Advice for those thinking of a M240 in 2021

[boojum]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

59 minutes ago, martinot said:

Fiat, Skoda and Kia sells more cars than Mercedes and Porsche.

Sony sells more cameras than Leica.

My local seafood supplier sells more shrimps than lobsters.

More sales does not equate that quality is higher.

That is just poor logic on your part.

I do not think you have answered why Sony outsells Leica 280 to 1.  Narrow Sony to just the A7 line and I will wager a mortgage payment that Leica, again, is not even in the running.  If you are saying that Rolex tells time better than Timex because it costs more and looks prettier and has a lot of hand work in it I do not think that will fly anywhere.  It is interesting that you chose M-B and Porsche as quality cars, both notorious money pits.  Great to impress folks, if that is your aim, but they will not get you from A to B any better.  And maintenance is an expensive nose bleed.  Fiat is another joke, I know nothing of Skoda.

I do not doubt you cherish your Leica(s).  I do not doubt that you believe that the Leica is finer than any other camera in the world.  That does not make it so and the world has decided the same.

But this is tedious.  Facts do little to dissuade the true believers.  Let's just agree to disagree.

[Advertisement]

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

[martinot]

5 minutes ago, boojum said:

I do not think you have answered why Sony outsells Leica 280 to 1.  Narrow Sony to just the A7 line and I will wager a mortgage payment that Leica, again, is not even in the running.  If you are saying that Rolex tells time better than Timex because it costs more and looks prettier and has a lot of hand work in it I do not think that will fly anywhere.  It is interesting that you chose M-B and Porsche as quality cars, both notorious money pits.  Great to impress folks, if that is your aim, but they will not get you from A to B any better.  And maintenance is an expensive nose bleed.  Fiat is another joke, I know nothing of Skoda.

I do not doubt you cherish your Leica(s).  I do not doubt that you believe that the Leica is finer than any other camera in the world.  That does not make it so and the world has decided the same.

But this is tedious.  Facts do little to dissuade the true believers.  Let's just agree to disagree.

Like I have explained before. I have nothing against mirror less cameras. I own perhaps 10-12 of them, 2 DSLRs and just one Leica RF. I just do not like Sony mirror less cameras. Technically they are awesome, but I do not like their convoluted menu systems and poor ergonomics.

Regarding photo: use what ever tool you prefer for the moment. I even use instant cameras and my phone a lot of the time. 

Just like I enjoy using all my other cameras, I also enjoy using my Leica M rangefinder. It is another experience that I enjoy. 

For me it is not either or. It is a complement.

It is a tool that I simply enjoy. It is not a religion (like Sony worship seems to be to some fanboyz).

[martinot]

Addition: you seems to be quite un secure in your choices, and needs to validate them booth in this forum, and also by only using things that most other people buy. Like I gave example of it is a total fallacy to equate most sold with best choice.

I eat a lot of fresh lobsters, but is eating shrimp better or of finer taste  because they are sold in higher numbers?

Is McD better food than a Michelin star restaurant? With your "logic"; probably yes.

 

[pgk]

10 hours ago, boojum said:

If you are saying that Rolex tells time better than Timex because it costs more and looks prettier and has a lot of hand work in it I do not think that will fly anywhere.

But this is tedious.  Facts do little to dissuade the true believers.  Let's just agree to disagree.

Rolexes are not as accurate at telling the time as mobile phones but they still sell. Odd world isn't it?

Given your last paragraph, which is insulting, why exactly are you here?

[Jean-Michel]

So…

Early photographers had to be chemists and magicians. The mysterious craft had to be mastered in order to produce a photograph (that is, a print).

Then came George and his contraption.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Much too simple! So we asked for increasingly complicated instruments in order to produce our own splendid images. Everyone else just used a Kodak and made all the images they ever wanted.

And… what is the really big difference between the Kodak and today's image capturing thing-a-magigs?

The answer: today, you can still see the images made by those Kodaks – using human-readable documents, that is: the print. Today's images are mostly only machine-readable; unless you make prints to make them human readable in the future.

So. How many Leica, Sony, Canon, iPhone, PhaseOne, etc. images are any 'better' than the one made by a mom or dad with the Kodak?

 

[RayD28]

On 2/13/2021 at 3:08 PM, Denys said:

I don’t claim to speak for the majority of Leica owners - just me - but when I walk around with my (two) ‘trophies’, I’m aware it screams “look how f@cking rich I could be”.

Hope this helps! 👍

Great one!  

 

On 2/18/2021 at 4:06 PM, pgk said:

We seem to be getting a few threads on the forum in which the poster fails to appreciate that equipment is only a part of the equation and the 'best' equipment is the equipment which produces the results that the photograher wants. I'm not going to attempt to explain how having the latest, greatest and most highly specified camera is of no import if you can't control it (automation cannot second guess a photographer's intent). On the other hand, being able to control a simplistic camera which works extremely well at low ISO (for those of us who shoot at low ISO by default) can produce very affective and satisfying results.

Agree, and I add that some Leica enthusiast unintentionally come across as saying the most recent release is the only way to fully realize the Leica experience.  

 

On 2/18/2021 at 5:58 PM, boojum said:

Agreed, any survey with a single observation is notoriously inaccurate.  I did not present my experience as a survey but as my personal experience.  Also, the Sony Alpha series has evolved since it arrived on scene.  And as shoddy as you infer it is please account for Sony's 42% market share.  Has the world gone mad?  These numbers are a large survey and they point to the overwhelming success of the Sony camera line, reviews to the contrary.  A review is notoriously inaccurate as it is one observation also.  

The facts are indisputable but have at it.  When I pick up my Sony and point it at something I want an image of I am sure of one thing: an accurate, in-focus image, no hassle, every time.  Apparently the camera buying world and I are in agreement, 42%.  And while the Leica RF is a nice camera it is not as fast and accurate.  This is fact.  As for forces of nature, neither I nor the Sony will be out in foul weather, nor the Leica.  I have no reason to be out in foul weather just as I have no reason to stand upon my Sony.  I can stand on my Leicas.  So what?  How does that help me take a better photo?

You can hang your hat on bad reviews.  I'll hang mine on good reviews: market share.  Those are the reviews which count.  All the rest is just opinion.

Cheers

The market share of total camera sales is misleading because Leica markets to a small section of total buyers.  Since the 35mm rangefinder market is so small a general conclusion is unfair.  

 

On 2/21/2021 at 3:49 AM, Ray Vonn said:

I share the same views as you regarding the M240, but looking at some of the responses, I’m glad I didn’t raise it here! Never pull a tiger’s or in this case, M240 owner’s tail I suppose. But I do appreciate you being the (albeit unintended) canary down the coalmine.

I believe posting in this forum and suggesting buyers to consider other options is appropriate since people interested in an M2XX visit this forum for information.  I bought my M-P after researching in this forum AND the M9 forum.  If you dig deep in this forum you'll find posts saying M users will not upgrade to the M10, and if you look in the M10 forum you see posts explaining why M users will not upgrade to the M10.  As long as comments are informative and objective, it's a great help to potential buyers.  

 

On 2/26/2021 at 1:41 PM, boojum said:

Leica owners have among their numbers a fanatic following who will brook no criticism of the product.  I think they sometimes border on the irrational.  

 

I've seen some but here but not many.  With some folks it's like you're either a Chevy guy or a Ford guy.  At least for the LUF, there are no parking lots to go to to settle disputes.

 

21 hours ago, boojum said:

I do not think you have answered why Sony outsells Leica 280 to 1.  Narrow Sony to just the A7 line and I will wager a mortgage payment that Leica, again, is not even in the running.  If you are saying that Rolex tells time better than Timex because it costs more and looks prettier and has a lot of hand work in it I do not think that will fly anywhere.  It is interesting that you chose M-B and Porsche as quality cars, both notorious money pits.  Great to impress folks, if that is your aim, but they will not get you from A to B any better.  And maintenance is an expensive nose bleed.  Fiat is another joke, I know nothing of Skoda.

I do not doubt you cherish your Leica(s).  I do not doubt that you believe that the Leica is finer than any other camera in the world.  That does not make it so and the world has decided the same.

But this is tedious.  Facts do little to dissuade the true believers.  Let's just agree to disagree.

OK, I'm sure there are some people that buy a Leica for eye candy to parade their wealth.  Where I live and generally shoot about 90% of the people have never heard of Leica, 8% know the name, 1% know it's an old and expensive brand, and only 1% know how expensive.  For the 1% that know how expensive the equipment is, half of them don't give a rat's ass about your camera.  The rest either:

* Have a Leica too or are generally interested getting one.

* Are fellow photographers that think their Nikon/Cannon/Sony is far superior to Leica and feels sorry for you.

* Are fellow photographers that think you are an ignorant snob.  

 

 

Edited February 27, 2021 by RayD28

[Denys]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

33 minutes ago, RayD28 said:

 

OK, I'm sure there are some people that buy a Leica for eye candy to parade their wealth...

 

Possibly - but if that’s the intention would it not be easier to, say, wear a (vulgar) Rolex? Firstly,  more people would recognise what it was. Secondly, most owners could tell the time as easily with a (vulgar) Rolex as with a more modest wristwatch, without any extra training. Why buy a Leica rangefinder when to make photographs with it requires some effort?

[RayD28]

2 hours ago, Denys said:

Possibly - but if that’s the intention would it not be easier to, say, wear a (vulgar) Rolex? Firstly,  more people would recognise what it was. Secondly, most owners could tell the time as easily with a (vulgar) Rolex as with a more modest wristwatch, without any extra training. Why buy a Leica rangefinder when to make photographs with it requires some effort?

Denys, thanks for question and comment. I was keeping the topic to cameras.  Watches have been discussed in different threads.  However, I get your point.  

But let me say this, I sincerely believe most enthusiast on the LUF do not use Leica equipment to try to impress others.  Instead most here appreciate the Leica heritage and enjoy the picturing taking process required by simple(r) photography equipment.  

BTW, I agree Rolex watches are "vulgar" and that's why I prefer the blue collar, working man's watch, the Omega Seamaster.  🙂  

[boojum]

16 hours ago, pgk said:

Rolexes are not as accurate at telling the time as mobile phones but they still sell. Odd world isn't it?

Given your last paragraph, which is insulting, why exactly are you here?

Rolexes are sold not only to tell time but to impress other people.  This is common to many luxury items, isn't it?  They are showy but sometimes not so great at what one would imagine to be their primary function.

I had hoped this forum would be more a platform of discussion of the strong and weak points of the Leica.  However it seems that the weak points are not to be discussed here.  Of all the BBS's I am on it is the ones with strict controls and rules of imposed etiquette which have the less to offer.  The ones without the "stout defenders" seem to thrive on an exchange of ideas and growth more than the others.  But then again, this is just my opinion.  I do not doubt for one minute that there are many who would disagree with this.  But we live in a free world where the exchange of opinions, even those we disagree with, can happen without fear or favor.  Sitting in the choir and limning "Amen" at regular intervals does not illustrate much other than obedience. But then again, this is just my opinion.  YMMV

If you were insulted please accept my regrets.

Edited February 28, 2021 by boojum
rewording

[Sauro]

On 13/2/2021 at 14:03, UltraDan said:

Non c'è assolutamente niente di sbagliato in questo, non è quello che ho detto, ma devi accettare che la maggior parte degli sparatutto digitali oggi abbia usato uno dei sistemi di fotocamere che ho menzionato, quindi penso che sia un confronto valido - sì, se hai sempre girato solo in analogico e l'M240 è stata la tua prima fotocamera digitale in assoluto E volevi un telemetro, quindi ne rimarrai sbalordito, ma penso che chiunque provenga da Canon / Sony / Nikon vedrà immediatamente i suoi difetti - lo so che l'ho fatto immediatamente. E non dimentichiamoci che questi vanno ancora per oltre £ 2k, che è una cifra enorme per le prestazioni, e che ti comprerebbe facilmente un 5Dmk4 o un Sony A7iii o anche un Sony A7Riii. 
 

Stavo solo cercando di offrire un consiglio prima che le persone spendano quel tipo di denaro per qualcosa di cui potrebbero essere insoddisfatte o addirittura deluse. 

Ma chi compra una leica 240 non è interessato alla tecnologia attuale e a fare dei confronti, se lo fai non eri entri nella mentalità telemetro

[jaapv]

Welcome. Please post in English, this is an international forum.

Quote

But those who buy a leica 240 are not interested in current technology and making comparisons, if you do you don't have  the rangefinder mentality

[pgk]

7 hours ago, boojum said:

I had hoped this forum would be more a platform of discussion of the strong and weak points of the Leica.

If you were insulted please accept my regrets.

The OP could as easily have compared the 5DmkII with a current camera and said much the same. Why would you? The post was pointless and negative IMO, and full of opinions dressed as facts. It got the robust rebuttal it deserved.

Don't worry about it. Free exchange of opinions and all that😉🙂.

[UltraDan]

On 2/18/2021 at 4:40 PM, padam said:

With that opening post, it was a dead thread to start with.
I buy and sell cameras sometimes, but if I sell one I don't start a thread about why you shouldn't buy one because this and that is better, etc. since that is just my own personal opinion and sometimes people won't admit that they might be the source of the problem, not the camera and it is easy to blame it on the gear as the reason it does not work out.
This is great clickbait material for youtube as well, you can see it as a trend: 5 reasons not to get this or that, it is like a gear competition. It is very sad.

On the other hand, I do enjoy passionate articles with nice pictures even if that particular item wouldn't be my choice. And these people usually speak fondly about their older gear as well.

Anyone can look up plenty of M240 images to see if the image quality is fine or not.
I think where it sits right now, it is a very compelling choice for anyone wanting to try a Leica. I don't think anybody would choose it not knowing about other potential choices with different advantages and drawbacks.

Slightly insulting take on my post but you are entitled to your opinion, I stand by what I said and dispute what someone else said about me offering opinions dressed as facts - your results may vary. For me the M240 was lacklustre as far as the whole shooting experience goes and poor as far as image output but I accept I'm surrounded by much better photographers here. We're all entitled to our opinions, I was just sharing mine, sorry if it didn't fit the mantra. 

[aksclix]

It’s ugly to see the arrogance and hostility in some of the comments.. wonder what it would take for people to be “nice” 

Why do people want to be right? Why is it ok to show you’re a genius and a know-it-all even if it means the other person is bullied around by a pack of Leica aficionados here? 
when would some of us rise above this appalling behavior? 
 

Unless you’re a teenager it’s NOT OK to ridicule others if their opinions differ from yours.. 

[didier]

On 2/12/2021 at 3:57 PM, UltraDan said:

1600 is about max that you'd want to use after that the image deteriorates pretty quick. 

I agree the M(240) is weak compared to other cameras in high iso. I used to go up to iso 2500 in color, and 3200 or even 6400 when converting in B&W.

In the 100 - 1600 no issue with image quality in my view, all the more as you can you use all Leica glass  

I went from the M(240) to the M10M. Just 2 different worlds is ergonomics, IQ and responsiveness.

 

Didier

[aksclix]

So is the S2 -and S006.. they’re still well liked and being sold at the “right price”..

IQ when the conditions are right are still great as I found out when I was looking to buy one of those.. however, the low ISO and very ordinary dynamic range were unacceptable in this day and age..  

 

[Herr Barnack]

After reading this thread, it is obvious that there is but one "scientific," "logical" and "smart" course of action:  Everyone should immediately throw all of their Leica cameras and lenses (and all copies of LFI magazine just to be on the safe side) into the nearest dumpster, then run out and buy one of the cameras that Consumer Reports endorses as a supposed best buy:  https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cameras.htm

Only then will you be revered as a "smart" camera buyer - and isn't that what really matters?  🙄

 

 

Edited April 10, 2021 by Herr Barnack

[rpsawin]

How about you each take in a deep breath, release it slowly and grab your camera and a lens or two and go out and shoot. Isn't that why you purchased the gear in the first place?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Gadfly21]

On 4/10/2021 at 1:10 PM, Herr Barnack said:

After reading this thread, it is obvious that there is but one "scientific," "logical" and "smart" course of action:  Everyone should immediately throw all of their Leica cameras and lenses (and all copies of LFI magazine just to be on the safe side) into the nearest dumpster, then run out and buy one of the cameras that Consumer Reports endorses as a supposed best buy:  https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cameras.htm

Only then will you be revered as a "smart" camera buyer - and isn't that what really matters?  🙄

 

 

I would argue that the correct course of action is to admit why we really enjoy Leica, and it is for reasons outside of image quality and performance. Those reasons will vary.

I agree with the OP that the M240 has weak ISO performance. The first A7 was announced a year after the first M240 and it has a better base ISO and can easily go to 12,800 ISO without major degradation of the image quality.  I can't push my M-E 240 past 1600 and in post-processing I can't reliably pull shadows more than 2 stops.

That being said, I still prefer the M-E 240 over almost anything else except my M6. The limitation of 1600 is not a deal-breaker because I am already used to that with film. The cost of the camera represents a savings in time/effort/money over film. I accept the limitations because I prefer the shooting experience that much more (OVF, true rangefinder) and making the major decisions myself (mechanical focus with distance scale, exposure settings). It's over-engineered, but for that reason I feel that I can trust it over other cameras (purely subjective).

I differ from the OP in that I can also trust my M-E 240 to deliver the right exposure on A mode. If needed, I set exposure comp down a stop or meter when pointing at a highlight and hold that setting with the half-press of the shutter. I am aware that the screen isn't great so when I see a "dark" image on the back, I know it will be right on the computer. That is far from ideal, but it works for me. It didn't for him, and that's OK. Let's not be so pejorative.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Gadfly21

[Herr Barnack]

4 hours ago, Gadfly21 said:

I would argue that the correct course of action is to admit why we really enjoy Leica, and it is for reasons outside of image quality and performance. Those reasons will vary.

I agree with the OP that the M240 has weak ISO performance. The first A7 was announced a year after the first M240 and it has a better base ISO and can easily go to 12,800 ISO without major degradation of the image quality.  I can't push my M-E 240 past 1600 and in post-processing I can't reliably pull shadows more than 2 stops.

That being said, I still prefer the M-E 240 over almost anything else except my M6. The limitation of 1600 is not a deal-breaker because I am already used to that with film. The cost of the camera represents a savings in time/effort/money over film. I accept the limitations because I prefer the shooting experience that much more (OVF, true rangefinder) and making the major decisions myself (mechanical focus with distance scale, exposure settings). It's over-engineered, but for that reason I feel that I can trust it over other cameras (purely subjective).

I differ from the OP in that I can also trust my M-E 240 to deliver the right exposure on A mode. If needed, I set exposure comp down a stop or meter when pointing at a highlight and hold that setting with the half-press of the shutter. I am aware that the screen isn't great so when I see a "dark" image on the back, I know it will be right on the computer. That is far from ideal, but it works for me. It didn't for him, and that's OK. Let's not be so pejorative.

@Gadfly21  My remarks were not directed to the OP's (@UltraDan) observations.

I will be the first to agree that ISO performance is the M240/M-P240's Achilles heel - it has been a frustration/limitation for me personally more than a few times.  That limitation has me thinking in terms of upgrading from my M-P 240 to an M10R.

The claim that "professional" photographers do not use Leica M cameras is a sweeping generalization that does not hold up under scrutiny.  It's true that Leica M cameras do not dominate in the fields of sports, wildlife or wedding photography.  It is also true that from its founding in April of 1947, Magnum photographers have overwhelmingly chosen Leica M cameras for their documentary and photojournalism work and - they still do so today. 

 

Edited April 12, 2021 by Herr Barnack