ALD Posted October 31, 2013 Share #1 Posted October 31, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am now kind of glad that the M that then became the M240 was never given the M10 badge. I think the M9 and the MM are still the classic Leica cameras to keep. I hope one day that the M10 arrives and will fulfil more of what I expected from the M240 before it was released. M240 is just a crap name and the M was always reserved for all the different M models. I look forward to a new MM model with the updated rangefinder and video on a higher resolution sensor able to handle low light better and to match this with the APO summicron 50mm. I am glad I have kept my m9 it's just such a good camera and it produces images that have a look that in my opinion are more artistic and aesthetically pleasing. The mm now that is high art. The M240 images nothing special in them they lack something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 31, 2013 Posted October 31, 2013 Hi ALD, Take a look here Leica M10 vs Leica M240. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
M9reno Posted October 31, 2013 Share #2 Posted October 31, 2013 Pax vobiscum! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted October 31, 2013 Share #3 Posted October 31, 2013 I am glad I have kept my m9 it's just such a good camera and it produces images that have a look that in my opinion are more artistic and aesthetically pleasing. The mm now that is high art. You'd be better served by not relying on cameras to produce your more artistic and aesthetically pleasing images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted October 31, 2013 Share #4 Posted October 31, 2013 I am now kind of glad that the M that then became the M240 was never given the M10 badge. I think the M9 and the MM are still the classic Leica cameras to keep. I disagree - I call it the Leica M, just M. To me its the obvious successor - the M3 revolutionised photography in the 50s. Why shouldn't Leica keep revolutionising as well as keeping to its roots? A company that doesn't innovate and revolutionise will wither and die - that's what happened to Leica until Kauffman saved it and worked towards a truly digital framework. Kauffman even said something about the M8 saying that it wasn't the camera he wanted to produce because it was merely a sensor replacing film, and he wanted to see more progress but Leica is a small company. I I am glad I have kept my m9 it's just such a good camera and it produces images that have a look that in my opinion are more artistic and aesthetically pleasing. The mm now that is high art. The M240 images nothing special in them they lack something. Why so much value placed in a camera? It just takes pictures and if you rely on a camera to give you an image and complain another camera cant do the same, then as my photography teacher says all the time "you haven't learnt much." What I think is great about the M is that its FINALLY catching up... Its a sign that Leica wants to innovate and revolutionise again like it always has since the M3. Im new to Leica and feel unaffected by the church members of its community. Based on purely practical senses, the Leica M240 is merely a "me too" camera today - compared to other Ms, its definitely deserving of the M badge, in fact, it takes the M where M9 cant even dream to - it makes Photography accessible to people like me. Im just a teacher with a love of photography with practical needs with memories of my dads OM10 and owns a OM1, and in the end, I get everything I ever wanted from a camera. If leica kept to their arrogant self in the 90s, they would just be a memory for toffs and the arrogant. I would not buy one and therefore watch the company slowly die. But because they have (for the first time since the 50s - because there was nothing innovative about the M9 - it was the same old formula - Leica has shown innovation.) You may not like this opinion and lots of Leica fans have told me that I don't deserve a Leica - but realistically Leica isn't selling this camera to you, they are selling it to people who want a RF experience, want a leica but don't see the value in technology that's 5-6 years behind... at least the M feels like a current camera, and why, after 6 years of saving, I passed over the 8, the 9 and decided on the M10. Leo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted October 31, 2013 Share #5 Posted October 31, 2013 ... there was nothing innovative about the M9 ... I think that's a little harsh. It was the first full-frame digital rangefinder camera, a feat which for such a long time even Leica said couldn't be done owing to the 27.8 mm register and obliqueness of light rays at the edge of the sensor. Yet Leica persevered and achieved it, which shows real innovation. For me the M9 was an innovation over the M8 because it allowed me to use my lenses at their designed focal length rather than being cropped longer. The M is also an innovation because it allows me to use my wonderful R lenses and therefore enables true 1:1 macro and telephoto shots without a Visoflex. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted October 31, 2013 Share #6 Posted October 31, 2013 You'd be better served by not relying on cameras to produce your more artistic and aesthetically pleasing images. People have been choosing cameras for their aesthetic nature for a very long time, probably since lenses were manufactured and different films stocks and processes became available. It's no different to choosing oil paint over water colour. If you're not choosing a camera that suits your point of view, style of photography and content then I think it is you that could be better served to do so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted October 31, 2013 Share #7 Posted October 31, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I hope one day that the M10 arrives and will fulfil more of what I expected from the M240 before it was released. What’s in a name … ‘M10’ was what the camera to replace the M9 used to be called both inside and outside of Leica. This camera now exists and with a little patience you can actually buy one. However, Leica decided not to call it ‘M10’ since by the time of the big announcement they had introduced a new naming scheme for all their cameras. So what used to be referred to as the ‘M10’ is now the ‘M’ (Typ 240). And it would be the same camera by any other name. Btw, ‘M240’ is a crap name; Leica doesn’t use it and neither should you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted October 31, 2013 Share #8 Posted October 31, 2013 People have been choosing cameras for their aesthetic nature for a very long time, probably since lenses were manufactured and different films stocks and processes became available. It's no different to choosing oil paint over water colour. If you're not choosing a camera that suits your point of view, style of photography and content then I think it is you that could be better served to do so. If Leica or any other manufacturer introduced a camera that promised "more artistic and aesthetically pleasing images" I'd run a mile. As a painter of 40+ years I'd do exactly the same regarding the selection of medium. I do choose cameras that suit my point of view, style of photography and content, I own both the M9 and M240, but I'm not under any illusion either camera or for that matter any camera will produce "more artistic and aesthetically pleasing images". I rather hope that is down to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george + Posted October 31, 2013 Share #9 Posted October 31, 2013 M (type 240) is an unfortunate designator. But that's what we have. Learn to live with it. No matter how unused it is. But the camera, particularly when you come from an M8, is great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted October 31, 2013 Share #10 Posted October 31, 2013 I think that's a little harsh. It was the first full-frame digital rangefinder camera, a feat which for such a long time even Leica said couldn't be done owing to the 27.8 mm register and obliqueness of light rays at the edge of the sensor. Yet Leica persevered and achieved it, which shows real innovation. For me the M9 was an innovation over the M8 because it allowed me to use my lenses at their designed focal length rather than being cropped longer. The M is also an innovation because it allows me to use my wonderful R lenses and therefore enables true 1:1 macro and telephoto shots without a Visoflex. Pete. Its not really innovative because the market had full frame for a long time. The M3 was innovative because it took large huge cameras and used film mediums and made one of the first commercial portable still cameras. When the M9 came out, it didn't really do much to the industry really... only for range finders. You call the iphone innovative because it changed the market. The M10 isn't innovative, I call it "catching up" and being on equal ground so I expect innovation with the next M (I hope) Everything the M9 did minus having a FF sensor in a RF was already done in the market. Its not harsh, its just being realistic and Im saying this as a new found Leica fan. Someone once told me that Leica was a failing business that had yes men in the board room. So Im glad people used to be mad at the M9, now they love it, Im glad people are mad at the M10 - it means Leica will be listening (I hope) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted October 31, 2013 Share #11 Posted October 31, 2013 OK, horses for courses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted October 31, 2013 Share #12 Posted October 31, 2013 Its not really innovative because the market had full frame for a long time. ... I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here - are you comparing innovation as though 'A was more innovative than B'? I agree that there were full frame sensors in dSLRs prior to the M9 but the problems associated with producing a full frame sensor in a camera that uses rangefinder lenses is the truly innovative part. The M9 is 4 years old now and the only company to have achieved it since is Sony last month and it's not yet clear how well it performs with wide-angle lenses. ... The M3 was innovative because it took large huge cameras and used film mediums and made one of the first commercial portable still cameras. ... Are you confusing the M3 with the 'Barnack' cameras such as (the Ur Leica), Model O, and Leica I, II, and III series', which were all commercial, portable stills cameras 20 years before the M3? ... You call the iphone innovative because it changed the market. ... The iPhone captured the market owing to its unique design but in reality it was only an iPod Touch which could make and receive phone calls. Since you introduced the analogy, I think the true Apple innovation was the first iPod because it offered the user functions in a size that weren't available elsewhere. I personally don't measure innovation by market share; it may capture market share but equally it might be unmarketable in its raw form and require development and marketing before it becomes a commercial success. That doesn't detract from the innovation in my book. But we digress ... Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 31, 2013 Share #13 Posted October 31, 2013 The M240 images nothing special in them they lack something. You've seen prints of all pics involving the camera? Is there a worldwide show? If you attended an exhibit of prints from a group of unknown photographers, I bet you couldn't name the camera (or lens) used other than a lucky guess here or there. There are dozens of variables involved in the workflow from camera to framed and displayed print, not the least of which are the pic itself and the photographer's eye and talent. I've never seen a print signed 'By (fill in blank) Camera'. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted October 31, 2013 Share #14 Posted October 31, 2013 When people look at my prints, they either like them or not. Never a question about what camera or lens. I find that flattering. Only photographers seem to care about camera, lens, f stop, shutter speed, ISO, pixels, etc. Some of us do not take in the image, we just want technical details which can spoil the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted October 31, 2013 Share #15 Posted October 31, 2013 I've been creating and supplying images for more years than I care to remember and have never* been asked what camera I've used. * OK, I fibbed, for some reason camera manufacturers like confirmation that the camera used was theirs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted October 31, 2013 Share #16 Posted October 31, 2013 M240 and M10 etc are just nicknames so people know you're talking about the succesor of the M9... thats all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALD Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share #17 Posted October 31, 2013 The M9 was so ahead of its time and in fact so is the M (type 240). When I reread my post it actually seemed more negative of the M (type 240) then I in actuality am. I really just did not like the colours it renders they are to my eye artificially over coloured and bright and I expected more megapixels. If you use a Canon or Nikon flagship model and go wandering for the whole day with lens you better have arms like Arnold Schwarzenegger because it's heavy and bulky and indiscreet. Sure the Cannon especially focuses in a light speed instant but there are so many controls and settings that invariably most people set it to fully auto and just shoot thousands of perfectly focused pictures. But I hate the canikons after a day in the bush it becomes a chore. Besides it's the leica lens that really are the beauties here. Eventually I will buy the APO summicron 50mm and if I find a well priced used mm I might buy that also but would prefer to wait for a later version. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 31, 2013 Share #18 Posted October 31, 2013 I really just did not like the colours it renders they are to my eye artificially over coloured and bright... Before or after your use of recent FW update, custom profile (e.g., using ColorChecker Passport) and/or WB card, PP edits (many options, e.g., luminance, saturation, color channel adjustments, contrast, etc...with easy pre-sets, as desired), different papers, different lighting conditions, etc? One can easily create dramatically different looks from the same pic, using the M or any digital camera. Especially changes to characteristics such as "over coloured and bright.' Workflow. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannybuoy Posted October 31, 2013 Share #19 Posted October 31, 2013 iPad 2 then iPad (third generation). Leica have adopted the same pattern. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted November 1, 2013 Share #20 Posted November 1, 2013 iPad 2 then iPad (third generation). Leica have adopted the same pattern. No the official name of the third iPad was 'the new iPad' now they refer to it as iPad third generation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.