chris_livsey Posted June 29, 2013 Share #41 Posted June 29, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Too slow on all cameras? Nikon quotes 0.12 secs for D3 and D4. Do I not recall a thread here where complaints about 2.5 secs were voiced for the 240 ? Leica's data sheet specifies "about 1 sec." That is not by my standards "in line". A nit pick I know but I got fed up with that red font Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 29, 2013 Posted June 29, 2013 Hi chris_livsey, Take a look here diglloyd: "Leica M Typ240: Unreliable". I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest tanks Posted June 29, 2013 Share #42 Posted June 29, 2013 ...I find the camera totally reliable, with some occasional glitches, which have never caused me to miss more than a few seconds of shooting. I expect a new FW will address these issues as they have with the previous M9 and M8, which had similar issues at launch. Question is if Leica is as quality conscious as when they try to explain the production delays (quality control was mentioned numerous times in their statement) then why are those type of issues not fixed prior to the launch? As you mentioned that is not unique to the M240 either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 29, 2013 Share #43 Posted June 29, 2013 Digitalfx, to see all of diglloyd's reports about the M240, you need to click through on one of the highlighted links on the blog page. You will be prompted to buy a subscription if you go further into the Leica library of information. I believe that your comment "the reviewer spent 12 hours with a bad camera and was not happy" is exactly the point Lloyd was making. First of all, he had probably shot a couple of thousand exposures with a dozen lenses on another M240 copy. Then, when he paid the same $7,000 that we all have, his own M240 turned out to be a lemon. What we could read into the post is that Leica QC remains more variable than anyone would hope for. So it is the camera production that is unreliable, not the reviewer as some posts on our forum suggested. If somebody makes basic theoretical mistakes - and no, I am not referring to his current opinion on the M240, I even suspect he has a point there- I find him unreliable based on his previous Internet writings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 29, 2013 Share #44 Posted June 29, 2013 Define "nobody" with the XVario selling not half bad according to the dealers I know... Possibly to the pre orderer's thinking they were going to get a 'Mini M'? There is something murky going on with the M, and perhaps the anonymous name of the camera will work for Leica in the long run. They won't have an 'M10' debacle to spoil the lineage, just a sideline in Leica history, but just so long as they can re-discover the skill of naming subsequent cameras in a logical progression (and not screw up again). Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 29, 2013 Share #45 Posted June 29, 2013 Would you buy a 2800 Euro camera that you pre-ordered which did not live up to your expectations? I wouldn't... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted June 29, 2013 Share #46 Posted June 29, 2013 Well, in nearly 4 months use the camera has locked up 3 times and only with a new 'not run in' battery ...... which seems to fit with a fair few other reports. Apart from that I cannot fault this camera for reliability and ease of use/accuracy in many thousands of images. With some allowances for WB and the appropriate LR profile images are consistently excellent. EVF use is fine and only really needed for very particular circumstances ...... it's limitations are not a big issue. Most of the other gripes are opinions not problems..... Poor Mr Digi seems to have unfortunately been in receipt of a friday afternoon M240...... not typical of most of the reports here..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 29, 2013 Share #47 Posted June 29, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) So this reviewer received a demo camera to eval that was defective, then he bought one that was defective too??? I would suggest staying clear of this guy....you might get struck by lightning if you get to close. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timd. Posted June 29, 2013 Share #48 Posted June 29, 2013 he had a good demo camera, liked it, then, later bought a bad one new from the shelf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 29, 2013 Share #49 Posted June 29, 2013 he had a good demo camera, liked it, then, later bought a bad one new from the shelf. Did he do a positive review about the sample he liked? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted June 29, 2013 Share #50 Posted June 29, 2013 Since only a few have freezing problems with the M240 I suspect that this reliability thing is either tied to certain memory cards or the new electronic viewfinder - or both. Should be easy for Leica to fix, when they find the source. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timd. Posted June 29, 2013 Share #51 Posted June 29, 2013 lct, i'm not much of a review reader, but i guess if he had disliked the demo sample, he would not have paid 7000$ to buy one for himself. Who would? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pklein Posted June 30, 2013 Share #52 Posted June 30, 2013 Many people have noted that the M(240)'s rangefinder seems easier to focus than earlier models. I believe this is related to the LED frame line illumination. The down side is that the frame lines disappear when the camera is off, but this (to me) is a small price to pay. Remember how many people complained about rangefinder flare-out in film Leicas from the M4-2 through the early M7? It was caused by stray light from the frame-line illumination window, which allowed light at some angles to wash out the RF. The fix was to restore a condenser that had been eliminated in those models. The M(240) does even better. The illumination for the frame lines comes from an LED or LEDs exactly where Leica wants them to be, rather than from a range of angles. This appears to improve the RF contrast. I've read that Leica says that the RF design hasn't changed. And when I played with a friend's M(240), I noticed the difference in the RF between it, my M8 and another friend's M9. It's small, but it's there, and it's helpful. Back before zoom lenses ruled the world, many of us would simulate various common lens' field of view by holding our elbows at right angles and making a viewfinder frame with our fingers (50, 75, 90mm) or arms and hands (35mm and wider). It takes all of 5 minutes to learn, and the benefit lasts a lifetime. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 30, 2013 Share #53 Posted June 30, 2013 lct, i'm not much of a review reader, but i guess if he had disliked the demo sample, he would not have paid 7000$ to buy one for himself. Who would? My question was did he do a positive review about the sample he liked. I doubt it when i read his negative generalizations but i may be wrong, hence my question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 30, 2013 Share #54 Posted June 30, 2013 I'm not sure why Mr. Lloyd Chambers aka diglloyd did not just come on the LUF like all of the other experts and "professionals" that come on our forum from time to time to throw their internet tantrum when they get a bad copy of a camera. I just got a new MacBook Air that has a bad speaker and the display flickers. I didn't post a review about these problems and state my personal opinions about its operation, like the electronic screen doesn't stay on when you turn off the power or that the buttons are hard to get used to. No, I took it back to the store and got a new one. I have not run across diglloyd before, but I did click on the link and read a few of his blog entries and was not impressed. I understand that there is more, but I couldn't find much about him because, the links all asked for money. I have enough of what I like to call "Performance Artist" like, Steve Huff, Ken Rockwell, Thorsten Overgaard, and the like. Whom, I enjoy, by the way. All I can add is that I have owned the camera since March and it has been "reliable." It hung up a couple of times the first week and did some weird thing in the video mode a couple times, but that was the end of its "unreliability." I think Thorsten mentioned that his did this in the beginning as well. Maybe I should blog about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted June 30, 2013 Share #55 Posted June 30, 2013 So this reviewer received a demo camera to eval that was defective, then he bought one that was defective too???I would suggest staying clear of this guy....you might get struck by lightning if you get to close. Digitalfx, perhaps read the man's publications, unless it is just fun to joke about luck. Because Leica only makes demo's available to a few in their circle, Lloyd posted a request and finally was loaned an M240 and 50 AA by one of his readers... I understand that few Leica forum members are subscribers of diglloyd.com, but his business is actually pretty good because in addition to Leica he covers Zeiss, Nikon and small chip cameras with objective comparisons that are not matched by any other reviewer I have heard of. His quite favorable review of that early M240 was posted in April, I believe. Lloyd was finally able to scrounge up new, Leica USA dealer deliveries for an M240 and 50 AA. The post that apparently puts you off was written about several days work with the new (lemon) M240. So, there are no demos involved, and there is a lot more information if you read the posts that have been referred to in this thread. Jaap, I understand you to say that you reject diglloyd's reliability because you interpret his comment about rangefinder problems as an ignoramus' error about how an optical rangefinder works. I would also urge you to read some of diglloyd's work before taking that interpretaion... I think he is saying that the rotational sloppiness in his M240's lens mount throws off the alignment of the tracking wheel that registers (in the body) where the lens sits on its focus travel. Certainly when I rotate my lens off of full lock (even as little as I can, which is not easy because my lock is thankfully very, very tight), the registration of focus patches in the OVF moves a little. Do you find that just putting the lens onto the body mount, regardless of rotational position relative to the lock, brings correct rangefinder function (i.e., focus readout)? Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timd. Posted June 30, 2013 Share #56 Posted June 30, 2013 My question was did he do a positive review about the sample he liked. I doubt it when i read his negative generalizations but i may be wrong, hence my question. maybe the answer is to be found in this thread: Lloyd posted how unhappy he was with receiving an M240 lemon (new, out of the box) so he could not perform the tests he promised readers until his body is brought to spec. If you read his review of the M240 from earlier this year (completed with a loaned copy), you will see his strong approval of the camera.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted June 30, 2013 Share #57 Posted June 30, 2013 I'm not sure why Mr. Lloyd Chambers aka diglloyd did not just come on the LUF like all of the other experts and "professionals" that come on our forum from time to time to throw their internet tantrum when they get a bad copy of a camera. Rick, diglloyd regularly posts aggressive complaints about all manufacturers. You should read some of his criticism of the D800E, which seems to be Lloyd's favorite camera. My impression is that he makes sharper criticism of Leica because the product is priced at multiples above other very good equipment... higher price = sharper criticism. I have never asked him, but I would be quite surprised if Lloyd reads our forum. It would probably not cross his mind to take the care and patience responding to forum posts and bitching, which Thorsten, Jono, Chris, Tim Ashley and others do so well. Of course, those pro posters are in the Leica circle and participate in development with Leica. My guess is that Lloyd would feel it is a conflict of interest to help develop a camera and then sell an "objective" review of same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 30, 2013 Share #58 Posted June 30, 2013 ...and bitching, which Thorsten, Jono, Chris, Tim Ashley and others do so well... I wasn't talking about these professionals and experts when I was talking about people coming on our forum and throwing tantrums. I enjoy reading all of these folks. I hope that is understood. Now, what are you talking about? Also, I'm not sure why you are defender of the diglloyd? I have not read anything of his except a rather incomplete and incorrect (factually) post about one M copy that he bought. How could I possibly judge anything about him other than what that one review concluded from one faulty copy of the camera? Everything else seems to be hidden behind the pay wall. I'll take your word that he is an equal opportunity basher. I understand that sells subscriptions. But, I don't think he really wants that poorly thought through post out in front of his pay wall. It isn't the sort of reasoned and balanced review that is going to drive people to the pay portion of his site. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoarFM Posted June 30, 2013 Share #59 Posted June 30, 2013 Lloyd makes many accurate observations about the cameras and lenses that he tests. Yet, there is something about his tone and attitude that is abrasive, unpleasant and unprofessional and I can't bring myself to renew a subscription. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 30, 2013 Share #60 Posted June 30, 2013 It would probably not cross his mind to take the care and patience responding to forum posts and bitching, which Thorsten, Jono, Chris, Tim Ashley and others do so well. Oh, on second reading I understand. Sort of a dangling participle phrase. Thorsten et al are not the ones bitching. Got it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.