To buy an ‘M” or not ?

[Pingus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Greetings - longtime X user (vario and x-e) wondering if it’s time to upgrade, and to what ? I’m a pretty serious amateur artist who uses the camera to take reference photos for my paintings. Take the photo, transfer to 30’ monitor next to the easel and paint away. Mainly landscapes with some still life and portraits.  I’ve been noticing some limitations with the x’s regarding low light, auto focus, and cropping to see details. I’m not afraid of manual focusing, since I do it most of the time with the X -vario. The SL is out of question due to size. CL looks pretty sweet, but I wonder if it’s that much of an improvement from the X-vario. The 18-56 zoom seems right off the X-vario.  Is an M going to get me any noticeable improvement ? I know buying a new camera isn’t going to make me a better artist or a better photographer. If the consensus is stick with the X-vario and just shoot more, I’m OK with that.  But if an M is going to get me those details I need at the terminator right between light and dark, then it’s worth it and the unavoidable learning curve.

 

thanks much for any feedback/comments. Looking for some help in a big decision.  Thanks very much

If the consensus is ‘go for it’, then we can fight about 240 v 262

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[a.noctilux]

Hello Pingus,

With your way using your camera for, I think that M camera would be in your way of creativity.

You may gain some "more details/hues" with M (depending on lens choice , not many lens are excellent for long range and close range).

I think that in many cases, you wouldn't notice some differences, if the M lens used is not carefully choosen/used (with tripod, low ISO, etc.).

If possible, try the system M in sight (borrow, rent with the M lens of your plan of course) before buying one.

...

- transfering files from M can be done only with SD card with M262 (that light M without LV )

- with M240, you need a big add-on grip to have some more features if those matter (wifi, GPS, flash, etc. )

- so carrefully choosen lens for the job can be very expensive (apo, asph. etc.) or you would not see much improvments

- as "cheap lens but good enough", I suggest Summarit-M 2.4/50mm or older/cheaper 2.5/50mm (this is my favorite lens for all my M since last year)

 (good for it's price/size/weight and at long distance or near but not as good as Apo-Asph-Summicron-M 50mm of course which has floating lens for near distance)

 

Arnaud

Edited November 17, 2018 by a.noctilux

[enboe]

Before you splurge, may I offer another path?

Start shooting DNG only and use a tripod.  You can pull the details out of the shadows better with the DNG.  The tripod will make up for the slow aperture lens.

Eric

[Peter Kilmister]

I agree with @enboe

Definitely use DNG only. As you shoot mainly landscapes, still life, and portraits a tripod would certainly help. 

[Lee Rust]

Most contemporary digital cameras can make very high quality images, assuming good lenses, adequate sensor size, RAW files instead of jpg, using a tripod etc. The big thing about the M is the experience of using it... direct optical viewfinder, rangefinder focusing, tactility of simple controls and physical form. This is why you choose an M, not image quality, which in some quantitative ways actually lags behind the current state-of-the-art.

Edited November 17, 2018 by Lee Rust

[evikne]

I agree with @Lee Rust The main reason why I use Leica M is because of the unique user experience.

Another thing I love is the possibility to put on a huge number of lenses, both new and old, without any adapters. So you can give your images whatever expression you want.

Edited November 17, 2018 by evikne

[Jean-Michel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For what you use a camera for an M would be a total waste of money. Buy a real tripod, such as a Gitzo, with a good tripod head and keep your current camera. There isn’t a camera manufactured today that cannot give you an excellent file to view an any screen size. I do use an M-P (and other cameras) to document art exhibitions and find the integrated level very useful.

[Pingus]

Thanks all for your thoughtful answers. I have a good manfretto tripod  that I use when painting outdoors and have used it with the camera, although probably not often enough. It’s a point well taken about allowing me to maintain low ISO as well as shutter speed to get better images.  I had the suspicion that sooner or later I would have to gain some competence in post processing, but has always put it off because I prefer to spend the limited free time I have in front of an easel as opposed to sitting in front of a computer. I guess I might as well face facts and start saving up for a MacBook Pro as opposed to the M, even though I know which would be more fun.

 

thanks again for your comments I will take them to heart.

[Jeff S]

While you’re at it, why not buy a printer as well and invest some time learning to print?  Much better aid to painting IMO, and you end up with two presentations for each scene.  I think it’s a better way to allocate dollars than on another camera, although a different focal length or different character lens might offer new ways of seeing. So, too, can different papers, inks and print/PP techniques.

Jeff

Edited November 18, 2018 by Jeff S

[Ko.Fe.]

I have one question. It might be too technical. So, my apologies in advance.

If it is about landscapes, why not to use tripod? Again my apologies, but tripod technique works for still life and classic portraits were done with ISO 3 emulsion and tripod. Or with flash.

 

[pico]

Because tripods are clumsy and antithetical to traditional Leica photography? IMHO, anyone who knows his work will require a tripod should employ medium format or larger.

 

[Jeff S]

32 minutes ago, Ko.Fe. said:

I have one question. It might be too technical. So, my apologies in advance.

If it is about landscapes, why not to use tripod? Again my apologies, but tripod technique works for still life and classic portraits were done with ISO 3 emulsion and tripod. Or with flash.

 

If you read the short thread you’ll find that at least two other members raised the tripod issue, and the OP gave his thoughts.

Jeff

[Ko.Fe.]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

If you read the short thread you’ll find that at least two other members raised the tripod issue, and the OP gave his thoughts.

Jeff

This is why I added flash. Did I missed flash from previous two?

OP thoughts aren't clean to me. What tripod has to do with post processing? Put it on tripod, get correct and quality exposure in P mode and this is it.

How Mac Pro is related to painting is also difficult to me.  

[Jeff S]

5 minutes ago, Ko.Fe. said:

This is why I added flash. Did I missed flash from previous two?

OP thoughts aren't clean to me. What tripod has to do with post processing? Put it on tripod, get correct and quality exposure in P mode and this is it.

How Mac Pro is related to painting is also difficult to me.  

I edit to some degree EVERY pic that ends up as a worthy print. Same principle as in my darkroom days.  Sure, proper in-camera exposure helps, but it’s never the end point for me.  

A tripod is useful for many types of photography; personally I avoid it with the M unless I’m doing some camera/lens calibration tests or something similar.  But surely others use one for landscape or other.  Whatever works.

In the end, the photographer (or painter) makes the difference, with the best tools between the ears.

Jeff