Short-term ownership: M240 or M10?

[southbaybrian]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm almost exclusively a film shooter, but am going to be in Vietnam for a photography workshop this fall and need to find a way to shoot digital for a couple of weeks. I've looked into renting a digital M body, but it'll cost me around $1,000, so am thinking of just buying one for the trip and then selling it when I come back. My only requirements here are that the camera has a full-frame sensor that works with my M lenses, of course, and has a stable resale value so I can get my money back out at the end. Lenses are a 21mm Super Elmar, 35mm Summicron-M ASPH, 75mm Summarit-M, and 90mm Elmarit-M.

The M11 is overkill here, so I'm thinking about the M240 or M10. Suggestions? Is this a dumb idea and I should just rent?

[Advertisement]

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

[Carlos cruz]

I don’t have much experience with used camera prices behaviour, but I guess m240 has already stabilised, m10 will start falling when m12 shows up. I am not sure how m240 acts with super elmar (colour vignetting) i believe it should be ok ¿can anyone confirm? 
You need to consider age of the camera, batteries getting older and scarce, I’d buy set with at least two.  If you choose m240 you’ll have 100-1600 usable iso, with m10 I’d go up to 3200. The thing that made me go for m10 is iso selector, no need to search in menu if you want to switch film ;-]
Wet climate- I used both m10 and m240 in rainy conditions never had a problem. Both cameras are solidly built, probably m10 has better weather proofing. 
Just make sure you don’t end up with digital m, after you do math on film prices.

[southbaybrian]

Ha, thanks. I don't shoot film for the savings, and am certainly living in denial regarding how many digital cameras I could have bought for the price of the film I've shot and developed...

Good point on price stabilization of M240 vs. M10 and on color vignetting. Will look into the latter, but if folks have thoughts on the former, that'd be helpful.

[southbaybrian]

1 minute ago, Al Brown said:

I quickly changed my M240 for M10 because of the form factor, the nasty green shadows when lifted and the tiny buffer.

Does this mean when brightening shadow areas you get a green cast on the M240?

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Al Brown said:

M10 is the first proper digital M camera. Choose this one.

Incorrect - It is the last of the real M cameras. 😉

[Carlos cruz]

Since you’re new to digital and going on longish trip I’d recommend getting and learning  how to use sensor swabs/cleaners saves hours in photoshop/lightroom. 

[southbaybrian]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, Carlos cruz said:

Since you’re new to digital and going on longish trip I’d recommend getting and learning  how to use sensor swabs/cleaners saves hours in photoshop/lightroom. 

Thanks, good tip. I've used digital in the olden days and very rarely shoot with a DSLR so am not totally foreign to digital issues, but probably wouldn't have thought to bring sensor swabs. Will look into it.

[jaapv]

Well, we agree. 👍🏼 it is the ultimate M.  Nowhere to go from there as proven by the M11 😉

[davysn]

The newer the digital camera,the lower the depreciation rate.Leica should be no exception.

Edited June 3 by davysn

[southbaybrian]

42 minutes ago, davysn said:

The newer the digital camera,the lower the depreciation rate.Leica should be no exception.

I would think it'd be the opposite, no? The newer the camera, the less it has already depreciated and the farther it is likely to drop when the replacement comes out.

[250swb]

The M240 is a fine camera in context, the only reason I didn't get along with it was because I transitioned (regretfully in hindsight) from an M9 which is the best ever M digital camera ever for a film like look. The M10 doesn't even come close out of the box, but then it's all down to how you post process your images, but many photographers will have trouble mimicking in post processing the beautiful film like roll-off of highlights that the CCD sensor of the M9 gave.  

[Jeff S]

4 hours ago, southbaybrian said:

I've looked into renting a digital M body, but it'll cost me around $1,000, so am thinking of just buying one for the trip and then selling it when I come back.

Lensrentals charges $593 for an M10-P for 14 days, before insurance, etc, but maybe you could work out a discount. Alternatively, I would buy an M10 variant for form factor, robustness, quietness and file malleability over the earlier models.  I’ve owned the M240, and still have an M(9) Monochrom, but my M10M or M10-R would be my first choices for a 2 week trip.  But I’m well up the learning curve on PP and printing with all of those cameras, and wouldn’t want to experiment on an important photo-based trip without having digital processing confidence… unless maybe that’s the purpose of the workshop.

Edited June 3 by Jeff S

[southbaybrian]

53 minutes ago, 250swb said:

The M240 is a fine camera in context, the only reason I didn't get along with it was because I transitioned (regretfully in hindsight) from an M9 which is the best ever M digital camera ever for a film like look. The M10 doesn't even come close out of the box, but then it's all down to how you post process your images, but many photographers will have trouble mimicking in post processing the beautiful film like roll-off of highlights that the CCD sensor of the M9 gave.  

I've heard this before, but have also seen a bunch of sensor corrosion issues and color fringing problems with the M9?

3 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Lensrentals charges $593 for an M10-P for 14 days, before insurance, etc, but maybe you could work out a discount. Alternatively, I would buy an M10 variant for form factor, robustness, quietness and file malleability over the earlier models.  I’ve owned the M240, and still have an M(9) Monochrom, but my M10M or M10-R would be my first choices for a 2 week trip.  But I’m well up the learning curve on PP and printing with all of those cameras, and wouldn’t want to experiment on an important photo-based trip without having digital processing confidence.

Thanks, I'll try Lensrentals. $600 seems reasonable for a rental fee. I have OK (not great) digital processing chops, but would probably just shoot JPEG for the most part. I don't have much of a choice here anyway, since processing and printing film in a foreign country within the 5-day workshop period will be basically impossible.

[Jeff S]

Don’t know the nature of the workshop, but would be a shame to rely on JPEGs with such capable cameras, and with today’s amazing PP tools. Or shoot both, and at least retain the DNGs for later.  One benefit of owning, depending on how soon your trip is, is that you could play around with the camera in advance of the trip. 

Edited June 3 by Jeff S

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, southbaybrian said:

I've heard this before, but have also seen a bunch of sensor corrosion issues and color fringing problems with the M9?

Thanks, I'll try Lensrentals. $600 seems reasonable for a rental fee. I have OK (not great) digital processing chops, but would probably just shoot JPEG for the most part. I don't have much of a choice here anyway, since processing and printing film in a foreign country within the 5-day workshop period will be basically impossible.

I echo Jeff on shooting DNG + jpg, but if you feel that you have to limit yourself to jpg images, don’t use an M240 ( or M9 for that matter). JPGs out of those cameras can only be described as acceptable if one is in a charitable mood. The M10 is a bit better but still not the best performer on the market by a large margin. 
Come to think of it, wouldn’t a CL with  M adapter be a better alternative? 

[Chris W]

Owned both an M240 and an M10. The M10 is a much better camera IMO. Very close to shooting film on an M6.

I had issues processing colour to look real out of the M240 (overly warm or too orangey).

I would never consider shooting jpegs alone out of a high end, multi-thousand dollar camera system.

[jaapv]

Yes, I found the M240 colour a bit of a challenge  as well. And it was, after the M8, the the second-most IR sensitive M which did not help either. 

[southbaybrian]

Thanks, guys. On a trip like this I'd shoot DNG + jpeg just to have the flexibility, but to be honest, I'm not super interested in intensive post processing. Would probably just rely on the jpegs unless there was an issue on a specific image that I needed RAW for.

This is one of the reasons I like film - you choose your look before you shoot and use what comes out (with some minor dodging and burning, of course). I'd like to stay as close to that workflow as possible. Maybe there are some presets or something that will allow me to get film-like looks from DNG images with just a click or two? If so, that would be appealing. Otherwise, I'm just very unlikely to need the flexibility that DNGs allow.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[southbaybrian]

17 hours ago, jaapv said:

Come to think of it, wouldn’t a CL with  M adapter be a better alternative?

I don't know much about the CL, but doesn't it have a crop sensor and no OVF? One of my main goals here is to get digital images while keeping my shooting experience mostly the same, so I think an M is the best choice.

[Chris W]

21 hours ago, southbaybrian said:

I'm not super interested in intensive post processing. Would probably just rely on the jpegs unless there was an issue on a specific image that I needed RAW for.

 

Having used a variety of higher end cameras, I also use Capture One. Typically it takes me a minute or two to achieve a lovely final image from a raw dng.

The software makes quite a few assumptions based on the metadata, and the first thing you see when clicking on the image already looks pretty nice.

I might add bit of contrast, a bit of clarity and adjust the exposure if the bright sky has made my subject a bit too shadowy.

In reality it's three or four clicks and I'm generally done. Al this works equally well on the mobile platform (iPhone or iPad).

Of course you can spend a lot longer deep diving if you want.