Jump to content

a week with the M240 and pretty disillusioned‎


hossegor

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Why on this earth would ANYONE shoot JPG with a professional grade camera, is beyond me. The whole idea is to shoot in a non-destructive format, that retains the full data of the image taken. JPG is NOT that file type. By definition, JPG is a process of compromises, to ferret out more complex graphics algorithms, just as is GIF. It's not that JPG is a bad final product, but it is NOT the format you want to be storing your images in for future editing. DNG, or RAW is the only way to go, unless you shoot DNG and then convert to TIFF. TIFF is non-destructive. It does not use algorithms to process your graphics files, making certain assumptions, and throwing away certain data. It keeps the layers, and allows you to have ALL the processing data you that was available to your camera's imaging system.

 

I didn't mean that to be a course in what to shoot, but rather to make the major point that PLEASE don't buy a M Type 240 or any M and shoot JPG in camera. Worst mistake you could make.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

How you can make such a judgement in such a short space of time is difficult to for me understand. Perhaps if you were to provide a serious critique to justify your statement then your post would be a little more meaningful.

 

I say this not to offend but more to better understand your frustration with the M.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I cannot understand people buying a camera and selling within a month...

 

When I switched over from M8 to M9 I didn't like the files, I thought they were not as crisp and sharp as the files out of camera from the M8/M8.2.

 

Also the colours I just didn't like them, it took me a while to get to know the processing of them in Aperture (back then I used Aperture now Lightroom) after a month or so I picked up my M8.2 again since I had not sold it yet. And did a M8.2 + Elmari-M 28mm ASPH only week during Christmas 2012.

 

I still liked the files but felt they were no were near as good as the M9 files I was then already used to. 1 resolution wise but also colour rendition en some other things...

 

Now after less then a month, I already find it 'hard' to be satisfied with the M9 files. (when reprocessing M9 DNG's for example)

 

The files from the new M are BETTER, it just takes a while to get used to them in Lightroom.

 

 

 

In my eyes people who upgrade and then complain are not understanding what they are doing, they should learn a new method on how to processes instead of clinging on the old ways. It might be my young brain thinking this way, but thats just my few minutes of life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've gotten used to the differences between two camera's with practically the same sensor: the M8 and the M9. The differences in rendering haven't disappeared though.

 

Much bigger are the differences between the M and the M9. I can imagine somebody never really being able to overcome these differences.

It's silly to own a 7000 $ camera which you have to work hard at to even like, let alone fall in love with.

 

I still don't particularly like the rendering of my M. The ergonomics I really like though. And the higher iso.

 

The Monochrom is a camera I love. The M is a camera I like.

 

If you love the M9, staying with it makes perfect sense imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...It's silly to own a 7000 $ camera which you have to work hard at to even like, let alone fall in love with...

Why do you have to work hard if i may ask? Is it because you're accustomed to get pleasing OOC results with other cameras? Just curious really as i don't find significant differences between my M240 and my other digicams from this standpoint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you have to work hard if i may ask? Is it because you're accustomed to get pleasing OOC results with other cameras? Just curious really as i don't find significant differences between my M240 and my other digicams from this standpoint.

 

Well, as we have found out on these forums previously people's experiences and opinions seem to differ with regards to getting the same results with the M9 and the M.

 

I agree with you that I don't find significant differences between the M and the Nex-5 (besides obvious technical improvements) which I have previously used. The Nex was quite a good performer with a ZM lens I used at the time, so finding the M to be similar is perfectly ok.

 

But I do find differences when compared to the M8 and M9. And since I see differences I can understand it when some prefer one above the other. (Btw some people did not like the M8 or M9 when compared to other digicams, which I can understand as well, although my own preferences were different.)

 

Anyway, although it does seem kinda futile to announce to the world that you can't live with the M on the M forum without even properly trying to explain why you feel that way, I do think there is nothing wrong with having preferences and making choices based on them. The M9 is still a magnificent camera and it seeems perfectly valid to keep using the camera instead of any other precisely for that reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have all subjective preferences of course, but my question was about the hard work to do with the M240 according to you. Why such an hard work? If you have a good raw converter it will do the same good job for your M9 or your M240 doesn't it? Hence my question. Do you prefer such or such camera because it gives you pleasant OOC results and is it for this reason that you prefer the M9 for instance over the M240? Or if you're used to tweak your pics in PP, with what application(s) do you find the differences you're referring to? Just curious again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We cannot expect any product to be to the taste of every human being in the world. The OP is up front with it and he is consistent - he does not like it so he returns it.

I respect that.

It is far more acceptable than the posters who buy a camera and then come to this forum to bash Leica for their private grievances-or even do so without ever having laid hands on the camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest malland

jaap/algorve: hey, guys, not everyone can get a hold of the M240 to try it out. Some of us have to judge it on the basis of the results one sees on the web and from processing DNG files from it. And to say that one perceives a difference in color rendition from that of the M9 is not bashing the camera, but represents simply a matter of taste. I certainly think that most photographers experienced in post-processing of DNG files will be able to come to a conclusion, as the OP here has done. Nothing surprising about that. That also seems to be the case of Prosophos who is a rather good photographer in Toronto, who recently bought an M240 and seems to be going back to the M9. There seems to be a difference of taste, based on some difference in color rendition. Please don't call to bashing.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

Link to post
Share on other sites

given that the OP spent only one week with the M and does not provide any insight in his workflow we can assume he is not a full time photographer, so he spent how many hours with the M? maybe 14? how many hours in pp?

Based on that he decided to start a new thread in this forum, what does he expect will happen :rolleyes:

 

The M files are marvelous, and if I need the so called "CCD" Look (which does not exist IMHO), the Clarity/Contrast/Dynamic/Black - Settings in Lightroom can do some magic ;).

Link to post
Share on other sites

jaap/algorve: hey, guys, not everyone can get a hold of the M240 to try it out. Some of us have to judge it on the basis of the results one sees on the web and from processing DNG files from it. And to say that one perceives a difference in color rendition from that of the M9 is not bashing the camera, but represents simply a matter of taste. I certainly think that most photographers experienced in post-processing of DNG files will be able to come to a conclusion, as the OP here has done. Nothing surprising about that. That also seems to be the case of Prosophos who is a rather good photographer in Toronto, who recently bought an M240 and seems to be going back to the M9. There seems to be a difference of taste, based on some difference in color rendition. Please don't call to bashing.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Looking for Baudelaire [WIP]

 

Mitch

Agree, the M is not for everyone. For me there was a steep learning curve going from the M9 to M because I decided to try to simplify my PP by using LR for the first time instead of CS6. My CS6 workflow became very tedious for me and until I can get a better notebook for travel (where I am confident CS6 would not crash it) I am living with LR for now. Mt first posts using LR are under using R lenses on the M starting with the Florida Keys group.

 

As for the MM I find LR + SEFEX Pro is sufficient. I just do not like having to carry both battery chargers and associated batteries versus just one set when I had my M9. I have not actually sold it just in case of ?.

 

The lockup and dimming EVF are very disruptive to my shooting workflow and cause innumerable delays all while missing many captures. Not good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...