M240 vs MP (a la carte)

[Likaleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That is Ostrich Leg. Nothing like the leather Leica uses. Rather unappealing to my eye.

This Stunning Leica M9 Wraps Chrome In Ostrich Leather (Yes, Ostrich)

 

Looks reptilian

[Archiver]

This is so very true, when I first bought my M it was much more than I've ever spent on camera gear. In fact it was worth nearly more than my entire collection but I had lots of fun using the rangefinder and I don't regret the purchase. Its devalued a lot since the first release but for me its been worth every penny.

 

+1 for this.

 

The M9 was the most I've ever spent on a single piece of gear. AUD$9300 in early 2010. When I placed my order I felt my guts dropping out of my backside. Finally taking delivery was an exercise in squealing excitement, and the files ... wow. I struggled with metering for a few weeks, as I was used to DSLR matrix metering, and the need to manually focus was another learning curve, but it is still my favourite camera after four years.

[Herr Barnack]

I am to be in a fortunate enough position where I am able to own both the MP and the M240. Although the MP is not an a la carte.

 

The ergonomics of the camera is what keeps me in touch with leica. I like how it makes me shoot; and it allows me to switch seamlessly from film to digital without much issues.

 

WHICH SHOULD YOU CHOOSE?

I recommend basing your choice on your temperament and reason for taking / making photographs and images.

I pick up the M240 because an image needs to be made. Typically for a friend or some kind of event. Something where the image made is the main priority. Or there is insufficient time for me to process and scan the images. Or i need a play button to check my exposure. Any situtation where I need an image, and there is no room for me not have an image. (torn film, Kink in the reel, uneven development, forgetting to close the dark bag, etc)

 

I pick up the MP because i enjoy the process of making an image. From the first moment were I pre-visualize the image i'm going to make. The assurance from the the feedback of the shutter mechanism cocking. to the rewind of the film, loading it into the darkbag. mixing the chemicals. Seeing my image for the very first time as it comes to live. To see what I was able to produce with my two hands, ten fingers and two thumbs, and that little piece of brain matter between my ears.

 

What do you need a camera for?

I was not in a position to pay cash for my M240 so after much thought I traded in my MP to help pay for it. I still have an M4-P so I have the best of both film and digital worlds.

 

My experience has been that there is much common ground shared by the M240 and the film M cameras I have owned and used. They are quite similar in dimensions and in "feel," for lack of a better term. There are obvious differences between the film and digital M cameras, but they have far more in common in terms of tactile feel and operation (electronics notwithstanding) than one might imagine without having one of each in the hand.

 

The M240 shutter is to my ear nintey percent (perhaps more than 90%) as quiet as the MP and M4-P shutters. The M240 makes a different shutter sound; not so much a louder sound, but different. This was very much a concern before I purchased my M240 and I can say conclusively that it has not disappointed in this regard.

 

Before getting the M240, I was very much comitted to film photography. I decided to trade for the M240 because of economics: It made no sense to spend $3000 USD for film and chemistry in 2014 (and more in coming years) when the M240 could be had for $7000 USD. The conveniences of digital work have been a revelation, to say the least. The M240 is my first and only digital camera.

 

Film photography now seems cumbersome in many ways when compared to digital. I can see that travel photography will be much more quick and easy with the M240, although I will also take the M4-P and a smaller quantity of film as a backup.

 

I will still shoot Tri-X for smaller projects that I specifically want B&W prints as my presentation. I think in terms of M4-P and Tri-X for B&W, M240 for color.

 

The bottom line is that I would not send back my M240 to get my MP back, even if I could.

[IkarusJohn]

I'd just like to point out my advice to Stryker to by an M3 and an M9 - and low and behold, the Leica anniversary M-A and Monchrom gets released (with sone very nice lenses).

 

So, there you have it. Easily matched at a fraction of the price - M3 and M9, with change for some lenses!

[MarkP]

I go back and forth on this all the time, even writing this is difficult because I continually change my mind and contradict myself. The only real answer I can arrive at, is to buy both. Consider the M3 and M9-P route John suggested. Two bodies is always very useful anyway. There are somethings I want film and others I want digital.

 

If you have the option and the freedom of waiting for development, travelling to labs, or even better, developing and printing your own, don't mind the ongoing cost of film and crazy prices of Drum scans (you don't necessarily need to go that far, you can buy a Hasselblad/Immacon at pretty decent prices these days but they are going to be limited to old and dated hardware for future use and limited repair) then sometimes I will say the best answer, is Film. For the love of the look, for what it represents, I can't get past film, it's timeless and beautiful.

 

Sometimes I will tell you it's digital, but sometimes I think Digital sucks, you use it if you like the look of it, have to use it to keep commercial clients happy, or if you have, like most, become accustomed to it's clutches. I think it's colour is average, I personally hate the blown highlights that in some cases are unavoidable, it does not compare to the reach of film in that regard. It takes you years to learn to adjust it properly and when you finally get there you realise that the colour when adjusted, is false because that's what computers do.

 

In my mind it is very hard to exceed the beauty of film, hand developed black and white or of corse lab developed colour and enlarger prints, preferably done my yourself.

 

There's times I like digital, but often, these days, I don't like it all. Sometimes I like the look, sometimes I don't. There's times I hate it. I hate that we've lost film, so many incredible stocks, Polaroid, Kodachrome, some of the Agfa films. An MP is a camera for life. Who knows if it will be one you can use for your life if film keeps disappearing that way it is.

 

But then there's times I love digital and what it offers. Sometimes I love the look. There's times I feel film is stupid, over laborious and pointless/sentimental. I love the freedom of shooting unlimitedly, but that is a double edged sword too.

 

I love film for it's colour and contrast and the way there are no real defined edges, like a great painting. Film is a tangible and almost indelible record of the ephemeral and fleeting existence of life and moment. I can't get past the fact that digital is just numbers in nothing but a hard drive.

 

Ah, the contradiction that life is. In my mind I think we could do with a whole other format that is in-between. A new instantaneous format that is unencumbered by processes and labs but something real and tangible like film (i'm still mourning polaroid) that has has keeps what I love of film and what is great a bout digital. I want my cake, to eat I suppose. Both have their equal place in my life for different reasons and at this point I'm left to decide when I want to use either and I'm OK with that. It's about selecting what you want to use for the right reasons. Hard at first but it gets easier as you go. It's the restrictions we place on our selves that cause the issues in the first place so in this case I think both is best.

 

Your opening line said it all

[Paul J]

I go back and forth on this all the time, even writing this is difficult because I continually change my mind and contradict myself. The only real answer I can arrive at, is to buy both. Consider the M3 and M9-P route John suggested. Two bodies is always very useful anyway. There are somethings I want film and others I want digital. If you want a quick answer you could probably stop here!

 

If you have the option and the freedom of waiting for development, travelling to labs, or even better, developing and printing your own, don't mind the ongoing cost of film and crazy prices of Drum scans (you don't necessarily need to go that far, you can buy a Hasselblad/Immacon at pretty decent prices these days but they are going to be limited to old and dated hardware for future use and limited repair) then sometimes I will say the best answer, is Film. For the love of the look, for what it represents, I can't get past film, it's timeless and beautiful and it's a base physical and tangible object.

 

Sometimes I will tell you it's digital, but sometimes I think Digital sucks, you use it if you like the look of it, have to use it to keep commercial clients happy, or if you have, like most, become accustomed to it's clutches. I think it's colour is average, I personally hate the blown highlights that in some cases are unavoidable, it does not compare to the reach of film in that regard. It takes you years to learn to adjust it properly and when you finally get there you realise that the colour when adjusted, is false because that's what computers do.

 

In my mind it is very hard to exceed the beauty of film, hand developed black and white or of corse lab developed colour and enlarger prints, preferably done my yourself.

 

There's times I like digital, but often, these days, I don't like it all. Sometimes I like the look, sometimes I don't. There's times I hate it. I hate that we've lost film, so many incredible stocks, Polaroid, Kodachrome, some of the Agfa films. An MP is a camera for life. Who knows if it will be one you can use for your life if film keeps disappearing that way it is.

 

But then there's times I love digital and what it offers. Sometimes I love the look. There's times I feel film is stupid, over laborious and pointless/sentimental. I love the freedom of shooting unlimitedly, but that is a double edged sword too ad sometimes it's something I think is a negative. We humans are in the midst of technological change and can't fully relate to it.

 

I love film for it's colour and contrast and the way there are no real defined edges, like a great painting. Film is a tangible and almost indelible record of the ephemeral and fleeting existence of life and moment. I can't get past the fact that digital is just numbers in nothing but a hard drive.

 

Ah, the contradiction that life is. In my mind I think we could do with a whole other format that is in-between. A new instantaneous format that is unencumbered by processes and labs but something real and tangible like film (i'm still mourning polaroid) that has has keeps what I love of film and what is great a bout digital. I want my cake, to eat I suppose. Both have their equal place in my life for different reasons and at this point I'm left to decide when I want to use either and I'm OK with that. It's about selecting what you want to use for the right reasons. Hard at first but it gets easier as you go. It's the restrictions we place on our selves that cause the issues in the first place so in this case I think both is best.

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Your opening line said it all

 

lol, as you can see I deleted and reposted while you replied for the same reason. I added a couple things and changed a couple more. lol.

 

I don't believe we humans are quite evolved to handle this sort of choice without considering, yearning, wondering. It's the green grass effect. Sometimes it is actually greener and sometimes it isn't. You never know until you try and you probably will never arrive at a conclusion because both are limited but valid in their own ways.

 

Personally I just think it's best to take down the fence and live in both fields. The uber green slick sic-fi digital one and the provincial beautiful tuscan film one.

[MarkP]

The Monochrom (and to some M240) has clearly convinced me that I will not be going back to B&W film any time soon. I had long considered, and now decided against, an M4-P or M6 or M7 or MP, each with their obvious advantages and disadvantages. No M3 because of the limited VF framelines.

 

So the purchase of a film Leica for me would only be a romantic & nostalgic gesture, and one to satisfy a gear fetish as they really are beautiful mechanical works of art - maybe for my desk at work, maybe not, maybe, maybe not........

[Paul J]

I can't see myself ever replacing B+W with a Monochrom. It's that highlight ceiling and abrupt cut off that ruins it for me and is one of the incredibly beautiful characteristics of black and white film that no amount of post processing can change.

[IkarusJohn]

The M3 can be had for small change (by Leica standards). With a Summitar on it, it's compact and very purist. Frame lines? Well, the viewfinder is so bright (it's a thing of beauty), I just love leaving the 50 on it. I can add a viewfinder if I want to use it wider, but guessing the frame lines doesn't bother me (I know that sounds odd).

 

Yes, it's an indulgence, but it's a pleasant one if your background is film ...

[jdsheepdog]

The M3 can be had for small change (by Leica standards). With a Summitar on it, it's compact and very purist. Frame lines? Well, the viewfinder is so bright (it's a thing of beauty), I just love leaving the 50 on it. I can add a viewfinder if I want to use it wider, but guessing the frame lines doesn't bother me (I know that sounds odd).

 

Yes, it's an indulgence, but it's a pleasant one if your background is film ...

 

I am with you on this. I had an MP (sold to help pay for the M240,) and frankly the M3 is a better camera, IMO. Simply because of the viewfinder. It is that much better, clearer, and brighter, and simply better. The meter in the MP was a convenience, but that's all it is.

 

Since my M3 is a bit scratched and worn, it is only of financial value to me, in that I don't have to buy another one.