colonel Posted January 14, 2015 Share #601 Posted January 14, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Exactly. I don't know where Harold was taking his measurements from but the M film bodies (not sure about the M5) are all the same thickness and are all thinner than the digital M bodies. The body casting thickness is the important dimension as it is that which determines how thick the camera feels. I took the numbers from camerasize.com which I believe takes them from the manufacturers specification. I tested this with the manuals I have and it ties up. I would argue that protrusions from the base are important. For example the drop down film flap on the film Ms adds a few millimetres which is something you feel. The ISO dial may add less feel. For my part I use leather half cases which means that non unified protrusions still push the whole case out. Lastly on the point about carrying the M3 all day. I don't use a neck strap and keep the camera in a bag when not using. Otherwise typically I carry in my right hand most of the time I am walking. I have small hands BTW. I found the M240, M8, M9, M7, M6 Classic and M6 TTL all comfortable to carry. I would say the M7 and M240 the most and the M240 the winner as the thickness and thumb rest just perfect for me for proper grip, the M6 Classic being the mostly slippery and worst of this group. I guess those who use the thumbs up probably have a different dynamic. I also come from the DSLR generation that is used to a sculptured grip, so obviously I find too thin more of a problem then too thick. As I mentioned above I think these cameras are all so close it's hardly worth talking about, except that it comes up all the time and I suppose is a good sign of how Leica M users are sensitive to their equipment. However I do feel it is regularly overplayed. If I had to pick something I wanted changed in the M260, the thickness wouldn't make the top 10, let alone the list. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 Hi colonel, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
JimKasson Posted January 14, 2015 Share #602 Posted January 14, 2015 I recently talked to a photographer that the shutter slap that plagues the Sony A7R is mainly a result of the camera being too light, so he uses a battery grip to add weight to the camera. A camera that is too light for a lens is not a good thing. Weight can mitigate the effect to some extent, but the a7R shutter shock stems from a combination of live view and no electronic first curtain shutter, which requires the shutter to be wound, then released after the shutter button is pressed. The M240 has the same problem if you don't turn off live view before making the exposure. On the a7R, unfortunately, you can't turn off live view. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimKasson Posted January 14, 2015 Share #603 Posted January 14, 2015 Any grip, especially a pistol grip, improves stability, that is undoubtedly true, but it cannot change the centre of gravity of the camera/lens combo. The Pete Souza grip (my name for it) is not a mechanical device. It's a way of holding the camera. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 14, 2015 Share #604 Posted January 14, 2015 OK. The grip is certainly important. The stance as well. And breating technique. There are quite some similarities with sharpshooting a rifle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimKasson Posted January 14, 2015 Share #605 Posted January 14, 2015 It looks like Pete Souza isn't using his left hand to focus; I don't think his gesture is adaptable to M operation. You are correct about focusing. I think he's using AF lenses. The only trick to using that grip with AF lenses whose rings move when focusing is getting your fingers in front of the ring. In many situations, particularly when using longer lenses like the 90 and 135 where this technique pays off the most, it's fine to focus, change your grip, and make a few exposures. If you're using the RF to focus, you have to move the camera between focusing and the exposure -- for me, anyway, the thing I want to focus on is never in the center of the frame. So you've already given up focusing and shooting simultaneously. Because the M240 live view only works in the center, the same situation obtains there. If you practice, it becomes natural and quick to reframe and change your grip at the same time. In fact, you can use a focusing grip that's better suited to the shift since you know stability is not important for focusing (except for jitter in magnified live view). The Souza technique has really improved my medium telephoto results. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted January 14, 2015 Share #606 Posted January 14, 2015 I would argue that protrusions from the base are important. For example the drop down film flap on the film Ms adds a few millimetres which is something you feel. The ISO dial may add less feel. For my part I use leather half cases which means that non unified protrusions still push the whole case out. In 45 years of shooting Leica's my right thumb has always rested against the top plate on the release side. Never against the film flap, so thickness in that area makes no impact on the feel of holding it, whether it's a film flap, ISO dial or LCD. And using half-cases on metered M's, there was a cutout for the ISO dial, so like the LCD on the digitals, did not push the whole case out. What changes the feel is the thickness of the body casting. A few millimeters opens the hand and at least for me, causes just enough increase in the muscle tension required for a firm grip that it becomes more quickly fatiguing. The thumb wheel and its bump/shroud on the M240 is, for me, too small to be useful as a thumb rest, therefore I have had to shift my thumb down under it from the place I have rested that thumb for 45 years, and further changes the geometry of my grip and makes for an even more fatiguing hold. With the M240 I always use a neck strap and a 2-handed hold, with the brunt of the grip and stability coming from the camera resting in my left hand. My right hand is therefore passively resting around the camera, not gripping it. I have adapted, because I have no choice if I want to shoot with this camera. I don't want an add-on grip. To fit 2 bodies+grips would mean going up to a larger bag, thus negating my main reason for prefering an M over an SLR in the first place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted January 14, 2015 Share #607 Posted January 14, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) In 45 years of shooting Leica's my right thumb has always rested against the top plate on the release side. Never against the film flap, so thickness in that area makes no impact on the feel of holding it, whether it's a film flap, ISO dial or LCD. And using half-cases on metered M's, there was a cutout for the ISO dial, so like the LCD on the digitals, did not push the whole case out. What changes the feel is the thickness of the body casting. A few millimeters opens the hand and at least for me, causes just enough increase in the muscle tension required for a firm grip that it becomes more quickly fatiguing. The thumb wheel and its bump/shroud on the M240 is, for me, too small to be useful as a thumb rest, therefore I have had to shift my thumb down under it from the place I have rested that thumb for 45 years, and further changes the geometry of my grip and makes for an even more fatiguing hold. With the M240 I always use a neck strap and a 2-handed hold, with the brunt of the grip and stability coming from the camera resting in my left hand. My right hand is therefore passively resting around the camera, not gripping it. I have adapted, because I have no choice if I want to shoot with this camera. I don't want an add-on grip. To fit 2 bodies+grips would mean going up to a larger bag, thus negating my main reason for prefering an M over an SLR in the first place. I understand, so the design is uncomfortable for you. The small base plate centered grip might help, although I note you don't want one. Its really very small. For me the size is excellent. I feel no physical difference between the M7 and the M240, but strangely did feel the M4 and M6 classic were thinner and less comfortable for me to hold, despite the molding comments above. If I had a magic fairy I would ask to shave a bit off the weight of the M240 but not at the expense of the battery. Interestingly if you hold the camera without the battery it feels surprisingly light. Perhaps Leica will shave off the mm you need for the next model. best rgds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo63 Posted January 14, 2015 Share #608 Posted January 14, 2015 If I had a magic fairy I would ask to shave a bit off the weight of the M240 but not at the expense of the battery. Interestingly if you hold the camera without the battery it feels surprisingly light. best rgds my M feels like a feather compared to the Canon 1DX i shoot with at work its actually part of the reason i bought it, i wanted a smaller, lighter, "everyday" camera with good image quality Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
squarenegs Posted January 14, 2015 Share #609 Posted January 14, 2015 As you will notice the Sony has a DMF (Dumb Mother Fucker) and MF (Mother Fucker) choice. I think that is why. I haven't figured out what the AF stands for. Apart from that, I don't like the f-word used in writing, thought it is much less political incorrect in Europe (where most people will use the f-word about anything without causing the stir that it does if used in the US for example). AF = "Ah fuck it!" As in, "If at first you don't succeed, ah fuck it." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted January 14, 2015 Share #610 Posted January 14, 2015 Perhaps Leica will shave off the mm you need for the next model. LOL what worries me more is the thought of Leica reading all the "I can barely tell the difference" and "the film M's were too thin for me" and deciding it would be ok to fatten the next version up another couple mm's I wonder if there was negative reaction when Leica went from the IIIb to IIIc, or LTM to M, as there were increases in size on both occasions (quite a bit more with the latter). I started out in Leicadom with an M4, picked up a IIIa and IIIf later on. I can see why the Barnack's were such a hit with travelers when they first came out, compared to contemporary cameras of the day. And I recall with some amusement now how the M5 nearly drove Leica into oblivion and forced them to resurrect the previous form factor. By comparison to the M240 the M5 really doesn't seem all that much larger/heavier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted January 14, 2015 Share #611 Posted January 14, 2015 If using the name "M (type 240)" instead of M10 means that this body have its sensor upgraded, then I'm really pleased. Otherwise, that's what I want -- an upgradable M body. That would (1) save me some money (just got rid of an M9 and M8 in order to buy this one), and (2) increase the used value of the body (somewhat unnecessary since I wouldn't need to sell it). Also, I want a silent shutter. Regards to all, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimKasson Posted January 15, 2015 Share #612 Posted January 15, 2015 Naw, it happened when I had my A7r mounted on a heavy tripod. It is something else. Did you know that Leica saw a 25% increase in lenses returned for calibration when the A7r was introduced. According to my source, Leica concluded that the A7r mount + adaptors were so out of tolerance that Leica lenses often were not coincident at infinity with the A7r. So, customers were sending them back to Leica to be calibrated thinking that is was the lens. Rick If you mean by "not coincident at infinity" that when the lens is focused at infinity, the indicator on the lens barrel shows the lens to be focused closer than that, that occurs because the adapter is too short. All adapters that I've tested are too short, throwing off the distance scale by a little on teles, and a lot on WAs. Novoflex says that's by design: Lens adapter tolerance, part 2 | The Last Word Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 16, 2015 Share #613 Posted January 16, 2015 If you mean by "not coincident at infinity" that when the lens is focused at infinity, the indicator on the lens barrel shows the lens to be focused closer than that, that occurs because the adapter is too short. All adapters that I've tested are too short, throwing off the distance scale by a little on teles, and a lot on WAs. Novoflex says that's by design: Lens adapter tolerance, part 2 | The Last Word Jim Interesting, Jim. My source did not mention if the adaptors were too short or too long, just not correct. But, it does make sense that the adaptor manufacturer would error shorter than longer. But, what makes more sense would be, to manufacture the adaptor be correct. But, in the end, users of Leica lenses assumed that the problem was with the Leica lens. And I can understand the error. The user looks at the lens mounted on the adaptor and when the lens is set to infinity, it is out of focus at distance. Send it back to Leica. As I mentioned above. This has caused a 25% increase in lenses sent to Leica to be CLA'd. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garygraphy Posted January 16, 2015 Share #614 Posted January 16, 2015 As much as I love the M9, it is apparent further development of the M240 is the way forward. I have nothing against a CMOS sensor but somehow Leica's implementation of it seems less favorable than say Fuji. It may have to do with the colors associated with the WB but I think there may be more issues intrinsically in it. I find I have less headway in playing with the raw files. Size is definitely a major factor and I hope this is not a trend of ever increasing body sizes. I believe the size associated with the MP is where I hear most people say the sweet spot is. Remove the damn movie function, although minor I find the 4 holes to the left of the camera to be exceedingly annoying. I know Leica is providing another feature to attract new adopters but I think few actually use the video function on their M240s. Aesthetically the M9-P is the champion for digital and somehow despite efforts, the M240 (and the associated -P version) cannot match that. If they can once again replicate that look, they got something good going again. Kudos for the improvement over shutter sound, finally putting in a good screen, weather sealing and excellent battery life. I am a little meh over the LED framelines and potentially prefer the frameline illumination window simply because it is part of how a Leica RF looks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 16, 2015 Share #615 Posted January 16, 2015 I really do not understand the gripes about the movie function. I'm as luddite as the next Leica owner, but in this case... It can be turned off, so what. At home I haven't taken a single video shot, but when traveling I find it a blessing to be able to switch to video seamlessly. My wife is the one taking the film, but even her rather nice videocam is not able to match the bits I do with a 400 mm on. Also it allows doubling up when there is too much to video at the same time. One of the main functions of the M is a travel camera. In that context I think video enhances the concept. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 16, 2015 Share #616 Posted January 16, 2015 Size is definitely a major factor and I hope this is not a trend of ever increasing body sizes. I believe the size associated with the MP is where I hear most people say the sweet spot is. What's the sweet spot when they add a spendy half-case? Innovation is tough. I'm always looking for the frantic articles on how the M3 just ruined the Leica. "Too big - I prefer the III series", "That lever wind is going to tear film!" (thus at first the double-stroke), "Who needs that monster viewfinder window?", "Black! Get rid of it. I'll never buy one." (and they did drop it), "What's with the two flash terminals?"... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted January 16, 2015 Share #617 Posted January 16, 2015 The only thing I would like from a new digital M is NOT to have some so important improvement over the 240 to make me desire to buy it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennifer Posted January 16, 2015 Share #618 Posted January 16, 2015 The only thing I would like from a new digital M is NOT to have some so important improvement over the 240 to make me desire to buy it... Yes, I too can relate to that request. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 16, 2015 Share #619 Posted January 16, 2015 Would be interesting to know how much human hands have grown in size since the M3. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimKasson Posted January 16, 2015 Share #620 Posted January 16, 2015 Interesting, Jim. My source did not mention if the adaptors were too short or too long, just not correct. But, it does make sense that the adaptor manufacturer would error shorter than longer. But, what makes more sense would be, to manufacture the adaptor be correct. I can't argue with that, Rick. But, in the end, users of Leica lenses assumed that the problem was with the Leica lens. And I can understand the error. The user looks at the lens mounted on the adaptor and when the lens is set to infinity, it is out of focus at distance. Send it back to Leica. As I mentioned above. This has caused a 25% increase in lenses sent to Leica to be CLA'd. And these must have been users of Leica lenses with no Leica camera bodies around to try the maybe-not-focusing-right lenses on... Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.