M9/M-E to M262?

[strangeboy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello.
I'm interested in hearing from anyone whose made the move from an M9/M-E to a 262.
How are you feeling about your decision?

I've recently replaced the sensor in my M-E, which included a full CLA from Leica, NJ. It feels like a new camera, but I'm also reminded of the only gripe I've ever really had about it: Limited ISO performance. I max out at 1200, but even that can turn a Summer afternoon into a snowy day in B/W. I'd love to (when necessary) shoot between 1600 & 3200 without the resulting photograph becoming an exploration in Pointillism.

In addition, weather sealing and the larger sensor seem like a plus.
Let the CCD vs CMOS debate begin!

So good people...
What say you?
Thanx!

[Advertisement]

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

[a.noctilux]

M9/M-E are nice picture producers...

M typ 262 can give much better "experiences" than M9/M-E.

Some users complain that the color from M262's DNG are not as nice as M9, not me because some post prod can do matching things.

 

Usable to 3200 ISO with overdrive if need be to 6400 ISO, but that is not the only M262 strength,

...quieter, quicker writing, longer battery live, etc.

[Ko.Fe.]

I have no problem with M-E 220 ISO 2500. I just give it enough light.

[rivi1969]

A friend of mine offered me a straight trade, her M262 for my stunning M9-P, and I said an absolute NO way! If you use a fast lens you will seldom need very high ISO settings and the M9 is already a classic.

[martinot]

On 7/21/2020 at 11:33 PM, strangeboy said:

Hello.
I'm interested in hearing from anyone whose made the move from an M9/M-E to a 262.
How are you feeling about your decision?

I've recently replaced the sensor in my M-E, which included a full CLA from Leica, NJ. It feels like a new camera, but I'm also reminded of the only gripe I've ever really had about it: Limited ISO performance. I max out at 1200, but even that can turn a Summer afternoon into a snowy day in B/W. I'd love to (when necessary) shoot between 1600 & 3200 without the resulting photograph becoming an exploration in Pointillism.

In addition, weather sealing and the larger sensor seem like a plus.
Let the CCD vs CMOS debate begin!

So good people...
What say you?
Thanx!

Check this one for another one in your situation; http://gear.vogelius.se/-editorials/leica-m262-m9/index.html

I where in the situation 1-2 years ago to choose between a M-E (M9 version) or a 262.  I love the dark grey colour of the old M-E (great looking camera!), but decided against it for mainly all the sensor and reliability problems (either corrosion, or cracking sensor glass). The terrible ISO performance was also not in favor for the older sensor (even if reliability was a show stopper) for me.

When I just where to buy a 262 last year, Leica announced the new M-E (240 version), so I went with that new M-E instead.

Very happy I did so! Love the expanded 2 Gb buffer and the possibility for Live View. I would not like to skip LV today. Even if I mainly use RF for focusing and composing, in the few cases when I do need LV for either composition or focusing, it is invaluable to that that feature on an M camera. 

[DandA]

I'll just make a personal comments regarding matching M262 colors to M9. I don't claim to be a Photoshop guru but have been working with Photoshop since Ver. 1 many years ago and working with RAW files in general for more than 20 years. Depending on the kind of light as well as lighting conditions for subjects, sometimes you can match colors of the two camera but there are times you can't. It depends..and sometimes you can get close but a difference is readily noticeable. I've used both camera but for image output alone, I much prefer the M9. Functionally of course the advantages of the M262 are well known. All things considered its a personal decision and taking a few shots with each camera is not enough to get a feel of which image output you prefer but taking a wide variety of different kind of subjects in all sorts of lighting situations, would be most helpful.

Dave (D&A)

[martinot]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, DandA said:

I'll just make a personal comments regarding matching M262 colors to M9. I don't claim to be a Photoshop guru but have been working with Photoshop since Ver. 1 many years ago and working with RAW files in general for more than 20 years. Depending on the kind of light as well as lighting conditions for subjects, sometimes you can match colors of the two camera but there are times you can't. It depends..and sometimes you can get close but a difference is readily noticeable. I've used both camera but for image output alone, I much prefer the M9. Functionally of course the advantages of the M262 are well known. All things considered its a personal decision and taking a few shots with each camera is not enough to get a feel of which image output you prefer but taking a wide variety of different kind of subjects in all sorts of lighting situations, would be most helpful.

Dave (D&A)

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-1/

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-2/

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/03/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-3/

 

Tip, here you can download Lr presets so you can get M9-colour rendering of your 262/240 photos:

https://reddotforum.com/Lightroom_Presets/Leica M240 (M9 Emulation) Preset (DF)_2020.xmp

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2020/04/lightroom-presets-for-leica-cameras/

Edited September 6, 2020 by martinot

[DandA]

I've already discussed this at length with Dave at Leica store Miami (in person) and are familar with the discussions in the link. There's a reason a significant number of individuals who went from a M9 to a M240, went back to a M9. Additionally I've worked with some top notch Photoshop experts and they too agreed that not all M240 files can be manipulated to look exactly like their M9 counterparts. There is also a reason M9's have retained their value, even above many M240 variants. I respect those that have a different opinion there will always those who prefer one of these cameras over the other.

Dave (D&A)

[martinot]

23 hours ago, DandA said:

Additionally I've worked with some top notch Photoshop experts and they too agreed that not all M240 files can be manipulated to look exactly like their M9 counterparts. 

I have no idea about Photoshop. Almost never used that software.

[DandA]

3 minutes ago, martinot said:

I have no idea about Photoshop. Almost never used that software.

Photoshop/Lightroom (same company basically same algorithms) I'd venture to say is one of the most popular photo software for post processing, especially of RAW files. What do you use?

Dave (D&A)

[martinot]

Might also add; I personally much prefer the more natural looking colours from M240/M10 (with a preference for the former). Looks like photos from modern well behaved digital cameras from the professional manufacturers.

I think the M9 colours are much more garish and oversaturated. Reminds me of many Asian mobile phones processed and saturated colours (much prefer the more flat and natural looking photos from iPhone).

Also remember; it is much easier to start with a natural looking flat picture, and later on saturate it to your likings, than the other way around.

Edited September 7, 2020 by martinot

[martinot]

34 minutes ago, DandA said:

Photoshop/Lightroom (same company basically same algorithms) I'd venture to say is one of the most popular photo software for post processing, especially of RAW files. What do you use?

Dave (D&A)

I know they are from Adobe.

I have used Lr since 2010. I am Ok with that (and recently I also started to do dabble a little in C1 Pro 2). However that does not mean I know how to use all of Adobes other products (and especially not Ps). Ok?

Just because your an expert in one Microsoft program, does not mean you automatically know how to use them all.

Edited September 7, 2020 by martinot

[strangeboy]

On 9/6/2020 at 6:01 PM, DandA said:

I've already discussed this at length with Dave at Leica store Miami (in person) and are familar with the discussions in the link. There's a reason a significant number of individuals who went from a M9 to a M240, went back to a M9. Additionally I've worked with some top notch Photoshop experts and they too agreed that not all M240 files can be manipulated to look exactly like their M9 counterparts. There is also a reason M9's have retained their value, even above many M240 variants. I respect those that have a different opinion there will always those who prefer one of these cameras over the other.

Dave (D&A)

This actually makes a lot of sense, and comes pretty close to the way I feel about the situation. The technical advantages of the 262 are obvious, but I'm all about the composition. 

I believe the M9 CCD sensor is painter's palette & canvas unto itself, in the same way that film shooters live and die by either Fuji Superia or Kodak Ektachrome and so on. And like the M9, neither of those films ever produced what one would refer to as natural colors.

And as you probably guessed, I'm happily keeping the M-E, which is beginning to brass, btw. It's lovely.

Thanks everyone for your input! Carry on.

Edited September 7, 2020 by strangeboy
Slight addition.

[DandA]

Strangeboy very well said and a great analogy. The M9 doesn't have the most neutral and accurate color but it's unique signature (like certain film stocks you mentioned) are very attractive to many users and it gives the camera a unique position with regards to output as compared to the plethora of CMOS based cameras. Sure a lot can be done to any digital cameras RAW files but there are limitations and in addition time constraints if working on large numbers of files.

Dave (D&A)

[Ray Vonn]

11 hours ago, martinot said:

Also remember; it is much easier to start with a natural looking flat picture, and later on saturate it to your likings, than the other way around.

That's the problem, you can't replicate the look of the M9's files, believe me, I wish you could.  This is not unique to the M9 - it's the same when one compares the files of, say, the Ricoh GR/GRII to the GRIII.  Having said that, I have seen images from the M262 that stand out to me very similarly to the M9 in a way images from the 240 or even M10 do not.  I have trouble getting my head around that given I am told the M262 and 240 are pretty much the same camera in terms of rendered images.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Ray Vonn

[DandA]

 Although both cameras (the M240 and M262) are essentially the same with regards to still images...I have heard from some that supposedly the M262 was tweaked regarding its output. I'm not sure of the validity of this.

Dave (D&A)

[martinot]

On 9/8/2020 at 1:50 PM, DandA said:

 Although both cameras (the M240 and M262) are essentially the same with regards to still images...I have heard from some that supposedly the M262 was tweaked regarding its output. I'm not sure of the validity of this.

Dave (D&A)

According to Leica rep. it is the exact same sensor (LEICA MAX 24 MP-Still CMOS Sensor) and i principal the same type of DNG RAW-files between the M240 and the M262 (just tagged differently). Shutter is different, and might also be different tweaks to the JPEG in camera development. Should be easy to verify by importing RAW files from both cameras to Lr and C1, and without applying any camera specific presets, compare the images.