Advice for those thinking of a M240 in 2021

[jto555]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

The camera does offer the Leica rangefinder experience but for me as someone who shoots an M4-P I found it was actually slower to make pictures and this is due to the rear screen that really makes judging the image exposure hard. 
The camera is also quite a bit wider than my Analog Leica. 
 

 

 

It is not good practice to judge the exposure from the screen of any camera. The screen can appear bright or dark in relation to the ambient light level. It is much better and a lot more accrete to use the histogram to judge exposure.

This could be why you are having issues with you exposures.

 

 

As for ISO, have a look at this thread where I shot a M240 at 25,000ISO and got a clean image with some careful shooting and processing:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/316621-leica-m240-clean-image-at-over-25000-iso/

 

Also do not be afraid to use noise reduction in Photoshop or Capture One. I use it all the time. Have a look at some of my photographs on this site.

 

On 2/13/2021 at 9:22 PM, Al Brown said:

The three really hurtful things about M240 for pro use in 2021 are neither the thickness, nor the resolution (the latter being the only thing quoted in all "upgrade to M10-R" posts) but poor shadow recovery and the green cast thereof, blown out highlights and 7-image buffer.

 

 

 I have to agree with you on the thickness and resolution. Plus the M240 has a bigger battery than the M10. However I have to say that I find the shadow recovery much better than and Canon Eos (the R is a different animal) and prety good. I find that the green cast has improved with firmware and not an issue now. One of the forum members made a plugin for Lightroom to remove the case, but unfortunitly I cannot fine the link to the download now.

 

John

 

[tom.w.bn]

vor 57 Minuten schrieb jto555:

...

As for ISO, have a look at this thread where I shot a M240 at 25,000ISO and got a clean image with some careful shooting and processing:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/316621-leica-m240-clean-image-at-over-25000-iso/

 

...

I saw your post about that before. The result is fine but it needed numerous shots and excessive postprocessing. Because of that, your description "careful shooting an processing" is a bit funny.

[Advertisement]

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

[Good To Be Retired]

Is it just my imagination or is this thread beginning to sound like something from DPReview

[padam]

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.

Edited February 18, 2021 by padam

[jto555]

5 hours ago, tom.w.bn said:

I saw your post about that before. The result is fine but it needed numerous shots and excessive postprocessing. Because of that, your description "careful shooting an processing" is a bit funny.

I think the "careful shooting and processing" is accurate but in fairness not something you want to be doing all the time.

[martinot]

On 2/17/2021 at 6:01 AM, boojum said:

I have the A7M II.  I have not experienced the outlined problems

One sample is way too little to be of any statistical relevance.

Just check alls the tests I linked, and please read up on them and you will see the poor design choices Sony has made in their constructions. That is the reason why they did so poor in the tests who submitted the cameras from different manufactures to the forces of nature. It correlates quite well with the tear downs and assessments made by professionals.

 

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

[boojum]

1 hour ago, martinot said:

One sample is way too little to be of any statistical relevance.

Just check alls the tests I linked, and please read up on them and you will see the poor design choices Sony has made in their constructions. That is the reason why they did so poor in the tests who submitted the cameras from different manufactures to the forces of nature. It correlates quite well with the tear downs and assessments made by professionals.

 

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

[pgk]

9 hours ago, boojum said:

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 a Sony and Leica RF owner and user I would absolutely disagree on both your counts. They are opinions not facts. And as for the 42%, well they will inevitably be mostly 'casual' users who rely on automation rather than understand the finer points of using equipment to create nuanced imagery and would probably find a Leica M inaccessible in terms of technique. They may not be wrong, but they aren't a helpful indicator either.

Precise and guaranteed point of required focus is usually easier on the Leica and at time impossible on the Sony. Having a presetup M camera (I always return mine to its 'default' setting - aperture, shutter speed, ISO (rarely moves) and focus point based on my requirements) makes it a very fast and precise camera to use indeed. IMO you are misunderstanding that the two systems offer a very different way of working indeed.

[boojum]

49 minutes ago, pgk said:

As a Sony and Leica RF owner and user I would absolutely disagree on both your counts. They are opinions not facts. And as for the 42%, well they will inevitably be mostly 'casual' users who rely on automation rather than understand the finer points of using equipment to create nuanced imagery and would probably find a Leica M inaccessible in terms of technique. They may not be wrong, but they aren't a helpful indicator either.

Precise and guaranteed point of required focus is usually easier on the Leica and at time impossible on the Sony. Having a presetup M camera (I always return mine to its 'default' setting - aperture, shutter speed, ISO (rarely moves) and focus point based on my requirements) makes it a very fast and precise camera to use indeed. IMO you are misunderstanding that the two systems offer a very different way of working indeed.

Just look around at the next press conference and see what is being used.  You will not see Leicas where it is "do or die."  To say that only the elect are suitable for using a Leica borders on the arrogant.  And it denigrates legions of professionals who would not be "good enough" by your estimation to sport a Leica professionally and must fall back to the inferior Sonys, Nikons and Canons.  The pros are voting with their wallets.  They are not trying to impress anyone with their gear.  They have to get the job done.

True, the cameras require a different working method.  I wonder why professionals opt for the Japanese gear?  I wonder why the market is Japanese tech rich gear and Leica is at ~0.15%.  Is it because Leica is so much better a camera and the world "just does not get it?"  Is the minuscule minority the only savvy group?  Is there a camera elect?  Is that what you are intimating?  Perhaps if you explain to the professionals your technique it can make the difference.

You may be one of the Übermenschen who have that God-given talent to "understand the finer points of using equipment to create nuanced imagery" which is forbidden mere mortals defined by Sony ownership.  Only you can be the judge of that.  You may be right that I just do not understand the difference between manual and automatic cameras.  But I doubt it.

Please understand that I like the cameras.  Our difference seems to be that I can comfortably admit the camera has limitations.  I am not alone.  Better than 99% of the camera buying public agrees with me.  This is fact.

Cheers

Edited February 19, 2021 by boojum

[pgk]

30 minutes ago, boojum said:

The pros are voting with their wallets.  They are not trying to impress anyone with their gear.  They have to get the job done.

 

Our difference seems to be that I can comfortably admit the camera has limitations.

Well, I have made my living as a professional photographer for most of my life so..... . Like many professional photographers I run more than one system because no camera fits all solutions, and this is as true of the Sonys as it is Leicas. The Sony system would be infinitely better if Sony finally sorted its appalling User Interface out and discarded some of the irrelevencia which it seems is essential but never used in practice. Other cameras are not 'inferior' but the ethos behind their design and use is totally different from that of a Leica M. And professional photographers are often used as a marketing tool, however their actual photographic purchasing power is insignificant relative to amateurs.

The Leica M system has its limitations for sure, although for most uses that many photographers genuinely need they are not as significant as made out. Their problem is that they face automated competition, which suits most users because it means that they have not got to learn as much technique, and that 'specification sells' whether needed or not. You may not agree with me but please accept that your 'facts' are only 'opinions' and as ever are not always true.

FWIW I remember shooting some PR material alongside a professional jobbing photographer who covered press work. He couldn't remember how to disengage his camera from its 'auto' setting (pro- Nikon of the day) and had to ask me how it was done. Don't assume that all professional photographers are technically minded either (most are though some quite simply are not). The 'elect' as you describe them, are IMO photographers who prefer to be in control of simplistic cameras - try handing a Leica M to a photographer used to a modern dSLR; I have and the response is usually to hand it back untried because it is too unfamiliar despite offering minimal controls.

[RayD28]

I've used four digital cameras, Nikon D800, M9, M-P, and iPhone.  The iPhone is the most reliable at exposure.  The ISO limitations of the M9 was a major factor for upgrading to the M-P.  When chimping I rely on the histogram more than the digital image, but you have to know the limitations when it comes to under exposure to avoid blown highlights.  Bringing out the shadows also brings out the noise with high ISOs.  Exposure bracketing is a tool for any scene with tricky lighting.  

I use a Thumbs Up and it allows a comfortable grip offsetting the M-P's thickness.  

Someday I'll upgrade to the latest Leica technology but for now I'm happy.

My 2 cents.  

 

 

 

[Adam Bonn]

FWIW...

I think at the end of the day what’s important is the photo. The camera used, the way of using it etc are personal choices for the photographer.
 

Like having a healthy child, people are pleased to see the baby, they don’t start asking questions about what position, sex toys, how long it took, or if any fantasies were involved during the conception

 

People will always form emotive bonds to products from strong brands, and feel aggrieved if someone criticises their choice. Equally people can buy products from strong brands and feel aggrieved that they didn’t work out as hoped.

 

we tend to either shoot photos for ourselves or for clients. Those are the providers of opinions that matter.

 

There doesn’t need to be any dogma about techniques and brands, especially on the internet where it just ends up as a subtle form of tyranny where person A expects person B to agree with them because they’re “right”

 

No one’s got time for tyrannical dogma.

[UltraDan]

I feel this topic thread has come way away from my original conclusion, which I stand by : the M240 is a good camera, it's not a great camera and certainly using Leica glass on it greatly helps. As for those accusing me of not being a good photographer well that's fine, I consider myself a run and gun type of shooter so having a decent metering system for quick candid shots is important to me yes. I have had an image selected for the Sony world photography awards in the past so I really couldn't care less about some faceless posters on the internet, Leica also have used my images on their Instagram feed so yeah, maybe I'm not up to the level of some on here but I'm getting there. I still shoot my M4-p primarily alongside my digital bodies and will continue to enjoy my basic meter-less Leica experience x 

Edited February 21, 2021 by UltraDan

[Ray Vonn]

54 minutes ago, UltraDan said:

I feel this topic thread has come way away from my original conclusion, which I stand by : the M240 is a good camera, it's not a great camera and certainly using Leica glass on it greatly helps. As for those accusing me of not being a good photographer well that's fine, I consider myself a run and gun type of shooter so having a decent metering system for quick candid shots is important to me yes. I have had an image selected for the Sony world photography awards in the past so I really couldn't care less about some faceless posters on the internet, Leica also have used my images on their Instagram feed so yeah, maybe I'm not up to the level of some on here but I'm getting there. I still shoot my M4-p primarily alongside my digital bodies and will continue to enjoy my basic meter-less Leica experience x 

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.

[UltraDan]

1 hour ago, 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.

Haha, again though I say, it's a good camera, just as far as digital cameras today go it has its downfalls - which is absolutely fine - it's by no means a new release. Dunno why there is so much hate directed at me for giving an honest opinion that will hopefully help someone not spent £2.5k on a camera and be disappointed. Judging by the responses it's clear that the only people buying Leica digital are the sort of people who shoot Leica analog and are 100% comfortable with the rangefinder system and it's slow nature - again that's fine. I like to use all different brands of camera to get a feel for what works for me, with digital I want to compose and shoot at my selected aperture or shutter speed and not worry about the iso or metering because the files can be manipulated in post - I found very little latitude in the m240 files, again-  to be expected from a camera of this age.

For me personally I'll stick with my analog Leica 👍🏻

[pgk]

58 minutes ago, UltraDan said:

Dunno why there is so much hate directed at me for giving an honest opinion that will hopefully help someone not spent £2.5k on a camera and be disappointed.

It really is not hate which is far too strong a word, but many people who disagree with you will no doubt reserve the right (on this which is after all the LEICA forum) to disagree with you, and .....

On 2/13/2021 at 11:59 PM, UltraDan said:

It's just crap metering system on this camera that doesn't work well and requires the user to take multiple shots to be sure of a keeper, when you allow a camera to use its own judgment you usually want it to be right but this thing rarely is. 

..... when you make statements like, this which again many of us utterly disagree with, then debate will get heated. The 'crap' metering system on Leica rangefinders works just fine. Interpreting it takes understanding and interpretation, which many of us who have been used to centre weighted metering for a long time are aware of. The problem is that you OP 'advice' was compromised by assumptions and then backed up by assertions. People looking for information on Leicas should read such threads with robust rebuttals of opinions which don't accord with many user's experience.

 

[padam]

3 hours ago, UltraDan said:

I feel this topic thread has come way away from my original conclusion, which I stand by : the M240 is a good camera, it's not a great camera and certainly using Leica glass on it greatly helps. As for those accusing me of not being a good photographer well that's fine, I consider myself a run and gun type of shooter so having a decent metering system for quick candid shots is important to me yes. I have had an image selected for the Sony world photography awards in the past so I really couldn't care less about some faceless posters on the internet, Leica also have used my images on their Instagram feed so yeah, maybe I'm not up to the level of some on here but I'm getting there. I still shoot my M4-p primarily alongside my digital bodies and will continue to enjoy my basic meter-less Leica experience x 

What makes something a "great camera" is totally subjective.
It's all comes down to the experience. If this digital Leica does not work out, why would another one would be good.
There are inherent limitations here, which are exactly the same across the whole range. But the same is true for the advantages.

The original post says: "Don't buy this particular one, buy a newer, higher-end Leica"

Seriously, why? (Especially if it is not your only camera)

If you want to try a Leica, why would you spend that much money on it, when there is a lower entry to the system (and a lot less likely to break down compared to the M8 or M9 which might not even be repairable anymore, this is one thing than I would be more worried about) and if you realise that with some limitations this may actually work out, you can actually earn your way into the system.

And no, Leica glass is totally not necessary for the experience either, this is a big advantage of the M-mount in general.
Yes, you can also adapt it to mirrorless cameras - why wouldn't you - and some combinations may turn out to be a match made in heaven, why others may present issues with other sensors.
But at least you don't have to start with the body itself, you can also get the lenses first.

This is no different than buying the 5D Mark I instead of a 5D Mark IV. (and yes, the year 2021 has nothing to do with it)
Yes, it is unforgiving (more so than the M240), but also cheap, straightforward to operate, and this camera just like the M240 is capable of a lot of things when used right.

So my problem with these threads (for every Leica in general, not particular to the M240) is that they bring nothing new to the table, the A7RII is actually 6 years old now if ISO and dynamic range, IBIS, video, EVF, tilt screen etc. are more important.

[DMJ]

A camera never made a photographer.  My M240 is brilliant coupled with my M lenses.  I don’t pixel peep but print photos for my wall (not the side of my house).  If I upgrade it will likely be the film M-A 127 camera & an in-house dark room & better scanner.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mike_j]

I found this thread most informative. I have been dithering whether to update one of my Leicas for ages. Not the Leica 111, which at 87yrs old is still going well and has a film in it awaiting decent weather and lockdown freedom, but the M8. I have mixed feelings about the M8. It's on its third shutter but after the last holiday in Germany seems to be working well and produces good monochrome, adequate IR, and usable colour as long as I don't use jpg. I'd quite like a good M9 but not sure it's significantly better proposition than the M8. I have always been put off M240 by reviews commenting on poor implementation of live view and video, plus criticism of size and weight. The M10 sounds good though I have never had a chance to handle one but it's a sizable chunk of money and I suspect that I'd still be reaching for one of the Sonys for normal use. Perhaps I'm just one of those sad souls who just wants a 'trophy' camera slung around his neck while taking actual pictures with his phone.