in every gear-centric photo forum in existence... The truth is that if you consider that photography is about images, then the latest and greatest argument ceases to be viable. Once the perspective that photography is about the image is reached, then its merely a matter of buying the "best" gear you can get for the money you have to spend to make the image. Other gear may reduce the setup time, be more intuitive to use, or have a feature that makes a specific image easier or faster to do, but likely the image will be largely the same regardless of the gear. Frankly, for the difference in money between the M-E and M240, unless you need live-view, slightly improved high ISO response, or one of the other things the M240 does well, the M-E as a body is just as competent an image maker for $2k less. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted June 25, 2013 Share #35 Posted June 25, 2013 Multiply those costs by about four times here! I love film, but digital is simply more economic and very versatile. A new ME will give you the security of a two-year guarantee. I think Leica's "entry" M looks like a bargain (by Leica standards)! Zeiss lenses are excellent. I have the 2.8/21 ZM which has high contrast and high resolution. Build quality is also of a very high standard. But other focal lengths should be just as good. I concur you might also want to look out for used Leica/Leitz lenses. 4 times! Yikes!! Not even a close call then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 26, 2013 Share #36 Posted June 26, 2013 If you had to decide between 2 choices, what would you do? 1 - buy Leica M-E and use less expensive lenses for now such as Ziess I would go with option 1 because I prefer digital to film, and the Zeiss lenses are very good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Holy Moly Posted June 26, 2013 Share #37 Posted June 26, 2013 If you had to decide between 2 choices, what would you do? 1 - buy Leica M-E and use less expensive lenses for now such as Ziess or 2 - buy 1 Leica M lense and use Bessa film body while saving for M-E please give reason for your choice thanks Dan hi Dan, #2 is the milky way: 1. It seems that this is your first rangefinder contact. When you feel comfortable with the Bessa RF it's ok, if not you burn less money. 2. with a film camera you have the choice of a second medium - especially for b&w work* 3. Bessas are available with different finders and magnifications - Bessa R4 f.e. 4. Leica lenses are better than gold in the long run 5. 1 year warranty for used digital Ms is too short 6. after you saved enough money for the M-E it might be possible to get one cheaper than now 7. you have a second body when the M is one the way to Solms...... * Bessa R4A (with 21mm viewfinder compatibility + 21mm f4 Scopar): JU52 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.