colonel Posted March 8, 2015 Share #881 Posted March 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) 5 years for a $10,000 camera is one of many reasons the M-A is the best buy in the Leica range. PS - Actually, I'd go further. Leica does well forging a new and strong direction based on applying existing technologies better than anyone. If you take out the CMOSIS sensor and the rangefinder, the M(240) is a me too camera, and a poor one at that. Hmmmm Me too for other rangefinders ? Which ones were you referring to ? The M240 has a far superior CPU, sensor and shutter to the M9. The rangefinder mechanism has also been improved And the video is cool to have for the very rare times I need it M is evolution not revolution Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 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!
Mornnb Posted March 8, 2015 Share #882 Posted March 8, 2015 Hmmmm Me too for other rangefinders ? Which ones were you referring to ? The M240 has a far superior CPU, sensor and shutter to the M9. The rangefinder mechanism has also been improved And the video is cool to have for the very rare times I need it M is evolution not revolution Rangefingers and DSLRs are both old and mature products and there is little room for revolution. Sony has nothing to lose and is trying to be as revolutionary as possible. Hence the Sony A7, a camera based on an EVF and live view. However these are both features that Leica integrated into the M240 before Sony. Leica is definitely keeping up with the trends in the industry, and is even helping to set some of them. My analog cameras are bought to last me a lifetime. My M240, well... It's bought to be able to serve me for about 5 years. . There are still people happily shooting on the 10 year old Canon 5D, which was 12.8MP and the first full frame digital camera of reasonable weight (i.e. under a kilo). It is a landmark camera in the history of digital photography and is still regarded as having better colour tones than some of the later Canon bodies. It is the camera that enabled digital to take over from film. Check out the thread on photography on the net (largely Canon forum) http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1159990&page=564 The point is at the high end of digital, the bodies are still usable and continue to produce high image quality well past their obsolence date. A 24MP high image quality M240 is going to last you much longer than 5 years. It won't stop being a great camera in 10 or even 20 years, there will just be newer cameras that are even greater. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share #883 Posted March 8, 2015 Hmmmm Me too for other rangefinders ? Which ones were you referring to ? The M240 has a far superior CPU, sensor and shutter to the M9. The rangefinder mechanism has also been improved And the video is cool to have for the very rare times I need it M is evolution not revolution Hi Harold, I think you missed the bit where I said "if you take out the CMOSIS sensor and the rangefinder". Me too and poor iteration (from Leica pricing and standards) of video, focus peaking, EVF and general electronics (lock up etc). I have no doubt that many people enjoy video (as you do), focus peaking (Jaap), etc, but it isn't for me and I'm trying to explain why I think the M(240) is confused. It also explains why I made the strange decision (for some) to buy the M60. And yes, if I think the digital Leicas are poor value for money (in the sense that the electronic components seem to be at best average and Leica's ability/willingness to support those products don't match the price we pay), my decision to purchase the M60 seems odd. All I can say is that I have my head firmly in the sand, or that I hope that Leica has learned the lesson of the M8 and M9 ... Here's hoping. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted March 8, 2015 Share #884 Posted March 8, 2015 think the digital Leicas are poor value for money (in the sense that the electronic components seem to be at best average and Leica's ability/willingness to support those products don't match the price we pay),I agree totallybut there is no other complete system , with small lenses and that quality For the moment I wait but if a good Zeiss Ikon with Sony electronic comes, the game will change Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share #885 Posted March 8, 2015 Hence the Sony A7, a camera based on an EVF and live view. However these are both features that Leica integrated into the M240 before Sony. While you are correct that the M(240) was announced at Photokina in September 2012 and the A7 release in October 2013, EVF and live view were "integrated" into the NEX 5 and other cameras well before the M(240) was released. Sony was using this technology long before Leica joined that bus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share #886 Posted March 8, 2015 I agree totallybut there is no other complete system , with small lenses and that quality For the moment I wait but if a good Zeiss Ikon with Sony electronic comes, the game will change For me, I tried a number of Sonys and was dissatisfied after the M9 (my first real digital camera) - they were a struggle for me and they ultimately didn't play well with Leica lenses. After a month trip through the US with an A7r and the Zeiss zoom, I gave up on Sony. I'm enjoying the Leica T (by comparison), and for all my criticism I love my digital Leicas. I just want Leica to sort out the quality issues and to be able to commit to support their products to a level which justifies the prices they charge. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 8, 2015 Share #887 Posted March 8, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) 5 years for a $10,000 camera is one of many reasons the M-A is the best buy in the Leica range. For less than the cost of a new M-A, we can buy a pristine, never used M4, get a CLA, and be on our way with great savings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share #888 Posted March 8, 2015 True, as you can with an M3. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 8, 2015 Share #889 Posted March 8, 2015 True, as you can with an M3. Never used? I can only dream. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 8, 2015 Share #890 Posted March 8, 2015 For that price, you could also buy a nearly new 35 Summicron and a 90/2.8 Elmarit as well as an M4. I am off to Seville later this week. Am I going to take the M240 or go film and take my M4 - decisions decisions. I am only taking hand luggage so it is one or the other. I am tempted to take the M4 plus a C112 in my pocket. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share #891 Posted March 8, 2015 Never used? I can only dream. You can buy a never used M4? I was amazed when I got my 1960 M3 (bought for €500) back from Solms after a CLA. Apart from some scratches on the top deck (presumably from a meter) it really was pristine. You can buy pretty much any second hand Leica - the issue is Leica's current offerings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mornnb Posted March 8, 2015 Share #892 Posted March 8, 2015 While you are correct that the M(240) was announced at Photokina in September 2012 and the A7 release in October 2013, EVF and live view were "integrated" into the NEX 5 and other cameras well before the M(240) was released. Sony was using this technology long before Leica joined that bus. Leica beat Sony in bringing the technology to a full frame camera. An SLR doesn't make sense in an age with quality electronic viewfinders. In this sense the Leica M and Sony A7 are on the cutting edge and my well be the direction Nikon and Canon will take. Ergonomic issues however with large zoom lenses on small bodies may be the only thing that keeps DSLRs around. For me, I tried a number of Sonys and was dissatisfied after the M9 (my first real digital camera) - they were a struggle for me and they ultimately didn't play well with Leica lenses. After a month trip through the US with an A7r and the Zeiss zoom, I gave up on Sony. I did similar as a Canon 5D Mark III shooter trying out the A7r, the body does not provide an enjoyable shooting experience. I was searching for a mirrorless camera as fun to shoot as the Canon DSLR, and found it in the M240. I'm enjoying the Leica T (by comparison), and for all my criticism I love my digital Leicas. I just want Leica to sort out the quality issues and to be able to commit to support their products to a level which justifies the prices they charge. What quality issues are you referring to? Leica has done quite a great job with integrating common digital features into a classic camera. The M platform as a digital system has more of a longevity and future to it than most camera platforms out there. With the M240 Leica has finally got digital right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 8, 2015 Share #893 Posted March 8, 2015 For less than the cost of a new M-A, we can buy a pristine, never used M4, get a CLA, and be on our way with great savings. I'd consider buying that never used M4 of your's for the price of an M-A if that's what you are alluding to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted March 8, 2015 Share #894 Posted March 8, 2015 Even though electronic viewfinders are getting better I still prefer a dslr or a Leica. Simply because of not having to look through an EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share #895 Posted March 8, 2015 I did similar as a Canon 5D Mark III shooter trying out the A7r, the body does not provide an enjoyable shooting experience. I was searching for a mirrorless camera as fun to shoot as the Canon DSLR, and found it in the M240. I agree that Sony didn't have it right with the A7r - that's as far as my experience with the A7 series went. Similarly, for Leica lenses, I came to the conclusion that a Leica camera is the best option for Leica lenses. What quality issues are you referring to? Leica has done quite a great job with integrating common digital features into a classic camera. The M platform as a digital system has more of a longevity and future to it than most camera platforms out there. With the M240 Leica has finally got digital right. I agree that Leica has done a fantastic job making a digital camera in a traditional camera form. That is what attracted me to Leica in the first place. Cracked sensors, delaminating cover glass and cover glass corrosion on the M9 series of cameras discouraged me, failing to maintain supplies for the M8 LCD alarmed me, and ongoing issues with the M(240) electronics didn't help (people complaining about WB, lock-ups and banding). What appealed to me about the M(240) is the sensor and the revised rangefinder. The rest, I didn't really like. Cluttering up Leica's flagship camera with a bigger LCD (I use mine on the Monochrom only for menu settings, which I don't actually need with the M60), an average EVF, focus peaking which is ultimately not as good as the rangefinder and indifferent video struck me as diluting the Leica experience. It also struck me as odd that for a premium camera, these options would be less than stellar. That said, I do like the idea that you can use lenses wider than 21 and longer than 90 using live view. That opens up long tele, zoom and macro, which is a good thing. But then, I actually don't go wider than 21mm or longer than 90mm, so all this is of limited appeal. Back when I was using my Nikon FM2, my 180/2 was the longest lens I used. For all that electronic trickery, I think the T is a better platform - it is an electronic camera through and through, though sadly misses out by not being full frame. Compared to the M cameras, the price is more in line with electronic componentry, and I will be more likely to feel I've got my money's worth after 10 years. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 8, 2015 Share #896 Posted March 8, 2015 I'd consider buying that never used M4 of your's for the price of an M-A if that's what you are alluding to. I am dearly tempted. I will try to make some snapshots of it to post here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 8, 2015 Share #897 Posted March 8, 2015 You can buy a never used M4?. Yes. In fact I did. Black paint. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 8, 2015 Share #898 Posted March 8, 2015 Cluttering up Leica's flagship camera with a bigger LCD (I use mine on the Monochrom only for menu settings, which I don't actually need with the M60), an average EVF, focus peaking which is ultimately not as good as the rangefinder and indifferent video struck me as diluting the Leica experience. It also struck me as odd that for a premium camera, these options would be less than stellar. The M240 with bigger LCD is only 1mm thicker than the M9 (excluding thumb rest), and lighter still than an M60. The EVF doesn't come with the camera….it's an option….just like the Visoflex is for other Ms. LV and video are turned off with one simple setting, never to intrude again if not desired. I forget mine even has video. [The best part of LV for me is that it allows for quick and accurate camera/lens focus calibration checks.] The cost for the 'add-ons' is zero….the M240 costs the same as a new M9 when it was released without them. And the M240 is much better built RF camera and has…so far…proven much more reliable. Color is also excellent once profiled. Regarding M240 'problems' you cite, I don't see why there would be any difference between the M and M60 on WB or banding…in fact, the M offers more WB control. And as far as lock-ups, nobody knows what causes them (mine has none)…so the jury is out on the M60 as well. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 9, 2015 Author Share #899 Posted March 9, 2015 so the jury is out on the M60 as well. Not really, as it doesn't have any of the things I dislike about the M(240). I'm happy with the M60, where I really wasn't interested in the M(240) from the get go. I recall posting that I thought it would sell like hotcakes, but I wouldn't be a buyer. Like you.I've had no lock-ups, WB isn't actually an issue as this was really a JPG problem (I adjust WB with every shot, though I have asked for it to be fixed at 5500 in the next firmware). Haven't seen any banding (yet), and it isn't entirely clear to me if it is actually a DNG problem. So, of all that, it may be that the banding at high ISOs will also be a M60 issue, if it is sensor related. I guess I may never know as I rarely take high ISO images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 9, 2015 Share #900 Posted March 9, 2015 Not really, as it doesn't have any of the things I dislike about the M(240). The 'jury was out' was a reference to the lock-up issues. Nobody knows what causes them….for those relatively few who have complained. So the M60 may be susceptible…hopefully not. As I've noted, the M60 is an M240, sans screen and strap lugs. I doubt you or I would be able to distinguish the innards. I also don't shoot with the M using very high ISO, nor wider than 28, nor longer than 90, nor video. The M240 is a perfectly simple RF camera for me. But it has options if desired, without carrying another camera, and without interfering with RF simplicity. I owned 2 M8.2s (still have one for back-up), and both performed without fault (except my own) for 5 years. So far, the M240 does everything the M8.2s did, only better, in almost an identical package. Choices are good. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.