Quality is good, but speed is more important.

[douglas fry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The only time I would need such fast start up times would be shooting street photography, but then when I'm actually shooting this genre, my camera is at my eye anyway, so start up times etc are irrelevant. Yes my old canon 1DX's are faster in nearly every respect but I never used them for street work because they were too heavy and too conspicuous. 

 

Henri Cartier-Bressons well known image 'Derriere La Gare St Lazare, arguably the photograph of that century was shot by HCB pushing his camera through a gap in the fence and pressing the shutter when the guy leapt, in an M240 sense that would be a 'camera that is already on' . Incidentally it was one of only two of his photographs that was cropped.

 

Quote: “There was a plank fence around some repairs behind the Gare Saint Lazare train station. I happened to be peeking through a gap in the fence with my camera at the moment the man jumped. The space between the planks was not entirely wide enough for my lens, which is the reason why the picture is cut off on the left,” he explained in his usual laconic manner."

 

So once the M is on and I have had enough coffee, then I cannot detect any difference between its shooting time and the 1DX

[kkonkkrete]

If you can measure it with a watch ... it's too slow

[Bill Livingston]

If you can measure it with a watch ... it's too slow

 

Apart from it being a smart line, can you elaborate?

 

i would like to know:

 

1. what time you get from 'on' to 'ready' on your digital M?
2. can you give one example of when switch on lag caused you to miss a photograph you would have got otherwise
3. where was the camera positioned at that time (hanging from a neck strap/in your bag/in your hand ready to fire, but switched off).
4. if it was last, in your hand ready to take a photo but switched off, can you explain why you would do that?

 

You see, I am fed up with glib comments designed to look smart but that add absolutely nothing to the discussion at hand. There seems to be a lot of it on here from the same people, time and time again. We have had to endure a lengthy thread already on this very subject... again with no practical reasons why this would ever be an issue. 

 

How about those see this as a genuine issue explain clearly the circumstances under which they find themselves losing a moment due to the camera and not down to their own lack of awareness and preparation.

[douglas fry]

If this 'lag' was an issue you surely would have noticed it in the shop when trying it out, if you are on this forum then presumably you already have an M and keeping it, otherwise sell it on eBay..

 

There are so many variables it makes timing this bit and that bit virtually pointless. Basically you either like the camera, in which case keep it, or sell it. 

[LocalHero1953]

I'm baffled that so many people here, when finding there is an issue that is not a problem for them but is for others, feel obliged to criticise the practice of those others, sometimes offensively, rather than accept that not everyone takes photographs in the same way and of the same subject.

 

I am not a professional, and I suspect (without evidence) that most members here are not. Many of us are therefore likely to be taking photographs in amateur circumstances: of family and friends, while walking with family and friends, of "people" scenarios, in crowds of people where there is a lot going on, while we are multitasking (e.g. having a meal in a street cafe and taking photos). In those circumstances, of course, I accept that many of you are not distracted and maintain the concentration needed to have the camera ready at all times, with your eye and brain in perfect co-ordination and aware of the decisive moment about to happen. You know exactly when a person is going to put on a particular expression or choose to adopt a particular pose. You don't forget to turn your camera on because a rugrat needs its nose wiped, or you keep it on and permanently awake with one or two spare batteries to hand. Good for you. I admire and respect you (if you exist). But please have sympathy for us poor mortals who don't work to this standard.

 

And finally......I like the M240, which is why I bought it (and the M9 before it). I wouldn't have another camera (of those that are out there now). But that does not make it incapable of improvement as far as my photography practice is concerned. YMMV (and clearly does).

[flyalf]

Thank you for all feedback,

 

Back to starting point: "I also agree on the observation made by Thorstein as seen from pros "Quality is good, but speed is more important.l"".

 

I am not a pro, so I can live with the M being slow. I am a happy hobbyamatheurist. When doing street or other peopIe photography I carry my M (justed to be a M9) or X1 in hand, normally turned off, and switch in on when something happens. The M is far to slow for me. I am using the SDFormatter without it making significant improvement. Since Im not a pro I dont loose income but only oportunities for good photoes. I am fine with accepting that others have diefferent needs and state those. I also assume that others can accept my needs and be civil about this.

 

If I were to make a living out of my photography and calculate the RoI of camera I would be reluctant to choose M. This is what Thorstein points out, this has allreday happened in the pro market.

But even though I am not a pro I belive in the right to state what I belive is critical userneeds that can be improved without being bashed for that.

 

So good for you all if you feel that the digital Ms are fast enough, what about the statement from Thorstein and userneeds from others that agree with him? The reasom that Leica lost some of these users was exactly because of the attitude that some answers state in this thread; dont listen to users.

[kkonkkrete]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Apart from it being a smart line, can you elaborate?

 

i would like to know:

 

1. what time you get from 'on' to 'ready' on your digital M?
2. can you give one example of when switch on lag caused you to miss a photograph you would have got otherwise
3. where was the camera positioned at that time (hanging from a neck strap/in your bag/in your hand ready to fire, but switched off).
4. if it was last, in your hand ready to take a photo but switched off, can you explain why you would do that?

 

You see, I am fed up with glib comments designed to look smart but that add absolutely nothing to the discussion at hand. There seems to be a lot of it on here from the same people, time and time again. We have had to endure a lengthy thread already on this very subject... again with no practical reasons why this would ever be an issue. 

 

How about those see this as a genuine issue explain clearly the circumstances under which they find themselves losing a moment due to the camera and not down to their own lack of awareness and preparation.

 

Bill, I'm still new here, don't post so much and didn't know about the lengthy other thread that you had to endure.  If you look through my post history, there's a fair amount of trash, but I don't think it's all glib comments.

 

In this case, I apologise, it was glib.  But at the same time, true.  IMO something as simple as powering on/waking up should be in the range below one second ... in other words in the range where it can't be measured with a watch.

 

I don't actually own a Leica, but I have shot several thousand images over several months with a borrowed M9 (family stuff, street photography, travel, reportage style stuff).  There were many times when the camera had fallen asleep (unbeknown to me), I raised it to my eye, focused, waited for the perfect moment, and then missed the shot because I forgot to wake up the camera before hitting the shutter. That short (~1sec) lag between hitting the shutter and actually getting the shot meant I missed the decisive moment, which I had been waiting for on the scale of many seconds.  That doesn't happen with a purely mechanical analogue camera, and is a drawback of most (all?) digital cameras.  User error perhaps: I should get used to half tapping the shutter button as I raise the camera to my eye.  Fair enough. But if the camera woke up in the range of 1/100th second, it wouldn't be an issue.

 

With other cameras, slowness in other areas has definitely caused me to miss shots.  I pretty much gave up on taking anything spontaneous / moving with the DP2 Merrill because the autofocus, although stunningly precise, was just too slow.  Man, that lens gives the 50 APO a run for its money it is so damn clear and sharp (on an APS-C sized sensor!).  But just too damn slow to focus.  Even with posed portraits, the glow often goes out of the subject's eye if it takes 2 seconds between hitting the shutter and getting the shot.  So, yes, speed does sometimes matter.

 

For me the ideal camera slows you down methodologically (no more spray & pray, some 'cost' to each shot so that you are mindful of each image you create), but doesn't slow you down in a way that makes you miss stuff.

 

Maybe I should just shoot film.

[Adam]

If you make a living from photography then you should be able to afford a spare battery, there is no lag when you keep the camera on.

 

I am not even remotely a pro, but I would think that there are other more important factors keeping pro photographers who do standard assignments like weddings etc. from using the M. Cost effectiveness is one. Reliability, no Lock ups. ISO. Big choice of zoom lens. AF...

 

Maybe I am wrong, but if I had to make a living from photography just the cost of a spare battery would not stop me from using a $7000 camera.

[Belle123]

Bill, I'm still new here, don't post so much and didn't know about the lengthy other thread that you had to endure.  If you look through my post history, there's a fair amount of trash, but I don't think it's all glib comments.

 

In this case, I apologise, it was glib.  But at the same time, true.  IMO something as simple as powering on/waking up should be in the range below one second ... in other words in the range where it can't be measured with a watch.

 

I don't actually own a Leica, but I have shot several thousand images over several months with a borrowed M9 (family stuff, street photography, travel, reportage style stuff).  There were many times when the camera had fallen asleep (unbeknown to me), I raised it to my eye, focused, waited for the perfect moment, and then missed the shot because I forgot to wake up the camera before hitting the shutter. That short (~1sec) lag between hitting the shutter and actually getting the shot meant I missed the decisive moment, which I had been waiting for on the scale of many seconds.  That doesn't happen with a purely mechanical analogue camera, and is a drawback of most (all?) digital cameras.  User error perhaps: I should get used to half tapping the shutter button as I raise the camera to my eye.  Fair enough. But if the camera woke up in the range of 1/100th second, it wouldn't be an issue.

 

With other cameras, slowness in other areas has definitely caused me to miss shots.  I pretty much gave up on taking anything spontaneous / moving with the DP2 Merrill because the autofocus, although stunningly precise, was just too slow.  Man, that lens gives the 50 APO a run for its money it is so damn clear and sharp (on an APS-C sized sensor!).  But just too damn slow to focus.  Even with posed portraits, the glow often goes out of the subject's eye if it takes 2 seconds between hitting the shutter and getting the shot.  So, yes, speed does sometimes matter.

 

For me the ideal camera slows you down methodologically (no more spray & pray, some 'cost' to each shot so that you are mindful of each image you create), but doesn't slow you down in a way that makes you miss stuff.

 

Maybe I should just shoot film.

Think the key words here I have underlined above in your response is this is a digital camera problem and not a Leica problem.  Even my point and shoot cameras take time to turn on.  I would suggest keeping your camera on and disabling the sleep function.  You might eat up batteries, but then you won't necessarily miss shots except for the time it takes to focus.  But as far as speed over quality, the whole reason most serious photographers buy Leica is for quality!  Most of us learn our equipment well enough to anticipate situations so speed is secondary.  And, yes, film was absolutely faster except when you had to change film!  I remember that well with my M6 cameras!  I will take the time to turn on a switch vs that time lag any day.  I have missed many shots in those days having to reload!  How fast can you reload a film camera?

[LocalHero1953]

I'm aware of all the work practices and work-arounds one can adopt to deal with the fact that the M takes up to 2 secs to start up or wake up.

 

OK, for some people, their photography doesn't require that responsiveness. And others have got their fingers trained to a fine art of automation, or would rather carry a spare battery than have a quicker camera.

 

But what is actually wrong with wanting a faster start up and wake up? Would it cause a problem for you if Leica did make an improvement here?

Why does it trigger such a hostile response when it is flagged as an issue? OK it's been discussed before: since when has that held back posts on this forum - 74 pages of repetition about a prospective new M/SL/Q that hasn't been announced yet!

[pop]

There's a number of things which must be set to the right values and so on in order to get the desired picture. I just can't get into an uproar for lightly touching the release when I see a situation develop. Anyway, one of the other cameras I often take with me is a Sony something or other. It takes about 4 (four) seconds until I even can use the viewfinder. 

[lct]

Think the key words here I have underlined above in your response is this is a digital camera problem and not a Leica problem.  Even my point and shoot cameras take time to turn on.  [...]

 

It is nothing but a Leica problem sorry. My 8 years old Canon 5D is blazingly fast by comparison and even slower bodies like my M8.2 or Fuji X-E2 do better. I am not a fast shooter myself, one second wakeup time is fast enough for me. But two seconds (or 1.7s in the best cases) is a no no definitely. We are discussing about Leicas folks, the cameras of the decisive moment. It really is a shame at this price point.

[Belle123]

It is nothing but a Leica problem sorry. My 8 years old Canon 5D is blazingly fast by comparison and even slower bodies like my M8.2 or Fuji X-E2 do better. I am not a fast shooter myself, one second wakeup time is fast enough for me. But two seconds (or 1.7s in the best cases) is a no no definitely. We are discussing about Leicas folks, the cameras of the decisive moment. It really is a shame at this price point.

Well, I have a newer Canon 5diii and it's no speed demon, plus every time I use it I scratch my head trying to remember how all the buttons work again, eating up time, which is why I grab my Leicas.  So, with everything there is a plus and a minus.  You can't have it all.  Sure, it would be terrific if my M booted up faster but it will not keep me from using it successfully.  You get to know your equipment.  Heck, my IPhone or any digital equipment I own takes time to boot!!!  Why all the belly aching???  At least you don't have to change film every 16 or so shots.  How soon we forget...

[LocalHero1953]

Just done a quick test, which is about as quantitative as I am going to get.

My M takes just under 2 secs to startup or wake up.

I normally carry my camera on a wrist strap.

 

- I can switch on the camera, bring it to my eye and press the shutter button in less time than it takes to start up.

- I can touch the shutter, bring it to my eye and press the shutter button in less time than it takes to wake up.

 

But in that time gap between seeing the picture to be taken and the shutter actually releasing at the second time of asking, the subject's expression may change, they may become aware of me, they may be past the balance point etc.

 

This is important to me (though, Pop, I do not get into uproar about it) - I accept it is not important to many others.

[Adam]

I am not against faster startup, I just don't think this prevents me form taking critical pics since I can just leave the camera on. More than 90% of  shots that I have missed is because of my own errors.

 

The remainder missed shots are because of the camera. The reasons were on:

 

1. a DLSR because of slow AF

 

2. EVF cameras because of EVF slow startup

 

3. film cameras because I ran out of film

 

4. an M because of startup.

 

Of the four, I think the easiest to fix is the startup time on M, just keep it on. Without Live view the battery drainage is minimal.

 

I think that it is harder to fix AF on DSLR unless you shoot manual (defeats a DSLR for me). It is also hard to keep an EVF camera constantly on since the viewfinder display eats up battery fast. Finally, there is no way to speed up changing film.

 

For me, the M is the easiest to set up so that it is always ready. Sure it would be nice if it was faster, but in practical terms this would be just a paper spec for me, not a real critical issue.

[lct]

[...] At least you don't have to change film every 16 or so shots.  How soon we forget...

 

 

16 shots? Seems like you forget faster than me . Just kidding. My rolls had 36 frames and when i pressed the shutter release it worked immediately. Now again i don't ask for immediacy. The one second wakeup time of my M8.2 is fast enough for me.

[LocalHero1953]

Without Live view the battery drainage is minimal.

I changed from using sleep mode to leaving it permanently on about 5 months ago. I found that I was getting close to exhausting the battery at the end of a day out, whereas using sleep mode that was never the situation (I use two batteries alternately). Now I carry the spare if I'm out for a full day, whereas before I didn't (it was in any case a big improvement over the M9, when I always carried a spare).

 

So I wouldn't call battery drainage "minimal".

[IkarusJohn]

The only time I would need such fast start up times would be shooting street photography, but then when I'm actually shooting this genre, my camera is at my eye anyway, so start up times etc are irrelevant. Yes my old canon 1DX's are faster in nearly every respect but I never used them for street work because they were too heavy and too conspicuous. 

 

Henri Cartier-Bressons well known image 'Derriere La Gare St Lazare, arguably the photograph of that century was shot by HCB pushing his camera through a gap in the fence and pressing the shutter when the guy leapt, in an M240 sense that would be a 'camera that is already on' . Incidentally it was one of only two of his photographs that was cropped.

 

Quote: “There was a plank fence around some repairs behind the Gare Saint Lazare train station. I happened to be peeking through a gap in the fence with my camera at the moment the man jumped. The space between the planks was not entirely wide enough for my lens, which is the reason why the picture is cut off on the left,” he explained in his usual laconic manner."

 

So once the M is on and I have had enough coffee, then I cannot detect any difference between its shooting time and the 1DX

 

You walk about with your M camera at your eye?  There have been many times with the M9, Monochrom and M Edition 60, I've seen a picture opportunity unfold, and pressed the shutter to find nothing happening. Now, granted the issue has been that I have forgotten to turn the camera on, but I think I've got past that. 

 

To say you don't have a problem, or to ask people to record start up times is, frankly, disrespectful. I'm no Leica apologist, but I do think this is something Leica should improve. 

 

I don't think it is such a problem with the M60, because there's no live view to turn on, and the frame lines come on almost instantaneously. But if Thorsten notices an issue, then I think it would be churlish to say those complaining are looking for problems. 

 

I generally turn my camera off between shots - it's habitual, going back to when cameras first had batteries, and the film advance locked the shutter (on Nikons). So, I turn the camera on first, think about perspective, framing, aperture, exposure, shutter speed and distance as I raise the camera. If I haven't turned the camera off, I touch the shutter as I raise the camera. 

 

I then take the picture, and find I've left the lens cap on. Joking aside, with any photography, but particularly those times when the camera is in your hand, you will see a moment unfold and you need to bring the camera up and snap that shot. I'm sure we've all done it, and those images are the ones which make us most proud. If Thorsten says he's had a problem with slow start and wake up times (repeated by others here), I believe there is a problem. This is an area Leica does have issues - firmware. 

 

I tend to take what HCB says about his images with a huge grain of salt; but where the Gare St Lazarre image is concerned, I don't believe a word of it. There is, famously, a massive disconnect between his stories and what actually happened. I think it's a shame that cameras that are so fabulous in so many respects have this electronic problem which lets so many people down. 

 

Your experience may vary, but to be able to quickly raise the camera and take a picture is a critical aspect of photography for many here. Sure, there may be work arounds which reduce the lag, but clearly there is a lag. 

[douglas fry]

Just to quickly add, to IkarusJohn, yes I most certainly do keep my camera up when shooting street, if its not at my eye then its just below as I look for a shot. Shooting street is hard work and not to be done casually, well of course it can but the hit rate is much much lower. If the camera is ready either at my eye or just below (not sleeping) then the camera isn't the problem it'll be me. I have just completed two courses with Matt Stuart a well known and well published street photographer in the UK and he is always ready to shoot http://www.mattstuart.com and while of course I in no way reach his level of ability I did appreciate the need to be continuously ready, which means at the end of a day shooting you definitely need a beer.

 

I take the lens cap off in the morning and it goes back on in the evening, I adjust the settings as I walk around, so the exposure is always correct even if I'm not shooting and I pre focus on anything that takes my eye even if it doesn't work out...that way speed isn't much of an issue just ability

 

I didn't set out to offend anyone, and apologise if I did, but completely unintentionally, but I guess there are as many views on the subject as there are posts on this forum.

 

I have been a professional photographer for 20 years and find the Leica's work well for me so I guess thats good enough, YMMV

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Adam]

I changed from using sleep mode to leaving it permanently on about 5 months ago. I found that I was getting close to exhausting the battery at the end of a day out, whereas using sleep mode that was never the situation (I use two batteries alternately). Now I carry the spare if I'm out for a full day, whereas before I didn't (it was in any case a big improvement over the M9, when I always carried a spare).

 

So I wouldn't call battery drainage "minimal".

You are right, I  should have prefaced minimal compared to other mirror-less cameras with EVF. It is hard for me to say what minimal drainage would be in absolute terms.