M240 vs M9

[Adam Bonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, ianman said:

Never said it wasn’t... I wrote it is very usable at 800 and higher.

ps. Could you please stop with the persistent passive aggressive comments whenever I write about M9 performance being perfectly ok. Thanks so much.

The truth isn't passive aggressive, and the truth is that the M9 doesn't perform as well as the more modern Ms at high ISO

Is it usable at higher ISO? Well yes - but come on that's a how deep is a hole type thing isn't it? What's the subject, what's the necessary SS, what's the target with the file, web/print/big/small

I get that the M9 is an emotive camera with a cult following (I own one too) and I made it work (or thereabouts) in every scenario I wanted a picture in for years

But when folks ask for advice about the M9 I feel variable data trumps attribute. Every time.

And when the question concerns the differences between a 240 and an M9 of course ISO is going to get mentioned

The M9 is usable, but the newer Ms are more usable (and let's not talk about other brands)

Remember Ian,

If I say something about a product you own, I'm NOT criticising you on a personal level... we probably like different sports, different music, movies etc I mean I thought The Grand Budapest Hotel had everything a movie needs, but I guess others might say it was crap and needed zombies or whatever - doesn't mean I'm taking it personally 😅

This is the internet. Try to desensitise yourself a little.

Failing that just put me on ignore...

 

[pippy]

On 7/11/2021 at 9:51 PM, jimmy@jimmybruno.com said:

Is there any advantage to trading in a 240 for a Leica M9 or M10?  I have an M240 and thinking of making an upgrade...

Can I ask why you think that either 'alternative' camera might be - for your desires - an upgrade?

The M9 comes from an 'earlier age' and the M240 and M10 are different in certain fundamentals which may be of no consequence to you or, conversely, might make all the difference. ALL of these cameras are superb performers. Boiled-down to bare essentials they really only differ in a few details.

Philip.

[Advertisement]

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

[jimmy@jimmybruno.com]

Because I hear so many people rave about the M10 or M9.   I didn't know much about the M series until I got the M240.  I also have a Q and a Leica Cl which has a crop sensor.  I've been using all my M mounts on the CL with an adapter. Don't know which I like best.  On the M sometimes I miss the auto focus..

 

[mmradman]

Let’s not be overly sentimental, digital cameras are electrical appliances like a toaster, radio or electric toothbrush, key difference is camera can be paired with optical lens which is different type of technology.

Later model is in most cases advantageous over older model, for one electronics is more robust in M240 compared to M9. M9 As much as lovely camera it is is suffering with problems and Leica stopped providing service support, third party fixes are for the hard core who have spare camera or two to play with.

You will find that some M9 owners are sentimentally attached to what is now 2009 full frame model based on 2006 (M8) technology.  My first digital M camera was beautiful M9P in Chrome, lets just say I was very happy when I part exchanged it towards buying new  M lens.

Edited July 13, 2021 by mmradman
Add para

[mmradman]

4 minutes ago, jimmy@jimmybruno.com said:

Because I hear so many people rave about the M10 or M9.   I didn't know much about the M series until I got the M240.  I also have a Q and a Leica Cl which has a crop sensor.  I've been using all my M mounts on the CL with an adapter. Don't know which I like best.  On the M sometimes I miss the auto focus..

 

If M240 works for you keep it, if you choose M9 chances are your photographic experience may go seriously downhill unless you are prepared to put up with essentially unserviceable camera.  

On the other hand you can strike lucky and get second-hand one in thousand non-Friday camera with upgraded sensor replaced by Leica which just about keeps working for some time to come.

Edited July 13, 2021 by mmradman

[pippy]

40 minutes ago, jimmy@jimmybruno.com said:

Because I hear so many people rave about the M10 or M9.   I didn't know much about the M series until I got the M240....

In which case 'Don't Sweat the Small Stuff'. Seriously.

Learn how to use your M240. Learn - especially - how to use the R/F system otherwise you will be perpetually disappointed. The rest is - for someone at your relatively early stage in digital-M usage - largely inconsequential. Every digital M ever made is capable of capturing phenomenal images in the right hands.

Best of good fortune!

Philip.

 

[jaeger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, pippy said:

Learn - especially - how to use the R/F system otherwise you will be perpetually disappointed.

how do you use it?

[ianman]

5 minutes ago, mmradman said:

M9 As much as lovely camera it is is suffering with problems and Leica stopped providing service support

Note: this is not a reply to mmradman, I'm just quoting his text as it is used quite often and IMHO not quite correct.

What problems are they suffering from? A "loud" shutter? Slow writting? Poor battery? Yes, if you shoot it like machine gun then slow writing, small buffer and poor battery could be issues. But if you shot like that maybe any Leica M is not the best tool for the job. I shoot with a digital M just as I shoot with a film M, in almost 12  years of using it, I have never run out of battery (I'm still using the original), I can go days using the same charge and maybe waited for the buffer to clear a few times. Even if you shoot a lot, so carry a spare battery in your pocket, problem solved.

It had a well known dreadful sensor problem and dreadful management from Leica of the issue. Any other problems are internet heresay. Yes they are old tech now, but still work perfectly well. Leica is to this day offering full support for everything except the sensor. The glass can be changed by third party I believe. But I would never advise to anyone to buy a M9 or sibling without the certificate showing the sensor has been changed to the new version. The redesigned version is superb and there are zero issues with it. Despite a number of claims from people saying that their new sensor is corroding, not a single one of these claims has been confirmed.

If it was so dogged with problems I wonder why Leica released a whole bunch of refurbished units a couple of years ago which sold like hotcakes.

That being said, of course the subsequent models provide more and/or different features. They've got to be "better"... I mean 10 and 240 are bigger than 8 and 9 so they HAVE to be better, right? Just like the M5 HAS to be better than the M4. But these features only make the camera better (for that user), if they are actually needed. I mean does anyone really use the video? I mean really? Is that a major selling point of a Leica M? I think we know the answer to that as Leica quickly and wisely dropped it. High ISO is great... but how high do you really need to go? For me, my style of shooting, I think that high ISO would be a hindrance on digital. Meaning that I would be tempted to use the easy route, go too high and not capture the atmosphere as intended.

As ever, it's horses for courses. If a user needs LiveView and/or video and/or mega high ISO then nope, don't choose the M8 or 9. If you shoot your M like a machine gun and need x frames per second, don't get an M8 or 9. If you need to do IR, then get an M8. It's the needs of the user that should determine the body she/he uses, not just the latest and "greatest".

This is also true of lenses of course. How many hundreds of threads are titled "Should I upgrade my Summithing v3 APO to the Summithing v4 APO?" as if overnight the Summithing v3 APO has become obsolete or useless.

At the end of the day, I don't give a hoot what users choose but I do try to give honest and truthful information. Then users should for the model which provides the features required, be it the 8, 9, 240, 10 or one it's many, many variations. But don't spread false information about "suffering with problems" which are just not true.

I'll leave it there.

[pippy]

16 minutes ago, jaeger said:

how do you use it?

Me? Correctly.

P.

Edited July 13, 2021 by pippy

[Guest Nowhereman]

3 hours ago, jimmy@jimmybruno.com said:

Because I hear so many people rave about the M10 or M9.   I didn't know much about the M series until I got the M240.  I also have a Q and a Leica Cl which has a crop sensor.  I've been using all my M mounts on the CL with an adapter. Don't know which I like best.  On the M sometimes I miss the auto focus..

Jimmy - I loved the M9 and found that low light shooting was better at ISO 640 and "pushing in post" than shooting at higher ISOs. As others have said, the M9 required less post-processing of DNG files than many other cameras in good light, but quite a bit for low light shooting. I never went for the M240 because I didn't like the color rendition — while you can fix a lot in post-processing some combinations of colors are difficult to deal with and you never get what you want. The M10 is a lot better in this respect and is a great low light camera, with exposing for the highlights and recovering some shadows in post-processing: still, club lighting will often have so much contrast that you shouldn't he afraid of blowing the highlights and leaving a lot of the shows black. Going too gray and flat is a sin in this context.

You mentioned that you didn't want to incur the cost of an M10: what I would do would be to sell the Q and the CL and get an M10. That's because I like Leica-M cameras and their rangefinders, and am not enamored with auto-focus.

The other camera that I like is the Ricoh GR III, which I think would be great for your environment. No need for a viewfinder: shoot one-handed with this tiny camera and look at the LCD only establish roughly the content of the frame and look at the subject directly when pressing the shutter. I would shoot DNG + JPG: there are two terrific JPG modes, Positive Color and Hi-Contrast B&W — both adjustable for your own user setting. If you've shot Positive Color and want B&W, you can develop the DNG in-camera into Hi-Contrast B&W, and then have both these and the DNG to look at in Lightroom and decide what you want.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[52K]

Jimmy, 

The M240 is a great camera, I shot a pair of those for many years before moving to M10’s. Marginal gains with the M10’s made it an overall better proposition for me, but mainly to do with low-light performance, which in all honesty wasn’t ever a huge problem on the M240. I loved the colours on the M240, and travelled the world many times with just an M240 and 35mm Summicron. The M240 was lauched in 2012 I believe, so it’s a little dated now but still a fantastic camera. The M9  was the first M I fell in love with, but to be honest, the day-to-day use is even slower and more ‘cranky’ than any M240 and low-light performance isn’t the best, but some people love them and I understand why. You really need to find a good one if you go down that route, preferably with a sensor change.

By far the best advice would be to stick with your M240 and spend any money you have spare on lenses. This is a common thread in photography, but Leica have some unbelievably great lenses that can really step up your creativity. I use a 50mm Summilux as my go-to for every day stuff and it’s one of the best lenses I’ve ever encountered. I also have a 28mm Summilux which is just as special. Summicrons also are brilliant, most Leica M lenses contain a good amount of ‘Leica Magic’ and it’s up to you to unleash it into your photos.

Whatever you decide, enjoy the journey and have some fun along the way. I’ve experimented with a lot of different lenses and kit and after that I’ve ended up back with a very simple set up which covers 95% of what I want to shoot. 

 

[jimmy@jimmybruno.com]

thanks for your input.  I will stick with the M240 for now.  Still learning the camera

 

[a.noctilux]

It is a pity that M240 is among the less loved digital M.

As user, I appreciate it and happy having bought it cheaper second hand ( to try out and keep it in the end, nothing to complain ), to see that the sh price

decreases at the level that selling ( if possible ? ) is not 'economically wise' anymore.

[jimmy@jimmybruno.com]

👌

[thatkatmat]

I love the m240, never shot the m9. I had an m10 and an m10p. At the time, they were both VERY expensive and I was worrying about scratching or dinging them. I decided to "downgrade" to an m240 and I think it's the best choice I've made for a body in a long time. I love it. It was like new and relatively cheap (less than 1/2 the price of my m10P) so I've never felt any hesitancy about slinging it around my neck and shooting it in situations I might not have with my m10's. To me, the files look pretty much the same as the m10.

I'm sure I'll buy an m10 when they come down in price just because of the size and the little extra's...but until then, the 240 is all the RF I need.

[emilkarl]

On 7/20/2021 at 9:23 PM, thatkatmat said:

I love the m240, never shot the m9. I had an m10 and an m10p. At the time, they were both VERY expensive and I was worrying about scratching or dinging them. I decided to "downgrade" to an m240 and I think it's the best choice I've made for a body in a long time. I love it. It was like new and relatively cheap (less than 1/2 the price of my m10P) so I've never felt any hesitancy about slinging it around my neck and shooting it in situations I might not have with my m10's. To me, the files look pretty much the same as the m10.

I'm sure I'll buy an m10 when they come down in price just because of the size and the little extra's...but until then, the 240 is all the RF I need.

I have the M6 but looking into getting an M240 or M10. Would prefer the M240 due to price but coming from the M6 I’m "scared" that it will feel bulky cluttered with the buttons? What do you say that has shot both of them? Did you find the M10 more balanced? What do you think of the ISO dial compared to the M240 iso adjustment?

[irenedp]

The M9 is a clunker, but the files are magical. The M240 is as much of a clunker as the M9, but has nothing special. If you find an M9 with the sensor changed and good traceability, I'd go for it. Otherwise, the M10 is a much better bet than the 240.

[dpitt]

As a M8 and M9 user, I wanted to have the M240 when it came out. IMO the LV capability of the M240  is the main practical difference with the M9.
I do not bother with video. There is also an upgrade from 18MP to 24MP, an extra stop of ISO performance...

I loved my M9 for most things, but needed to find a solution for doing macro and longer tele work, which can not be focused with rangefinders. The M240 looked like an alround solution with its EVF capabilities.

As years went by and prices started to drop to what I could afford, I had the opportunity to try out the M240 with some R lenses using the EVF. That was not really the best experience. The M body is too small and the EVF 2 is not ideal too. When you try using the M with EVF and heavier lenses, it stops being a great camera, because the balance is all wrong. Great for occasional use, but not ideal.
Eventually, I realized that my ideal R lens solution would be something like the SL.

The SL is great with manual focused R lenses, and IMO it balances better with R gear than with M lenses. So my GAS for M240 was cured, and now I am still happy with the M9 performance within its limits, and I have a very good solution with the SL for other stuff.

I am now looking for an upgrade of my M9, but I hesitate. I will skip the M240 generation, and will probably go for a M10 variant. I realize that the M9 is unique in the M line for its CCD sensor and simplicity, both in menu's and body features. Of course I will love the results that I get with the upgrade, but maybe I will keep the M9 for a while longer for nostalgic reasons.

Edited December 20, 2023 by dpitt

[jdlaing]

On 7/13/2021 at 3:05 PM, Adam Bonn said:

If at high iso you just expose for the highlights and let the blacks fall where they land then you can get pleasing pictures but that isn't the same as iso performance 

And however you cut it the m9 has worse iso performance than the 240

I believe it has different ISO performance. Not worse.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[espelt]

vor 19 Stunden schrieb emilkarl:

I have the M6 but looking into getting an M240 or M10. Would prefer the M240 due to price but coming from the M6 I’m "scared" that it will feel bulky cluttered with the buttons? What do you say that has shot both of them? Did you find the M10 more balanced? What do you think of the ISO dial compared to the M240 iso adjustment?

There is hardly any difference when taking photos - you can use the Digital M just as you would with the M6. Apart from the difference in exposure metering: Don't expose digitally to the shadows...
You can ignore the back of the camera. Once you've made your settings, you don't need to fiddle with it much anymore. And I like the ISO setting on the 240 even better than the M10. The ISO wheel looks very cool - but I find it a bit fiddly. On the 240 I can adjust this in a matter of seconds, even in poor light. Thumb left hand presses the button, thumb right hand turns the adjustment wheel - done.
If the budget plays a role - the M 240 is currently a very good entry-level option. Maybe there will still be room for a good lens.