Shade Posted October 18, 2013 Share #1 Posted October 18, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't know if I should've made this thread, because I think I will get some bashing by several members here that adores their M240. Don't get me wrong, I have been using Leica's digital era since the M8. And have followed, and upgraded, to every single release they have made. The two exceptions were the M8.2, because I don't see any difference at all than the M8, and the MM - because I couldn't justify myself spending for it. I have been using the M240 since it's early release, and have been lucky to even bought it preowned (YES! You heard me right). It's 6 months going now, and I have decided to sell it off to a friend yesterday. Wow why perhaps you may ask? Several reasons culminated and I have thought long and hard, and I decided it is not the right M for me. Be in mind you are entitled to have your own opinions as do I. The M240 files are nice, they are rich and workable, but somehow I don't feel the same. The grains are different, the rendering is different, everything that it spews out, is different. Albeit not a grand huge difference, but different nonetheless. And I can notice it. It's not about "better", nor "worse", it's just a matter of preference. Somehow the ISO department, albeit nice, I am baffled as to why I am getting grains in my ISO640 shots. I even thought I set the camera wrongly and double checked the EXIF, and it is indeed ISO640. Underexposed you might ask? Perhaps - slightly, but then I also noticed it in darker/shadowy areas on my properly exposed shot. Compared to my Fuji (yes sorry it's redundant but I have to mention it), it's waaayyy cleaner. Now I have no idea why, nor understand it's technicalities, or maybe whatever - but it just beats the crap out of my mind to the question "WHY?". Sure you can say "just post process it", or maybe "use a noise reduction software", etc etc, but that is not my point. For an ISO640 file, I expect it - in this kind of "era", and with 7000 USD price tag, to be - clean. Or at least much cleaner. The files are yes, sharp, but so are the files from many non AA filters sensors cameras these days. But I'm not going to do comparison bla bla, my short point regarding it's sensor is, it could've and should've and MUST'VE been better. I somehow have a niggling feeling that Leica is "downgrading" their current sensor as so they have a "noticable" update when M240.2 comes along. The screen? Wow yes nice - but way too late to the party. The nice on M240, is not-so-nice compared to say the current generations of camera. Again, this is minor, but paying 7000 USD, I think it's reasonable to have the best screen available. It's like buying a porsche with generic tin rims. It's not a deal breaker but it sure hell makes it look less better! LOL. The EVF? Not a solution IMHO, sure for some - but not for me. Go for Fuji style or ditch it altogether. Live view - pretty good actually, and useful in certain situations and I found myself using it every now and then - HOWEVER, shutter lag is horrible in Live view. It has a 1 sec lag AT LEAST, so if you're a moment chaser, either you press the shutter 1 sec before that moment, or you'll end up 1 sec after that moment. Which is somehow wierd to me, others can do it faster. Everything else? Well minor niggles here and there and the occasional freeze. But I guess that's about it, others are too small to mention and too minor to be discussed even for my personal tastes. Oh one more - the lug problem, yes I have it. And damn Leica for letting that happen. How am I supposed to send it back to Germany, while I live in a country where it's so damn difficult to ship in or out of the country of expensive things and such. And the risk of having it fall out - argh. I hate that ultimately. Anyways - I have sold my M240, for a price MORE than what I purchased it for LOL - and I'm back with M9. Which is now almost half the price of an M240 where I live. And hey, I find out that I love the M9 better - aside from the worse ISO performance and worse screen, I don't find myself paying almost double for a camera that is not to what I expected it to be. Maybe the next M240.2 or M360. Thanks for reading! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Hi Shade, Take a look here Bye M240.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
StephenPatterson Posted October 18, 2013 Share #2 Posted October 18, 2013 Isn't it amazing that even after the introduction of the M240 that the M9 is still able to take stunning images? I feel that the improvements over the M9 are substantial, and especially with FW2.0.0.11 I am happier than ever with the M, but I respect your decision and wish you many more happy years of M9 shooting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luakbay Posted October 18, 2013 Share #3 Posted October 18, 2013 I think you should have some valid reasons for you to consider parting it. Yes, I owned M240, but that doesn't really bother me, because everyone has preferences. I am also disappointed with the lugs, and also sudden freeze of camera which I sent back to Germany twice! Yes, twice! I will be more careful in choosing the new camera now, but I am shopping new lens. Cheers! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwchisholm Posted October 18, 2013 Share #4 Posted October 18, 2013 People are partial to different things, and that's ok. Personally, I just re-purchased an M9 because I liked the CCD so much more than CMOS files. Just a personal choice. I don't love the M240 files as much, at least from what I've seen. I know the DR is better, the high ISO is better... I just don't love the look. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shade Posted October 18, 2013 Author Share #5 Posted October 18, 2013 Thanks for your comments Stephen and Luakbay, of course all cameras are about personal preferences and tastes, there is no one perfect camera for everyone! Yes indeed after all these years I believe the m9 is no slouch, for the matter of fact, the m8 as well! It takes stunningly crisper images especially in B/W. I am actually thinking of picking up an m8 for personal B/W use only instead of buying an MM. Call it a poor man's MM maybe!? Lol.. But with the direction Leica is heading I am both excited and worried at the same time, I cant wait until the end of next year to see what kind of step Leica will take.. For now I wish you all m240 users are happier than I am! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyper67 Posted October 18, 2013 Share #6 Posted October 18, 2013 Well it's been a month since I've had mine so far....As an industrial product I think that it's a more refined M9 in most departments (if you exclude some of its electronic shortcomings). In fact I try to treat it with a gentler touch as any coarseness in handling has at times resulted in too many pictures been taken and at the wrong moment..its shutter is sweet but can be too sweet at times if you come from an M9...but this is a good thing not a bad thing. The IQ however I haven't quite gotten used to it yet...there is something that I'm not able to put my finger on but that feels "odd" - not worse in my opinion but just "odd"! It's strange to say this but at times I feel the files seem to be too perfect - the rendering of the images seem to me to be too "evenly lit" in certain situations than those from my M9. I do though like the colours out of the camera (FW 2.0.0.11). Having said this however, to its credit I have shot scenes that due to the difficulty of the lighting situation would have been nearly impossible to have taken with my M9 without having to overwork the images in post to get something descent....go figure! I think Leica has moved in another direction from the M9 with this iteration and in doing so has left something of the past behind but in the meantime has gained something new and interesting at the same time - not all is bad, in fact most is good - that could be the bedrock for a bigger and brighter future for them. Some will embrace the new and see it also as a challenge whilst others will abandon it in fear of loosing there trusted workflow...only time will tell if this new direction will pay off for Leica in the long term...as for me I will be trying the new a7 when it comes out and hopefully by then I would have made my mind up if the M240 is a keeper or not... Alexandros Demetriades - Photographer Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted October 18, 2013 Share #7 Posted October 18, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...The IQ however I haven't quite gotten used to it yet...there is something that I'm not able to put my finger on but that feels "odd" - not worse in my opinion but just "odd"! It's strange to say this but at times I feel the files seem to be too perfect - the rendering of the images seem to me to be too "evenly lit" in certain situations than those from my M9...Interesting. I was having similar thoughts in a completely different context when post-processing M-Monochrom files this morning, first in LR5 and then starting over from the original DNG in Silver Efex 2. The latter files usually turn out more interesting (more "uneveness") but the LR5 version shows me the direction to go. Laborious but interesting. Sorry for the OT chatter. —Mitch/Paris Tristes Tropiques [WIP] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 18, 2013 Share #8 Posted October 18, 2013 Sounds more like the hankering for an old familiar girlfiend that you ditched for someone more glamorous .... Choice of cameras never was.... and never will, be a wholly rational decision ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted October 18, 2013 Share #9 Posted October 18, 2013 I would not keep something I am not happy with, but I think you are too critical. Just my opinion. So now you go back to a M9 or look at something else. A nikon D800 is a killer camera. I have seen prints from it that look like 6x7 or 4x5. If you want a high ISO camera, Nikon D4 is excellent. Look at "image comparometer" , then use Lens Rentals to make a final decision. Imaging Resource "Comparometer" . Modern Nikon glass is pretty decent and I feel it competes well with Leica from 2.8 or 4.0 not counting zooms which I use only in emergencies. Nobody has anything like a 50 `Lux or collapsible Elmar 50 or collapsible 90 . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted October 18, 2013 Share #10 Posted October 18, 2013 Nobody has a RF either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shade Posted October 18, 2013 Author Share #11 Posted October 18, 2013 Yes the files from m240 are just different, not better nor worse. And it boils down to preferences. Im not saying "I need high ISO cameras", yes Im fully aware the latest Canikon provides noisefree images. What Im saying is: Leica has now adopted cmos censor which is well reknowned for its much better noise handling technology as compared to ccd yet they have chosen to not fit the "up to par" censor in the cmos world. Put it this way, Im b*tching about why my Porsche is running 4000cc engine with 150 hp while other cheaper car engines are already spewing 250 hp. While yes the new M has its perks, I find them nice but not a dealbreaker for me if I dont have them. For whatever the reason, I didnt bond with my new glamorous girl friend and Im asking my old one to get together LOL! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Emile de Leon Posted October 18, 2013 Share #12 Posted October 18, 2013 Sometimes you just like one cam better then the other.. Don't have to intellectualize it.. It just is.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george + Posted October 18, 2013 Share #13 Posted October 18, 2013 Whatever turns you on. No need to apologize; but thanks for letting us have your thoughts. Carpe Diem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted October 18, 2013 Share #14 Posted October 18, 2013 Good luck to you, OP. A very personal thing is camera choice. For me, the M(240) is a great improvement in many ways over the M9 and I would not go back. I am very pleased, and the M(240) remains my camera of choice. Yes, even over my Nikon D800E, which has its own strong points and which I use especially when AF is needed. My eyes are not what they used to be. But if I was told I could have only one camera it would be the M(240). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HV25 Posted October 18, 2013 Share #15 Posted October 18, 2013 Interesting thoughts. I think the M240 is absolutely fantastic and so much better in lots of ways than my D800E. That is an apples and oranges comparison but to me that doesn't matter because I know what I like and why I do. Its great that you love your M9 and I hope you continue to enjoy it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sisoje Posted October 18, 2013 Share #16 Posted October 18, 2013 Wow, what a strange page from OP to the last one... I don't get it, sorry:( I never "analyze" my files so "scientific" as some of you guys commenting before me. I must be doing something wrong (?), since I was happy with images produced with every generation of digital M, from M8 to M240... Hmmm.... Oh yes, I am keeping both my M9 and M240... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 19, 2013 Share #17 Posted October 19, 2013 Current trend is toward an M9 with Sony guts and price in a Leica CL package if i understand well. Without rangefinder of course, EVFs are so much superior. The M240's shutter sound could be kept though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted October 19, 2013 Share #18 Posted October 19, 2013 lct Did I read you clearly? EVF's are superior to RF's. What a novel idea!:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 19, 2013 Share #19 Posted October 19, 2013 Sorry i forgot one word. I meant "vaaastly" superior. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted October 19, 2013 Share #20 Posted October 19, 2013 I know there are plenty here who will disagree, but in 13K shots with M's I have probably used R glass 65% of the time. In this way I found using the EVF easy, logical, informative when data placed at bottom of LCD and accurate even to showing varying degrees of depth of focus when peaking and adjusting f stop. It is a joy to use for me. I guess that tunnel vision affects some, but after racing high speed sports cars around European and North American tracks I am used to tunnel vision (i.e., the view between crash barriers). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.