BerndReini Posted October 9, 2015 Share #21 Posted October 9, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) In digital years the M240 is an old camera. Why wait this long and not wait until a new version is released. Even if you don't want to buy new, the M240 will further drop in price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 9, 2015 Posted October 9, 2015 Hi BerndReini, Take a look here Transition from M9 to M240 - your thoughts. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
colonel Posted October 10, 2015 Share #22 Posted October 10, 2015 In digital years the M240 is an old camera. Why wait this long and not wait until a new version is released. Even if you don't want to buy new, the M240 will further drop in price. on the contrary, its the best time to buy the M240 now Price low, guarantee, firmware robust, etc. If you buy cameras at the end of their run its only a 2-3 year delay over the hot heads on the internet, you save money and you have all the issues wrinkled out Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrödinger's cat Posted October 10, 2015 Share #23 Posted October 10, 2015 and you have all the issues wrinkled out Well ........... Although, if you know an M240 is what you want, I do agree that it's a very good time to buy. I'm interested to see what happens to the prices if they announce something interesting this month. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted October 11, 2015 Share #24 Posted October 11, 2015 Except for the wrinkles I mentioned above that will be ironed out with the next version of the M. I'm not sure that $4,500 is that great of a deal once an M comes out with a sensor based on the one used in the Q. Digital camera prices are only going in one direction: down! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomlianza Posted October 11, 2015 Share #25 Posted October 11, 2015 I'm finding the transition from M9 to m240 a bit of work. Naturally the weight and size differences make for a completely different experience. I have a large selection of lenses from my M2-M6 era, and a few of them have been coded. I own a Nikon d800e which is a great camera, but the size is an issue. The leica lenses work well on the Fuji X-Pro1 and it has a much better EVF than the 240. The short maximum exposure time of the M240 probably would have prevented me from buying it, but like everything else there are trade offs. If I need to make very long exposures, I have the Nikon and 6 seconds isn't really a killer. For city shooting, the higher ISO performance is very welcome. Had I known about the poor high ISO performance of the M9, I definitely would have passed. In the end, it just takes practice with any camera you choose to use. I just ordered a set of 10stop ND filters so I will be testing out the 6 sec effect. It's autumn here in New Hampshire and we have lot's of moving water so we will give that six second limit a try. One of the best features of any Leica M is that you can use it in complete manual mode: no fishing thru endless menus or unmarked multi-use buttons.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted October 11, 2015 Share #26 Posted October 11, 2015 if you used an m8 or m9 and then got a m240- after a while- if you pick up and shoot the older camera- it feels very outdated. The shutter sound, button action, and LCD on my M8 feels positively antiquated. It's like winding up an old gramaphone... However the images coming out are still as crisp as back in 2006. The M240 really is a MUCH improved camera, the feel of the shutter, LV, many enhancements, etc. However- one thing I did have a problem with- the RAW shots out of camera just don't seem to have the 'pop' factor of M9 images. Making M240 shots look good requires more effort in post processing- often I was quite happy with the M9 shot straight from the camera. I found this a little disheartening for a while- and missed my M9. I am hoping that my M240 will last for years and years. I now want to own it until it is thouroughly brassed up. My only concern is that it will fail- and the cost of repair in 5 or more years time will be un-economical. I hope I am wrong and it keeps soldiering on and can be serviced affordably! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d2mini Posted October 11, 2015 Share #27 Posted October 11, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) The best camera is the one you have and use. With technology, you can wait and wait and wait. I sold my M9 a few years ago, used something else for a bit and now back to a new-to-me M 240. Because of the break, I notice nothing different in size/weight/handling. All feels as good as I remembered it being and now I have a much improved sensor and image quality. High ISO performance is awesome, and I also own a Nikon D800. There is nothing about the 240 image quality that I dislike or wish for improvement upon. I too plan on keeping this around for quite a while and the brassing has already begun! And for used prices... look at M9 prices. They are not that much lower now than when I sold mine back before the 240 even came out. What are you going to save by waiting a month or two or three? $500? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert blu Posted October 11, 2015 Share #28 Posted October 11, 2015 It's my impression as well that now M 240 prices on the pre owned market are getting interesting...maybe the correct moment to buy an one year old camera with still one years warranty time...just thinking... robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted October 12, 2015 Author Share #29 Posted October 12, 2015 It's autumn here in New Hampshire and we have lot's of moving water so we will give that six second limit a try. Tom, I hope you had half as good a day as we had in Maine today. Overcast skies make the turning deciduous trees positively electric. Appreciate your observations. I am waiting, along with everyone else who cares about such things, to see how Leica will tempt us again. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted October 12, 2015 Share #30 Posted October 12, 2015 The best camera is the one you have and use. With technology, you can wait and wait and wait. Yeah, but he has been using an M9. How many pictures between ISO 1,000 and ISO 2,500 is he going to miss between now and the time a new M is announced? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 12, 2015 Share #31 Posted October 12, 2015 Yeah, but he has been using an M9. How many pictures between ISO 1,000 and ISO 2,500 is he going to miss between now and the time a new M is announced? Wow, bang would have gone my weekend its winter now in England. Summer cameras that need light are all in mothballs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
profus Posted October 12, 2015 Share #32 Posted October 12, 2015 I went from the M9 to the M240 with no regrets other than it is fatter. Sorry, but it is not fatter at all. Exactly the same size as M9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted October 12, 2015 Share #33 Posted October 12, 2015 Exactly! However, there seems to be a lot of people that think this. I think the step in the top plate on the M9 and perhaps the built in thumb rest by the dial on the M makes it appear fatter... but it isn't. The battery is heavier and maybe that makes people think it's bigger/heavier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loren Posted October 12, 2015 Share #34 Posted October 12, 2015 Sorry, but it is not fatter at all. Exactly the same size as M9 Actually, it's a little thinner when you consider the buttons. It definitely weighs more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 12, 2015 Share #35 Posted October 12, 2015 70g of the extra 90g is due to the battery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted October 12, 2015 Author Share #36 Posted October 12, 2015 Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Sorry, but it is not fatter at all. Exactly the same size as M9 OP here. Appreciate all the kind input. I supposed if some troubled soul put up his 240 on Ebay for an irresistible price between now and the anticipated announcement I might take the plunge. Short of that, I will wait just as we all are. Of all the points of contention that fly by me are concerns over the size and weight of the M camera. I came to my M9 from a Rollei 6008 which I shleppled all over the world including the Egyptian desert in June. Scrambling around the interior of a pyramid that time of year is like "chillin" inside a brick oven. The body alone weighs around 3.3 lbs. Add the 45 finder, film back and the exquisite 90mm Schnieder and you are toting a German made brick that weighs appx 6 pounds. Add the 150mm and 35mm glass at about 2 pounds per and you have a kit that cracks 10 pounds. And is about as stealthy as a neon sign. In troubled areas, not the obvious tool. In the Middle East, passers-by would scatter when I raised that beast to my eye and trained it in their direction. A passing Israeli solder chortled "nice bazooka." Ah, but those 6x6 square chromes.... Consequently, a few grams or millimeters between the M progeny I find to be distinctions without a difference. I also have the wonderful RRS L bracket/grip on the M9 at all times. The security of that grip is a trade off well worth the modest increase in weight and girth. David PS: Attached images is a stock image of the Rollei 6008i with 45 finder, back and 80mm (I think). The 90mm is the bigger sibling. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! OP here. Appreciate all the kind input. I supposed if some troubled soul put up his 240 on Ebay for an irresistible price between now and the anticipated announcement I might take the plunge. Short of that, I will wait just as we all are. Of all the points of contention that fly by me are concerns over the size and weight of the M camera. I came to my M9 from a Rollei 6008 which I shleppled all over the world including the Egyptian desert in June. Scrambling around the interior of a pyramid that time of year is like "chillin" inside a brick oven. The body alone weighs around 3.3 lbs. Add the 45 finder, film back and the exquisite 90mm Schnieder and you are toting a German made brick that weighs appx 6 pounds. Add the 150mm and 35mm glass at about 2 pounds per and you have a kit that cracks 10 pounds. And is about as stealthy as a neon sign. In troubled areas, not the obvious tool. In the Middle East, passers-by would scatter when I raised that beast to my eye and trained it in their direction. A passing Israeli solder chortled "nice bazooka." Ah, but those 6x6 square chromes.... Consequently, a few grams or millimeters between the M progeny I find to be distinctions without a difference. I also have the wonderful RRS L bracket/grip on the M9 at all times. The security of that grip is a trade off well worth the modest increase in weight and girth. David PS: Attached images is a stock image of the Rollei 6008i with 45 finder, back and 80mm (I think). The 90mm is the bigger sibling. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/251109-transition-from-m9-to-m240-your-thoughts/?do=findComment&comment=2903251'>More sharing options...
indergaard Posted October 12, 2015 Share #37 Posted October 12, 2015 70g of the extra 90g is due to the battery. The camera, in it's functional state, still weighs noticeably more than it's predecessor. From what I've seen people say "but this weight increase is because of the much bigger battery". Well, as a modern digital camera, the camera needs a battery to work at all. So no matter if the larger portion of the weight increase is because of the battery, the battery is an integral and necessary part of the camera to function. So in that sense, the camera is 90g heavier, no matter what part caused the increase. AFAIK, there is no lightweight battery option available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 12, 2015 Share #38 Posted October 12, 2015 The camera, in it's functional state, still weighs noticeably more than it's predecessor. From what I've seen people say "but this weight increase is because of the much bigger battery". Well, as a modern digital camera, the camera needs a battery to work at all. So no matter if the larger portion of the weight increase is because of the battery, the battery is an integral and necessary part of the camera to function. So in that sense, the camera is 90g heavier, no matter what part caused the increase. AFAIK, there is no lightweight battery option available. Maybe, but Leica took the option to significantly bump the battery capacity many times over, for which many of us are deeply appreciative. They could have kept the original battery to keep the weight lower, like Sony did with the A7Rii, but this just means everyone has to carry 2-3 batteries on them just for shooting for a single day, which kind of counterbalances the weight issue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted October 12, 2015 Share #39 Posted October 12, 2015 Maybe, but Leica took the option to significantly bump the battery capacity many times over, for which many of us are deeply appreciative. They could have kept the original battery to keep the weight lower, like Sony did with the A7Rii, but this just means everyone has to carry 2-3 batteries on them just for shooting for a single day, which kind of counterbalances the weight issue That's true. I just wish they had dropped the brass parts and rather used magnesium to keep the weight down, for example. As a digital camera, it doesn't need to be built to last forever. A decade is fine. And magnesium would keep the weight and costs down, and provide the same level of reliability regarding construction quality, as magnesium have better machining properties than brass, for example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d2mini Posted October 12, 2015 Share #40 Posted October 12, 2015 That's true. I just wish they had dropped the brass parts and rather used magnesium to keep the weight down, for example. As a digital camera, it doesn't need to be built to last forever. A decade is fine. And magnesium would keep the weight and costs down, and provide the same level of reliability regarding construction quality, as magnesium have better machining properties than brass, for example. But then what do you say when your paint starts to wear off... your M is "magnesiuming"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.