CheshireCat Posted July 1, 2013 Share #101 Posted July 1, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think you lost this one. Put the shovel down. I am not here to win anything. Just wanted to put things into perspective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 1, 2013 Posted July 1, 2013 Hi CheshireCat, Take a look here diglloyd: "Leica M Typ240: Unreliable". I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
macjonny1 Posted July 1, 2013 Share #102 Posted July 1, 2013 Yes' date=' the M has the same price of top-notch pro cameras with state of the art technologies, able to shoot 12 frames per second using subject tracking autofocus, built like a tank, can be used under a waterfall, have zero power up delay, have huge buffers that "never" fill up, can shoot 60fps H.264 video, have much better firmware with customizable menus, are blazing fast to operate and extremely reliable. I think you just made my point [/quote'] Yes but do they come in special white leather versions? No? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 1, 2013 Share #103 Posted July 1, 2013 Yes, the M has the same price of top-notch pro cameras with state of the art technologies, able to shoot 12 frames per second using subject tracking autofocus, built like a tank, can be used under a waterfall, have zero power up delay, have huge buffers that "never" fill up, can shoot 60fps H.264 video, have much better firmware with customizable menus, are blazing fast to operate and extremely reliable. I think you just made my point Last I checked, even with all that tech these uber cameras can't handle wide angle lenses or maybe it's better to say the manufacturers can't design wide angle lenses or maybe it ought to be said that the very nature of the system doesn't allow for high quality wide angle lenses. Which is to say, that all that tech is useless if the system can't provide solutions to the needs of the user. It's easy to find things that are lacking in a system. It's far more interesting to understand the compromises within a system and to understand the areas that the system excels. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 1, 2013 Share #104 Posted July 1, 2013 Last I checked, even with all that tech these uber cameras can't handle wide angle lenses or maybe it's better to say the manufacturers can't design wide angle lenses or maybe it ought to be said that the very nature of the system doesn't allow for high quality wide angle lenses. Which is to say, that all that tech is useless if the system can't provide solutions to the needs of the user. It's easy to find things that are lacking in a system. It's far more interesting to understand the compromises within a system and to understand the areas that the system excels. Last time you checked should have been several decades ago I find the Zeiss ZE 21/2.8 to be as good as the SEM 21/3.4. The Zeiss ZE 15/2.8 is also an amazing ultra wide lens with excellent performance. And yes, both lenses are huge and heavy with respect to Leica M lenses, because of the retrofocus design and high number of elements. Again, horses for courses, but the only thing that can justify my M purchase is that it is the only FF body available for my M lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 1, 2013 Share #105 Posted July 1, 2013 Last time you checked should have been several decades ago I find the Zeiss ZE 21/2.8 to be as good as the SEM 21/3.4. The Zeiss ZE 15/2.8 is also an amazing ultra wide lens with excellent performance. And yes, both lenses are huge and heavy with respect to Leica M lenses, because of the retrofocus design and high number of elements. Again, horses for courses, but the only thing that can justify my M purchase is that it is the only FF body available for my M lenses. Those are your choices and that's great for you. There are photographers who find the Jupiter 12 to have excellent performance (for their needs). Yet it remains true that the rangefinder system allows for better wide angle lenses and currently no amount of tech can change that for 35mm dSLRs. Of course medium and/or large format lenses can and do perform better than the 35mm RF or dSLR. You can have any number of reasons for purchasing or for not purchasing a Leica M camera. However erroneously comparing the best one system has to offer with the worst another system has to offer is nonsensical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 1, 2013 Share #106 Posted July 1, 2013 Yet it remains true that the rangefinder system allows for better wide angle lenses and currently no amount of tech can change that for 35mm dSLRs. No, this is false, but I have the feeling that you will not change idea even if presented with actual data and photos. However erroneously comparing the best one system has to offer with the worst another system has to offer is nonsensical. Well, actually this is what you are doing with this "better wide angles" argument ! I just pointed out that the price of the Leica M is only justified by being the only option in the market, not certainly because of research, technology, materials and... the best wide angles in the world (which is true for a couple of lenses, but nothing to do with the price of the body, don't you agree ?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 1, 2013 Share #107 Posted July 1, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) The price is for the best rangefinder ever made, the small FF size, the quiet shutter noise and the superb image quality. Show me a fast FF DSLR the same size, quietness and IQ as the M240 and i write a check right now to replace my 5D. I won't hold my breath though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted July 1, 2013 Share #108 Posted July 1, 2013 According to what I've heard from several dealers and Leica users there is almost zero interest in the X Vario and it isn't moving (selling) at all... I am certain that most Leica users aren't really too interested in the X Vario. There are probably exceptions: 1. Gear heads that just wants to test everything and then later re-sell it. 2. People with too much money to waste, and 3. People that are obsessed with brands, and which prioritze owning a certain brand above all. The thing is utterly overpriced for what it is. It costs more than a RX1, which again is utterly overpriced for what it is. The X Vario isn't worth one cent more than the Fuji X-E1 equipped with the Fujinon 18-55 OIS for example. Even most typical Leica evangelists agrees to that. The RX1 certainly isn't overpriced according to all users I have seen posting. a top notch Zeiss lens with a full frame sensor in such a small package with silent shutter, a bit of a bargain Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted July 1, 2013 Share #109 Posted July 1, 2013 The price is for the best rangefinder ever made, the small FF size, the quiet shutter noise and the superb image quality. Show me a fast FF DSLR the same size, quietness and IQ as the M240 and i write a check right now to replace my 5D. I won't hold my breath though. The 6D has all you mention and is only 60g heavier but the weight can be lighter with the 50mm f1.4, 24, 35 or 28 IS. Note that the M240 is the only digital RF in the market. Also the only platform for Leica lenses with a FF sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 1, 2013 Share #110 Posted July 1, 2013 No, this is false, but I have the feeling that you will not change idea even if presented with actual data and photos. Google "retro focus lenses", and you'll soon discover why rangefinder/MF/LF wide angle lenses are superior to those made for dSLRs. I am not interested in "actual data and photos" produced by you unless they've some artistic merit. For objective analysis of lens design, I'll stick with scientists. Well, actually this is what you are doing with this "better wide angles" argument ! Please Google "retro focus lenses" and the difficulties/complexities involved in designing wide angle lenses for SLRs. I read this forum on my mobile and can not provide you with specific links. If you are genuinely interested, you'll take the time to do some research. I just pointed out that the price of the Leica M is only justified by being the only option in the market, not certainly because of research, technology, materials and... the best wide angles in the world (which is true for a couple of lenses, but nothing to do with the price of the body, don't you agree ?). Good luck taking photos with just the body:) I look at the entire system (from initial capture to final output) not just camera bodies. How you justify (should really use the term: rationalize) your purchases, may or may not work for other people. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 1, 2013 Share #111 Posted July 1, 2013 The 6D has all you mention and is only 60g heavier... I wish you were right but the 6D is significantly bulkier (145 x 111 x 71 vs 139 x 80 x 42mm) and heavier (770 vs 680g). Also it cannot fit split image focus screens for manual lenses but it is another story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gilgamesh Posted July 1, 2013 Share #112 Posted July 1, 2013 "Leica M Typ240: Unreliable?" A "Yes" or a "No" was I believe asked for . You only need read people's comments to know Leica have brought a product to the market place that is causing some reliability issues. Leica have had no end of problems moving from film to digital. It continues to be a difficult and protracted birth. Each M8, M9, M comes with rose tinted spec's and myopia. Blinkers come in handy too. As long as you accept these pre conditions and that your picture taking is not seriously hampered by these short comings then the most obvious conclusion will always be "No", with the side caveat that you're prepared to accept such limitations and occasional issues along the Leica Journey in the way that an end user would not tolerate with say Nikon or Canon. Similarly, I wonder: how many here use the M as the main tool in their arsenal as a professional photographer? Precious few, if any. Then again, how many here are professional photographers? Few I would hazard a guess. So, ultimately it's a post we all know the answer to, or as Mr Gump would have it, "And that's all I have to say on the matter." PS - "Yes & No" and, yes, I do own a M Type240 & currently working / travelling in Moscow having an affair with the 50mm f1.4. With a family of 4 lenses and the D800 & 3 new lenses bringing up the rear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted July 1, 2013 Share #113 Posted July 1, 2013 No, this is false, but I have the feeling that you will not change idea even if presented with actual data and photos.Google "retro focus lenses", and you'll soon discover why rangefinder/MF/LF wide angle lenses are superior to those made for dSLRs. I am not interested in "actual data and photos" produced by you unless they've some artistic merit. For objective analysis of lens design, I'll stick with scientists. Problem is—when googling for "retro-focus lens" you'll find mostly half-baked nonsense rather anything coming from scientists. Your notion of wide-angle lenses for rangefinders being inevitably better than those for SLR cameras is over-simplified and insubstantial. Leica M lenses are better than most others because they are well-designed, well-made, and cost a fortune ... and not because they are for rangefinder cameras. After all, the Leica S wide-angle lenses also are better than most others, and these are not made for rangefinder cameras. If you can charge your customers more money then you'll be able to make better products. That's all there is to it. It has nothing to do with the lenses being "retro-focus" or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george + Posted July 1, 2013 Share #114 Posted July 1, 2013 The question was: "Has others experienced this?" No. It is unfortunate. And, hopefully, rare. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gilgamesh Posted July 1, 2013 Share #115 Posted July 1, 2013 Actually, if anyone has experienced this unreliability, in whichever guise, even just one owner / user, then the answer is of course, "Yes". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted July 1, 2013 Share #116 Posted July 1, 2013 Problem is—when googling for "retro-focus lens" you'll find mostly half-baked nonsense rather anything coming from scientists. Your notion of wide-angle lenses for rangefinders being inevitably better than those for SLR cameras is over-simplified and insubstantial. Leica M lenses are better than most others because they are well-designed, well-made, and cost a fortune ... and not because they are for rangefinder cameras. After all, the Leica S wide-angle lenses also are better than most others, and these are not made for rangefinder cameras. If you can charge your customers more money then you'll be able to make better products. That's all there is to it. It has nothing to do with the lenses being "retro-focus" or not. If the color of your sky is green, nothing I can do about that (nor can I do anything about physics operating differently for you). Take the time to understand lens design or don't put forth the effort. It makes absolutely no difference to me. I won't be commenting any further unless some thing useful is added to the conversation. PS. Read my comments, I admitted MF and/or LF lenses out performing RF and 35mm dSLR wide angles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted July 1, 2013 Share #117 Posted July 1, 2013 Take the time to understand lens design ... That would be my advice to you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydkugelmass Posted July 1, 2013 Share #118 Posted July 1, 2013 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/275357-m240-forget-biogon.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MirekE Posted July 1, 2013 Share #119 Posted July 1, 2013 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/275357-m240-forget-biogon.html And obviously, there is the somewhat retrofocal 21/28 Biogon that does not suffer from this problem... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoarFM Posted July 1, 2013 Share #120 Posted July 1, 2013 Yes, the M has the same price of top-notch pro cameras with state of the art technologies, able to shoot 12 frames per second using subject tracking autofocus, built like a tank, can be used under a waterfall, have zero power up delay, have huge buffers that "never" fill up, can shoot 60fps H.264 video, have much better firmware with customizable menus, are blazing fast to operate and extremely reliable. I think you just made my point Oh. You want 12 frames per second and subject tracking autofocus? Maybe the Leica M isn't for you. And you won't even have to suffer the indignity of a waiting list for your Nikon or Canon. (disclosure: I also own a Canon DSLR with T/S lenses) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.