Another 'which one' query... M9/M9P or M240!

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have owned an M9-P (and still treasure an M8.2) and several weeks ago I rented an M240. No question in my mind - the M240. I'm trying to decide whether to pull the trigger or not before I head for Italy.

 

As I mentioned to you.

 

Jeff

[AnakChan]

The shutter sound, the higher ISO, the higher resolution, battery life and the range finder seemed a bit better. And also the bw conversions (done my own personal way ) were just terrific. While the WA lenses still have some problems WO, stopped down they were everything I expected.

The thing is, when I go out to shoot, I want the highest quality files I can come home with. Heading to Italy soon, the best quality is very important. I would love to take my D800, Zeiss 55 1.4 combo, but it weighs more than all my Leica gear combined! If I must I will take the M8.2, but I'd rather have more resolution. Just saying...

Agreed about the bolded. I have both the M9 and the M240 and this past weekend spent time shooting with the 240.

 

Catches with the (my?) 240, I'm still seeing firmware bugs/features :-

- 1 second to boot up is way too long. Missed a few shots

- AWB is still sub-par (problem on both 240 & M9)

- I had quite a few times the 240 telling me that it's "full" but later when I check I've used less than 3% of my SD Card - missed shots again.

- sometimes I press the shutter and it doesn't click. I hold it down and it does a second later - this was a problem I had with my AF cameras when it couldn't lock. What is this 240 doing? Missed shots yet again.

 

Aside from the AWB, I didn't have those problems on my M9.

[jaapv]

Nor have I with my M240 (except startup) I would have yours checked over by Wetzlar, if I were you.

[Jeff S]

- sometimes I press the shutter and it doesn't click. I hold it down and it does a second later

 

Is your camera in sleep mode? What setting do you have for auto power? If, for instance, you have 2 min. set and you try to press the shutter after 2 min, the camera will need time to 'wake up' and respond. In that case you could set a longer time to power off, including no power off.

 

The time to wake up is another issue, but that's already been discussed at great lengths in other threads, with no consistent conclusion.

 

Jeff

[AnakChan]

Is your camera in sleep mode? What setting do you have for auto power? If, for instance, you have 2 min. set and you try to press the shutter after 2 min, the camera will need time to 'wake up' and respond. In that case you could set a longer time to power off, including no power off.

 

The time to wake up is another issue, but that's already been discussed at great lengths in other threads, with no consistent conclusion.

 

Jeff

I don't think it's auto-power off but just be sure I'll switch that off and just rely on the manual power off (which I seem to have a habit anyway). Thanks for the tip.

[MXpro1]

For the sort of photography I mentioned which would you recommend?

 

Maybe you should just try a Fuji-glas on your XE2 rather than the options you have in mind

[rafikiphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe you should just try a Fuji-glas on your XE2 rather than the options you have in mind

 

Always an option but:

During my trip I realised how much I prefer the rangefinder compared to focus peaking on the X-E2.

[MXpro1]

@rafkiphoto:

 

I read this, but with a Fuji-glas there is no need to use (the unloved) focus peaking on his X-E2 as he will be able to simply use the AF

[rafikiphoto]

@rafkiphoto:

 

I read this, but with a Fuji-glas there is no need to use (the unloved) focus peaking on his X-E2 as he will be able to simply use the AF

 

So I am toying with ditching my Fujifilm system and going 100% Leica with an M9/M9-P or an M240.

 

Yes, I have been with the Fuji system for some time and have most of it so I am familiar with it. As I said, I am considering changing to all-Leica; I already have an MM and several Leica lenses. On here I have asked for advice on choosing from the colour options from Leica.

[sblutter]

I have M9P & M-E - guess my preference. All lenses are perfectly calibrated to both.

 

For situations a 240 may be called for, 5DM3 with good glass is a hell of a tool.

 

Shutter sound? C'mon, that's silly

 

As for ISO, Milland's thread opened the night for me. Photoshop used properly eliminated that problem - even more so in the latest CC version - amazing what you can do cleanly and enlarged to 20x24"+

 

I'm totally satisfied with the M9 - have been a pro 40+ years, started with a IIIF

 

Throw an extra chip and battery in your pocket. I've never shot 1500 RAW's in 1 day - not even close.

[rafikiphoto]

Milland's thread? I did a search but drew a blank for some reason. Could someone clarify for me please?

[oltimer]

enlightment here ;-)

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/292708-m9-colors-night-best-way-shoot.html

[mkrzyzow]

Have been using the M240 for nearly a year, the M9 for nearly four.

 

Rough rule of thumb -- I find the new lens designs like the 50 APO produce nicer results on the M9 series cameras, while the Mandler designs really shine on the M240, with that camera's richer and more saturated look.

 

Another rule of them -- for color daylight shooting in good light, I often have a subjective preference for the look of the M9 files, while for B&W and for shooting at around ISO 1600 I nearly always prefer the M240 files.

 

It goes without saying that the M240 offers a better shooting experience, and that does matter. But I also think for photography it is fair to consider the end result, i.e. the images and their subjective aesthetic qualities.

 

The upshot is I still have both. With the M9's market value now roughly comparable to a single new M lens, and no assurance forthcoming that there will be any further CCD M cameras, it is not too hard to justify.

[Ralf]

Have been using the M240 for nearly a year, the M9 for nearly four.

 

Rough rule of thumb -- I find the new lens designs like the 50 APO produce nicer results on the M9 series cameras, while the Mandler designs really shine on the M240, with that camera's richer and more saturated look.

 

Another rule of them -- for color daylight shooting in good light, I often have a subjective preference for the look of the M9 files, while for B&W and for shooting at around ISO 1600 I nearly always prefer the M240 files.

 

It goes without saying that the M240 offers a better shooting experience, and that does matter. But I also think for photography it is fair to consider the end result, i.e. the images and their subjective aesthetic qualities.

 

The upshot is I still have both. With the M9's market value now roughly comparable to a single new M lens, and no assurance forthcoming that there will be any further CCD M cameras, it is not too hard to justify.

 

Thanks for your comments. Could you please expand a little bit on what you mean by "better shooting experience"?

[tom0511]

Have been using the M240 for nearly a year, the M9 for nearly four.

 

Rough rule of thumb -- I find the new lens designs like the 50 APO produce nicer results on the M9 series cameras, while the Mandler designs really shine on the M240, with that camera's richer and more saturated look.

 

Now this is interesting. I feel the same. I have used Summiluxes (50asph and 35 FLE) a lot on my M9, but now I do like the 35Chron asph and a 50 Chron a lot on the new M.

I believe that the Chrons have a little cooler (less red, more cyan) color rendering which works very well with the new M. The other point is I don't feel the need for f1.4 that often any more and I do like the somewhat smaller size and the handling of the Summicrons.

[mkrzyzow]

Now this is interesting. I feel the same. I have used Summiluxes (50asph and 35 FLE) a lot on my M9, but now I do like the 35Chron asph and a 50 Chron a lot on the new M.

I believe that the Chrons have a little cooler (less red, more cyan) color rendering which works very well with the new M. The other point is I don't feel the need for f1.4 that often any more and I do like the somewhat smaller size and the handling of the Summicrons.

 

Agreed on the 50v5 Summicron -- it's great on the M240. I like the 35v4 on the M240 too; same for the Rigid. I actually had not considered the lens color palette aspect that you raise -- I was thinking the reason I generally favored the newer lens designs on the M9 and Mandlers on the M240 was an issue of lens rendering style, focus transitions, glass used, how each sensor shows "sharpness," the various elements adding up to "pop," how heavy or light a touch each sensor has when showing color, etc. There is something about the Mandler lenses I use that benefits from the richer, more saturated and "wet" look that the M240 excels at. But there may be something to the lens color palette point as well.

 

For me the differences are clear but subtle -- small enough that any lens can be used on either camera with great results, but large enough that I have developed clear preferences.

 

Thanks for your comments. Could you please expand a little bit on what you mean by "better shooting experience"?

 

Better rangefinder and much better shutter. Also a series of minor things that are irrelevant to me most of the time but nice to have at certain moments, e.g., splash-proofing, seemingly endless battery, larger LCD, LV to check lens calibration, etc.

 

The experience is not different in kind, but it is nicer and for me more fun.

[colonel]

Thanks for your comments. Could you please expand a little bit on what you mean by "better shooting experience"?

 

 

IMHO the M240 is faster and quieter. And although I hardly use live view, it's very handy when I do ....

On the mechanical front the M240 is much more compatible with SD cards, has not reported any sensor problems and has a slight improvement to the RF mechanism which makes it more resistant to moving out of line due to knocks or over time.

Lastly I find 3200 on the M240 equivalent to 640 on the M9 in terms of noise and DR. Note that there is a ISO push technique available on the M9 which gives an extra stop or so. This technique does not apparently work so well on the 240. All the threads on this are in this forum.

 

However the M9 second hand is half the price of the M240 second hand in the UK. So if you are shooting at f1.4 in average light or at f5.6 or above in good light, there is not much difference

 

Best rgds

I love both BTW.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Gtan]

On my recent trip to Paris I took my Monochrom and my Fujifilm X-E2. I decided to take only my Leica glass and a Metabones adapter for the X-E2. I love my MM but I need colour too and so far I have considered the rig I took with me to be the dream team.

 

During my trip I realised how much I prefer the rangefinder compared to focus peaking on the X-E2. So I am toying with ditching my Fujifilm system and going 100% Leica with an M9/M9-P or an M240. My gut tells me to get a low mileage M9-P but my head tells me to consider the terrific high ISO performance of the X-E2 which I have come to rely on. I have the big Fuji flash and the big Leica flash and with the current setup I hardly ever use either.

 

I regularly cover local events here in Spain both during the day and at night. The MM and the X-E2 have both been great. If I go 100% Leica how much better is the ISO performance of the M240 over the M9-P? For the sort of photography I mentioned which would you recommend?

 

The M 240 has a significantly superior low light capabilities compared to the M9-p although the latter has a sweeter shutter . Also, the rear display gives better images compared to that of the M9-p . I would recommend the M240 which tho slightly bigger n heavier gives better pictures especially in low light . With the fast lenses u can leave your flash at home