Jump to content

Leica m 262 image quality


Bobby
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm interested about getting an M 262 but I read on a blog post that the image quality of the M 262 is about the same of 2009 DSLR. 

 

Is that true?

 

The writer of that blog should make up his mind, as he starts off with:

 

 

 

but newer models like the M Typ 262 still produce excellent image quality. The M262's IQ is very good for full frame by today's standards

 

Anyway, in a way he has it right. Since the end of last decade all the better cameras have an image quality that surpasses the needs of even exacting photographers, so it comes down, as he justly notes, to the quality of the lenses. In this combination the Leica offerings are, IMO, impressively good.

 

On a side-note, the words "image quality" are a bit of an undefined catchall which appears to mean vastly different things to different people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Define image quality....myriad variables, even apart from the photographer's processing skills and the picture itself.  Sometimes 'flaws' can serve to enhance artistic intent.

 

Define output.....screen, print (and size), etc.

 

Today's gear is not generally limiting except for very specialist needs.....but that's been true for a long time.  Some folks do a lot with a little; some vice versa.  

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm interested about getting an M 262 but I read on a blog post that the image quality of the M 262 is about the same of 2009 DSLR. 

 

Is that true?

The author says his Canon 6D sensor is "truly excellelnt" whereas M262 is merely "very good". I wonder what criteria people use to rate sensors. I am guessing most people are more focused on high ISO noise (lack off) as the main criteria. For whatever is worth, the following is dxo's comparison between 6D and M240. I don't see much difference honestly (if there is, it is in M240's favor).

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Leica-M-Typ-240-versus-Canon-EOS-6D___844_836

 

(I could not find M262 comparison).

Edited by jmahto
Link to post
Share on other sites

The author's comparisons are so loose that it's impossible to pin down exactly what he is talking about.   The DxO link above gives you an objective comparison of the sensors, if that's of interest.  But the image quality on both cameras likely surpasses your needs (and mine).  If either one didn't, you would already know it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO I doubt that's true.......but as others have said IQ is based on many things.
Is not really fair to compare the M rangefinder to a DSLR from 09 or even 2016

My MP240 is a lot sharper than my Nikon and in my opinion overall IQ of the Leica is better....but different. Specs are relative and deceiving....also everyone has a blog and an opinion.
 Rent one, shoot for the day, download the files and decide for yourself.  Its not about the specs, blogs or other opinions.

Is the end result something your satisfied with and will be satisfied with? ......'cause sure as shooting, next years cameras will be better than last years.

Edited by ECohen
Link to post
Share on other sites

All of these cameras have outstanding image quality.  I know that there are more knowledgeable photographers than I who need to use DSLRs and imagine that some of them make some great images with those cameras.  The DSLR in terms of ergonomics and added bells and whistles is anathema to me and I have been shooting rangefinders (mostly Leica) for well over 30 years. I did have a Leica R6 for a time and that was an SLR I could bond with because of it's simplicity.

 

If you are looking at a Leica M9 M 240, 262, I have to assume that the experience of seeing through a rangefinder is something that you value for your photographic experience in which case, the comparison to a DSLR is just academic.  The value of the Leica M cameras for IQ is a matter of record.  If this is a camera that appeals to you, get one and learn to use it. I've had many an M camera (back to film days) and I am still learning!

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before I read it your question about the blog post made me worry that I would read a lot of nonsens about the M262 and Leica M in general.

IMO the image quality of the M full frame bodies is still superior to anything the 'brand' names have to offer. It just depends on what you define as quality.

 

The main concern of the blogger seems to be the ISO range, and it shows in the summary in the bottom of the review.

I was surprised that he managed to grasp some of the most appealing aspects of the M like

...you start to delve into the world of atmospheric image quality- even when using the Voigtlander lenses (I've the Nokton 50mm f/1.5 and it's excellent). There's a tone and texture to the images that indeed has a "Leica M stamp" on them. Again, subtle, but it shows. ....

 

and

...I like shooting with the M262 and find the images very appealing,...

 

He attributes the "Leica M stamp" to the lenses and in part this is true, but I can tell you from experiments with Leica R lenses on both the M240 and the same lenses on so called more advanced 'brand' name full frame DSLRs that there is more to it than that. Even when the Leica R lens often blows away its current counterpart on the DSLR body in terms of sharpness and overal IQ, this Leica stamp is largely gone when you look at the pictures. No amount of PP can correct that.

 

So who has the most advanced FF body? If you put the M240 at base ISO (200) and compare it to current DSLRs, I have yet to see one that can improve on that. Even the most obvious difference (amount of MP ) seems to be irrelevant because it is very hard to out resolve the 24MP sensor in the M240, even if the DSLR has 50MP.

 

Yes, if you need high ISO the Leica M might not be the best best choice, but bear in mind that if you use a zoom at F4.0 on the DSLR at ISO 25000, you can put your M at ISO 3200 and use a Summilux at F1.4 or even use a Noctilux with ISO 800 and still use the same shutter speed!

Edited by dpitt
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to consider this from another point of view...

 

1) I couldn't care less what a review says, if I like something myself

2) I've owned and still own more than one Leica camera. Image quality has never been an issue. I've basically used every digital M generation from M8 to now M262 - in normal conditions even the M8 is still very much useable, as so many people in the M8 forum display day in day out.

 

M262 is fantastic and there's enough image quality to outperform the needs of 99% of photographers. The bigger question is wether "all manual" rangefinder fits your style/needs, rather than problems with image quality.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I listed the deficiencies of the M240/262, then ISO200 and a top shutter speed of 1/4000 would be towards the bottom of the list, and his use of the term "IQ" is just lazy.

The obvious issues (to me) are price, and all the generic rangefinder issues like difficulty in using WA and telephoto, the learning curve for focusing, and inaccurate framing. 

Listing "weathersealing" as a Pro is misleading, as the lenses are not weathersealed and the mount certainly is not.

I think there are reviews out there which are more insightful in highlighting both pros and cons.

 

But what persuaded this particular photographer to switch from a 2010 DSLR to a M9 was the simple experience of hiring one for the weekend: the hire charge was refunded when I bought the camera the following Monday. I'd read the all reviews, but it was personal experience that decided me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica commented on the weathersealing of lens and mount and claims that the tolerances are narrow enough to qualify as weather-sealed.

As an aside, the silicone rings used in some other mounts are not compressed on mounting the lens and do not seal better than the M mount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the OP, this review by Jim Arnold of the typ 262 is excellent.

 

http://www.jimarnold.org/blog/2015/12/leica-m-typ-262/

 

BTW, these comparisons of cameras hold as much water as comparing a Porsche 911 with a Ford F150 pickup truck. Two different items that do two different things. One is fast and sleek while the other is big and clunky.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica commented on the weathersealing of lens and mount and claims that the tolerances are narrow enough to qualify as weather-sealed.

As an aside, the silicone rings used in some other mounts are not compressed on mounting the lens and do not seal better than the M mount.

You may recall the thread about light leak around the M mount during long exposures, and the use of a scrunchy to block the leak. I wouldn't be so confident that a mount that leaked light couldn't leak water.

That said, I've used my M in fine dense spray from the Dettifoss falls in Iceland without trouble. However, I wouldn't risk it in the pouring rain, where I have used the SL and SL zoom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may recall the thread about light leak around the M mount during long exposures, and the use of a scrunchy to block the leak. I wouldn't be so confident that a mount that leaked light couldn't leak water.

That said, I've used my M in fine dense spray from the Dettifoss falls in Iceland without trouble. However, I wouldn't risk it in the pouring rain, where I have used the SL and SL zoom.

Gap doesn't necessarily mean water will get in. With pressure, sure, but without any pressure it may or may not depending on how small the gap is and how viscous the liquid (water) is.

 

http://www.fukuda-jp.com/en/msz/pdf/A_hole_without_water_leakage%28E%29.pdf

 

Do I trust this with my camera? Yes, I have taken my camera in pouring rain without ill effect. My main concern is drops on front element/filter which is not noticeable while shooting since OVF is not looking through the lens.

 

This photo was taken in an hour hike while it was raining almost all the time and my camera was hung on my shoulder. Towards the end my VF was fogging. I had come across a DIY article on how to seal VF but lost the link. I don't bother now for that DIY article since it is rare that I take my M in a rain, but when I do, I look forward to dramatic, well saturated pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gap doesn't necessarily mean water will get in. With pressure, sure, but without any pressure it may or may not depending on how small the gap is and how viscous the liquid (water) is.

 

http://www.fukuda-jp.com/en/msz/pdf/A_hole_without_water_leakage%28E%29.pdf

 

Do I trust this with my camera? Yes, I have taken my camera in pouring rain without ill effect. My main concern is drops on front element/filter which is not noticeable while shooting since OVF is not looking through the lens.

 

This photo was taken in an hour hike while it was raining almost all the time and my camera was hung on my shoulder. Towards the end my VF was fogging. I had come across a DIY article on how to seal VF but lost the link. I don't bother now for that DIY article since it is rare that I take my M in a rain, but when I do, I look forward to dramatic, well saturated pictures.

You don't need pressure; capillary forces can do it. As I said, I've taken my own M out in wet conditions, so I don't see it as a major problem. After all, the M mount was designed in the early 50s, so I see nothing to complain about, just a bit of care to be taken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may recall the thread about light leak around the M mount during long exposures, and the use of a scrunchy to block the leak. I wouldn't be so confident that a mount that leaked light couldn't leak water.

That said, I've used my M in fine dense spray from the Dettifoss falls in Iceland without trouble. However, I wouldn't risk it in the pouring rain, where I have used the SL and SL zoom.

Well, having used and drenched my M9 in tropical downpours in the rainforest with no ill effect bar a temporary fogging of the viewfinder, I certainly trust my M. That said, weatherproof  is not waterproof. For that you would need an S, which allegedly can be submerged for a limited time.

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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...