Jump to content

Would you upgrade to M(360) for $9000


dant

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If Leica announced a new 36 mp M in the works for $9000 USD. And most other features were the same as M(240. Would you upgrade?

 

If you would upgrade, do you have an upper limit for the mp size that you would stop upgrading at? Or will you pretty much be moving up in mp size as sensors do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I'm still on my M9-Ps, skipped the M240 after testing.

 

No, would not upgrade to an M360.

 

Wait for the Sony 54 MP sensor with new design to show up on the market in 2015/16.

Or a 70 MP M still with Bayer pattern and without any flaws.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having only just bought an M240, and still very much feeling my way around with it, I doubt it. This camera far exceeds both my photographic ability and my photographic budget Growing into it will be a long and enjoyable journey. :)

 

Lenses? Now that is a horse of a different color. The need for a 35mm that is more versatile than my old begoggled f2.8 Summaron is rapidly becoming apparent. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tanks

Same here. Between the Monochrom and the new M, my camera needs are met. Now, I do find a need for a wider angle lens than a 35mm now and then. But, I restrain myself ;).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I skipped the 240 because I see no compelling enough reason to upgrade with the IQ (the reason I usually upgrade) for what I shoot. I chose to direct that money to lenses for the M9 instead. I would buy a 36MP 360, yes. In answer to your second question I am happy with my 60MP system and I have no real need for larger size than that a this stage.

 

I think with the rumoured new Medium Format camera, if that is around 50±MP then we are more likely see a 40±MP M. But not until then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same here. Between the Monochrom and the new M, my camera needs are met. Now, I do find a need for a wider angle lens than a 35mm now and then. But, I restrain myself ;).

 

Restraint is greatly over rated. I have the little 28 mm Elmarit, and I adore it. It is not even expensive. Well, not by Leica standards, anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest redge

I don't understand the question.

 

Why stop at 36MP?

 

I want a digital camera that will give me the same resolution as 8x10 at a price that I can afford. Why wouldn't I?

 

Meanwhile, the M 240 is fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest jvansmit

After an M8, M9, MM and M240, I don't see the point of again spending a ridiculous amount of money on an outdated concept, and finding out yet again that the latest M still remains behind the curve.

 

I've already upgraded from the M240....to a couple of Fuji X-E2's.

 

Photo quality is approximately equal, low light performance is better, start-up time is in a different league, they are lighter, and I can drop them without having a panic attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 months ago I bought a Leica rangefinder, a Leica MP. With it's fabulous lenses, I considered it to be the finest film photography camera made. I plan to use it almost exclusively for 'street' photography, and I have no reluctance at all to proclaim Leica the king of film photography. Again. For my purpose only two lenses should be sufficient (a 28 mm Elmarit; and the 50mm Summicron). Highly rated glass. A film image in all that implies.

 

For digital photography I have retained my Canon system, a 5D2 with a lovely gaggle of L lenses, zoom and prime, to enable me to reach from 16mm to 400mm. In the end, the 5D2, although an older system in the digital world, has significant performance advantages over Leica's M240, not the least of which is sensor cleaning, much better high ISO capabilities, and 'b' extended exposure performance. Wildlife photography is in my reach, for Sports photography, there's nothing better. I could choose to add perspective control, adding professional level architectural photography, and other lenses for macro-photography, Canon has some terrific lenses for those as well. The 5D3 body is better yet (but not so I'm tempted to upgrade my 5D2). There will be a Mark IV, and a V. Maybe at Mark V I'll look to upgrade.

 

Leica has fabulous M lenses, of which I have two. The Canon L lenses are excellent too though, and their camera sensors I suspect a generation, or two, ahead of Leicas. The core M240 design is a forever limitation to matching the scope of applications of the Canon system.

 

If/When I upgrade my Canon DSLR it's not going to cost me $9,000, or likely even $5,000. It will not be a Leica.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest redge
2 months ago I bought a Leica rangefinder, a Leica MP. With it's fabulous lenses, I considered it to by the finest film photography camera made. I plan to use it almost exclusively for 'street' photography, and I have no reluctance at all to proclaim Leica the king of film photography. Again. For my purpose only two lenses should be sufficient (a 28 mm Elmarit; and the 50mm Summicron). Highly rated glass. A film image in all that implies.

 

For digital photography I have retained my Canon system, a 5D2 with a lovely gaggle of L lenses, zoom and prime, to enable me to reach from 16mm to 400mm. In the end, the 5D2, although an older system in the digital world, has significant performance advantages over Leica's M240, not the least of which is sensor cleaning, much better high ISO capabilities, and 'b' extended exposure performance. Wildlife photography is in my reach, for Sports photography, there's nothing better. I could choose to add perspective control, adding professional level architectural photography, and other lenses for macro-photography, Canon has some terrific lenses for those as well. The 5D3 body is better yet (but not so I'm tempted to upgrade my 5D2). There will be a Mark IV, and a V. Maybe at Mark V I'll look to upgrade.

 

Leica has fabulous M lenses, of which I have two. The Canon L lenses are excellent too though, and their camera sensors I suspect a generation, or two, ahead of Leicas. The core M240 design is a forever limitation to matching the scope of applications of the Canon system.

 

If/When I upgrade my Canon DSLR it's not going to cost me $9,000, or likely even $5,000. It will not be a Leica.

 

Yes, but the question posed in the thread is whether one would upgrade from the M 240 to a 36MP successor.

 

Am I right that you don't own an M 240, nor an M9, nor an M8, nor indeed any Leica digital camera, in the first place?

 

If so, it would appear that your point is that you prefer Canon digital to Leica digital without ever having owned the latter.

 

Good for you, but on the face of it, your point doesn't seem to have anything to do with the discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but the question posed in the thread is whether one would upgrade from the M 240 to a 36MP successor.

 

Am I right that you don't own an M 240, or an M9, or an M8, or indeed any Leica digital camera, in the first place?

 

If so, it would appear that your point is that you prefer Canon digital to Leica digital without ever having owned the latter.

 

Good for you, but on the face of it, your point doesn't seem to have anything to do with the discussion.

 

It is on point. I would not spend $9000 to 'upgrade' from one limited camera (the M240 falls short of the 5D2 across a number of significant dimensions) to another limited camera.

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...