Rick Posted February 5, 2014 Share #1 Posted February 5, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... about a 21mm WA comparison with the M240. The little a7r is a cool camera but definitely the first owners of this camera are the beta testers for Sony until the rest of the lenses come out from Sony and the next version is released. I also see Sean is selling his M9 after this review. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 Hi Rick, Take a look here Sean Reid has another article.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
algrove Posted February 6, 2014 Share #2 Posted February 6, 2014 I found it disappointing that he picked a discontinued Leica lens to compare with the other lenses instead of using the 21/3.4 unless it would not work for him on the a7R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest redge Posted February 6, 2014 Share #3 Posted February 6, 2014 Here's what I don't understand. Why are some people on this forum so interested (judging from the length of the threads, maybe even obsessed) with how the M 240 compares to other cameras? If you own one, and it's working for you, who cares? Seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted February 6, 2014 Share #4 Posted February 6, 2014 Here's what I don't understand. Why are some people on this forum so interested (judging from the length of the threads, maybe even obsessed) with how the M 240 compares to other cameras? If you own one, and it's working for you, who cares? Seriously. Seriously, I sure don't! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted February 6, 2014 Share #5 Posted February 6, 2014 Here's what I don't understand. Why are some people on this forum so interested (judging from the length of the threads, maybe even obsessed) with how the M 240 compares to other cameras? If you own one, and it's working for you, who cares? Seriously. I can only speak for myself, but I would like to have a full frame sensor, backup/2nd body camera to supplement my M240. Instead of just purchasing another M or M9 (an expensive proposition) I would prefer an EVIL camera that could compliment and enhance my primary camera, either with higher resolution, improved high ISO performance, or some other feature or enhancement that makes focusing faster and more accurate. However such a camera would need to work with my full range of M lenses, including wide and ultra wides, with little or no corner smearing or magenta edge. I had hoped that the Sony A7r would fit the bill, but I have been less than impressed with lenses wider than 35mm. I think that Leica will someday produce a full frame EVIL M mount camera. Well, I hope……..someday…….. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted February 6, 2014 Share #6 Posted February 6, 2014 Here's what I don't understand. Why are some people on this forum so interested (judging from the length of the threads, maybe even obsessed) with how the M 240 compares to other cameras? If you own one, and it's working for you, who cares? Seriously. For me, and I think for a lot of us, it is more a frame of reference. I have an M, I'm pleased with it and I know it's strengths and weaknesses. I don't have an A7/r and am not really in the market for one. But, it is an interesting camera and one I might consider at some point as a backup to the M or as a replacement for my Nex6. So, I'm interested in how it compares to my M simply to gauge from that M reference point. I have a big investment in M lenses and if I can find a new way to use them then I might be interested. Again, how they perform on an A7 ( or any other camera) as compared to my baseline standard - the M - is interesting to me. So, yeah, I'm interested - although not obsessed... But this is why. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith (M) Posted February 6, 2014 Share #7 Posted February 6, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) During years of Canon ownership, I used to read all the test reports of new DSLR's and still kept an eye on developments when I switched to a Leica M9. Late last year after three years with the M9, I part-exed it for the M240 and now find I have no interest in reading tests of new releases which previously might have tempted me as potential back-up solutions, such as those from Sony, Olympus and Fuji. More time for concentrating on mastering what I already have! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted February 6, 2014 Share #8 Posted February 6, 2014 During years of Canon ownership, I used to read all the test reports of new DSLR's and still kept an eye on developments when I switched to a Leica M9. Late last year after three years with the M9, I part-exed it for the M240 and now find I have no interest in reading tests of new releases which previously might have tempted me as potential back-up solutions, such as those from Sony, Olympus and Fuji. More time for concentrating on mastering what I already have! the Leica world is quite different and insulates you from the rest of the GAS occasionally one should be aware of major breakthroughts, of with the A7 series is one, but I assume if you want AF with face detect you wouldn't be here in the first place ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sisoje Posted February 6, 2014 Share #9 Posted February 6, 2014 If only people would actually use (more) cameras they already have rather then "looking for" (obsessing after) the newest and greatest, we would have far better images and more interesting stories featured in Photo Forum of this site. Instead, we have a lot of lousy images (blurry, decomposed, wrong processing and exposure). I will stop at technical aspects of the work displayed, not even go in to artistic... Why do we have to have a new digital camera almost every season? Why is M9 not good enough any more? Or even M8? Did we all outgrown possibilities of few years old "technology"? The cycle repeats every 6 months. With every "game changing" (hate that phrase) digital camera... Rant end! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voigt Posted February 6, 2014 Share #10 Posted February 6, 2014 My interest in the Sony product was only to see if technology had surpassed the more traditional Leica concept. I'm extremely satisfied with the M. For me, it's the perfect camera. It does everything I need it to do very well… better than I once thought possible. But can it be better still and if it can be better, would it then allow for a significant, important, improvement in my work or work flow? The fact that the Sony doesn't do well with wider lenses is a definite turn-off. But the fact that many of the planned future lenses for it will have to be bulbous-sized is even a greater turn-off. Where is the advantage of the smaller body when the lenses add so much extra bulk? In time, I'm sure, technology will find a way to resolve these problems. My interest in the Sony was only to find out whether that time had come. Obviously it hasn't. The small rangefinder with its wonderful little lenses is still the camera I'll choose today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tanks Posted February 6, 2014 Share #11 Posted February 6, 2014 Here's what I don't understand.Why are some people on this forum so interested (judging from the length of the threads, maybe even obsessed) with how the M 240 compares to other cameras? If you own one, and it's working for you, who cares? Seriously. Probably to be comfortable with their purchase decision, though one should make the comparisons before purchase not after. I knew for what I want to use it for, the live view was worthless before the purchase (not having the ability to pan the focal plane made it useless with macro tilt and shift lenses), and was disappointed that other cameras had it. However, I still bought my M for its other features. Since then I have not looked at another camera review as I am no longer in the market. Once one gets married it is no longer practical to go out on dates with other women . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londonmember Posted February 6, 2014 Share #12 Posted February 6, 2014 I flirted a bit with the OMD E-M1. I can see the advantages of a high quality EVF, and focussing with the one in the E-M1 is almost as easy as a RF, and you get live feedback on exposure and white balance changes. Its almost too easy. Set the camera on auto exposure and dial in the correction till it looks right. Problem is as always the quality of the lenses and (in the OMD's case not being a FF sensor). A high quality f1.4 35mm lens is essential to me, and the best you can get with the OMD is equivalent of f4 and the Sony f2.8. I've now got an M to accompany my Monochrom. I suppose if you're going to hold an investment in kit with two M bodies and 24,35,50 Summilux and 75 Summicron, its worth knowing that you couldn't get the same results with a system costing much less. You can't.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcraf Posted February 6, 2014 Share #13 Posted February 6, 2014 With my M and MM, after many years of flitting 'twixt other brands and Leica, I feel I have now reached my photographic Nirvana. Perhaps it's my age (into my early 50s), or the fact that I love what my Leicas, and my Leica glass can do. Whilst I view other brands with idle curiosity these days, and I am still interested in what goes on in the world of kit, I have reached a point where I am happy, supremely so, with what I've got. IMHO, we are into the law of diminishing returns in terms of IQ and optics so I'll be happy to shoot with my Leicas until they are taken from my cold dead hands. And actually, I don't really give a fig about the Sony A7...or A8....or A14 compared to my M240. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted February 6, 2014 Share #14 Posted February 6, 2014 ... about a 21mm WA comparison with the M240. The little a7r is a cool camera but definitely the first owners of this camera are the beta testers for Sony until the rest of the lenses come out from Sony and the next version is released. I also see Sean is selling his M9 after this review. So if he's selling his M9, what is he using in its place, an a7? We shouldn't really be surprised if the Sony disappoints with Leica wide glass; it's the same issue which Leica has been struggling with all along and unless you abandon your Leica glass for much larger wide-angle designs, it's always going to be an issue. Sony solve the issues with new lenses, we must be grateful to Leica they do not do the same. One other consequence of the a7 is that Leica can no longer claim to make the smallest full frame interchangeable lens camera; Sony have always been masters of miniaturisation and I'm sure they laughed at the packing density when they took an M240 apart. If anyone could achieve the often wished for M6/7 size for a Digital M, it would be Sony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted February 6, 2014 Share #15 Posted February 6, 2014 ... about a 21mm WA comparison with the M240. The little a7r is a cool camera but definitely the first owners of this camera are the beta testers for Sony until the rest of the lenses come out from Sony and the next version is released. I also see Sean is selling his M9 after this review. Well I own the A7 and I certainly don't feel like a beta tester and in fact as much I as I appreciate my leica's the reality is that the M9 in some ways was more of a beta tester when compared to the M (240) than the A7 compared to….. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voigt Posted February 6, 2014 Share #16 Posted February 6, 2014 [quote=marknorton;2623876 One other consequence of the a7 is that Leica can no longer claim to make the smallest full frame interchangeable lens camera… No, but Leica can now claim that it led the way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted February 6, 2014 Share #17 Posted February 6, 2014 do not do the same. One other consequence of the a7 is that Leica can no longer claim to make the smallest full frame interchangeable lens camera; Sony have always been masters of miniaturisation and I'm sure they laughed at the packing density when they took an M240 apart. If anyone could achieve the often wished for M6/7 size for a Digital M, it would be Sony. Interesting point. When I used to go to a well known Leica repair person to calibrate my lenses with my M9, some of the employees would joke about how the inside of my M9 looked like a piece of electronics from the '80s. That would be awesome if Leica can advance to the point where digital Ms are the thickness of film Ms, although needing a LCD behind the sensor is a big part of the problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted February 6, 2014 Share #18 Posted February 6, 2014 [quote name=marknorton;2623876One other consequence of the a7 is that Leica can no longer claim to make the smallest full frame interchangeable lens camera… No' date=' but Leica can now claim that it led the way.[/quote] .... and I'm sure someone will eventually make one the size of a cigarette packet ..... but I actually find the A7 is about at the limit where shrinkage becomes a problem rather than an asset. Too many fiddly tiny buttons and cramped handling ..... I have a X-Vario and it comes in at just about the optimum size and weight for ease of use and an LCD big enough to be useful..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 6, 2014 Share #19 Posted February 6, 2014 Boy, this comparison issue sure gets a lot of band-width on this forum. Why would anyone consider something other than a Leica? Well, we are all different, thank goodness. I look at the Sony A7r as a way to use "some" of my M lenses to shoot a "few" color images when carrying my M Monochrome for rangefinder work. The M21/1.4 ASPH is fine, but most my stuff is with a 50mm anyway. Tucks into the corner of the MM bag quite well. Kinda fun shooting a M50/0.95 at ISO 6400 using an EVF and focus mag. Black cat in a coal mine at midnight : -) I rarely shot color with any M film camera, so the MM was an immediate sale for me. Done, no need to look further. Not all that motivated to drop $7,000 on a camera to shoot a couple hundred color shots per year. That'd cost me over $5 a shot over the digital lifespan of a M240. The A7r, will get more use as an alt/backup to my Sony DSLR in many cases, so it makes more sense. If you primarily shoot color, and prefer a rangefinder with a full compliment of optics, there is only Leica. So, why obsess? - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustafasoleiman Posted February 6, 2014 Share #20 Posted February 6, 2014 Here's what I don't understand. Why are some people on this forum so interested (judging from the length of the threads, maybe even obsessed) with how the M 240 compares to other cameras? If you own one, and it's working for you, who cares? Seriously. Here's what I don't understand. Why are some people on this forum so interested (judging from the length of the threads, maybe even obsessed) with why others compare cameras? If you don't, and it's working for you, who cares? Seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.