New: Leica M-E (Type 240)

[pmlpoma]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

28 minutes ago, Ko.Fe. said:

And have you seen seven years old car models in productions these days?  

What’s the matter? After seven years I have to throw it away? Probably yes. It’s quite a big shift in Leica engineering philosophy.

[mdemeyer]

Must have had way too much 240 parts inventory. First the Russian deal and then this...

[Roberto Watson]

Beautiful grey color, and the 2Gb buffer makes it very attractive. 

[steamboat]

M240 has two options for ‘color’ of frame lines- white & red. I wonder if the red lines are available on new M-E?

[LexS]

Ich frage mich wie es eigentlich mit Leica geht. All dies kann bedeuten, dass die Firma zu viel geld verbraucht hat.

[roma]

Very glad to know that new M240 batteries will still be available for at least 5 more years, maybe longer.  

[Richardgb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, pmlpoma said:

What’s the matter? After seven years I have to throw it away? Probably yes. It’s quite a big shift in Leica engineering philosophy.

Sadly, and as discussed under other threads re the SL2, a 'shift in Leica engineering philosophy', while difficult to swallow for existing users is the harsh reality. Digital camera bodies will:

1. Get cheaper and / or have more features (just like other 'computers')
2. Will have a shorter life cycle because of relatively rapid changes in digital technology compared to mechanical.

and as a result the product overall will get cheaper, while older models (no matter how reliable for the time being) will become unsupportable.

Sadly, for (us) M users, this is a bitter pill to swallow. It is unlikely that the cost of the mechanical precision in the body can ever fall below a certain price point whereas the electronics inside will. Compare this to a digital (mirrorless) body which simply depends on electronics. I imagine, like certain marques of car or wristwatch, there will always be a market for mechanical-optical precision but this will be at a prices that, except for enthusiasts, fewer people will be prepared to pay.

As / when my my M240 becomes unusual, it will be a difficult decision whether to replace it with a later M model, or to change systems.

 

[NigelG]

Possibly related - or maybe not - I noticed Leica Manchester are giving a discount of £1000 on an M10 if bought with any M lens.......

[budrichard]

Interesting to read all the Posts from the Forum Members and ‘Experts’.

I got tired of reading about equipment and not photography on this forum years ago.

As a former Newspaper photog, used mostly Nikon F equipment  supplemented by M3 and 2&1/4X3&1/4 equipment. 

With the advent of further advances, an M6 0.85 and two M7’s 0.85 along with Nikon equipment came to my collection.

With a number of Leica ASPH lenses from 21, 35, 75 and 90 in my inventory, a switch to digital was in the offing but with the high prices, no.

So the New M-E fits the bill completely for me and not withstanding, the comments about body manufacture, Sensor, and whatever, it will take pictures!

Those that think of photography as an investment strategy may not like the New M-E.

Mine is on order.

-Richard

 

[Ko.Fe.]

10 hours ago, pmlpoma said:

What’s the matter? After seven years I have to throw it away? Probably yes. It’s quite a big shift in Leica engineering philosophy.

So, you are throwing away Mercedes and Cadillac after seven years? Or are you pissed off then BMW makes same model cheap after opening domestic assembly line and cutting off import duties ?

If you are going to throw away working camera, what's the matter with you?  

[Ko.Fe.]

11 hours ago, Big John said:

And what about the SL pricing....

Sorry, no idea about SL. 

I have to google SL. It is A7 copy.  . It seems anything, except M, is already made for less.  

So, what happened with SL pricing? 

[jaeger]

15 hours ago, Big John said:

It is priced not that differently to an M240 and functionality looks like an MP240 (2GB buffed). It might in fact keeps more value than an MP240 for those that like the distinctive colouring. 

I continue to wonder about buying into the M system, and this lower price entry makes it harder!  IF the ME is largely the same as the MP240, then the factors that I would need to understand I am giving up vs a new M10 include:

1. Sensor - older design, colours (red), weaker High ISO performance 

2. OVF - I like the increase in size of the M10 viewfinder 

3. No physical ISO control

 

 

it's a MP240 without sapphire LCD indeed.  It's such a disaster for MP owners and bad move from Leica. 

[Big John]

5 hours ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Sorry, no idea about SL. 

I have to google SL. It is A7 copy.  . It seems anything, except M, is already made for less.  

So, what happened with SL pricing? 

Deals to be had on SL and lens - undercutting original pricing. Maybe indicative of SL2 - or fact that SL competes with other mirrorless cameras (whereas M has monopoly). 

[colonel]

13 hours ago, Richardgb said:

Sadly, and as discussed under other threads re the SL2, a 'shift in Leica engineering philosophy', while difficult to swallow for existing users is the harsh reality. Digital camera bodies will:

1. Get cheaper and / or have more features (just like other 'computers')
2. Will have a shorter life cycle because of relatively rapid changes in digital technology compared to mechanical.

and as a result the product overall will get cheaper, while older models (no matter how reliable for the time being) will become unsupportable.

Sadly, for (us) M users, this is a bitter pill to swallow. It is unlikely that the cost of the mechanical precision in the body can ever fall below a certain price point whereas the electronics inside will. Compare this to a digital (mirrorless) body which simply depends on electronics. I imagine, like certain marques of car or wristwatch, there will always be a market for mechanical-optical precision but this will be at a prices that, except for enthusiasts, fewer people will be prepared to pay.

As / when my my M240 becomes unusual, it will be a difficult decision whether to replace it with a later M model, or to change systems.

 

digital cameras are replaced more frequently

that doesnt stop old ones working. There is no pressure for you to upgrade except from yourself

M8's still working fine if one looked after it

Second hand M 240s in the UK are still 2-2.5k. A Nikon Z6 is 1.6k, a better camera in every respect (except not a rangefinder, and no brass) but the second hand prices for digital Leicas still hold up much better then other digtial cameras.

Everyone needs to get used to the idea of depreciation.

We buy the cameras for pleasure. Anyone buying a camera for investment, unless an antique which they lock in a cabinet, is playing a loosing game ...

 

 

Edited June 26, 2019 by colonel

[sls]

We buy Leica M because it is ergonomically chalk and cheese to anything else. We like using them. I hate cameras with lots of buttons and weird shapes. If there was a cheaper alternative I'd consider it, but there isn't. My M10 is a long term investment in pleasure and happiness. I've used my Q for 4 years and will get over half my money back (upgrading to Q2). I just sold an M7 for an 80% profit and am using the money to buy my son an M6 TTL. He will use it, but he could leave it in the box and it will likely increase in value. I sleep safe in the knowledge that my lenses will last me my lifetime and my son will hopefully enjoy them (we share anyway). It does cost quite a bit to buy into the M system, but once I did I've never questioned the benefits of doing so. So if Leica make available some perfectly good entry level bodies at a favourable price, that's great in my book.

[Peter Zapp]

Leica M film bodies depreciated very little after they left the shop. The cost of ownership for a second-hand Leica M body was the capital outlay rather than the depreciation. This changed with digital. Digital Leica depreciate slower than the mainstream competition, but in absolute terms the cost of ownership is higher. This however should be compared to the cost of film and lab in the analogue era. Today, after the decline of budget or one-hour film processing at almost every corner in town, the cost and time would be even higher, with a lot of unnecessary prints from bad negatives. And there never was budget or one-hour option at every corner just for B&W processing and contact prints.

Digital components become progressively unrepairable and obsolete within few years. This doesn't matter for a smartphone or a mirrorless camera with electronic viewfinder which are all and onlTy digital components, except the frame. Compared to that a digital Leica's mechanical and optical components appear overdesigned, likely have the same service life as in film Leicas. It is sad, uneconomic and unsustainable that there is no way to reuse the mechanical and optical components, or to upgrade sensors and image processors. Perhaps with further miniaturisation they may fit into user-replacable modules. That would be a killer in terms of true lifecylce cost.

[JimBo]

On 6/25/2019 at 7:32 AM, mdemeyer said:

Must have had way too much 240 parts inventory. First the Russian deal and then this...

That’s reminds me of Porsche back in 1975. They had discontinued the 914 but had a surplus of the 4 cylinder fuel injected engines. They installed them in 911 bodies and sold them as the 1976 912E...

Edited June 26, 2019 by JimBo

[aj37]

Hmmm, in view of the M-E 240 it looks as if I am going to have to revisit this comparison in a video I made:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1a9yd43P-8&t=2m55s

Meanwhile... one big hesitation I would have about the M-E 240 is going back to the older 0.68x (?) rangefinder, since the M10's rangefinder was supposedly so much improved. There has to be somebody here who has both an M240 and an M10... in all honesty, how dramatic is the difference?

 

[a.noctilux]

2 hours ago, aj37 said:

Hmmm, in view of the M-E 240 it looks as if I am going to have to revisit this comparison in a video I made:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1a9yd43P-8&t=2m55s

Meanwhile... one big hesitation I would have about the M-E 240 is going back to the older 0.68x (?) rangefinder, since the M10's rangefinder was supposedly so much improved. There has to be somebody here who has both an M240 and an M10... in all honesty, how dramatic is the difference?

 

M240 family (M246, M262) and M10, I use them along for some years now.

At first, I saw a bit of more comfort with M10 "larger" (14mm , x 0.73) than the 12mm wide eye piece of previous M.

In real use, now I don't see the difference anymore.

If you use 35/50/75 lens , the VF of the two types can be used without any "visible difference" in real use.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Peter Kilmister]

Having owned M240, M240-P, and M10-P maybe I can help.

M240: Basic, easily scatchable rear screen, poor buffering, Leica red dot. Continuous shooting option and Video function. Intuitive menu. A good camera but limitations.

M240-P: Incognito with no red dot. Same features as M240 but double buffering and a scratchproof rear screen. A very good camera and holds value better than M240.

M10-P: Incognito ... more than the M240-P because of the nearly silent shutter. Neither continuous shooting, nor Video. Slightly larger and brighter viewfinder. Better ISO handling. Menu is less intuitive than M240. Slightly thinner than M240, however battery is smaller and needs charging more often. Considerably more expensive so depreciation will be high unless you buy a used camera. An excellent camera which might be described in English vernacular as the dog's bollocks