indergaard Posted February 21, 2015 Share #41 Posted February 21, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Personally I find the M240 sensor to be great at lower ISO's, and up to 1250-1600. From ISO 2000 and up though, there is visible banding and pattern noise, which I really wish wasn't there. I much prefer the look of images from the M240 sensor at 200 ISO than a Sony A7S or A7R at 100 ISO. The Sony files look clinically clean, almost plasticky clean, kinda fake looking clean. The M240 files still have some of that organic mojo going on at base ISO. Everytime my fiance uses my M240 she comments on how the results she gets from it feels like shooting with slide film. She's printed some images huge, and were completely amazed at how great the prints look. She's mostly used a Hasselblad 501cm with a Zeiss 80mm f/2.8 CFE T* lens and Portra 160 and HP5+ 400 for many years, as well as 5DII with a couple of L lenses and tilt-shift lenses for architecture work. She's been studying studio art and have access to professional large format printers, imacon scanners, drum scanners, and such, and have had for many many years, so I trust her judgements more than I do my own since I don't have that experience. She absolutely did not like the files from the Sony A7S compared to the M240, and the files from the X100S and T were pretty much not usable she thought. Then again, her needs are vastly different than mine, as she prints all of her work rather big, and bases her conclusions on print quality, and never bothers to judge quality on a computer monitor. She prefers analog still to this date, and only mostly shoot analog MF film her self. Mostly for the look, but also for the process of making something physical rather than bits and bytes. She processes and scans her own films. I guess my point is, based on her being one of the most critical people I know in regards to digital photography, and when she actually likes the results from a digital camera - printed big, on professional equipment and for exhibition and museum purposes - that has to mean something. It does for me anyway. So that tells me that the sensor in the M240 can't be that bad, especially at low to moderate ISO's. My only wish for the M sensor is to have a higher workable upper ISO limit. I don't mind grain and noise, but I do mind banding and digital artifacts. Get rid of that, increase the DR and make the sensor usable up to 6400-12800 ISO - I don't want noiseless, I just don't want digital artifacts or banding - and it's a winner. Sure the Sony sensors are great for shadow recovery. But I generally don't require to lift the shadows by 5 stops. That would mean that I was horrible at exposure evaluation, and I should rather consider quitting photography completely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 21, 2015 Posted February 21, 2015 Hi indergaard, Take a look here New direction for Leica rangefinder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wolfloid Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share #42 Posted February 21, 2015 Because the topic has been 'done to death' and yet it just can't be left alone. Use of the (clearly little used) search function will show that such threads simply go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on....... Why can't people just accept that the M rangefinder is a 'tried and tested' design. By all means discuss a new camera system, but not a modified M rangefinder - for all the reasons which everyone has/will state. I notice you failed to quote the first part of what I said which was to question why you would need to follow up the post. I ask again, if this post is distasteful to you, why are you following it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted February 21, 2015 Share #43 Posted February 21, 2015 I do realise that simplicity and minimalism are very desirable features, and that is, believe it or not, what attracts me to M cameras. However, I also believe that well-integrated technology can sometimes be integrated into a minimalist design without killing the original idea (the iPhone is a good example).. I am sorry but could you please explain? In what way can you compare an Iphone with a Leica M? The iphone lying next to me is IMHO just a hull with some buttons, screen, battery and a very smart computer with a sim card. Where do I put the rangfinder in this story? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalHeMan Posted February 21, 2015 Share #44 Posted February 21, 2015 I used Fuji and Leica for this project. Fuji for night work, Leica for day. nsfw De Wallen - Amsterdam's Red Light District Out of interest, and sorry for going off topic, but are you really able to sell a book of 54 such pictures for $1800? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbon_dragon Posted March 2, 2015 Share #45 Posted March 2, 2015 I have an M9 (and an M8) not a M240 and a Nex7. I find the sensor of the M9 compares very well against the Nex, I don't think it has anything to apologize for in that department. It's a phenomenal engineering achievement to get full frame in such a small camera and they did it before Sony did. The Nex 7's EVF may be dated now, but it's very good, but I like the optical viewfinder better even though I would like to be able to review my pictures in the viewfinder the way I do with the Sony. Not sure if there is a way to have both without something clipped to the top of the camera. I'm pretty satisfied with the M9. I just hope it holds up mechanically/electronically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted March 2, 2015 Share #46 Posted March 2, 2015 If there is one thing that would kill off the M line it would be to orphan the mechanical lenses. It seems to me that automatic photographers are having the most difficulty with mechanical lenses. But who am I to post? It remains difficult for me to understand why Leica includes more aperture settings than just a couple of stops down from full (open) potential... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted March 3, 2015 Share #47 Posted March 3, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) It remains difficult for me to understand why Leica includes more aperture settings than just a couple of stops down from full (open) potential... Because although it may be hard to believe, some of us don't belong to the every-image-must-have-zero-depth-of-field users group, or we may actually use our lenses in bright daylight . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted March 3, 2015 Share #48 Posted March 3, 2015 I know it is an anathema to many who love Leica, but I think that to attract new users Leica has to invest in some very specific new technology. Leicas are very, very expensive for fairly low tech camera bodies, so let's see some more value for our money. Improvements in the M over the M9 have been worthwhile and that is the direction that Leica needs to explore more professionally. The quieter shutter, better battery life, fewer bugs and failures with memory cards, faster chip, better rear screen and even an improved rangefinder are all laudable and very welcome, but there needs to be more to keep the camera relevant as time goes on. So what would I like to see? First off, keep the form factor the same - same basic size and shape, with the excellent rangefinder. Sensor development - lower noise levels, greater DR, better colour, WB etc. will happen inevitably anyway, so little need to worry there. That out of the way, I think they need to improve the EVF side of things so that it functions well in itself but also as a useful adjunct to the optical rangefinder (to accurately check and adjust rangefinder calibration, which should be simply user adjustable). The way to go seems to be in the Fuji direction of a hybrid viewfinder, so that at the flick of an external switch there is an immediate switch from optical to electronic viewfinder and back, without the need for a cumbersome add on. Obviously the built in EVF would have to be cutting edge, and not some cheap economy version as have been offered so far. So the pixel count and refreshment rates of the EVF would have to be superb, and the lag and blackout would have to be non-existent, before it could even be considered. That being said, the ergonomic integration would also have to be flawless, so that only the information that is desired in the EVF or as overlays in the OVF can be fully (meaning no limits) customised by the user. There also needs to be a one-external-button-press available for magnification of the EVF. The other additions I would like to see are a flip up EVF and alternative framing ratios - 4x3, 6x7 and square. Better and more sophisticated coding for all focal lengths to allow more sophisticated and accurate EXIF information, including for the frequently used 40mm and for lenses over 135mm. Obviously, all this would have to set new standards of bug free, robust reliability. Any thoughts? I personally still maintain that Leica should do what it does very well and that is produce a very high quality rangefinder camera to work with current and older M lenses. If there is a debate it is how much of the technology available should Leica adopt and integrate. I can only answer for my self, for me keeping it simple. I'd like a 8k shutter, I'd like the new M to be the same dimensions as a film MP (At least shrink a little please), I'd like some mechanical way of altering the viewfinder to accommodate 24,21,18 and better show 75,90. I'd prefer another CCD sensor (I won't go there as the debate is seemingly hot again at present) with a 1-2 stop improvement and a greater dynamic range. The EVF, better screen, bigger screen, and focus assistance I have zero interest in. So I don't want a new direction at all, I want the M to improve in terms of image quality not functionality. My M9 is perfect (nearly) in respect of functionality. The Leica M is the 911 of sports cars, care is needed to develop a gem Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2015 Share #49 Posted March 4, 2015 Self-cleaning sensor. Better weather sealing. No EVF needed. No flip screen need. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted March 4, 2015 Share #50 Posted March 4, 2015 Because although it may be hard to believe, some of us don't belong to the every-image-must-have-zero-depth-of-field users group, or we may actually use our lenses in bright daylight . And zero focus depth is a fad that will pass, I hope If you want your pics to look like nothing is in focus, bless you and keep on doing it. In 20 years you will look at the picks and say why did I do that. Same with swing lenses to get top & bottom out of focus or left & right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark_studio66foto Posted March 5, 2015 Share #51 Posted March 5, 2015 After reading most of the posts I've come to the conclusion that I would like to see the M update backwards by leaning more toward the M9. I choose not to get the M240 based on the fact I don't want Live View, don't need video and I like the CCD. Actually, if they came out with a camera that had no monitor on it and a shutter advance lever I would buy it. I prefer no electronics or virtual viewfinder in my Leica M. Leica still makes film cameras for a reason, I say bring the digital M camera back as close to film as possible and you will have a huge success with that camera. If they accessorize it outlandishly to compete with Fuji, then the M will slip down the slope into oblivion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted March 5, 2015 Share #52 Posted March 5, 2015 A shutter advance lever on a digital camera? Please help me understand why... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timde Posted March 5, 2015 Share #53 Posted March 5, 2015 A shutter advance lever on a digital camera? Please help me understand why... Hand crank generates power for the next shot, no need for a battery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblutter Posted March 5, 2015 Share #54 Posted March 5, 2015 I'm very happy with M9P - assume I will be for years. Have an brand new ME in wait - with battery out. Print up to 60" clean For the rare times I need vid or LV, 5DM3 is quite a machine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted March 5, 2015 Share #55 Posted March 5, 2015 Self-cleaning sensor.Better weather sealing. No EVF needed. No flip screen need. Better weather sealing??? What's wrong with the M 240 weather sealing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 5, 2015 Share #56 Posted March 5, 2015 Hand crank generates power for the next shot, no need for a battery.Have you ever considered how many turns of the crank one needs? And the size of the generator? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.