Guest Posted February 23, 2016 Share #41 Posted February 23, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) If I had the choice between the 262 and the 240 when I was buying my 240 I'm sure that the Luddite in me would have gone for the 262, a choice that in retrospect would have been unencumbered by the thought process. As it is I find there's occasions when I do like to use the Olympus EVF I bought, especially with lenses wider than 28mm. I never use anything longer than 50mm on any of my M's, film or digital, and tend to alternate between clip-on OVF's and the EVF depending on what I'm shooting or want to carry around. The Olympus EVF and the self-same Leica branded one aren't great for sure, but they're not bad either. Useful.... Now thankfully we can turn the video facility off, ( yes, please Leica issue a FW update so we can re-map and re-use that button ), as well as Live View if we wish so I see little point to go for a 262 if you already own a 240. I wouldn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 23, 2016 Posted February 23, 2016 Hi Guest, Take a look here Would you swap M(type 240) for M(type 262) ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted February 23, 2016 Share #42 Posted February 23, 2016 It is all a matter of preferences. If one made the right choice one would not swap a M262 for an M240 either... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jto555 Posted February 23, 2016 Share #43 Posted February 23, 2016 The short answer is No! The longer answer is that the ability to use LVF for critical focus is wonderful and essential in my view. While the LV is not implemented as well as I would like it is a lot better than not having it. The only penalties for using the 240 are a 100g extra weight, it cost a bit more and in my opinion the biggest penalty is the shutter is a bit louder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted February 23, 2016 Share #44 Posted February 23, 2016 The short answer is No! The longer answer is that the ability to use LVF for critical focus is wonderful and essential in my view. While the LV is not implemented as well as I would like it is a lot better than not having it. The only penalties for using the 240 are a 100g extra weight, it cost a bit more and in my opinion the biggest penalty is the shutter is a bit louder. I have a solution for louder shutter. I cough a little as I press the shutter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 23, 2016 Share #45 Posted February 23, 2016 That is better than the sneeze one needed for the M8 (jokes aside, I find the shuttersound of any of the digital Ms quite acceptable and the M240 very discreet) None will sound like an M3 -ever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewDD Posted February 23, 2016 Share #46 Posted February 23, 2016 No. If I was buying from scratch I would probably buy a 262, but there is no need to sell my 240 (at a big loss) to buy a 262. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 23, 2016 Share #47 Posted February 23, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) the biggest penalty is the shutter is a bit louder. I compared the two side to side, and they made basically the same noise, same loudness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 23, 2016 Share #48 Posted February 23, 2016 It's odd, or maybe I'm odd, but there's no "purity of experience" in the M9 for me, at least not when compared with the M240. Purity doesn't come about as a result of antiquity, but as a result of being most fit for the task at hand, and I cannot think of a single type of photography that I do where the M9 is the more appropriate camera than the M240. The same would go for any other current or recent reduced version of the M, although I can just about understand the thinking of those who find the castration attractive. Castration is, perhaps, a little pejorative! Once the bling is removed (pointless functionality which confuses the fundamentals of photography is another way of putting it), we are just taking pictures. There are many many cameras which simply focus, set aperture, shutter and ISO and they have the same potential to take great photos as an all singing all dancing Sony A7R2, if you can find your way through the menus. I'm not criticising your choice, Peter; just suggesting that there are many who still use film cameras with no meters, motor drives or batteries to great effect. Castration suggests something beyond that. Sorry, if I had an M(240), no I wouldn't swap it for an M(262). It's not that the M(262) is for those new to M cameras or anything like that, it's just a different option. If the M(240) and M(262) were available at the same time, then yes I would probably consider it. If the M Edition 60 was able to take an upgraded Visoflex EVF, would I buy such an accessory? Hmm, probably not - using Peter's analogy that would be like using condoms after a vasectomy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim0266 Posted February 23, 2016 Share #49 Posted February 23, 2016 I compared the two side to side, and they made basically the same noise, same loudness. A friend sent me this video comparing the shutter sound between his 240 to a loaned 262. https://youtu.be/ECaAfVsUg9s Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted February 23, 2016 Share #50 Posted February 23, 2016 Sometimes it is like this: If You want all (or too much), You get nothing. A simple camera with one or two lenses can improve the ability to see and take really good photos - more good photos as one misses because there ist no EVF or LV. This said: In comparison to a DSLR the M240 is a simple camera too. To choose a M262 or M240 is a matter of taste, Elmar Asceticism has its place. But often a simple camera makes a task more complicated where a more complex one simplifies it. I agree, comparing these two is, as you say, a matter of taste, more down to one's personal sense of purity than anything concrete. That said, if absolute simplicity of interface and artificially imposed limitations were the one true path to photographic nirvana, we'd all be shooting with Brownies or iPhones, not Leicas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted February 23, 2016 Share #51 Posted February 23, 2016 If I understand well, M 262 would only be sold to (small number ) "new to M 2xx users" and zero to user who already own M 240. So the 2 types don't have same customers. Two types and two lines of customers: bravo Leica. Regards, Arnaud i paid a visit to one of my photographer friends yesterday & he now has both cameras. the 262 is his backup - very sensible but there was a hint of wanderlust in his eyes as he passed it to me. whilst the camera is aesthetically finished more beautifully than the M-240 & apart from live view, my first impressions of shutter & weight were that both were quite similar & not that significantly different. very nice, though...*sigh*. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted February 23, 2016 Share #52 Posted February 23, 2016 I compared the two side to side, and they made basically the same noise, same loudness. Same here. All I could think of was technically Leica can get away with stating that claim because the M240 has advanced metering as a result of Live View, and that does incur more noise due to the required additional shutter action. What I don't see in favor of the M240 however is the claim one can't cross-check rangefinder accuracy on the M262. Both cameras utilize the same resolution LCD, only with the M262 one would need to review shots to determine if the rangefinder had nailed focus or needs adjustment. That's how I calibrated my M9's rangefinder, and despite its lower-res screen, at full magnification it quite clearly indicated the precise focus point by virtue of contrast rather than detail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted February 24, 2016 Share #53 Posted February 24, 2016 Castration is, perhaps, a little pejorative! Once the bling is removed (pointless functionality which confuses the fundamentals of photography is another way of putting it), we are just taking pictures. There are many many cameras which simply focus, set aperture, shutter and ISO and they have the same potential to take great photos as an all singing all dancing Sony A7R2, if you can find your way through the menus. I'm not criticising your choice, Peter; just suggesting that there are many who still use film cameras with no meters, motor drives or batteries to great effect. Castration suggests something beyond that. Sorry, if I had an M(240), no I wouldn't swap it for an M(262). It's not that the M(262) is for those new to M cameras or anything like that, it's just a different option. If the M(240) and M(262) were available at the same time, then yes I would probably consider it. If the M Edition 60 was able to take an upgraded Visoflex EVF, would I buy such an accessory? Hmm, probably not - using Peter's analogy that would be like using condoms after a vasectomy. I think I shall use "castration" a little more often in relation to castrated versions of the M. It's nicely graphic. I like a little colour in my language. Predominantly and appropriately red, in this case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted February 24, 2016 Share #54 Posted February 24, 2016 No matter how I placed my cameras in the cupboard, I have yet to find any new little cameras I haven't put there myself. Are all my cameras castrated or am I doing something the wrong way? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted February 24, 2016 Share #55 Posted February 24, 2016 Cameras are inherently reproductive, try using the the new 35mm film ViagrA 400..'()' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted February 24, 2016 Share #56 Posted February 24, 2016 No matter how I placed my cameras in the cupboard, I have yet to find any new little cameras I haven't put there myself. Are all my cameras castrated or am I doing something the wrong way? Pop, this is the Leica forum. Of course you're doing something the wrong way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted February 24, 2016 Author Share #57 Posted February 24, 2016 i paid a visit to one of my photographer friends yesterday & he now has both cameras. the 262 is his backup - very sensible but there was a hint of wanderlust in his eyes as he passed it to me. whilst the camera is aesthetically finished more beautifully than the M-240 & apart from live view, my first impressions of shutter & weight were that both were quite similar & not that significantly different. very nice, though...*sigh*. So at less one photographer does have the two M 240/262. I'm very impressed. The idea of buying an M 240 is coming in my head . Regards, Arnaud Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
waloszek Posted February 24, 2016 Share #58 Posted February 24, 2016 No. I am probably one of the two or three photographers who use their M240 only in LiveView mode (I only switch to the rangefinder when the battery gets low). I bought the M240 as a body for my M-mount lenses (from 15mm to 135mm), which I had acquired for the Ricoh GXR M-mount module and which I wanted to use in full-frame format eventually. I nearly bought a used M9 because of the lower price, but reminded me in time that this is not what I really want (or think I need...). And I was glad that I had already an Olympus viewfinder from my X Vario when I finally bought a used M240... All in all, photographic preferences are different, and mine are probably exotic in this forum -- but they exclude an M262 for me completely. Best regards, Gerd Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayewing Posted February 24, 2016 Share #59 Posted February 24, 2016 Gerd, I doubt if you are in such a small minority. Like many others I use the rangefinder system for lenses from 28mm to 50mm. I find the liveview/EVF helpful in nailing accurate focus with 90mm and indipensible for 135mm and above as well as for framing lenses wider than 28mm. Many who develop problems with eyesight find that liveview/EVF permits them to continue using their Leica M cameras. I regard the M240, despite its higher cost, to be better value than the M262 as it is a much more complete and versatile camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdk Posted February 25, 2016 Share #60 Posted February 25, 2016 Piling on. No, I like the utility of using the EVF for composing with wideangles, and it's great for night photography too. The EVF implementation of the M 240 series could be far better, with better resolution, and more importantly with a much shorter lag after a photo is taken, but it's still more utile than an optical accessory finder overall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.