jamriman Posted September 27, 2014 Share #201 Posted September 27, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) My problem is that the technology gets in the way. That, and I dislike the implementation in the M(240). What's attracting me about the M60 is the wide reports (you, Peter, included) that the rangefinder is a vast improvement, along with the sensor. This is pretty much the heart of the camera. Isn't it the same sensor as the M240? Did I miss something? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 Hi jamriman, Take a look here Why would anyone want a Leica with no screen?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter H Posted September 27, 2014 Share #202 Posted September 27, 2014 Hi John, Compared to what? The M9/M-E or the M240? I thought it was identical to the latter. Regards, Mark Mark, I'm assuming the rangefinder in the M60 is the same as in the M, not the M9 which would be perverse even by these retrogressive standards wouldn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 27, 2014 Share #203 Posted September 27, 2014 Compared to the M9. I'm not comparing this camera to the M(240) at all - it's an attractive alternative to it. I'm comparing it to the M9. What I've picked from both of you is that the M(240) is a significant improvement on the M9 with its much improved viewfinder and sensor. So, why am I interested in the M60 and not the cheaper M(240)? Particularly as the latter has more tricks up its sleeve? Sure, I can put a big ugly piece of gaffer tape over the back of the camera and then pretend that the LCD, and buttons aren't there, and I can ignore the video button, and still be ahead. I could also buy another A7 ... I recently took out my Nikon and took some pictures. It took me some time to recall the menu settings, and the damn thing was absolutely huge. The next day I packed it up and sent the lot back to Greg in Christchurch, and I felt very happy about it. I then went for a walk with my SWC and had a very nice time with it (though with the irritation of a growing pile of negatives I have to develop at some stage), and it is really not that much smaller than the Nikon. That got me thinking. I really dislike the technology idea that you give people options, not because they're needed, but because you can. This is what I've hated about Sony equipment for years, and the windows operating system. And I didn't like it about the M(240). If a camera of this price and quality is to offer video, I want matching quality. If there's to be an EVF, I expect one which matches the quality of the rest of the camera, and the focus peaking needs to be as accurate as the OVF. I was very enthusiastic about these additional developments when they came out, particularly opening up the options for macro, longer telephotos, zooms and getting rid of framing and focus shift issues. It also meant uncoupled lenses could be used. But my experience with these features on the A7, and the comments from others on this forum reflected my observations. Now, I don't need to use these features, but I know I would try. That's why I commented at the time that the M(240) was confused. A kludge. Back to the gaffer tape. I don't want to have all those unnecessary things cluttering up my camera. If you remove the ones I don't like, and then dispense with the JPegs, this camera makes sense to me. I don't expect it to make sense to others, but I hope this explains why it appeals to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 27, 2014 Share #204 Posted September 27, 2014 A post of Rick's reminded me of another point. When I'm taking photos, I like to first think of the light and contrast levels (zone consideration, I guess), then I take a very simplistic view - what is the subject of my image, and where do I want to put the camera. I then think about the aperture and shutter speed I need, and that usually determines the ISO. If I get distracted from that, things tend to fall apart. I agree entirely that lens choice is an added complication. Back in the days of my F5 (stolen), I had one AF zoom, and I was either using it wide or zoomed in. I never framed using the zoom, and I tended to use my feet or move to get the subject separation I wanted (particularly from distracting backgrounds). As for lens choice, these days I tend to choose one lens, and maybe have another in my pocket - usually a 50 or 75 and 28 or 21. I like it simple. One thing bothers me about the M60, and that is the combination of no self-timer and no cable option - that is hugely limiting. I guess I won't be doing anything much on a tripod (if I take up the option). Cheers John PS - I guess what I'm saying is that if I want the electronic benefits, I'll use my T - it's cheaper and does more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted September 27, 2014 Share #205 Posted September 27, 2014 It makes the camera more of a toy, albeit a fairly pretty toy. Or maybe a vulgar one, that shouts "look at me! I don't need a screen!" I have devolved photography to ultimate simplicity. No camera. I look at the chaos surrounding everyday existence and when a compelling moment occurs I imagine a click and capture the image in my mind. Lying in bed before sleep I review the day of captures, keep the good ones, erase the rest, defrag my mind, then sleep. Printing and posting remain problematic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted September 27, 2014 Share #206 Posted September 27, 2014 John, I understand your preference for simplicity even though I can't quite understand why an unused screen is such a distraction that it actually interferes with your photography. But we're all different so I readily take your word that it does. But what I find harder to understand is that you'd be prepared to pay a very hefty premium for what is actually a significantly less capable camera , even though it is more desirable to you. But there we are. If you're happy to fund the development of my next camera in this way, I'm more than happy too. Thank you. :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 28, 2014 Share #207 Posted September 28, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) One step missing in your logic, Peter. While I've pre-ordered, I'm not sure I'll go through with it ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted September 28, 2014 Share #208 Posted September 28, 2014 One thing bothers me about the M60, and that is the combination of no self-timer and no cable option - that is hugely limiting. I didn't notice that and agree that it is limiting (certainly for my type of M usage). The internals of the top plate are presumably the same as a regular M240 – if you ask, maybe Leica will change the non-threaded release for a standard threaded version? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted September 28, 2014 Share #209 Posted September 28, 2014 what I find harder to understand is that you'd be prepared to pay a very hefty premium for what is actually a significantly less capable camera , even though it is more desirable to you. I think you've answered your own question, Peter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 28, 2014 Share #210 Posted September 28, 2014 I didn't notice that and agree that it is limiting (certainly for my type of M usage). The internals of the top plate are presumably the same as a regular M240 – if you ask, maybe Leica will change the non-threaded release for a standard threaded version? Yes, I've asked. Not sure I'll get a response, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 28, 2014 Share #211 Posted September 28, 2014 I would recommend reading of the Reid reviews review of the M60 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted September 28, 2014 Share #212 Posted September 28, 2014 What makes his opinions better than anyone else who has seen the camera and doesn't charge to read it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 28, 2014 Share #213 Posted September 28, 2014 What makes his opinions better than anyone else who has seen the camera and doesn't charge to read it? 1. It's just a review 2. He has actually used it. You haven't and neither have the other reviewers 3. IMHO he is one of the best reviewers If you don't want to read so what, that's your choice. It's true he does charge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted September 28, 2014 Share #214 Posted September 28, 2014 Something else just occurred to me: it has no lugs so many users would put a case around it , in which case(!) you might as well put a case on a standard M that covers the distracting screen and get the best of both worlds whilst saving a few thousands of your preferred currency. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voigt Posted September 28, 2014 Share #215 Posted September 28, 2014 On the water, the majority prefers the speed and modern comforts of a powerboat. Others, however, much prefer the traditional art of sailing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted September 28, 2014 Share #216 Posted September 28, 2014 On the water, the majority prefers the speed and modern comforts of a powerboat. Others, however, much prefer the traditional art of sailing. Yes, but preferably in a sailing boat with a sail. I think your analogy might have worked better if you were comparing film with digital, rather than partially disabled digital with digital, although even then, I'm not convinced. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 28, 2014 Share #217 Posted September 28, 2014 Something else just occurred to me: it has no lugs so many users would put a case around it , in which case(!) you might as well put a case on a standard M that covers the distracting screen and get the best of both worlds whilst saving a few thousands of your preferred currency. Peter, I had not spotted that. My older LTM Leicas (1C Standard and Model II) are lug-free and it is a proverbial pain in the posterior. As you say, it really means you have to have a case on all the time, which I would prefer not to have. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voigt Posted September 28, 2014 Share #218 Posted September 28, 2014 Yes, but preferably in a sailing boat with a sail. I think your analogy might have worked better if you were comparing film with digital, rather than partially disabled digital with digital, although even then, I'm not convinced. I understand, but today's modern sailboat usually has an auxiliary motor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 28, 2014 Share #219 Posted September 28, 2014 It comes with a rather elegant black leather case with a strap attached. I don't use cases that much, preferring the look of my cameras naked. I do use straps, but I'm not rigid about it. I have the much criticised case on my T, but only for protection when needed. I also tend to carry a bag, which would address the problem. I never carry a camera around my neck. I've been taking pictures since I was a child, and for some inexplicable reason, I have always put smaller cameras in my pocket, or if that's not feasible, slung over my right shoulder and hidden against me side, behind my arm. I know this is a bit odd, but I have always been self conscious about my cameras. When I first got my M9, I felt crushed when someone recognised it (on the ferry). This may be the overwhelming decisive issue for me - this camera is just a bit bling. But then, I don't actually believe that Leica will make this camera, let alone stainless steel versions of the camera and lens. Hmm, what to do ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted September 29, 2014 Share #220 Posted September 29, 2014 I didn't notice that and agree that it is limiting (certainly for my type of M usage). The internals of the top plate are presumably the same as a regular M240 – if you ask, maybe Leica will change the non-threaded release for a standard threaded version? Apparently, Leica will fit a normal threaded shutter release for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.