Swap Q for M240?

[Almizilero]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi there,

I'm thinking about going for the full Leica rangefinder experience with an M240. Problem is, I'd have to sell my Q for that, and I love that little devil to bits. It even made me change over to the SL system. Point is, this is my everyday camera for personal and travel stuff. It served me really well for both so far. So why swap?

For one, I often feel that the 28mm isn't for me. I usually either wish I had a 35 or something wider than 28. I could get that with the M240. Also, I played around with an M at a recent stopover in Wetzlar (big mistake) and liked it a lot. But how does the feeling and viewfinder of an M240 compare to an M11?

Because: Since this is my private fun cam, I can't afford an M10 or M11. M240 is just in the budget. And only with Voigtländer lenses, no Leicas
I also really fear that I will miss the Q. Focal length aside, I just love the output it gives me. Colour, contrast, the pictures are just great. Even at higher ISO. And the M240 is an even older camera, so I wonder how it compares to the image quality of the Q. Especially in high ISO situations. Mostly colours and contrast and noise, I already know that the lenses I could afford will be less sharp.

So I wonder if there are people around who have or had both and can give some insights into the pros and cons of Q vs M240. Bonus question: During my research so far I found a statement that the Ms need to go to the service about once a year to get the viewfinder aligned properly. I only read that once, so true or false?

Thanks!

Roland

[Olaf_ZG]

I went from Q to M. First m8, then m10. To me, the Q was almost perfect, except for not being water resistant (solved by Q2) and 28mm.

Next to a M, I have also an SL with 35. 
They are both great, and the Q is a perfect mix of both.

I miss the Q, but knowing that 28mm is not for me, I can resist rebuying it.

But man, it is a great camera. You will miss it.

[bobtodrick]

As a Leica dealer…where ever you read the once a year alignment…that’s laughable.

unless your camera receives a hard knock the M requires no more service than any camera.

[Almizilero]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Olaf_ZG:

I went from Q to M. First m8, then m10. To me, the Q was almost perfect, except for not being water resistant (solved by Q2) and 28mm.

Next to a M, I have also an SL with 35. 
They are both great, and the Q is a perfect mix of both.

I miss the Q, but knowing that 28mm is not for me, I can resist rebuying it.

But man, it is a great camera. You will miss it.

Yeah, I guess I would. The Q was my first Leica, so there is also some sentimental value. Best thing would be to find a dealer where I can test the M240 for a couple of hours.

vor 3 Stunden schrieb bobtodrick:

As a Leica dealer…where ever you read the once a year alignment…that’s laughable.

unless your camera receives a hard knock the M requires no more service than any camera.

Thanks for the clarification. I thought it was bulls..., since I couldn't find anybody else complaining about that.

[PaulJohn]

I think you will enjoy the experience but ultimately may come back to the Q.

There are a few things to be aware of:

• Shooting wide open your keeper rate will be lower than the Q due to missed focus. Depending on the lens, you may even have issues with front focusing at certain apertures/distances. I had the  Zeiss 50mm Sonnar for a while. Lovely lens but my keeper rate was low. If I went back I would be very tempted by Leica's cheaper summarit lenses.
• You might get frustrated by the lack of matrix metering. Centre weighted metering is a whole new skill to master. Exposing to the right is achieved by checking the blinkies after each shot. High dynamic range scenes require trial and error or at least bracketing.
• There is no EVF. I am sure you know that but if you plan to use the visoflex add on, you will find it a poor experience. 

Despite these challenges, rangefinder photography is a very rewarding experience and the M240 sensor combined with some choice lenses can produce some very special images.

[lencap]

I owned the Q, M9 and SL 601 digital cameras, as well as M-A & M7 film bodies.  Like you I wanted the M rangefinder experience. The reality was somewhat different.  As an enjoyable experience the M is without competitors, but as a tool designed to capture an image quickly and in any circumstance it's hard to choose a 1950s technology instead of today's modern camera platforms.  The M body was designed for reporting and documentation shooting, as well as casual shooting.  The M camera was also designed to be portable and reliable in a time when most cameras were neither.  The world has changed.

The SL and Q platforms provide autofocus, subject tracking, and an EVF that shows you exactly what you are going to capture in the final image.  The M does none of those things.  If the subject is rapidly moving getting sharp focus at any focal length is challenging at best with an M body, nearly impossible at the worst.  That's why I, and many other M shooters, set the lens at f/5.6 or f/8 with a 35mm lens set at infinity focus.  With that setting almost everything will be in sharp focus, and the 35mm lens has the best chance of getting at least a close replica of what you want to capture.  There's a reason that the 35mm focal length is the most popular on the M body.  M bodies also excel at 28-50mm focal lengths, and beyond that the "focusing screen", where the images converge for perfect focus, becomes harder and harder to see clearly.  Eyeglasses can be a challenge, and if you're "of a certain age" cataracts can be impossible to ignore.  For me getting sharp focus on longer focal lengths wasn't easy and soon became tedious.

Like you I didn't love the Q's 28mm focal length.  I found it difficult to compose portraits at that focal length, and getting closer isn't the answer.  It adds distortion that isn't welcome.  Cropping is also common as there is a lot of background at 28mm that you likely would like to cut from the final image.  For landscape it's great - for people, not so much.

Then I moved to the SL with the 24-90 zoom lens.  I told myself that would be the best of all worlds - essentially 6 prime lenses mounted all the time, autofocus too.  I found the overall system a very capable tool to capture what I wanted in the way I wanted. The issue became weight and comfort.  When I was shooting specific things - either people/landscape/whatever - the camera worked remarkably well.  The EVF is bright, manual focus is a snap, and the quality is spectacular.  It is also a very heavy combo, and the lens balances well in hand, but not so well on a shoulder strap.  Putting it in a camera bag makes it challenging to get any spontaneous shots as it takes a while to get it ready to shoot.  Keeping it on a strap makes the weight and lack of balance very difficult to justify over a long day.  I found I wound up keeping it home more than I thought I would.

So, my Leica journey has been very mixed.  I love everything about the brand, but specifically as a photo creating device that can get any shot I can consider easily and in high quality, each platform has pros and cons.  The M is best for candid 35/50mm shots with good light, the Q is a superlative travel camera, and the SL does everything.  But I haven't found the magical "all in one" Leica system on an autofocus Leica platform, despite trying all of them.  

My point isn't to bash Leica, and I'm almost certain to buy another at some point, but the M platform is 70 years old and was designed for relatively slow ISO film speed.  The film itself was the limit to high resolution, so lenses had "character" and didn't worry too much about MTF curves.  With digital sensors and ISOs that reach astronomical heights, all of that changed.  Fast lenses are more for artistic bokeh effects than the need to capture low light images with 400 ISO B/W film.  I don't deny you can get some great shots - I did, but the "keeper rate" with an M body and lens versus autofocus and subject tracking on the Q or SL isn't really a contest.  Using an M instead of Q or SL that will provide sharp images at very high frame rates gets old pretty fast when you want to capture the image accurately and quickly.  And if the subject is more than 15 feet away the limitations of getting critical focus on an M body will soon become apparent.  Still, the M is what made Leica what it is, and if you want to try it out enjoy the experience.  Just be sure why you're buying it - is it to create what you want in any circumstance, or to enjoy the experience of shooting in a classic manner?  Despite everything I just wrote, the M sings to me more than the technical capability of any other Leica platform.

I've enjoyed photography for 6 decades, and as I've written in other posts, I no longer recognize the hobby that has given my immense enjoyment.  At with the entry price for a new M body/lens well into 5 figures making a decision based upon nostalgia or the joy of shooting can be an expensive experiment.  Leica is doing all it can to adapt to the new world order, and I expect they will succeed, but the road ahead will be a challenge.  60/100 MP sensors seem to be inevitable from a sales and marketing perspective, but not so much for those of us who shot B/W film and didn't really mind grain or less than sharp lenses.  The feeling of the photo, to me, seems to have been replaced by the technical quality of the image.  And that's Leica's challenge.  Which bet would you make?  So far they are hedging with 4 major platforms (as well as the S) and moving higher up the price ladder.  At what point does that strategy reach a limit, especially when phone cameras now have better image quality than high end DSLRs of just a few years ago, and are always in your pocket?  

I miss my Leica gear already, but more because I feel something has been lost in modern photography that believes resolution is all that matters.  Peter Karbe is eloquent in describing the technical ability of modern Leica lenses.  Somehow that wasn't the primary requirement for Henri Cartier Bresson to create his magic.  I wonder how I can even see the potential quality of modern high MP sensors/lenses.  My iMac 27" display is about 15MP resolution.  The newest Apple PRO Display, the XDR is 20MP.  Where exactly am I supposed to view the 60MP M11 image in full resolution?  For that matter, where can I view a 24MP image in full resolution?  And if I can't do that, what is the point of the arms race to higher resolution sensors/lenses that cost large sums of money and add weight and complexity?  What do I do with a 60MP image file?  How often does anyone actually print a digital image that mades use of today's larger sensors?  And it's not too far away when 100MP sensors will become the norm.  What is the point?

And that's why I think the M platform is what people want when they think of Leica.  A simple, modest sized bullet proof camera that you can take anywhere and shoot without being mired in technology.  Unfortunately the M11 is dangerously close to moving away from that model.  60MP sensor and "optional" external EVF capable of live view blurs the line to the SL platform.  Apparently Leica agrees, as the 2022 M6 camera is the newest Leica, and clearly a throwback to when Leica was the dominant camera for serious photography when you had to get the shot on the first take in all conditions.  Those were reporter cameras, 35/50 mm lenses.  Seeing the entire field to get the perfect shot was the goal - and only the rangefinder could do that.  Today try to find a sports photographer that doesn't have a long fast focus telephoto and a camera that shoots 20 FPS or more.  

That may be why film is "back", it provides a pure experience for the purpose of enjoyment and tactile feedback.  The Metaverse may be the future, but I won't be much interested in joining it, and I suspect that M body fans won't be either.  Viva the M!  

To the OP:  Go buy an M and a Summicron lens and enjoy life!  If you want the classic Leica Bokeh, get a Summilux.  Even more enjoyable, actually PRINT your images and get the full experience.  I'm almost certain that if I return to Leica that's what I'll do, and it may be with the new M6 body.  Leica digital is getting more and more technical and less and less tactile.  It about the experience, the enjoyment of photography.  I suspect that's what attracted you to the Q - it's almost like a mini M in use and tactile feel. At least it was for me.  Use your iPhone to get just about any shot you want without fuss and with the camera in your pocket anytime you want it.  Bring the M for everything else.  One body, one lens.  Doesn't get much simpler than that.  And that's the point that M body fans have been making for 70 years.  

Edited November 5, 2022 by lencap

[Almizilero]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you @PaulJohn. I am aware of most of those limitations, but that's what I'm actually looking for. Slow down my hobby photography. Take (more) time to compose and think the image through before the shot. I Have the SL2s for everything else and even a remnant Sony with one lens for the few things where I don't trust the Leica AF. But from what you and others wrote (and my own thoughts), I can see that I will probably very much miss the Q at some point. That's why I posted in the Q forum, not the M section, I guess. Deep down, I don't want to give up the Q. I'm still interested in the rangefinder experience, but maybe, if I can't rent on, I can get find a good deal. Then I can test them both for a while and if it doesn't  work out just sell it with a little loss. Problem is, I'll probably want to keep both 😂

@lencap Wow, thank you for that insight into your photographic journey! I enjoyed reading that a lot! I found some of myself in there, albeit with other camera systems. And I have to admit I only really got into photography when it got digital. I had a Minolta SLR that I took everywhere, but I only started finding out what all the different buttons did when I got the Canon 300D and could imediately see the results. I stayed with Canon for a while, but never really liked the cameras, they were just boring work horses. Switched back to KonicaMinolta, stayed through the first terrible Sony years and then moved to the E-Mount all the way to the A1. And tell you what? The A1, as amazing  as it is, bored me. Where's the fun when you can shoot an event at 30 fps with AFc and every image is sharp? Great for professional work, but even there ... That's when the Q came along for me. A tiny little perfect thing. Well not perfect, but great in it's imperfection. And the image quality ... I was blown away by what I saw in Lightroom with no tweaking neccessary.  So I looked at the SL2s (never needed the high pixel count of the A1/SL2). Used them both for a while and preferred the Leica images after every shoot. So bye bye A1, hello Summicron. I keep my old A9 around for those crucial shoots where I feel the SL2s AF won't keep up, but I use it less and less. With the Leica, I do photography again. Not only pointing a technical wonder in the right direction. What a joy!

So now, after getting so much joy out of everything I got from Leica, I guess I feel it's time to find out where their roots are and see what the rangefinder experience is all about. Will I like it? No idea. Ready to find out. If only I won the lottery and didn't have to think about selling other stuff to even afford a 10 year old M ... 🙃

[cobbu2]

On 11/4/2022 at 10:45 PM, PaulJohn said:

There is no EVF. I am sure you know that but if you plan to use the visoflex add on, you will find it a poor experience. 

There is an EVF, as an accessory, the EVF-2 (or the identical Olympus VF-2, which I have for my M240).

[newtoleica]

Interesting thread. Like many I love the M as an object but it IS going to result in missed shots for moving things unless you go for wide DOF. I've been shooting for 44 years (now 60) and have used a whole bunch of stuff including M9/MM/M240 in the 2009-15 period. Street/travel/family. back then I could nail a wide open shot with the 35 Lux on a walking pedestrian Moree than 50% of the time, but 2 yrs ago I tried an M10P again and found I really struggled. My eyesight has shifted and I have a slight astigmatism now in addition to presbyopia and it makes the RF patch shift out of vertical alignment (even though it is correct). That removes the instant 'pop' needed for fast RF focussing and lining up horizontals is slower. using an M with glasses isn't great (especially if you like using a 24 without an external VF). The Q series is lovely but it's not the same as the M experience. However the reason for having any Leica camera is to use a Leica lens.... full stop. Using the EVF add on the M240 is a horrible experience. Far too slow. Its a bit better on the M10.

My main kit is Olympus OM film gear for B&W film and I have a darkroom. I have a used A7Rii body that I mainly use for copying film images with a slide copier/macro bellows, and a used Sony RX1Rii. The RX1Rii has a Zeiss 35mm f2 lens which is better for me than the 24-28mm on the Q for a fixed lens camera. I'm thinking of getting another Leica sometime this year and waiting to see what the Q3 brings, and either get that or a M10-P with 35 Lux. I don't 'need it', but it would be nice to shoot sometimes..... but it won't replace anything I have already.

[Farrell Gallery]

I would definitely love to have an M, a used M240 or M10 too, but it’s not going to be a replacement for my Q2. The Q2 is designed to be a take anywhere camera without the fuss of hauling mass amounts of kit around, and if you train yourself to be proficient with the 28 mm focal length, it can be used for almost anything. Of course keep in mind, if you go wider than 28 with an M, you’ll either have to guess outside your framing lines or get a Visoflex on your hot shoe. The deliberate actions and complete control, and versatility of several lens options make it appealing. The fact that it’s not a convenient option makes part of the appeal. But the convenience and versatility of the Q2 is also a special thing. I wouldn’t sell the Q2 to get an M, but get the M when I can afford it, to pair with it. 

[cobbu2]

On 2/2/2023 at 11:55 AM, Farrell Gallery said:

... Of course keep in mind, if you go wider than 28 with an M, you’ll either have to guess outside your framing lines or get a Visoflex on your hot shoe. ...

Or, in addition to the accessory EVF mentioned above, live view can also be used for lenses not covered by the frame lines.

[Farrell Gallery]

2 hours ago, cobbu2 said:

Or, in addition to the accessory EVF mentioned above, live view can also be used for lenses not covered by the frame lines.

Ah yes!! Which is easier to use in a more controlled environment or overcast conditions.