Paulus Posted August 23, 2014 Share #161 Posted August 23, 2014 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) With respect to the posts that are disappointed with the M-P I think that it's great that Leica has offered another variant if someone wants to buy it. A few days ago there was no way to buy a M240 with a sapphire screen, without a red logo, with a frame selection lever, and with extra buffer capacity but now there is. M240's continue to work just as they did and if you're not convinced by the M-P then you don't have to buy it. The disappointment with the M-P surprises me. Pete. I think I will buy the camera. The M is a great camera and , being an early adapter, I missed the M8.2 , M9P because I already bought the M8 and M9 and the M. This time, I will buy the M-P because, if the M 240 already is a great camera, the M-P will be too. Edited August 23, 2014 by Paulus 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 23, 2014 Posted August 23, 2014 Hi Paulus, Take a look here The New LEICA M-P: Discreet, Faster, Harder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
J12 Posted August 23, 2014 Share #162 Posted August 23, 2014 I hope you'll let us know if you find a digital rangefinder camera that's technologically on a par with Leica? If not then I wish you enjoyment and satisfaction with your dSLR, mirrorless, compact, or whatever else you choose. Pete. As you know full well before writing that witty retort, there is no other game in town. But does that mean we should remain silent as customers? Customer feedback is useful even if it seems harsh. Especially for companies producing a highly priced, niche product that occupies a precarious position in the market place. Now I’m off to shoot with my dSLR, mirrorless, compact, smartphone, tablet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicapages Posted August 23, 2014 Share #163 Posted August 23, 2014 Nice technical features but, as a few others have stated before, that screw on the front of the camera instead of the usual red dot is just plain ugly. Who thought of this one??? I realize this does not in any way alter the actual photographing with it but for an €€€ camera I would have thought that looks did matter as well... As for the M-P's naming, it is all very confusing given an MP already exists. Where are the good old days of the M numbering? Cheers after a long absence. Pascal Pascal's Leica Pages Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted August 23, 2014 Share #164 Posted August 23, 2014 J12, I weary of comparisons of apples with oranges in regard to Leica's digital camera technology but I meant no ill-will. Pete. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve P Posted August 23, 2014 Share #165 Posted August 23, 2014 Not sure about your logic here, Steve. The quoted P/X offer (from Harrison's – I also received the email) is for your "good condition" M9 plus £3500. In other words, you are being given £2,150 (a lowish to fair second hand price, albeit without any of the hassle in finding a buyer) for your M9. You are still effectively paying £5,650, rather more than the list price of the M-E. Well, if you will insist on reading the smallprint!... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted August 23, 2014 Share #166 Posted August 23, 2014 Ah with that large screw maybe it could be called the 'M-frankenstein' and add the original Frankenfinder and you would have a really discreet Monster:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve P Posted August 23, 2014 Share #167 Posted August 23, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica could introduce the M-Snap. O.K, you'd have to detach the lens and peel off the cover before you could change the battery but at least it'd hide the screw! Now, where's the suggestion box around here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 23, 2014 Share #168 Posted August 23, 2014 As you know full well before writing that witty retort, there is no other game in town. But does that mean we should remain silent as customers? Customer feedback is useful even if it seems harsh. Especially for companies producing a highly priced, niche product that occupies a precarious position in the market place. Now I’m off to shoot with my dSLR, mirrorless, compact, smartphone, tablet The only thing that really helps for customers is not-buying. As that appears not to be happening complaining in forums is not really effective, I would say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J12 Posted August 23, 2014 Share #169 Posted August 23, 2014 J12, I weary of comparisons of apples with oranges in regard to Leica's digital camera technology but I meant no ill-will. Pete. None taken. But form factor and focusing mechanisms aside, the digital guts of the M series, mirrorless cameras and dSLRs are not all that different in what they do. I can see Leica are making improvements with each iteration of the digital M. I'm just choosing to wait until there's a new model that offers significant performance improvements to justify the high cost of purchase. Until then I will continue to use the cameras I have. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J12 Posted August 23, 2014 Share #170 Posted August 23, 2014 The only thing that really helps for customers is not-buying. As that appears not to be happening complaining in forums is not really effective, I would say. I don't post often. It's OK to voice an opinion once in a while I think. Whether it gets heard or not is another matter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted August 23, 2014 Share #171 Posted August 23, 2014 The only thing that really helps for customers is not-buying. As that appears not to be happening complaining in forums is not really effective, I would say. I think you're right, but the trouble is Leica (and we) will never know what we're missing since on that basis we only have a yes/no vote and no other way of saying, for example, "I would have paid an extra $500 for my M when I bought it 2 years ago had a plain MM-style body been available as an option, but I'm not now going to buy an M-P." Or something... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted August 23, 2014 Share #172 Posted August 23, 2014 Lets be honest, Leica are laughing all the way to the bank... They make em, we buy em.. no one camera will ever have everything we individually want.. The M-P is a lovely camera and no doubt "The Screw" will eventually be idolized.. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tundraline Posted August 23, 2014 Share #173 Posted August 23, 2014 Well color me disappointed, but I can’t say it wasn’t expected. A very predictable update. Save for the larger buffer. Almost textbook. I have been soldiering on with the M9 I bought new in 2010. As most people who own one know, it can produce great files at base ISO, but for a long time I’ve been wanting a second digital camera to cover the areas where the M9 falls short. Mainly for better quality image files at higher ISO, and one that also has the ability to record video. While stills is my mainstay, the ability to record short video clips and not carry an additional camera body / system is something I’d find very useful, and a crossover feature that's become more relevant in this digital age. When it was first announced, on paper the M240 looked like the answer. But after carefully evaluating the camera's performance and seeing the all shortcomings (outdated EVF and high ISO banding etc..) the M240 did not seem worth the cost of purchase as an upgrade / addition to the M9. A much smaller point but one that’s all the more important when making what some might term “an emotional purchase” like a Leica, but I’ve never liked the unbalanced look of the M240. The electronic frame lines might be better, but the camera just looks unbalanced with the removal of the frame line window. The massive red dot was hideous and the goofy giant screw is almost worse. I understand they made them larger to hep fill the empty space, but it’s just a half baked solution that destroys the balance of the M-series design. As much as I have been putting it off and hate to do it, I think I might just give in and buy a Sony A7s to pair with my M9. Yes it’s no product design masterpiece, but functionality wise it checks all the right boxes, doesn’t cost an extortionate amount, and the lenses Sony and Zeiss are rolling out look more than good enough for my needs. The money I save, I’ll put towards a real film MP. Something I'm grateful Leica still produce. I’ll check back if Leica actually manage to produce a digital camera that’s technologically on par with the rest of the digital market. Or heaven forbid, one that’s ahead of the curve. I know it's difficult for a small company to achieve that, but digital is a different game and all about the gains offered by technological innovation. With an expensive camera like a digital Leica, you should be paying for the performance advantage as much as you are anything else. Prestige image just doesn't cut it if there's no substance to back it up. Harsh criticism, but if they want me to spend close to $8,000 on another digital camera they better provide some real incentive. I'll admit I knew the announcement of this camera wouldn't be the answer I was looking for, but one can still hope! I had an M9, which I traded in on an M240. I also had a Canon 6D system with a number of Canon lenses. The M240 and Canon are of course completely different beasts, good at different things. Recently I purchased a Fuji X-T1. After several weeks of using the Fuji, I sold all of my Canon gear and switched to a Fuji-based system. Over the past two days I have been taking comparison shots with my M240 and Fuji X-T1 using a wide range of lenses (tripod-mounted, self timer, same ISO and f-stop, same focus point, etc.). Not surprisingly, the Leica uniformly produced better results (at least in daylight). What was surprising, however, was how little difference there was between most of the results produced by the two systems, sensor sizes and other differences notwithstanding. The tests have made me rethink the whole Leica thing, and whether the cost of a Leica system is worth what wind up being relatively small improvements in image quality achieved under tightly controlled test conditions. No autofocus, no image stabilization, relatively poor high ISO performance (compared to other full frame sensors, at least), no zoom lenses, etc., are all additional factors to consider. The Fuji is small, like the Leica. And like the Leica, it produces outstanding images. There is no way I would now spend the money to trade up to a new Leica M-P. I'd buy a Fuji X-T1 and 18-55 kit lens for the difference in price. I don't want to get into a flame war with other Leica users because of this post. I am just providing my observations, opinions and conclusions, and am sure many will disagree with me. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 23, 2014 Share #174 Posted August 23, 2014 As a Fuji user i'm a bit surprised at what you say about the 18-55 that i find too mediocre to be compared with any Leica, Zeiss or CV lens but those little cams are very good indeed and i guess the next M and X pro 2 will be even closer. The M will remain the only FF DRF in town though, most probably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcraf Posted August 23, 2014 Share #175 Posted August 23, 2014 Do you honestly believe that? I don't, for one. And how many M240 owners feel truly constrained by the existing buffer size anyway? I never did, in the time I had my M. But then I'm probably untypical of the Leica M user, being as I am a keen amateur with a passion for fairly measured and slow paced street shooting..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tundraline Posted August 23, 2014 Share #176 Posted August 23, 2014 As a Fuji user i'm a bit surprised at what you say about the 18-55 that i find too mediocre to be compared with any Leica, Zeiss or CV lens but those little cams are very good indeed and i guess the next M and X pro 2 will be even closer. The M will remain the only FF DRF in town though, most probably. Actually none of the comparison shots I took were with the Fuji 18-55. I compared: (a) a Fuji 56 prime to a Leica Summicron 90mm Asph (very similar results); ( a Fuji 23mm prime to a Leica 35mm FLE Summilux (again, very similar results); © a Fuji 14mm prime to a Leica Super Elmar 21mm Asph (the Fuji 14mm lens showed noticeable softness away from center compared to the Leica Super Elmar lens); and (d) Fuji 18-135mm and 55-200mm zoom lenses to a Leica 135mm Asph lens and a Leica R 180mm 3.4 APO Telyt lens (the Fuji 55-200mm lens did very well against the Leica 135 and 180mm lenses -- not much difference at all, really; the 18-135mm Fuji produced similar results). For a do-everything lens, the 18-135mm Fuji lens is pretty hard to beat. I understand Leica and Fuji are completely different systems. But the performance of the Fuji is, IMHO, very impressive. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted August 23, 2014 Share #177 Posted August 23, 2014 Actually none of the comparison shots I took were with the Fuji 18-55. I compared: (a) a Fuji 56 prime to a Leica Summicron 90mm Asph (very similar results); ( a Fuji 23mm prime to a Leica 35mm FLE Summilux (again, very similar results); © a Fuji 14mm prime to a Leica Super Elmar 21mm Asph (the Fuji 14mm lens showed noticeable softness away from center compared to the Leica Super Elmar lens); and (d) Fuji 18-135mm and 55-200mm zoom lenses to a Leica 135mm Asph lens and a Leica R 180mm 3.4 APO Telyt lens (the Fuji 55-200mm lens did very well against the Leica 135 and 180mm lenses -- not much difference at all, really; the 18-135mm Fuji produced similar results). For a do-everything lens, the 18-135mm Fuji lens is pretty hard to beat. I understand Leica and Fuji are completely different systems. But the performance of the Fuji is, IMHO, very impressive. You seem to have an excellent lens collection, both Leica and Fuji! Btw, is your Leica 135mm Asph the Leica M APO 135/3.4? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 23, 2014 Share #178 Posted August 23, 2014 I compared: (a) a Fuji 56 prime to a Leica Summicron 90mm Asph (very similar results); ( a Fuji 23mm prime to a Leica 35mm FLE Summilux (again, very similar results); © a Fuji 14mm prime to a Leica Super Elmar 21mm Asph (the Fuji 14mm lens showed noticeable softness away from center compared to the Leica Super Elmar lens); and (d) Fuji 18-135mm and 55-200mm zoom lenses to a Leica 135mm Asph lens and a Leica R 180mm 3.4 APO Telyt lens (the Fuji 55-200mm lens did very well against the Leica 135 and 180mm lenses -- not much difference at all, really; the 18-135mm Fuji produced similar results). I have no experience with these Fuji lenses so i rely on you but i did not know that any zoom lens could be compared to apo primes like Leica M 135/3.4 and R 180/3.4 so far. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted August 23, 2014 Share #179 Posted August 23, 2014 Ah with that large screw maybe it could be called the 'M-frankenstein' ... Or the M-Cyclops? Pete. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted August 23, 2014 Share #180 Posted August 23, 2014 Or the M-Cyclops? Pete. A brilliant thought! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now