AlanG Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1281 Posted October 21, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Why not shoot the Canon 24-70/2.8 on the Canon? I don't know if it's worth it to me either. I'll play with one on Thursday in NY. But compared to the 5DIII, it has 36MP, no AA filter, a smaller body that can be used for other things. Will work with my E mount APS lenses too. That being said I'll only buy it if the quality of the image is better. But a 5DIII and A7r two body system is more useful than having 2 5DIIIs. Getting at least one E FF lens for eye tracking may be irresistible. (I have no idea if eye tracking is compatible or fast enough with a Canon lens and Metabones adapter.) Not mentioned here but a big issue for me is lack of tethered support in C-1 for the Sony. (The same for Leica.) I'd have to run Sony's tethering software simultaneously into a hotfolder and I don't know if I could get live view from it onto the laptop. I don't even think Sony has a wired remote release. So it won't be useful to me until I resolve these questions. I have no idea what Sony support is like but CPS is incredibly good and reasonably priced when repairs are needed. Canon will probably announce a 46MP mirrorless camera with on sensor 70D type AF the day after I buy an A7r. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 21, 2013 Posted October 21, 2013 Hi AlanG, Take a look here The Sony A7 thread [Merged]. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1282 Posted October 21, 2013 That's not what I meant. I didn't imply that a non-M body is what's desired. But by 'perfect' I did mean perfect. There seems to be some ambivalence towards the M240 for a variety of reasons as is evident in this thread. If it were the perfect rangefinder digital M, then I think that this thread wouldn't be active; i.e., there would be little reason to care about a "$2k EVIL camera."... The M240 is almost perfect as a rangefinder camera. I've used many Ms from M3 to M240 and i can tell you that the latter is the best rangefinder Leica have ever made. What is far from perfect is the non-RF part of the M240 i.e. LV and EVF but this has nothing to do with the success of this thread IMHO. Most people cannot afford or don't want to spend the big bucks for an M camera and will always dream that a $2K body can do the same. If i were them i would order the little Sonys with Zeiss lenses and be happy like this but i'm just me and my only reasons to buy the Sonys would be for the fun of it or to replace a DSLR eventually but not a rangefinder obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1283 Posted October 21, 2013 The M240 is almost perfect as a rangefinder camera. I've used many Ms from M3 to M240 and i can tell you that the latter is the best rangefinder Leica have ever made. What is far from perfect is the non-RF part of the M240 i.e. LV and EVF but this has nothing to do with the success of this thread IMHO. Most people cannot afford or don't want to spend the big bucks for an M camera and will always dream that a $2K body can do the same. If i were them i would order the little Sonys with Zeiss lenses and be happy like this but i'm just me and my only reasons to buy the Sonys would be for the fun of it or to replace a DSLR eventually but not a rangefinder obviously. I agree with this. If, I go through with it it will certainly be for the fun of it. Which lens did you order with it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1284 Posted October 21, 2013 With 50 lenses around me more or less i would be quite happy to stay with the latters so i would try my M and R lenses to begin with but also some little Olys like 21/2 and 28/2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
naturephoto1 Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1285 Posted October 21, 2013 I don't know if it's worth it to me either. I'll play with one on Thursday in NY. But compared to the 5DIII, it has 36MP, no AA filter, a smaller body that can be used for other things. Will work with my E mount APS lenses too. That being said I'll only buy it if the quality of the image is better. But a 5DIII and A7r two body system is more useful than having 2 5DIIIs. Getting at least one E FF lens for eye tracking may be irresistible. (I have no idea if eye tracking is compatible or fast enough with a Canon lens and Metabones adapter.) Not mentioned here but a big issue for me is lack of tethered support in C-1 for the Sony. (The same for Leica.) I'd have to run Sony's tethering software simultaneously into a hotfolder and I don't know if I could get live view from it onto the laptop. I don't even think Sony has a wired remote release. So it won't be useful to me until I resolve these questions. I have no idea what Sony support is like but CPS is incredibly good and reasonably priced when repairs are needed. Canon will probably announce a 46MP mirrorless camera with on sensor 70D type AF the day after I buy an A7r. Sony has a wired remote that will work with the A7r: Sony RM-VPR1 Remote Control with Multi-terminal Cable RM-VPR1 The M240 is almost perfect as a rangefinder camera. I've used many Ms from M3 to M240 and i can tell you that the latter is the best rangefinder Leica have ever made. What is far from perfect is the non-RF part of the M240 i.e. LV and EVF but this has nothing to do with the success of this thread IMHO. Most people cannot afford or don't want to spend the big bucks for an M camera and will always dream that a $2K body can do the same. If i were them i would order the little Sonys with Zeiss lenses and be happy like this but i'm just me and my only reasons to buy the Sonys would be for the fun of it or to replace a DSLR eventually but not a rangefinder obviously. Not all Leica owners are Leica M users and owners. There was another system that Leica had for over 40 years: the Leicaflex/R system. The Leica M240 is not the best replacement for an R system due to its limitations, cost, limited capabilities, and loss of capabilities once had by the R/Leicaflex camera bodies. The less costly Sony A7r is a better replacement or R solution and offers much more capability than the M240 for this lens system. For using M lenses as a rangefinder camera, no question the M240 is a better and the only option aside from the M9 and M9P for FF usage. Rich Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1286 Posted October 21, 2013 The Leica M240 is not the best replacement for an R system due to its limitations, cost, limited capabilities, and loss of capabilities once had by the R/Leicflex camera bodies. The less costly Sony A7r is a better replacement or R solution and offers much more capability than the M240 for this lens system. For using M lenses as a rangefinder camera, no question the M240 is a better and the only option aside from the M9 and M9P for FF usage. Rich I agree. So I may yet get the A7R for the 28-90 Vario-Elamrit-R, 28 PC-Super-Angulon-R, and perhaps the longer M lenses. Or I may yet rationalise my equipment and sell the two R lenses Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1287 Posted October 21, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, that depends on whether you like Canon rendering verses Zeiss ZA doesn't it? You may prefer it, I know I don't. As to size, yes, it is true that a Sony DSLR A mount lens + adapter will make it all bigger ... but perhaps still a bit smaller than a Sony A99 or Canon 5D-III with the same focal length (such as a 24-70/2.8). BTW, lenses like the ZA24/2 are actually quite small. Rendering aside, in a practical everyday sense, I'd take my A99 with ZA 24-70/2.8 over the Canon 5D-III with the new 24-70/2.8 even IF the Canon optic was slightly better... because the A99 stabilizes the Zeiss image, and the Canon doesn't. That is the sort of real world type effect on IQ that Allan seems to be referring to. So, someone like me with an array of ZA lenses from 16mm to 135 can migrate to this type E mount camera at my own pace as FE lenses of interest come to market. That I may be able to also use some M lenses on an 36 meg full frame A7R just makes it all the more interesting. Sony is not in competition with Leica ... they are after Canon and Nikon market-share, and have to change the game to succeed. - Marc You are one of the perfect users for this camera. For you, all of your ZA lenses are going to move over and work ok with either of the new adaptors. But, why not just use your lenses with your IS A99? Great sonsor with great color and super fast AF. Or, what ever comes out next from Sony for the A system. I heard a B&H interview with Sony that said they were going to support the system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1288 Posted October 21, 2013 I agree. So I may yet get the A7R for the 28-90 Vario-Elamrit-R, 28 PC-Super-Angulon-R, and perhaps the longer M lenses. Or I may yet rationalise my equipment and sell the two R lenses These days, the A7R is a bargain relative to the 28-90 Vario-Elamrit-R! I wonder myself how that lens will be doing on the A7R? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1289 Posted October 21, 2013 The M240 is almost perfect as a rangefinder camera. I've used many Ms from M3 to M240 and i can tell you that the latter is the best rangefinder Leica have ever made. What is far from perfect is the non-RF part of the M240 i.e. LV and EVF but this has nothing to do with the success of this thread IMHO. Most people cannot afford or don't want to spend the big bucks for an M camera and will always dream that a $2K body can do the same. If i were them i would order the little Sonys with Zeiss lenses and be happy like this but i'm just me and my only reasons to buy the Sonys would be for the fun of it or to replace a DSLR eventually but not a rangefinder obviously. Yeah, right. If we criticize Leica, it means we can't afford it or we don't want to spend the bug bucks. You're doing Leica no favor. They need to wake up and smell the coffee. IMHO, Sony is introducing a compact FF system with AF, high quality lenses and latest state of the art sensor technology. What's not to like about that. IMHO, the RF is the last remaining reason to use Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1290 Posted October 21, 2013 The M240 is almost perfect as a rangefinder camera. I've used many Ms from M3 to M240 and i can tell you that the latter is the best rangefinder Leica have ever made. What is far from perfect is the non-RF part of the M240 i.e. LV and EVF but this has nothing to do with the success of this thread IMHO. Most people cannot afford or don't want to spend the big bucks for an M camera and will always dream that a $2K body can do the same. If i were them i would order the little Sonys with Zeiss lenses and be happy like this but i'm just me and my only reasons to buy the Sonys would be for the fun of it or to replace a DSLR eventually but not a rangefinder obviously. And the group of those who wanted and could afford Leicas but decided to hold off on the M240 is not a small one. These are the ones Leica should be concerned about. After M6, 2 M8s, 2 M9s, MP, I have no intention spending USD 7000 for a M240 considering where camera technology (sensors, electronics) and prices stands and is heading. The red dot premiums for M8 and M9 were ok for me, but not for the M240. Leica has to get its act together when it comes to develop convincing cameras beyond the RF part of technology. The X Vario, one can only hope is not the new Leica standard of innovation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1291 Posted October 21, 2013 Marc, I just ran across this quote: "LensRentals' Roger Cicala, who plays daily with the best lenses in the world, on the 24–70mm II: 'If I say there are four billion stars in the Milky Way, everyone accepts that. If I say the paint is wet, everyone checks for themselves. I’m not sure which path people are going to take with this statement: This is the best standard-range zoom ever made. By any manufacturer. Ever. It’s not close.'" Thought it was both clever and interesting. I had the old one and the 5DII. I loved that combination. Hope Canon comes up with something Sonyesque in their next 5D to use that lens on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1292 Posted October 21, 2013 Yeah, right. If we criticize Leica, it means we can't afford it or we don't want to spend the bug bucks. You're doing Leica no favor. They need to wake up and smell the coffee.IMHO, Sony is introducing a compact FF system with AF, high quality lenses and latest state of the art sensor technology. What's not to like about that. IMHO, the RF is the last remaining reason to use Leica. The RF is *the* reason to use Leica Ms because Leica Ms are Leica Ms, not TTL cameras. The EVF of the M240 is just an accessory finder. An electronic Visoflex sort of. If Leica had followed the advice of some of us here (not me) the M240 would have neither LV nor EVF at present. The same, and me with them, will hope that things remain like that in the future i.e. with a faster refresh rate and a better EVF certainly but with no ambition to compete with TTL cameras in any way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1293 Posted October 21, 2013 ...Not all Leica owners are Leica M users and owners. There was another system that Leica had for over 40 years: the Leicaflex/R system. The Leica M240 is not the best replacement for an R system... R user here. We all know Leica's history don't we. Neither Visoflex nor M240 are the best replacement for the R system because the latter is dead and Leica don't want to replace it so far. So much the better for the 5D i'm using with my R lenses and perhaps for the little Sonys. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozkar Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1294 Posted October 21, 2013 The RF is *the* reason to use Leica Ms because Leica Ms are Leica Ms, not TTL cameras. The EVF of the M240 is just an accessory finder. An electronic Visoflex sort of. If Leica had followed the advice of some of us here (not me) the M240 would have neither LV nor EVF at present. The same, and me with them, will hope that things remain like that in the future i.e. with a faster refresh rate and a better EVF certainly but with no ambition to compete with TTL cameras in any way. The RF is fine, providing you don't shoot wider than 28mm nor wider than 90mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1295 Posted October 21, 2013 The RF is *the* reason to use Leica Ms because Leica Ms are Leica Ms, not TTL cameras. The EVF of the M240 is just an accessory finder. An electronic Visoflex sort of. If Leica had followed the advice of some of us here (not me) the M240 would have neither LV nor EVF at present. The same, and me with them, will hope that things remain like that in the future i.e. with a faster refresh rate and a better EVF certainly but with no ambition to compete with TTL cameras in any way. I'm not sure if you have read my position on this subject. In fact I am in the pro-classic RF camp, and wasn't very happy with the inclusion of LV, video, and EVF in the current M. I actually believe Leica should have introduced a two body solution, one classic RF M, and one EVF based body for using it with R lenses, and M wide angles as well as opening up the possibility of macro M lenses as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1296 Posted October 21, 2013 The RF is fine, providing you don't shoot wider than 28mm... We can't agree on this i'm afraid. The RF is the most accurate focusing device with wides, especially at slow apertures where EVFs are lost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1297 Posted October 21, 2013 The M240 is almost perfect as a rangefinder camera. I've used many Ms from M3 to M240 and i can tell you that the latter is the best rangefinder Leica have ever made. What is far from perfect is the non-RF part of the M240 i.e. LV and EVF but this has nothing to do with the success of this thread IMHO. Most people cannot afford or don't want to spend the big bucks for an M camera and will always dream that a $2K body can do the same. If i were them i would order the little Sonys with Zeiss lenses and be happy like this but i'm just me and my only reasons to buy the Sonys would be for the fun of it or to replace a DSLR eventually but not a rangefinder obviously. Yes, it's an "almost perfect" digital rangefinder. And it's also the only digital rangefinder. However don't toss in the "cannot afford it" stuff. Many of us have tens of thousands + in photographic equipment (it's our vocation) including expensive Leica lenses. And I've been using Leica since I was 14 years old, but so what. It doesn't mean anything except that I latched onto a certain small format 35mm camera. And yes, I sold my M9 just previous to the official announcement of the M240. It was a camera I sort of liked but wasn't 100% thrilled about. I also still use film and have kept my film Leica M bodies. So why not just bank my money for now and wait to see where the M240 might go with the next iteration. Perhaps if I wasn't still using my film Leica bodies, I might feel more compelled to get another digital M, who knows. But I'm not looking for a $2k body nor do I sit around "dreaming" that a $2k body will magically appear with a true optical viewfinder and which can use Leica lenses. I like to utilize a wide variety of tools, from point and shoots to view cameras and lots of stuff in-between. All of them are capable of producing spectacular images for specific purposes and my viewing audience couldn't care less what was used. I think we all know the reality here. Photographs command a viewer's attention because of the content and context of the image. So let's try not to get too snobby about Leica. I have no qualms about purchasing and using high quality tools, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking all those incredible images out there in history could have never been made if Leica hadn't existed (despite what Leica marketing might want use to believe ) Anyway, it does appear that there are people who feel that the M240 isn't quite perfect. And so they've chosen to sit on the sidelines for now. They might see the Sony as an interim option (?) Maybe that's part of all the buzz. Nonetheless, I find a thread like this to be very positive. (I'm actually gaining a lot of insight from such a wide variety of opinions, and it helps me think more about what's going on in respect to current technologies and how it fits into my own agenda.) And I think that's probably the real "success of this thread" for many here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1298 Posted October 21, 2013 I'm not sure if you have read my position on this subject. In fact I am in the pro-classic RF camp, and wasn't very happy with the inclusion of LV, video, and EVF in the current M. I actually believe Leica should have introduced a two body solution, one classic RF M, and one EVF based body for using it with R lenses, and M wide angles as well as opening up the possibility of macro M lenses as well. I don't recall having read you on this subject sorry but we've discussed those things many times a couple of years ago on this very focum. Your two body solution does exist currently with M-E and M240 but is not viable as a permanent solution unless there is much demand for the M-E imho. I still believe that the compromise offered by the M240 is brilliant... provided LV and EVF are at the same level of excellence as the rangefinder, which is not the case by far i'm afraid. Now it's just a beginning and even for people like me who don't like composing with a TV set, the EVF is useful as is on a tripod for macro and telephoto. Remember the Visoflex or your or your parents' youth. Was never on par with SLRs then but was still usefull as an accessory unit. Accessory is the key word i believe. Asking an M to compete with a TTL or a TTL to compete with an M are just wastes of time. Different beasts, different ways of taking photos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1299 Posted October 21, 2013 ...Anyway, it does appear that there are people who feel that the M240 isn't quite perfect. And so they've chosen to sit on the sidelines for now. They might see the Sony as an interim option (?) Maybe that's part of all the buzz,,,Nonetheless, I find a thread like this to be very positive. (I'm actually gaining a lot of insight from such a wide variety of opinions, and it helps me think more about what's going on in respect to current technologies and how it fits into my own agenda.) And I think that's probably the real "success of this thread" for many here.Agreed, and well stated. What surprises me is that in this whole, mile-long thread people have not been concerned about color rendition, expect possibly you reference to "digital emulsions" in post #1263, where you wrote, "It's interesting that in the motion picture industry (where digital capture is very high end and expensive) they talk about "digital emulsions." Different sensors and different lens combinations are often tested before the start of expensive productions...Even with post processing and skillled colorists, there will be differences coming from each capture device. Still photographers have to think the same way, too. We did so in the past with different film choices and different film formats. And therefore we had lots of tools in the toolkit. It's no different today." My own concern is that I feel that the M9 is unique in color rendition and the M-Monochrom unique in B&W rendition, both of which, to my taste, have not generally been equaled by the M240. In contrast to this, most people say implicitly, or explicitly as Alan G. did, that color from digital cameras can simply be manipulated to what you want it to be, which I don't think is true by a long shot. —Mitch/Paris Tristes Tropiques [WIP] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted October 21, 2013 Share #1300 Posted October 21, 2013 Agreed, and well stated. What surprises me is that in this whole, mile-long thread people have not been concerned about color rendition, expect possibly you reference to "digital emulsions" in post #1263, where you wrote, "It's interesting that in the motion picture industry (where digital capture is very high end and expensive) they talk about "digital emulsions." Different sensors and different lens combinations are often tested before the start of expensive productions...Even with post processing and skillled colorists, there will be differences coming from each capture device. Still photographers have to think the same way, too. We did so in the past with different film choices and different film formats. And therefore we had lots of tools in the toolkit. It's no different today." My own concern is that I feel that the M9 is unique in color rendition and the M-Monochrom unique in B&W rendition, both of which, to my taste, have not generally been equaled by the M240. In contrast to this, most people say implicitly, or explicitly as Alan G. did, that color from digital cameras can simply be manipulated to what you want it to be, which I don't think is true by a long shot. —Mitch/Paris Tristes Tropiques [WIP] Mitch, but we don't have any information yet on which to comment on the A7/A7R sensors. That's bound to be the next topic for discussion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.