Is the myth that M240 have a more "Film Like" , "Leica soul" rendering than M10, M11 actually true?

[mottykytu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I saw a trend of coming back to M240 , MP240 in my country, even when they have use M11, m10, many photographers in my country sold them and coming back to the M240 series

They said that M240 have the most Film Like and Leica soul rendering among CMOS sensor (close to the legendary m9 CCD)

I don't have m10, m11 to compare directly

If you guys have photo directly come out from the camera, do you think it have better rendering than the More clinical/digital m10 and M11 ?

[jakontil]

Is it? When i was using my m240, peopla say the M9 was 

[mottykytu]

4 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

No. I had both the M240 and still have the M10. The former is just a worse version of the latter. Do not believe everything you read online.

However, a legend of the ancients speaks of a certain M9 camera in the Leica scrolls that is created so as to be the most like film. The key druid ingredient inside is the coveted CCD sensor, many of them were destroyed to keep the legend alive but a few still persist for the new generations to remember.

In term of IQ ? or general user experience?

If it is User experience I think the M240 have much better battery and ISO Button is easier to use, more reliable than the ISO DIAL on M10

BTW, the M10 shutter I think sound much louder than the MP240 ? it is not until the MP10 the Shutter is more silent 

Edited May 14 by mottykytu

[Chris W]

I had an M240 and found the output too warm, almost orangey. It was hard to fix in post using the white balance and tint sliders. Sold it and a couple of years later bought an M10. I love it.

The completely subjective 'film like' description gets thrown around all kinds of Leica cameras. First it was the M8, then the M9, now the M240?

I think theM10 is a better camera in every regard, but the M240 is now a reasonably affordable way to get into the M rangefinder system, IF you are OK with the output quality.

[Carlos cruz]

Physical iso dial was one of the reasons for me to get m10, I prefer to see all of the exposure data before starting the camera, as to batteries the difference is negligible, for day outings one battery is sufficient for longer excursions you pack a spare and a charger.  What really counts is image quality, m10 is a bit better with wide angles compared to m240 Italian flag problem.

[costa43]

You will not get a conclusive answer to this question by anybody but yourself. There are thousands of photos on the threads here and on places like Flickr. Take a look and see if you see the filmic look.

Both cameras are very capable, the M10 is superior being the newer model in most measurable metrics. Key advantages of the M240 are great battery life and video.

Edited May 14 by costa43

[pedaes]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

58 minutes ago, costa43 said:

Key advantages

I never got comfortable with video in a 'M' body and as soon as it was dropped I leapt. There was certainly no 'filmic look', but the colours were very good and it was  reliable.

Edited May 14 by pedaes

[costa43]

12 minutes ago, pedaes said:

I never got comfortable with video in a 'M' body and as soon as it was dropped I leapt. There was certainly no 'filmic look', but the colours were very good and it was  reliable.

Yes, I guess whether the inclusion of video is a good thing is subjective but it is unique. I quite like the idea of having video with my vintage lenses for the odd short moment but I also want the M to be as basic as possible so 🤷‍♂️

[jakontil]

1 hour ago, costa43 said:

Yes, I guess whether the inclusion of video is a good thing is subjective but it is unique. I quite like the idea of having video with my vintage lenses for the odd short moment but I also want the M to be as basic as possible so 🤷‍♂️

May be the M11-C would fit this.. cinematic

i never used the video on m240, im not a video guy though lol.. and when M10 ditched it, i felt some kind of relief? Like it was a brave move at that time by leica.. and kept telling myself.. less is more… less is more 

[costa43]

21 minutes ago, jakontil said:

May be the M11-C would fit this.. cinematic

i never used the video on m240, im not a video guy though lol.. and when M10 ditched it, i felt some kind of relief? Like it was a brave move at that time by leica.. and kept telling myself.. less is more… less is more 

If i was being honest with myself I do not think I would use it either. I can always use my SL2-S for video with vintage lenses yet I rarely do. I always just use my iPhone. I'm a stills shooter, always will be.

[insomnia]

It's easy to remember. So far we have encountered a Windows-like rhythm, every second major release was meh.

M8 - meh

M9 - yay!

M240 - meh

M10 - yay!

M11 - meh

[sometimesmaybe]

16 hours ago, mottykytu said:

I saw a trend of coming back to M240 , MP240 in my country, even when they have use M11, m10, many photographers in my country sold them and coming back to the M240 series

m240 is very much underrated. it is probably the cheapest full frame M you can buy. with the money you save, you can prob buy a minolta CL or CLE (both use M mount) and judge for yourself.

ive personally done some side by side comparisons (with a canon 1DS mk2 and 1v). basically when viewed sided by side with Gold 200, they look nothing alike. i can make the digital image look like Gold 200 in post, but only by having the Gold 200 picture as a guide 

[lct]

I have kept my M240 as backup for the M11. While the latter has a bit of red cast, the M240 has a slight yellow cast and its reds tend to clip in case of over exposure but it can be fixed in most cases in post. Digital noise and/or banding can be a problem on the M240 at 6400 iso, which is the limit of the camera if you don't use noise reduction. The M240 produces more digital noise than the M11 anyway, which can give the feeling of more grainy outputs.

Edited May 15 by lct

[otto.f]

I’ve never heard of a myth around the M240 and if it would exist it is completely inappropriate. The colors are a setback compared to the M9 and a sacrifice to the high ISO race. The video option turned out to be something customers for an M aren’t interested in and a deviation from ‘das Wesentliche’.

[John Robinson]

I had an M8 and I the images it produced (with the IR cut filter) reminded me of Ektachrome.  Upgraded to an M9 with images that remind me of Kodachrome (still using it).  Rather than go further with M digital I chose the SL (Typ601) that produces images I would describe as neutral with excellent detail that can be adjusted in post-production to provide several different kinds of rendering (depends a bit on choice of lens).  Finally upgraded to a 60-year-old M3 and can now have any film look I like (subject to availability).  So much more flexible!

[Steve7]

This is certainly a subjective topic!  With that said, I like the M(240) for its colors and tones, especially when using the Vivid film mode.  Later Ms are better in a many ways (e.g., dynamic range, high-ISO noise, and resolution), but if you can live with those disadvantages, and are careful to underexpose a little, the colors and tones with the M(240) Vivid film mode are incredible.  Also, while I primarily shoot stills, I'm very happy to have the M(240)'s video when traveling.  

I only own an M9 and M(240) but have rented the M10 and M11.  I will upgrade someday but I love the M(240) right now.  

 

[Jeff S]

On 5/14/2025 at 12:50 PM, insomnia said:

It's easy to remember. So far we have encountered a Windows-like rhythm, every second major release was meh.

M8 - meh

M9 - yay!

M240 - meh

M10 - yay!

M11 - meh

Missing M8.2, M262 (no video), M10-R (completely different sensor from M10, plus Monochroms based on 4 different generations… all arguably a “yay”.

[pippy]

10 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Missing M8.2, M262 (no video), M10-R (completely different sensor from M10, plus Monochroms based on 4 different generations… all arguably a “yay”.

As (arguably) might be said for the M240 and the M11...

Philip.

[lct]

And the M8.2 is a yay-yay with IR-cut filters on.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jean-Michel]

On 5/14/2025 at 1:57 AM, mottykytu said:

 

If you guys have photo directly come out from the camera, do you think it have better rendering than the More clinical/digital m10 and M11 ?

The ONLY photos that come out of a camera are transparencies, so pick the film type you like, and Polaroids or similar product. All other outputs : film, file are merely a start to the end image. With not that much effort you can make any image then by different cameras to look pretty much the same. Learn to use your favourite image processor and see how much you can modify your capture into different look images.