Size of the M240 ... why do people complain?

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

 

I am also impressed by your courageous decision to open your expensive new camera in front of your boss. Bang goes any chance of that pay rise needed to pay for it!

 

 

 

 

 

Lol! Exactly my first thought

[Jeff S]

Leica don't seem to be aiming at making the camera any smaller, it hasn't even stood still, the M240 is another slight increment up on the M9. So it is a lack of ambition people are complaining about….

 

I'd say that adding a significantly bigger battery, yet maintaining almost identical thickness to the M9 around the middle, took some attention.

 

As an aside (nothing to do with your comment), I find it amusing when some of the same folks who yearn for film M thickness now put their digital Ms in fancy cases, which basically negates any difference.

 

Jeff

[genefama]

Leica was skating to where the puck was when it added video. Does anyone use it as a video camera? I haven't shot two seconds of video with mine. Yet isn't this why it's big and heavy, to accommodate the massive handy-cam battery? And isn't this why the EVF sucks, to accommodate video refresh rates? I don't know the answers, just asking. If so, they could improve it a lot just by losing a functionality nobody wants in an M camera and focusing on their strong suit: making simple, small, optically-superior still cameras best suited to certain types of photography and photographers.

[Jeff S]

...to accommodate the massive handy-cam battery?

 

I almost always use the M as a traditional RF, without EVF or other accessories, and that bigger battery is a big plus for me….and for lots of others who wanted the same.

 

Jeff

[Naper]

The Leica M has gotten a little larger and heaver over the years but so have I and I am fine with that.

[250swb]

I'd say that adding a significantly bigger battery, yet maintaining almost identical thickness to the M9 around the middle, took some attention.

 

I agree, as soon as they designed into the camera the wonderful and super useful video mode they then needed a bigger battery. As it was the M9 battery wasn't that bad, and although Live View will add an extra legitimate strain on the battery for a photographers camera again other manufacturers are making their cameras smaller, and with even more features than Leica such as running even more power hungry things like AF.

 

Steve

[thrid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Every time I think the 240 is too chunky I pick up my D600 and it immediately puts everything in to perspective.

 

Film M bodies are a whole different story, but those are elegant tools from a more civilized age...

:-)

 

 

Looking at what Sony does I'm pretty certain that it is possible to make a slimmer M, but I doubt that Leica has the R&D money to pull that off.

[Jeff S]

I agree, as soon as they designed into the camera the wonderful and super useful video mode they then needed a bigger battery. As it was the M9 battery wasn't that bad, and although Live View will add an extra legitimate strain on the battery for a photographers camera again other manufacturers are making their cameras smaller, and with even more features than Leica such as running even more power hungry things like AF.

 

And others feel (felt) differently (post 24)…many here had longer battery life on their wish list…without regard to video or LV. And Leica did it without making the camera bigger.

 

I never use video, rarely use LV (helps, though, with focus calibration checks), and appreciate the longer battery life. So far, Leica hasn't let 'feature creep' destroy my RF experience; in fact, there are numerous things I like better about the M as a traditional RF. I even like the somewhat larger digital M size compared to my past film Ms. Different strokes.

 

I'm pleased for now that Leica doesn't follow the pack. But that could change. We'll just have to see. M with touch screen, etc. wouldn't be my thing. If so, I wouldn't mind seeing two breeds of M….one scaled back and one not….but I don't think that's in the cards.

 

Jeff

[microview]

There doesn't seem to be an easy, strong, and natural way to hold it.

 

I was convinced the rangefinder mechanism had stopped working today, then I realised my right index finger-tip was over the second window!

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Microview,

 

Why not try:

 

Left hand for focussing & supporting, under the lens & camera body,

 

Ball of the tip of the right index finger on the shutter release. With right thumb in back of camera. Other fingers & right hand more or less holding the side & front of the camera body.

 

In these days of equality, even with an ambidexterous (eye) range/viewfinder:

 

A Leica "M" is decidedly a right handed camera.

 

Altho some people use it otherwise quite sucessfully.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[Herr Barnack]

...I picked up a big Nikon recently in a camera shop, and realized that the M 240, at its worst, is way, way, better to carry, unless one can afford servants.

My M240 with a lens is way smaller and easier to carry than any gripped SLR I have ever worked with. And then there's the lenses - M lenses are tiny comapred to the tree stumps that go on Canon & Nikon DSLRs. As far as the weight of the M240, again - compared to a gripped DSLR, it is well within reason. I like the weight of the camera; YMMV though.

 

People bitched about the small 2.5" LCD of the M9. Leica fixed that in the M240.

People bitched about the battery capacity of the M9. Leica fixed that in the M240.

Those two upgrades take up room. They won't fit in an M9 sized package. I'd rather have these two upgrades than an M9 sized camera with the small screen and a smaller, anemic battery.

 

I have the basic M grip (#14496) on my M. True, it is bigger than the grip that fits the M film cameras - and I'm glad of that. The handgrip that fits my M4-P (#14405) is too small for my hands; the M grip #14496 fits my hands perfectly (not everyone has my gnarled and scarred hands, though - and they should consider that a blessing).

 

My take on all the moaning about the M240 is that those who are fortunate enough to own a copy of this magnificent little machine might want to consider counting their blessings. That, and get out and use it rather than sitting around and moaning about how it is 0.000001% short of their personal idea of perfect.

 

JMHO.

[hamey]

Personally I do like the size of the M240, no complaints from me.

 

Remember the M240 was designed to couple up to much larger lenses besides M lenses.

 

So strength and balance must be taken into account, Leica's engineers got it right.

 

 

Ken.

[250swb]

So, that's agreed then, if Leica could make the camera smaller none of you would want one,..... yeah, the M240 would be 'upgraded' as fast as you can say 'black dot'.

 

Steve

[jaapv]

My M240 with a lens is way smaller and easier to carry than any gripped SLR I have ever worked with. And then there's the lenses - M lenses are tiny comapred to the tree stumps that go on Canon & Nikon DSLRs. As far as the weight of the M240, again - compared to a gripped DSLR, it is well within reason. I like the weight of the camera; YMMV though.

 

People bitched about the small 2.5" LCD of the M9. Leica fixed that in the M240.

People bitched about the battery capacity of the M9. Leica fixed that in the M240.

Those two upgrades take up room. They won't fit in an M9 sized package. I'd rather have these two upgrades than an M9 sized camera with the small screen and a smaller, anemic battery.

 

I have the basic M grip (#14496) on my M. True, it is bigger than the grip that fits the M film cameras - and I'm glad of that. The handgrip that fits my M4-P (#14405) is too small for my hands; the M grip #14496 fits my hands perfectly (not everyone has my gnarled and scarred hands, though - and they should consider that a blessing).

 

My take on all the moaning about the M240 is that those who are fortunate enough to own a copy of this magnificent little machine might want to consider counting their blessings. That, and get out and use it rather than sitting around and moaning about how it is 0.000001% short of their personal idea of perfect.

 

JMHO.

Ummm... They do fit in an M9 sized package. it is called the M Typ 240. Just put the two side by side.

[jonoslack]

I agree, as soon as they designed into the camera the wonderful and super useful video mode they then needed a bigger battery. As it was the M9 battery wasn't that bad, and although Live View will add an extra legitimate strain on the battery for a photographers camera again other manufacturers are making their cameras smaller, and with even more features than Leica such as running even more power hungry things like AF.

 

Steve

 

Actually Steve, the M9 battery was a real problem - all the power issues SD card issues etc. etc. related to the fact that the battery didn't really push enough power. It simply wouldn't have managed with the M240 processor (forget video and live view).

 

I'm amused by people who complain about the size of the M and then add stuff to it (half case, grip, EVF, soft release etc.) Mine stays firmly naked. On the other hand I'd love to see an M6 classic sized M.

 

all the best

[Keith Novak]

Congratulations on your acquisition Keith! I completely agree with your comments on its size.

I am also impressed by your courageous decision to open your expensive new camera in front of your boss. Bang goes any chance of that pay rise needed to pay for it!

 

 

Luckily the boss is really into my photography and has me lined up to take some pics of the latest addition to his family ... his six month old daughter Alice.

 

I took a set of their little boy Billy about a year ago with the Merrill and they were over the moon. They expect even better from the M240 ... I'm under pressure! LOL

[Herr Barnack]

Ummm... They do fit in an M9 sized package. it is called the M Typ 240. Just put the two side by side.

 

I don't have an M9, so I did some research to ge to the bottom of this. There are some miniscule differences in the dimensions, but the differences are not of any practical consequence.

 

M240: 139x80x42 millimeters

M9: 140x80x38 millimeters

M6: 138x77x38 millimeters

 

These measurements make the hand wringing over the "outsized" M240 even more incomprehensible. The M240 is 0.15748 inches thicker than the M9 and M6; that doesn't exactly inspire claims along the lines of, "Good God! You might as well drag around a Mamiya 7II!!"

 

Perhaps now this ugly business can at long last be laid to rest (but I doubt it).

[BerndReini]

And isn't this why the EVF sucks, to accommodate video refresh rates?

 

Actually, fast refresh rates help an EVF. If anything,the refresh rate is way too slow. Olympus doubled the refresh rate and it improves the viewfinder lag (seeing what you are actually shooting as it is happening.)

[Jeff S]

So, that's agreed then, if Leica could make the camera smaller none of you would want one,..... yeah, the M240 would be 'upgraded' as fast as you can say 'black dot'.

 

Lighter, sure; smaller wouldn't influence me a bit.

 

Removing the dot would reduce weight and improve appearance. That usually goes for about a thousand bucks.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[algrove]

Actually, fast refresh rates help an EVF. If anything,the refresh rate is way too slow. Olympus doubled the refresh rate and it improves the viewfinder lag (seeing what you are actually shooting as it is happening.)

 

Just for my further information, which Olympus are you referring to and do you use this one too?