Jeff S Posted June 13, 2014 Share #21 Posted June 13, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Refreshingly candid. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 13, 2014 Posted June 13, 2014 Hi Jeff S, Take a look here I'm joining the M240 ranks!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jdsheepdog Posted June 13, 2014 Share #22 Posted June 13, 2014 I use a strap with a hidden titanium wire, that avoids the quick cur and run thieves. Which strap is that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 14, 2014 Share #23 Posted June 14, 2014 What (perceived) M240 advantages prompted your decision? Jeff perceived? LV larger buffer improved RF better lcd ability to use evf ability to use macro lenses lower noise at high iso quieter shutter better battery improved dr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted June 14, 2014 Author Share #24 Posted June 14, 2014 I think it is a matter of perception whether or not one thinks of those as advantages. Personally I have no quarrel with the M9 in any of those regards. That is not to say I won't come to appreciate some or all of them after a while. OTOH the added heft (4 oz) and slight increase in girth, as well as the substantial size and cost increase of the batteries, plus the loss of the frameline preview, at this point I perceive as disadvantages. But that is not to say I won't come to find them unimportant after a while. perceived? LV larger buffer improved RF better lcd ability to use evf ability to use macro lenses lower noise at high iso quieter shutter better battery improved dr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 14, 2014 Share #25 Posted June 14, 2014 matter of perception? I don't understand...these are real improvements. I had the M9 for 2+ years before the M240 arrived...and I wouldn't go back to the M9 if you paid me. Larger buffer is real. M9 constantly stopped working while writing, this doesn't happen with M Larger screen/higher res is real and obvious Improved RF...just wait till your arrives. EVF...well? Lower noise at high ISO...perceived? no real Ability to shoot with R lenses or Macros...priceless Quieter shutter...perceived? no better battery...um, do the math improved dr...obvious. come back a week after yours arrives and tell me what you think. Frameline preview...really. You honestly use this to determine which lens to use? weight and girth...ha...tell me that you really feel this after the camera arrives. If you can feel the difference in "girth" you are a jedi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 14, 2014 Share #26 Posted June 14, 2014 perceived? Yes, one person's advantage is another's waste of time, or added bulk, or extra money, or is philosophically abhorrent, or whatever. And until one actually owns and uses the camera for some period, perception may not become reality. I could add my own advantages, as I see them, to your list, as I've already done many times; after all, I bought the M because of them. But I realize that many see it differently. Just do a search, and read hundreds of such comments. I'm not the one that needs to be convinced about anything….nor would I waste my time trying to convince others. There are plenty of other threads where this has been rehashed ad nauseam. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 14, 2014 Share #27 Posted June 14, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) But I realize that many see it differently. Just do a search, and read hundreds of such comments. Jeff Comments from M9 owners that upgraded to M and aren't pleased? Or M9 owners that justify not upgrading? I personally don't know any M owners that regret upgrading from the M9. For me the buffer alone was worth the upgrade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 14, 2014 Share #28 Posted June 14, 2014 I own an M and never owned an M9 (*). Your universe of audiences is much too small. Remember that even if something is factual, doesn't make it an advantage to everyone. Of course those who already spent lots on an M had perceived, or pre-conceived, advantages in mind. Do a search. This is an old debate…on every digital M iteration. The conceptual disagreement is often the same; only the specifics have changed. (*) I saw too many advantages of the M8.2 over the M9…for my needs and preferences. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 14, 2014 Share #29 Posted June 14, 2014 Do a search. This is an old debate…on every digital M iteration. The conceptual disagreement is often the same; only the specifics have changed. Jeff a debate by M9 owners that upgraded to M and were dissapointed? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted June 14, 2014 Share #30 Posted June 14, 2014 perceived? LV larger buffer improved RF better lcd ability to use evf ability to use macro lenses lower noise at high iso quieter shutter better battery improved dr This is a list of technical improvements. Some might consider them advantages. I have the M as well as the M9. The M is the more refined tool in many and to me important respects. But at lower isos its files do not show the level of "bite" and micro contrast the ones from the M9 do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 14, 2014 Share #31 Posted June 14, 2014 ok, I guess I was thrown by the word "perceived" ...the differences are real whether you perceive them or not. Id love to hear back from bocaburger after he has had the camera for a month with his honest assessment...I know I for one wouldn't go back to the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted June 14, 2014 Share #32 Posted June 14, 2014 99%+ of the time any given photo at any given point does not benefit from being taken in RAW. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted June 14, 2014 Share #33 Posted June 14, 2014 Im with Bocaburger. 99%+ of the time any given photo at any given point does not benefit from being taken in RAW. I agree with you there, considering the numbers of photo's that are taken. Vast numbers wouldn't benefit from RAW, just look at Facebook and all the crap on there. But this is a photo forum and I always thought photographers always wanted to do just that little bit better, otherwise why bother? Simply having the RAW potential in the photography is better than chucking away future possibilities for it by limiting an image to JPEG, even if differences or improvements may not be used immediately. It costs nothing, its there in the camera, it may only be a minor improvement, but people upgrade camera's for less benefit (M9>M9-P syndrome). If you want to throw fake statistic's around I think it is more to do with 99% of people who only use JPEG being a bit scared of making a judgement rather than post processing. They blame time constraints, they blame filling up hard drives, they blame everything except themselves for using JPEG. The answer for anybody who fears RAW is first to learn to edit their pictures, then instead of 500 'keepers' to share (like the longest slideshow in the world) they find they have only one or two that can go through to the processing stage. That is far less of a chore. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted June 14, 2014 Share #34 Posted June 14, 2014 ok, I guess I was thrown by the word "perceived" ...the differences are real whether you perceive them or not. Id love to hear back from bocaburger after he has had the camera for a month with his honest assessment...I know I for one wouldn't go back to the M9. Agreed. Also, I'm still, repeatedly and reliably, finding the M's rangefinder easier and quicker to focus accurately than with my M9. Not foolproof, but the best focussing system I've ever used. This is nothing to do with calibration, as both are spot-on. I just find that the movement is more fluent, (perhaps just smoother), and the contrast in the window greater as well as brighter overall, so that despite many years of rangefinder use, the M is by far the most pleasant and fastest M-camera, digital or film, I've used. And that's before I consider the other small but sometimes quite important improvements in handling. There are differences in the sensor also, but more often than not the M has the advantage there too. The M9 is still a very good camera, but I 'm delighted with the greater refinement, utility and output of the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdsheepdog Posted June 14, 2014 Share #35 Posted June 14, 2014 ...........snip .....despite many years of rangefinder use, the M is by far the most pleasant and fastest M-camera, digital or film, I've used........snip. I wish I could agree completely with you, and I have no argument with your comments about the M, I love mine, too. Now that I have parted with my MP, and the M8 before that, I am down to the M, and an M3. The viewfinder on the M3 is clearer, and bigger, and brighter, as is the rangefinder window. I appreciate the limits of the camera, 50, 90, and 135 mm lenses without external viewfinders or goggles, and leaving the whole film / digital issue to one side, at the end of the day, I still find it the easiest and most pleasant, to use your word, camera I have used. The M is brilliant, and capable in so many ways, but for ease of use, and pleasure of use, I still believe that the M3 is the best camera that has ever been made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted June 14, 2014 Share #36 Posted June 14, 2014 Whilst I've used an M3 often enough a long time ago, I've never owned one and had sort of forgotten about it. Anyway, the "which is the best ever camera" is not terribly fruitful as we know. I was really making a brief comparison of the M with the M9 and got a bit carried away! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted June 14, 2014 Share #37 Posted June 14, 2014 Just on the subject of the R-M adapter, I've got the Leica one, and I'm very pleased with it. It's beautifully made, has its own (removable) tripod mount for heavy lenses, and the six bit coding is reliably recognised to bring up the R lens selection menu. My view was that, having spent all that money on the camera, there was little point in compromising to save such a relatively small amount. Of ocurse, you've then also got to factor in an EVF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 14, 2014 Share #38 Posted June 14, 2014 ...the differences are real whether you perceive them or not. The issue you excerpted from my post was about perceived advantages, not perceived differences. Big difference, which you seem to keep missing. Again, whether factual or not, or whether one recognizes any difference, does not mean that one views it as an advantage or even relevant. I simply asked the OP about his perceived advantages before purchase (they're perceived until he has actual experience). In other words, what advantages were felt to be important….to him…enough so to prompt the purchase. His answer was "none"….he said it was about GAS. Get it? Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted June 14, 2014 Author Share #39 Posted June 14, 2014 Just to clarify, I did not buy it sight-unseen based on internet hearsay, nor after merely holding it in a store. I have actually used an M240, via the Leica-on-loan program at the LHSA meeting. I had my M9 on me at the same time and compared them closely. If I harbored even the slightest suspicion that I might be disappointed with it over the M9, I would not have bought it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted June 15, 2014 Share #40 Posted June 15, 2014 Bocaburger, You talked about your M9 biting the dust but I did not read about what this was. Was there an issue with your M9? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.