Jump to content

Leica M (Typ 262) - Reduction to Rangefinder Photography (at 1000 € less)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 483
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In my mind this is clear:  The M line going forward will be spit in two.  And, there is good reason for this.     If, Leica had continued the M line by adding features found in the Q and SL, Leica would have in essence turned the "essential" M experience into a ever more complex experience that very much is not the "essential."  But, on the other hand I am certain Leica was conflicted as to what new advancements in technology to add to the M without changing it so much that it was no longer ap

This is what I love about Leica. Where other manufacturers think that the answer is to make cameras more and more complex doing more and more things. Leica have decided to simplify. Exactly what I want from a camera. 

... and English! Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!

Posted Images

If smaller means; a smaller rangefinder base, that would give different problems.

The M6 base would be fine. It's the same, no?

 

The camera can be thinner and possibly shorter, but I agree the width must accommodate at least the current RF base. However it is not at all clear to me that precludes a less wide camera. There may or there may be a way to make some room.

 

You may not see a smaller camera as more desirable. Oskar Barnack would disagree.

Edited by uhoh7
Link to post
Share on other sites

This camera has no competition in the marketplace all Leica needs is to satisfy rangefinder freaks.

 

 

This is probably the first camera that I want to buy from the Leica stable  ..........................................there was the M4 many years ago

Edited by Imants
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica just announced an attractive (not ugly paint color) M camera for $5200 and the forum members seem unhappy? I dont get it. This serms like the perfect M to me. Leica did not stop making the full feature model for those who want it. So why complain? If you dont like it - dont buy it.

 

People have been asking for a lower cost M and a black chrome offering instead of paint. I think anodized aluminum will be fine. If you really want black chrome it is available a la carte.

 

If you like it and dont want an LCD screen - turn off image review in the menu. My camera is set up that way - but I end up chimping any way.

 

Did I mention the quieter shutter?

 

I almost forgot - they shrunk the red dot back to normal size (surely we remember this issue on the forum)

 

Seems like Leica listened to its customers

Edited by lm_user
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, although a used M 240 at a similar outlay will almost certainly retain a higher proportion of its price.

When the video and LV quality of the 240 become obsolete (hmmmm actually they're already obsolete) the 262 will keep its value better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My M240 came back from rangefinder calibration today.  One of the things listed under "Repair Parts" is 420-240-380-000 M (Type 240) SHUTTER.  To the best of my knowledge, there was nothing wrong with the shutter. I wonder if its possible that they've changed the shutter on the M240.  (It sounds the same to my ears though.)  It certainly would make more sense to be producing only one shutter for the 3 cameras, rather than produce an entirely new shutter to use only on the cheaper model of the M240.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A simpler, lighter and less expensive M without video?  Nice!  Apart from my beloved modified M3, THIS would be the digital M I would get.  For me, the perfect digital M would be the same as the M film camera but just digital.  My eyes glaze over when I'm confronted with a camera loaded with switches and buttons  and the need to rifle through various menus.  It's why I've stayed away from digital Ms so far.  The M 262 is a very good sign and if the simplification continues into future Ms, I will definitely get one for sure

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read all 5 pages of this thread, but has it been clarified whether the sensor in the 262 is the same as in the 240 or the same as in the SL?

 

Of course it is the same as in the 240, otherwise we would be reading much more marketing nonsense.

Edited by CheshireCat
Link to post
Share on other sites

They disabled EVF and Live View on purpose.

This is done commenting a couple lines in the code.

 

One of these days , they will hook you with a low cost base camera ; then you pay extra ( in App purchases

 ) to license the extra features you want .

 

For the M.262, the shutter mechanism is likely quieter as there is no need to quickly close then open between live view and capture.

 

I like the return to M9 styling and smaller red dot - proves the listen ; but will wait for more of a high ISO step before upgrading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They disabled EVF and Live View on purpose.

 

Bearing in mind that the various video related buttons and the EVF socket have been removed from the camera (a good thing IMO), don't you think it would be a little odd if the EVF and live view options remained in the software?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, although a used M 240 at a similar outlay will almost certainly retain a higher proportion of its price.

 

Possibly. At the moment the difference in price between a new M240 and the new M262 is only £350 at most UK dealers. Personally speaking, if I was in the market for a digital M body, I'd likely pay £350 extra for the pared-down M262 body, such is my dislike for the EVF and video 'additions' that appeared with the M240.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bearing in mind that the various video related buttons and the EVF socket have been removed from the camera (a good thing IMO), don't you think it would be a little odd if the EVF and live view options remained in the software?

Doubt it. It is easier to comment out than rip and write up again, assuming it is integrated into other parts of the firmware, which I am sure it is. It is also easier to upgrade, debug, and troubleshoot as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...