M(240), M9P or Q?

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... Also to consider, is that the M is kinda big and heavy  too. ...

Compared to what?

 

Pete.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Tailwagger]

Compared to what?

 

Pete.

 

A7, for one. 2/3 the weight of an M.

 

To the OP,  manual focus really isn't a big deal.  My vision is far from ideal, but the only frustration I experience with RF focusing is when dealing with a regular or complex random pattern, i.e. slats of a fence or leaves on a bush, etc.  Just takes a little bit of patience to ensure you've matched the right set of lines.  Over time it becomes second nature.  For various reasons, though, I wouldn't characterize the M as  a camera you can just pick up every once and while and expect superior results.  In my experience, the M tends to yield results proportional to care taken. One suspects given the AF, more sophisticated metering etc, that Q is more a bit more forgiving. 

 

If ease of use is important, I'd look the other way. But if rekindling a joy of shooting is what you are after, there is no better than an M of either variety subject to the issues previously discusses. Since acquiring mine, my other equipment has largely gone dormant.  It provides an addictive experience that's rather difficult to explain rationally, despite a feature set that might superficially seem to be hopelessly antiquated.  Best of luck!

[ECohen]

Compared to what?

 

Pete.

 

 

OK first off I love the M ........ but its a misconception that it is small and light.

 

Nikon 610 body only   26.8oz

Nikon 750 body only   24.3oz

 

Leica M240 body only 24.0oz

 

If you hate caring a Nikon because is heavy the Leica is not much of a change in weight.

 

When you are first making the decision to change .....you "expect" the M to be 1/2 the weight and size of your Nikon

the reality is that it is smaller ...but not that much.

 

 

 

Post#15   "I like to travel but I don't like to look like a tourist."

IMHO.....As long as your caring a camera that big on your shoulder .... in a country or state thats not yours.......you still look like a tourist. 

If your visiting the musee d'orsay  and your caring a "big" camera, any camera.......the locals know your a tourist

What sets the Leica user apart is that your camera will bring more on the "hot" market

 

There are far more experienced travelers on this site then I .........Am I wrong?

I sincerely hope I am...thoughts welcome

[JBond]

J, this is not exactly the most convincing set of reasons for dumping your Nikon and buying a Leica

 

Before you go out and blow what is for most people serious money on an M 240 and lenses, I think you should think about whether you have lost interest in the Nikon or lost interest in, or don't have a lot of time for, photography. If it's the latter, there are significantly less expensive options for taking very good photographs; and if you really think that your Nikon is holding you back because it's "too big", some of these options come in quite small packages, such as the Canon G7X and the Sony RX100.

 

STB, I know what you mean, but i tend to be like that in general.

 

I have definitely not lost interest in photography although at the same time I dont usually go out on the streets, etc with the aim of taking pictures. I'm more the person who takes the camera with them when out so that they can take a picture of something they may like. If I bought an M I would only get 1 or 2 lenses for it and have no intention of building up a collection of lenses. Whilst I am generally a logical and pragmatic person I do also have a tendency to give in to my inner "brand junkie" and "vanity".  Not sure if I'm making sense.

 

Agree with this. Sounds to me like you should be looking at a well featured compact camera to take out as a smaller alternative to the Nikon, and keep the Nikon for the occasions when you need a more capable camera.

 

The Nikon is gone I'm afraid

 

I'd tend to suggest the Q because it has an EVF that doesn't lag and comes with macro capability.  But it is a lot of money for a fixed lens camera.  The M mount gives you access to a pretty vast array of quality glass that will always be relevant.  But I don't think the M lines up to your requirements as well as the Q.

 

You mentioned a 75 or 90 lens... focusing those with a rangefinder can be a trying experience.  Especially on the fly.  You can use Live View (or EVF) and focus peaking with those lenses on the M240.  However, the M240's LV/EVF has a lot of lag.

 

If only that Q had a 35mm lens on it and was weather sealed. I wouldnt think twice about buying one.

 

Are the difficulties with the 75mm or 90mm lens due to lack of IS in the camera?

 

You really need to try an M (eg the M240) before making a purchase, RF focusing isn't for everyone and unless you are a natural at it you will need to put in hours upon hours of practice to become anywhere close to AF in terms of speed. I'd suggest you start with a 35/f2 cron and take it from there. This has a wider tolerance to focusing innacuracies compared to the faster lux, eg the 50/f1.4. I wouldn't rush at a longer focal length, such as the 75 or 90 you mention, until you've really conquered RF focusing.

 

I definitely will do before buying one. From all the advice so far I dont think i will make a decision without being sure first.

Have you posted this same question to the folks on the Q thread ?

 

The Q and the M are very different cameras...I wonder what the Q owners suggested ?

 

Also to consider, is that the M is kinda big and heavy  too.

 

I wish you hadn't said you lost interest in the Nikon....perhaps I misunderstood 

 

I wanted to but wasn't sure if I was allowed in case it was seen as a duplicate post.

 

In regards to the weight of the M, it's the actual shape of it that atracts me. The weight dont matter. The DSLRs look big and bulky and their lenses are pretty big too.

[ECohen]

After reading your posts JB...take the M240 out for a test drive ...you'll love it.

 

Its a joy to use as long as your cool with no auto focus

[colonel]

M262

 

best rgds

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... Are the difficulties with the 75mm or 90mm lens due to lack of IS in the camera? ...

Not really because a fast enough shutter speed will eliminate camera wobble.  

 

It's to do with the size of the image in the rangefinder patch at longer focal lengths; a 'through-the-lens' camera such as your Nikon will magnify through the eyepiece what you see with a longer lens but the rangefinder/viewfinder window provides a constant view for any focal length and offers corresponding frame lines to indicate what will be in the picture for a given focal length.  

 

At longer focal lengths for a rangefinder (ie up to short telephoto) the subject to be captured will only take up a small area of the rangefinder so being sure that the lines overlap when the subject is in focus, especially at wide apertures, can be tricky and can require practice to perfect a technique that ensures focus sharpness at the intended plane.

 

Pete.

[Belle123]

Ok.  Read thru some of the responses.  I was surprised to read the OP didn't know the M was a total manual camera yet considering buying because likes the 'look' of the M or the Q.  Hmmmmmm.  And I gather just will occasionally take a camera out for a spin.  

 

My suggestion, get a Q.  I have both Q and an M(been an M shooter over 20 years).  The Q "looks" good.  Great photos.  Don't have to learn how to manually focus or fiddle with timing and aperture settings unless you want to.  And if your concern is weather proofing, I don't believe the M is weather proof either.  I certainly would never use it in a downpour.  

 

The M takes a lot of learning and experience to use well.  Taking it out for an occasional spin, I just don't see being that happy with it.  But, if willing to make it a serious hobby, maybe.  But I certainly wouldn't buy just because like how it looks.  Please do some research and then decide if you want to deal with a totally manual camera.  The Q I think will serve your needs better, quite honestly. Great camera.

[colonel]

The M takes a lot of learning and experience to use well.  Taking it out for an occasional spin, I just don't see being that happy with it.  But, if willing to make it a serious hobby, maybe.  But I certainly wouldn't buy just because like how it looks.  Please do some research and then decide if you want to deal with a totally manual camera.

 

I would add that having an M and not using it often is a crime

Its the type of camera that you want to pick up and use

But you have to want to understand light and the relationship between focal length, focus, aperture and shutter speed ...

 

Great bedtime reading:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Photography-Approach-Expression-Photographic/dp/1933952687/ref=sr_1_18?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1463407391&sr=1-18&keywords=photography

[JBond]

Ok.  Read thru some of the responses.  I was surprised to read the OP didn't know the M was a total manual camera yet considering buying because likes the 'look' of the M or the Q.  Hmmmmmm.  And I gather just will occasionally take a camera out for a spin.  

 

My suggestion, get a Q.  I have both Q and an M(been an M shooter over 20 years).  The Q "looks" good.  Great photos.  Don't have to learn how to manually focus or fiddle with timing and aperture settings unless you want to.  And if your concern is weather proofing, I don't believe the M is weather proof either.  I certainly would never use it in a downpour.  

 

The M takes a lot of learning and experience to use well.  Taking it out for an occasional spin, I just don't see being that happy with it.  But, if willing to make it a serious hobby, maybe.  But I certainly wouldn't buy just because like how it looks.  Please do some research and then decide if you want to deal with a totally manual camera.  The Q I think will serve your needs better, quite honestly. Great camera.

 

Dont blame me too much. Quite often people come accross a product because of advertising and quite often they make decisions based on a variety of factors. I'm not wanting to buy an M because of what it looks like. Instead i want to buy an M based on the good brand reputation, the reputation of its lenses, the fact that it is different from a dslr, because of how it looks and so on. The looks come into play when it comes to the satisfaction they provide the user. When deciding what to buy I take into consideration all the factors (and more) mentioned above and I'd rather spend more and get a Q then spend the same or a bit less on a DSLR which doesnt appeal to me. After all the fact that Leica cameras have a dedicated following must mean something?

 

Now if people here are telling me that owning an M = high knowledge, hard dedication and substantial hours of practice, then I will bow out and forget about having one. Although with great sadness. And i will continue to remain puzzled by the fact that a lot of people rave about an M and in reality they sound a pain in the back side to own and use (I dont mean any disrespect)

 

Dont get me wrong, it's not that i dont want to take pictures or spend more time perfecting the use of the camera. When you are bringing up 3 children as a working couple, and work long hours and have various other family commitments and are studying a masters degree at the same time there isnt much time left. Not to forget that i do have other hobbies as well.

 

Now, when it comes to the Q I have considered buying one too however I am not quite certain about the 28mm lens and I dont want to spend all that money to be restricted to that one lens. And from what i have read there seems to be quite a lot of software correction to that lens which to me means that without the software correction the lens would be nowhere near as good as an M lens. But then again i could be totally mistaken so I might start a thread in the Q forum to ask for some advice.

 

I would add that having an M and not using it often is a crime

Its the type of camera that you want to pick up and use

But you have to want to understand light and the relationship between focal length, focus, aperture and shutter speed ...

 

Great bedtime reading:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Photography-Approach-Expression-Photographic/dp/1933952687/ref=sr_1_18?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1463407391&sr=1-18&keywords=photography

 

Thank you for the link colonel. I'll buy that one.

[ECohen]

"M = high knowledge, hard dedication and substantial hours of practice"

 

Anything worth doing is worth doing well.

Photography in general requires dedication and substantial hours of practice.

 

Your wasting your money on either the Q or the M....unless you are looking to own fancy German jewelry.

Buy a good book, on the kind photography you want to enjoy and shoot pictures...... 

knowledge,  dedication and  practice is your road to success

 

Any good camera will do...Honestly your Nikon is a wonderful tool and with dedication and substantial hours of practice

will take fabulous photographs that you will be proud to call yours 

 

​Don't waste your money on Leica....at least not the current line up.

The brand has come out with many new models in the past 2 years.

Perhaps in the near future they will have the perfect camera for your photographic needs.

 

I doubt its the current Q and its defiantly not the M

 

As for software...do you currently use  Lightroom or Photoshop ?

Knowledge of these programs are far more important to photography then the camera and lens you are using.....really.

[Ernstk]

Now if people here are telling me that owning an M = high knowledge, hard dedication and substantial hours of practice, then I will bow out and forget about having one. Although with great sadness. And i will continue to remain puzzled by the fact that a lot of people rave about an M and in reality they sound a pain in the back side to own and use (I dont mean any disrespect)

In my experience, nothing could be further from the truth. I came late to M ownership, after a lifetime spent with SLRs and I found Ms to be utterly natural and intuitive. Indeed, it was a much more immersive experience than using an SLR and I haven't looked back.

 

It's a camera. You compose, focus, set the exposure, take the photo. No more, no less. With the exception of metering, it's a fully manual process and that's beneficial, in my view.

You 'see' differently with an M and I wish I had discovered this way of seeing earlier in my photographic life.

 

Don't be put off by people saying that Leica Ms are difficult to use. They are not. You'll have to think about your photography a bit more but how can that be a bad thing for anyone?

 

Now go and get your hands on an M and let us know what you think. Rent one, or arrange to meet someone from here who can show you what it's like. You won't regret it.

 

Ernst

[Belle123]

Dont blame me too much. Quite often people come accross a product because of advertising and quite often they make decisions based on a variety of factors. I'm not wanting to buy an M because of what it looks like. Instead i want to buy an M based on the good brand reputation, the reputation of its lenses, the fact that it is different from a dslr, because of how it looks and so on. The looks come into play when it comes to the satisfaction they provide the user. When deciding what to buy I take into consideration all the factors (and more) mentioned above and I'd rather spend more and get a Q then spend the same or a bit less on a DSLR which doesnt appeal to me. After all the fact that Leica cameras have a dedicated following must mean something?

 

Now if people here are telling me that owning an M = high knowledge, hard dedication and substantial hours of practice, then I will bow out and forget about having one. Although with great sadness. And i will continue to remain puzzled by the fact that a lot of people rave about an M and in reality they sound a pain in the back side to own and use (I dont mean any disrespect)

 

Dont get me wrong, it's not that i dont want to take pictures or spend more time perfecting the use of the camera. When you are bringing up 3 children as a working couple, and work long hours and have various other family commitments and are studying a masters degree at the same time there isnt much time left. Not to forget that i do have other hobbies as well.

 

Now, when it comes to the Q I have considered buying one too however I am not quite certain about the 28mm lens and I dont want to spend all that money to be restricted to that one lens. And from what i have read there seems to be quite a lot of software correction to that lens which to me means that without the software correction the lens would be nowhere near as good as an M lens. But then again i could be totally mistaken so I might start a thread in the Q forum to ask for some advice.

 

 

Thank you for the link colonel. I'll buy that one.

Don't let people tell you this is an easy camera to take great pictures.  It's not.  It's a 'simple' camera, and it's up to you to learn photography and how to use it.  Simple doesn't mean easy except for those that know what they are doing already.  Is it a pain in the rear?  Only if you try and take photos without knowing how to use it, which takes time to learn and practice.

In contrast, cameras that have autofocus and other auto settings and electronics, most people will do better and doesn't require much time and dedication.  From what you describe, those will suit you better.  I might suggest another alternative.  Get a T and use it with M lenses and T lenses.  Less money.  If you then decide you really like shooting manual on that camera, graduate to the M or the SL in the future.  The T is no slouch of a camera.  And if invest in an M lens on it, if you decide not for you, easy to sell usually.  Might be some depreciation, especially if bought new, but not too bad.  I recommend buying used lenses.  

[pop]

In my experience, nothing could be further from the truth. I came late to M ownership, after a lifetime spent with SLRs and I found Ms to be utterly natural and intuitive. Indeed, it was a much more immersive experience than using an SLR and I haven't looked back....

Same here.

[Steve Ricoh]

Hi all. I'm looking to buy a Leica [my] Photography subjects include general family holidays, architecture, scenery. No fast paced sports. I quite like black and white now and again. 

 

Reminding myself of the type of photography that interests you, it seems that most of time you will be taking pictures of fairly static objects, therefore you should have little or no problems using a RF camera, such as the M240. On the other hand if you had included street photography on your list and wanted to capture fleeting moments with the lens wide open, that would be a higher challenge. Even so you can always set the aperture to f8 (and be there) and use zone focusing to achieve excellent results - as such it becomes one of the fastest street cameras available. Being happy with a camera is a bonus, you'll want to use it, and by using it your experience and ability will grow as you do. 

[biglouis]

I don't think you should be dissuaded from buying either a M or a Q.

 

It sounds like you want a different experience than you are getting with your current Nikon kit.

 

You are not making a life long commitment and you'll always wonder if Leica kit is for you if you don't try it. Buy second hand and you'll probably get most of your money back if you move on in 6 months.

 

An M will give you the unadulterated Leica experience (and you'll decide if it is for you or not). A Q will give you a lot of features found in Leica kit, e.g. the ability to work in full manual mode, very shallow depth of focus and the Leica 'look' to your captures in jpeg mode. It will also challenge you because of its fixed lens in much the same way a M will challenge you because of its lack of automation.

 

Just my two cents

 

LouisB

[Tailwagger]

Well, I suppose I'd ask whats more important to you? The shooting experience or the end result? Personally, I find no need to justify the lack of AF or precise framing or inability to seamlessly accommodate ultra wide or long glass. Its just a fact of life when shooting with an M. Other cameras are lighter, small, faster, offer better low light performance, are far easier to point, shoot and go home with higher levels of confidence. RF vs OVF/EVF debating aside, its not at all unreasonable to see those things as tilting any choice you might make well away from any M.  When I'm in a situation which requires some of those attributes to be successful, I use other cameras. But those circumstances are rare for what I do and when such things are not paramount, despite having substantial investments in other gear, I always, always, always shoot with the M.  

 

Why? Masochist? No. More of a sense of accomplishment? Nope.  Simpler, purer photographic experience?  Negative.

 

I take the Leica because no other digital camera I'm aware of renders quite like it. If you fall in love with what this camera can produce, you accept how you have to go about extracting it. Once hooked, as I am, nothing else matters. Some find the transition easy, some not so much, but if you simply have to have the image drawn with a Leica's subtle sense of clarity, there ain't any alternative thats truly satisfying.  You learn to focus faster and more accurately, you figure out how to deal with center weighted metering, you pick up tricks for pre-focusing, you learn how to better estimate framing.  All hurdles that you simply aren't forced to deal with if you shoot with any other genuinely modern camera.  So if its about casual ease of capture, look elsewhere.  But if its about the photograph, buy yourself an M.  It costs far more than money, but you're not likely to regret either the cash nor the effort spent on it.  

[Guest JMF]

STB, I know what you mean, but i tend to be like that in general.

 

I have definitely not lost interest in photography although at the same time I dont usually go out on the streets, etc with the aim of taking pictures. I'm more the person who takes the camera with them when out so that they can take a picture of something they may like. If I bought an M I would only get 1 or 2 lenses for it and have no intention of building up a collection of lenses. Whilst I am generally a logical and pragmatic person I do also have a tendency to give in to my inner "brand junkie" and "vanity".  Not sure if I'm making sense.

 

 

The Nikon is gone I'm afraid

 

 

If only that Q had a 35mm lens on it and was weather sealed. I wouldnt think twice about buying one.

 

Are the difficulties with the 75mm or 90mm lens due to lack of IS in the camera?

 

 

I definitely will do before buying one. From all the advice so far I dont think i will make a decision without being sure first.

 

I wanted to but wasn't sure if I was allowed in case it was seen as a duplicate post.

 

In regards to the weight of the M, it's the actual shape of it that atracts me. The weight dont matter. The DSLRs look big and bulky and their lenses are pretty big too.

 

What about a Sony RX1 R plus a pocketable Ricoh GR?!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[biglouis]

What about a Sony RX1 R plus a pocketable Ricoh GR?!

 

Everyone should own a Ricoh GR... but that is another discussion entirely.

[colonel]

Everyone should own a Ricoh GR... but that is another discussion entirely.

I went for the Fuji X70 - lovely camera ...