lct Posted July 7, 2013 Share #21 Posted July 7, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) No serious comparo with different lenses. Apples oranges and so on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 7, 2013 Posted July 7, 2013 Hi lct, Take a look here Amateur Photographer M240 review . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dwbell Posted July 7, 2013 Share #22 Posted July 7, 2013 As soon as you add comments to the images it becomes subjective. But just shooting the same object with the same lens and different sensors and keeping everyting the same (lens settings, camera settings and postprocessing) and showing the results (for you to subjectively interpret) is as objective as it gets. Very true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted July 7, 2013 Share #23 Posted July 7, 2013 Amateur Photographer seems mostly advertorial driven so it could be as simple as Leica bailed or didn't play ball with advertising with them....So I will wait till a few more independant reviews turn up. Well independant as they can be or seem to be. I've always thought and said that it felt like a total side step. Offering features rather than increases in IQ. It's always just felt like a migration to another sensor with all it's offerings rather than a focus on increase in IQ. In Leica's defence though guess it costs a lot of money to be all things to all people and what the new M sets is a new architecture and base for a system of the future. A work in progress so to speak. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 7, 2013 Share #24 Posted July 7, 2013 Surprised that AP has the temerity to criticise a Leica product. I normally think of them as being the mouthpiece for what passes as a marketing department in the UK. No, Mark to the contrary. AP invariably scores Leica cameras fairly harshly, largely due to their 'poor value for money' criterion and sometimes the lack of cutting edge technology compared with the market leaders. Over time I have grown to expect fairly critical reviews of Leica products. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 7, 2013 Share #25 Posted July 7, 2013 Seperately, the 5D3 is a stunning high ISO performer. Now, imagine that image quality plus: The same number of mega pixels. 1.5 stops expanded dynamic range at base iso. And, no AA filter. Beyond stunning, Leica M. I've always thought and said that it felt like a total side step. Offering features rather than increases in IQ. It's always just felt like a migration to another sensor with all it's offerings rather than a focus on increase in IQ. In Leica's defence though guess it costs a lot of money to be all things to all people and what the new M sets is a new architecture and base for a system of the future. A work in progress so to speak. Paul... Yes, features were added and that shouldn't be discounted. But, the M sensor isn't just a migration to another sensor. It does provide much better image quality and 24Mp. It has better SNR , better tonal Range, better Color Sensitivity, and 1.5 stops more dynamic range than the M9. No side step. It produces better image quality by a fair amount over my M9(which was great!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 7, 2013 Share #26 Posted July 7, 2013 I've always thought and said that it felt like a total side step. Offering features rather than increases in IQ. It's always just felt like a migration to another sensor with all it's offerings rather than a focus on increase in IQ. In Leica's defence though guess it costs a lot of money to be all things to all people and what the new M sets is a new architecture and base for a system of the future. A work in progress so to speak. Do you own an M or have you even used one? The M is a huge improvement over the M9...not even close to a "side-step". I happily sold my M9 once the M arrived and wouldn't go back for any reason. Improved buffer, which IMO was a huge fault on the M9, improved dynamic range, major upgrade to rear LCD, option to use a EVF (priceless as this adds the ability to use lenses previously impossible prior), improved shutter, and if you haven't used the M yet, the rangefinder is much improved. These are just the highlights...there is much more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 7, 2013 Share #27 Posted July 7, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Someone who is better at this sort of thing will correct me, I'm sure (this forum is a bit like that), but while both images show moiré, the M9 seems to resolve more fine detail than the M (typ 240) in that test image ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 8, 2013 Share #28 Posted July 8, 2013 The M240 shows less moiré and more resolution IMHO, at least from line 90 to line 100 (pic). 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/208298-amateur-photographer-m240-review/?do=findComment&comment=2368659'>More sharing options...
r7photo Posted July 8, 2013 Share #29 Posted July 8, 2013 Question about sensor in 240? Does it have a filter on chip? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 8, 2013 Share #30 Posted July 8, 2013 The M240 shows less moiré and more resolution IMHO, at least from line 90 to line 100 (pic). Thanks lct. I guess I could have done that myself, rather than simply look at the images. Am I right in saying that if you need to go down to 90-100 lpi, we're talking incremental improvement. In the crop you post, the difference seems subtle to me. I don't tend to struggle with moiré, but then maybe I'm not discerning enough to notice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 8, 2013 Share #31 Posted July 8, 2013 ...Am I right in saying that if you need to go down to 90-100 lpi, we're talking incremental improvement... Sure but fine details you were referring to are there aren't they. In practice i would not upgrade from M9 to M240 for the sole sake of getting more resolution. The lesser noise (in both acceptions) and the more accurate framelines are stronger reasons to take the plunge even if live view and video are not everybody's cup of tea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 8, 2013 Share #32 Posted July 8, 2013 Interesting. I am not looking for justification to buy or not buy, I'm just interested in the comparison. Your crop disproves my eyesight, because when I look at the full frame images of each, the M9 image seems to have less moiré, and to be sharper. It must be nothing more than prejudice creeping in! Needless to say that moiré and lpi resolution are the least of my worries with my photography! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted July 8, 2013 Share #33 Posted July 8, 2013 Now, imagine that image quality plus: The same number of mega pixels. 1.5 stops expanded dynamic range at base iso. And, no AA filter. Beyond stunning, Leica M. So where is this photograph that could only have been made with an M? We always hear about what photographers need, like higher ISO range and such like, but then they still set the ISO at its lowest because that is still the best for outright quality. The reason that putting a long telephoto on an M hasn't produced a stampede from Canon and Nikon users is because a Canon or Nikon still impliments this so much better. I don't believe such a photograph exists, one where the M uniquely produces an image that is "beyond stunning". It is a dangerous road to go down anyway, an amateur obsession with buying the next best photograph by buying the 'best' camera. It is what fuels Canon and Nikon's boilers, upgrading for the sake of a tiny increase in technical performance that would be hard to see or justify for each individual photograph that it makes a realistic impact on. AP is an odious magazine, until the time you need to buy it to trawl the advertisements, but I don't think they are wrong, the M is a sideways step. And the delays in producing the M are making a lot of M9 users think twice, not because they wouldn't like Live View or an EVF, but because they care about their images more than technical specifications, and they don't see any significant difference in the images they are seeing from the M. It is a horrible term, but an MM is a better 'investment' in photography right now, and leave Leica and the equipment obsessed end of its customer base to waltz around the M. But the idea of jumping a generation of an M model has never been more easily presented by the perfect storm of expectations not being met, no deliveries, and a camera like the M9 (M-E etc.) still inhabiting the age old Leica tradition of being a 'simple camera', possibly the last. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 8, 2013 Share #34 Posted July 8, 2013 I agree, it is a bit of a sideways step, but what is wrong with that? The M9 was already close to the ideal as a DRF, so there was not much to be gained in that respect. The core difference is the adding of various functions, which may or may not be of interest to some users. Having said that the added DR, better ISO performance more "polished" feel and above all the refined rangefinder are welcome improvements. The digital rangefinder, and SLR for that matter, have reached imo a bit of a plateau. Of course there will be developement in various fields, but it may well be that the stage of diminshing returns which started to appear about five years ago it really coming into its own now. The M8, despite ISO, crop,IR and etc.. is already capable of taking images close to the level >to the observer of the photograph - not to the pixelpeeping geek< of a current M, and the same goes for other brands. So now Leica increased functionality and implemented a incremental image quality increase, and runs into the next problem: where to go now? The only step I can see is again a sidestep: integrate autofocus into a rangefinder system. Anyway, I am happy with the M and consider the money spent as an excellent investment in a superior photographic tool. (Although I could probably have been just as happy with my M9, Monochrom and DMR...) Actually, that is all I really care about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 8, 2013 Share #35 Posted July 8, 2013 For me, the better ISO perfrmance, higher dynamic range and the improvement or refinement of the rangefinder (if it really is so) could be interest, but only if the color rendition (after a firmware upgrade and a better raw developer profile for LR5) is as good as that of the M9. So far, despite the fact that some, or most, of the people who have M240s now say that they are satisfied with the color, and despite that some say so on the basis of do-it-yourself profiles, I remain skeptical on this because of the color rendition (particularly, yellows and reds) that I see coming out of this camera. Seems to me it's not necessary for the fans of the M240 to "let slip the dogs of war" every time this issue is mentioned. —Mitch/Bangkok Bangkok Obvious [WIP] Eggleston said that he was "at war with the obvious"... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 8, 2013 Share #36 Posted July 8, 2013 Actually this WB "problem" if it is a problem, as the shifting of a slider is not too hard, seems to be not quite consistent. I have had a number of shots that were 200 Kelvin too warm, but others were fine or even a bit on the cool side. My first impression is that it tends to shift to warm when there is some warm light (eg tungsten) somewhere in the image in the first place. As for the clipping in the red, I did not see it really in day-to-day images, but I shot a few at a firebrigade demonstration yesterday and that should bring it out if anything. The RGB histograms on the camera look fine. All in all I am quite pleased with the colour, as good as the early M9 and not quite DMR (but what camera is?) Early days, however. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevieg Posted July 8, 2013 Share #37 Posted July 8, 2013 I posted this also in amateur photographer as I wasn't sure whether a similar readership existed or not and am genuinely interested in thoughtful replies.... Just read one of the letters from this current issue of AP regarding Leica being unable to replace/repair the LCD etc on an M8. The M8 is less than 10 years old (introduced 2006, if I'm not mistaken). What seems to be an otherwise simple component of a camera not being available now really concerns me, as I am on a waiting list for the new M(240). I currently use an M6 classic with a variety of m lenses. Value for money for a £5k camera that could be a worthless paperweight in a few years needs VERY careful consideration. My M6 can still be serviced and repaired! Really quite worried by this and am seriously considering removing myself from the waiting list because of this very real potential issue. The use of an M9 isn't what I was looking for as the live view along with rangefinder focussing suited my desire to use the camera as a lighter-weight landscape and travel camera with the potential to also use my nikon tilt-shift lens and grad filters at the time of capture (rather than the grad in lightroom). Now that Sony is rumoured to be bringing out a full frame mirrorless camera next year, I'm even more confused!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 8, 2013 Share #38 Posted July 8, 2013 Mitch, Don't you have a Monochrom? For me, the M9, Monochrom combination is ideal (and I'm adding a D800E) for similar reasons. Cheers John Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 8, 2013 Share #39 Posted July 8, 2013 The LCD issue is the result of a very unlucky chain of events. Leica did order (theoretically) enough units to ensure continuity of the supply. However the LCD developed a late fault (coffeestain) which put an extra drain on the supply. On top of that a batch of the stock turned out to have the same fault built in. By that time the supplier had gone out of business and there was no suitable replacement to be found. The end result being that the supply ran out too soon. Leica has compensated this by offering a generous exchange service where owners of the affected camera get a discount on a new M9 (or ME mayby by now). For the rest there is no such problem with any Leica M digital. I posted this also in amateur photographer as I wasn't sure whether a similar readership existed or not and am genuinely interested in thoughtful replies.... Just read one of the letters from this current issue of AP regarding Leica being unable to replace/repair the LCD etc on an M8. The M8 is less than 10 years old (introduced 2006, if I'm not mistaken). What seems to be an otherwise simple component of a camera not being available now really concerns me, as I am on a waiting list for the new M(240). I currently use an M6 classic with a variety of m lenses. Value for money for a £5k camera that could be a worthless paperweight in a few years needs VERY careful consideration. My M6 can still be serviced and repaired! Really quite worried by this and am seriously considering removing myself from the waiting list because of this very real potential issue. The use of an M9 isn't what I was looking for as the live view along with rangefinder focussing suited my desire to use the camera as a lighter-weight landscape and travel camera with the potential to also use my nikon tilt-shift lens and grad filters at the time of capture (rather than the grad in lightroom). Now that Sony is rumoured to be bringing out a full frame mirrorless camera next year, I'm even more confused!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted July 8, 2013 Share #40 Posted July 8, 2013 Mitch, Don't you have a Monochrom? For me, the M9, Monochrom combination is ideal (and I'm adding a D800E) for similar reasons. Cheers John ... John, yes. I got the Monochrom last November and shot only that until the end of February, when I bought the M9-P. By that time, I missed doing color and also was so taken with the color rendition of the M9 that I haven't touched the Monochrom since then. But I'm scheduled to go to Paris for six weeks towards the end of August and will probably shoot black and white there, although I haven't come up with a concept of what I want to shoot yet. Thinking about it. The M9 and the M-Monochrom are a great combination. If I didn't have these two cameras, I would have jumped already to get the Ricoh GR, which looks great — but I have no need for it now. Another good thing about having these two Leicas, which function in an identical way, is that one doesn't need to change to another camera for a long time: one trouble with digital has been that the equipment was changing and improving its capability so rapidly that people have been getting new cameras every year or 18 months. Changing cameras so frequently, like carrying or using too many lenses, is not good for one's photography. —Mitch/Bangkok Bangkok Obvious [WIP] Eggleston said that he was "at war with the obvious"... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.