Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M10, 240 family, M-P, M60

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 11-03-2013   #81
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 8,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepeguitarra View Post
That is a question I have (maybe for another thread): What are the frame lines for? I have never used it, because I never shot film with the M8 or Leica. I always use the card reader. Maybe that is the reason the made the M-E, just for people like me. Why isn't the M-E more popular???
For framing….
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2013   #82
srtiwari
Daktari
 
srtiwari's Avatar
 
srtiwari is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vero Beach, Florida
Posts: 1,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
Happily.
If you are looking for a dramatic increase in image quality in run-of-the-mill photographic circumstances as some posters here are doing you will be disappointed in the M over the M9 (as with he M9 vs the M8; we are into diminishing returns in digital photography by now) Even the increased noise performance is not very important for standard photography - even an M8 can be teased into good low-light shooting; the M9 more so and the M makes it a bit easier again. I find it of limited relevance.

Having said that I am home today from shooting in harsh tropical light for the last five weeks and the M forges ahead in dynamic range. That makes far more of a difference than a pixel-splitting resolution or acuity variances.
This alone is -to me- more than worth the upgrade.

Added to which the more accurate rangefinder, better framelines, better build quality and superb shutter are not to be discounted either.

Not to mention the EVF, simple as it may be, which allows an enormous versatility by being able to use just about any 135 format lens ever made, as long as it has manual controls.
I agree with this completely.
In switching from the M9, I expected only what was not debatable- higher resolution (so I may down-sample if its own benefits), better shutter, better ISO headroom, convenience of the LV (magnification, focus "peaking"), option for EVF, and better write-speed to the card.
Although I had hoped for "even better" IQ, I'm not sure my "run-of-the-mill" photographic needs will ever find the 240 inadequate. My 240 images look sharper and richer to me, specially on the older lens (Summicron 50 V3 and Summicron 35 V3).
My brief affair with the monochrom left no doubt about its better ISO headroom and tonality compared to the M240, but for now, I can't justify 2 digital M bodies.

I am very happy with the M 240.
__________________
Subhash
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2013   #83
hepcat
Former PH, USN
 
hepcat's Avatar
 
hepcat is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Eastern Iowa
Age: 62
Posts: 1,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepeguitarra View Post
I own a second-hand M8 that works beautifully. I know that if I buy a more expensive gear, I will be a better photographer. SO, I will upgrade to M-240 as soon as I get the money, which may take years and years (by that time there will probably be an M-260 or M-280),
Have you, by any chance, done some exquisite reviews of Leica products on YouTube? <grin>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcPqXKH69j4
__________________
Leicas and lenses

Find me on the web...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2013   #84
Rotarysmp
Registered User
 
Rotarysmp is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 41
As an M8 user, and a having an old beat up M2. I would prefer to have an M9 for the field of view the lenses were designed for. I like my 50 summicron, but 66mm equivelent is a FOV I find too long. I love my 28 Summicron, but find the 35mm equivelent FOV not wide enough. The 15mm finder which came with my 15mm Voigtländer is crappy enough that it gives about the 21mm FOV if you glance through it, and 15mm if you are careful and check the far corners.

I first got a Jupiter-12 to regain the 50mm FOV lost with the 1.3 crop, and just upgraded to a Nokton 35 1.4, but don't like the 35mm frame line being so small with the 24mm frame line surrounding it.

When it comes to frame lines, I love the M2. The 50 frame line on it's own is awesome. An M9 with the 135, and 75 frame lines removed would be ultimate finder for me.

I don't like that the the M8/ M9 bodies got fatter. The M1-M6 body is just right. The M240 is fatter still. Sony shows that it is possible to get the thickness out of a FF body, so hopefully the M260 will be thinner (not like I will be able to afford it).

I don't like the crappy monitor and slow playback on the M8. The M9 is the same here. This wouldn't drive me to upgrade to an M240.

I don't like the high iso IQ of the M8 sensor. Guess I'll have to live with it for a few more years though.

I guess I don't need more pixels. The IQ of the M8 with the Summicron 28 is truly fantasitc.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2013   #85
presspass
filmshooter
 
presspass is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 932
Not to get too far off course, but is an ME worth the $1,000 new it costs over a used M9? Admittedly, the ME comes with a Leica warranty and the M9 with a dealer's six-month warranty. Just going from the specs, it seems the ME is a stripped down M9 - same sensor, no frame selector.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2013   #86
35mmdelux
Fight On!
 
35mmdelux's Avatar
 
35mmdelux is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,233
Why would I want to "upgrade" when the M9 is a fabulous camera only inhibited by my own skill or lack therof. Does not compute.

I enjoyed the M8_ 21/4.0 VC lens. Delivered solid images even under fleeting light.

Any of these rigs delivers and they are built tough. Blows by the Fuji offerings.
__________________
M-E │ 21 asph │ 35 asph │ 50 apo-classic │ 75 apo │ Harley-Davidson Fat Boy
  Reply With Quote

Fussy, Fussy, Fussy!
Old 11-04-2013   #87
Rob-F
It's Only a Hobby
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Posts: 4,901
Fussy, Fussy, Fussy!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotarysmp View Post
As an M8 user, and a having an old beat up M2. I would prefer to have an M9 for the field of view the lenses were designed for. I like my 50 summicron, but 66mm equivelent is a FOV I find too long. I love my 28 Summicron, but find the 35mm equivelent FOV not wide enough. The 15mm finder which came with my 15mm Voigtländer is crappy enough that it gives about the 21mm FOV if you glance through it, and 15mm if you are careful and check the far corners.

I first got a Jupiter-12 to regain the 50mm FOV lost with the 1.3 crop, and just upgraded to a Nokton 35 1.4, but don't like the 35mm frame line being so small with the 24mm frame line surrounding it.

When it comes to frame lines, I love the M2. The 50 frame line on it's own is awesome. An M9 with the 135, and 75 frame lines removed would be ultimate finder for me.

I don't like that the the M8/ M9 bodies got fatter. The M1-M6 body is just right. The M240 is fatter still. Sony shows that it is possible to get the thickness out of a FF body, so hopefully the M260 will be thinner (not like I will be able to afford it).

I don't like the crappy monitor and slow playback on the M8. The M9 is the same here. This wouldn't drive me to upgrade to an M240.

I don't like the high iso IQ of the M8 sensor. Guess I'll have to live with it for a few more years though.

I guess I don't need more pixels. The IQ of the M8 with the Summicron 28 is truly fantasitc.
Some of the things that bother us when we are sitting around fondling and analyzing, become a non-issue when actually shooting. For instance, I don't worry about my M8.2 being "fat" when I'm using it. Not that you mentioned it, but the shutter noise doesn't bother me when shooting outdoors, BTW.

I get along well with my M8.2 framelines. The 28mm and 35mm framelines are especially accurate at what are for me, normal shooting distance: generally 8 or 10 feet and beyond. Well beyond.

Focal lengths? The 21mm makes a good 28mm, although its coverage also agrees well with the 25mm lines in my Zeiss 25/28 finder. My 24mm agrees well with the 28mm lines in the same finder (a good thing, since I can't see the 24mm frame in the camera finder. They could have left it out.) The 28mm works as a 37mm--not such a bad field of view. I use it a lot.

Which brings us to the 50. I have to agree, the 67mm equivalent view is a bit odd for those of us who are used to the classic focal lengths of 35mm cameras. But its horizontal field of view on the M8 is the same as the 100mm Planar for the Hasselblad, which feels perfectly fine. It all has to do with expectations.

We do agree on the 28mm Summicron--a great lens, whether on the M8, or on a film M!

Oh--speaking of expectations, I remember when Leica said that a digital M would simply not be possible. And then they did it. And then, as quickly as possible, some of us began finding things to complain about, like it won't do ISO 6400. Actually our refusal to be satisfied with anything must be what motivates Leica to keep improving!
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2013   #88
Mudman
Registered User
 
Mudman's Avatar
 
Mudman is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,096
I tried a M240 at Photoplus. I dunno about image quality, but handling wise I loved it. And the quiet shutter. In about 5 years when it drops in price a bit I would love to own one.
__________________
"Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships."
~Ansel Adams
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2013   #89
Roel
Registered User
 
Roel's Avatar
 
Roel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 235
Have been reading this topic and since I also have a coffeestained M8.2 i have to make decision on what to do.

Do I use the possibility to get a ME or do I go for the M240. (Or keep the M8.2 and not spend money but just take pictures)

I am really happy with my M8.2 regarding image quality. Ofcourse better lowlight performance would be great and a FF sensor would make me lenses work familiar like the M6TTl and M5 I have.

But how should I rate the sharpness. I hear the sharpness of the M8.2 is better than ME/M9 because the lack of in camera filter. And the M240 is less sharp than the M9/ME.

Maybe a stupid question, what does that mean exactly. Is it just a matter of using the sharpness slider and are the files than equally sharp? Or is the M8 really the crispiest and sharpest which could make me not trade in the M8.2 and take the coffeestain for what it is.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2013   #90
LCT
Registered User
 
LCT's Avatar
 
LCT is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,365
What do you mean by sharpness? Resolution? If so the M240 is the best. Contrast? Depends on lenses and tweakings in PP. This said if you don't print larger than A4 you won't see any significant difference with your M8.2. But you won't use lenses the same way because of the crop factor. Do you like fast wides? If so FF is your best friend. Otherwise the coffee stain won't prevent you from taking photographs the same way as you did before. Just recall that Leica don't allow the upgrade for M8s older than six years. (M8.2 and M240 user speaking.)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2013   #91
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 44
Posts: 18,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudman View Post
I tried a M240 at Photoplus. I dunno about image quality, but handling wise I loved it. And the quiet shutter. In about 5 years when it drops in price a bit I would love to own one.
I felt the same way... it made me wonder what everyone was bitching about... I thought it was really nice.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2013   #92
Tom Niblick
Registered User
 
Tom Niblick is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 222
Ah, a resurrected thread. I do not know about the M240. Living on a small speck in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, I've never seen one in person. A quieter shutter and a touch more DR sounds nice. But I'm perfectly content with my M9. In fact I'm thinking of reacquiring a M8 for its wonderful B&W files and as a second body. I don't care if it is loud or slow or even if I have to pull the battery every now and then, the M8 still takes great photos.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2013   #93
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 8,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roel View Post
Have been reading this topic and since I also have a coffeestained M8.2 i have to make decision on what to do.

Do I use the possibility to get a ME or do I go for the M240. (Or keep the M8.2 and not spend money but just take pictures)

I am really happy with my M8.2 regarding image quality. Ofcourse better lowlight performance would be great and a FF sensor would make me lenses work familiar like the M6TTl and M5 I have.

But how should I rate the sharpness. I hear the sharpness of the M8.2 is better than ME/M9 because the lack of in camera filter. And the M240 is less sharp than the M9/ME.

Maybe a stupid question, what does that mean exactly. Is it just a matter of using the sharpness slider and are the files than equally sharp? Or is the M8 really the crispiest and sharpest which could make me not trade in the M8.2 and take the coffeestain for what it is.
The sharpness argument is a red herring. At pixel level the M8 might have a smidgen more of acuity than the M9, the larger sensor/ higher MP count will make for less magnification, which more than compensates any difference there may be in a pixelpeeper’s perception.
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-14-2013   #94
Roel
Registered User
 
Roel's Avatar
 
Roel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
The sharpness argument is a red herring. At pixel level the M8 might have a smidgen more of acuity than the M9, the larger sensor/ higher MP count will make for less magnification, which more than compensates any difference there may be in a pixelpeeper’s perception.

@Jaap:
Just to be clear. So if the same M lens is used with the M8, M9 and M240 and given a standard image/print size the camera with the highest MP count (the M240) will appear the sharpest? (taken in to account the incamera flitering and different sensor)

And between the M8 (without the in camera filter) and the M9/ME also the higher MP/sensor M9 will feel equally sharp or sharper?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2013   #95
flyalf
Registered User
 
flyalf is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Norway, Tromsø
Posts: 233
Based purely on the end result its not a difference between M9 and M 8 (don't know about M8). But its much harder to get the same end results from M9 as M because of more limitations in dynamics.
__________________
Regards, Alf Sollund, Tromsø, Norway
------------------------------------
http://alfsollund.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2013   #96
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 8,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roel View Post
@Jaap:
Just to be clear. So if the same M lens is used with the M8, M9 and M240 and given a standard image/print size the camera with the highest MP count (the M240) will appear the sharpest? (taken in to account the incamera flitering and different sensor)

And between the M8 (without the in camera filter) and the M9/ME also the higher MP/sensor M9 will feel equally sharp or sharper?
That one is partly impossible to answer because sharpness is an undefined parameter. The contrast has to do with our perception of sharpness as well, maybe more than the acuity and resolution. That means that the M240 with a different dynamic range is out of the equation. As for the M8 and M9, yes, all being equal except the magnification, any difference in micro contrast and acuity on pixel level due to the slightly thicker* IR filter will be more than compensated for.
*The thickness of the IR filter on the M8 is 0.5 mm, on the M9 0.75 mm.
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2013   #97
Rob-F
It's Only a Hobby
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Posts: 4,901
I think there are too many variables to figure this out by armchair analysis. Let's look at some of the arguments that have been presented. The M8 has no filter over the sensor, but then the M9 has a larger sensor with more pixels. If you take a shot with an M8 that covers the same picture area as a shot taken with an M9, then maybe the M9's extra pixels win. But if your M8 picture is a crop out of a wider M9 shot, using the same number of pixels, then maybe the M8's cleaner sensor wins.

So, as one of our members has pointed out, the answer to this and many other photo questions is, "It depends."
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #98
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 8,290
Sorry, the M8 HAS an IR filter over the sensor albeit a thin one, thus a less effective one. IR reduction by the filter is about 50%. (80 % on the M9)
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #99
Rob-F
It's Only a Hobby
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Posts: 4,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Niblick View Post
Getting back to the original question, I noticed a few minor IQ differences when I switched from the M8 to a M9. The color response seems slightly different giving the M9 a slight edge but the M8 files look slightly sharper. Making this comparison is like splitting hairs. In day to day use, there is very little difference between the two cameras. In fact, the M8 was an absolutely stellar camera. I wish I could have afforded to keep mine but the M9 was such a stretch financially that it had to go. No regrets but anyone looking for a great camera on a "budget" should consider a good used M8.

Tom
This is what I wanted to call attention to: the importance of comparing the two by actually taking pictures, rather than arguing about it. Here is a poster who found the M8 a little sharper. Could we hear from those who have made the comparison in vivo?
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #100
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 8,290
I have an M8 (well, I gave it to my brother a few weeks ago) and M9 and I can see no difference in print. I do see a marginal difference in acuity in favor of the M8 at pixel level, easily corrected by a small shift in the sharpness slider (5-10 %) in post. Angels on the head of a pin.
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #101
Roel
Registered User
 
Roel's Avatar
 
Roel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 235
Never expected that sending my M8.2 to Solms and having to choose between a ME or M240 would be that tough a decision for me. I like the M8.2 but 'common sense' leads me towards getting the newer camera's with warranty for the coming years.

I have the black M8'2 which looks great and I have to get used to the ME grey color. That alone would steer me towards a more expensive black M240. But than the discussion about the M9 vs M240 (Leica CCD look vs more universal look) confuses me. So I go back and forth between the 'familiar M9' and the latest tech m240.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #102
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCT View Post
I don't use printers nor scanners to compare cameras but developping files from M8 & M9 with the same raw converters gave me the feeling that the M9 files need more sharpening than their M8 counterparts. Not a big deal to be honest but the M9 files need also more IR correction which is hardly satisfactory for a $7K or 8K camera IMHO. I would still use my IR-cut filters on the M9 if i had one i guess but the M10 will do better on this issue hopefully.
I just leave mine on the lens all the time, either camera. The 240 will benefit also so I have read. I bought some metal screw on shades from B&H as the filter tends to catch stray light with the currently short shades on the M lenses.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #103
malcD
Registered User
 
malcD's Avatar
 
malcD is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Age: 71
Posts: 234
shaper softer all depends on the glass you put in front your camera a 35mm lens on a m8 is completely different m9 because of the crop on m8, dof at wide open f2 changes to approx 2.8 when put in front of m9, so will defiantly be sharper, so comparison is for the user not the print. but keep disagreeing I'm enjoying the thread and I'd love to own a digital M.
__________________
malcD

leica lllf DA , digilux 3, nikon fm2, fed 2d , zorki 1d , canon G10 and some others that i don't use
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #104
LCT
Registered User
 
LCT's Avatar
 
LCT is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
...The 240 will benefit also so I have read...
Less so than M8s but it does actually.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-08-2013   #105
Snowbuzz
Registered User
 
Snowbuzz's Avatar
 
Snowbuzz is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 538
One advantage to keeping an M8 is that if one were ever to get the urge to do IR the M8 is one great IR camera, both b&w and false colour.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-15-2013   #106
bideford
Registered User
 
bideford is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 78
I took advantage of the Solms discount to part exchange my M8.2 for the M. I had the choice of either accepting the coffee stain (which could be an issue if I wanted to sell at a later date), a used M9-P, a new M-E or an M. The M-E would have been the cheapest option but there was little difference in the used M9-P versus the M.

I absolutely love the M. Compared to the M8.2 (I have never used an M9) the high iso capabilities are not just simply better but massively improved. 3200 files are relatively noise free and very acceptable. The EVF allows excellent framing with wide angle lenses. The rangefinder mechanism (despite no comment from Solms) is an improvement on the M8.2.

I am perfectly happy with both the colour and b/w output (I always shoot RAW). In fact I would judge that the colour is better (I find I use it more) and b/w just as satisfying as the M8.2 (my biggest worry!).

The M8.2 is a fine camera - and remains so. In my (humble) opinion the M is better. Your views may vary!

James
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-10-2014   #107
Cyriljay
Registered User
 
Cyriljay's Avatar
 
Cyriljay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpm View Post
I'm not here to fan the flames between which has better IQ, the M8 or 9.
Two weeks ago I bought an M8.2 in good shape with just a little brassing for character. I held my breath with all the known issues with Leica no longer supporting that model. I decided it would quench my GAS for a digital M for awhile.
Anyway, as to image quality, I've noticed that with certain grays, notably my Mazda MX5, the image comes out blue. I've used coded and non-coded lens, with and without ir cut filters, auto white balance and wb taken with an expo disk. Still comes out blue. Am I missing something or am I destined to deal with this in pp?
Thanks in advance for any help.
The best advise is to use the IR filter or you will not benefit from this great camera. That is my experience of using the camera with out filters and I started filters and seen the different. Better colours I have seen from M and better than M9 i am sure.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-09-2014   #108
rich_
Registered User
 
rich_ is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45
I had an M8, M9-P and now M240.

I found that in nice light, I enjoy the look of the M9 photos most. Although they aren't actually better from a technical standpoint I preferred the way it rendered the scene with the highlights and shadows. It seemed crisper and i preferred the skin tones. In any other light or lack of, I prefer the M240.

Whichever choice, no doubt you will enjoy it!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2014   #109
Johann Espiritu
Lawyer / Ninja
 
Johann Espiritu's Avatar
 
Johann Espiritu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roel View Post
I have the black M8'2 which looks great and I have to get used to the ME grey color. That alone would steer me towards a more expensive black M240.
The M8's are finished in black chrome, and the M240's use black paint. I'm in the minority that prefer the black chrome finish over the painted versions. The matte finish just looks nicer than the paint finish to me. It also feels a little cooler in the hand, versus the softer feel of paint.

I also prefer the grey ME over the steel grey M9.
__________________
“One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten is an experiment, and one hundred is a style.”

My Flickr

manilacamerastyle
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2014   #110
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johann Espiritu View Post
The M8's are finished in black chrome, and the M240's use black paint. I'm in the minority that prefer the black chrome finish over the painted versions. The matte finish just looks nicer than the paint finish to me. It also feels a little cooler in the hand, versus the softer feel of paint.

I also prefer the grey ME over the steel grey M9.
While I find myself thinking that I shouldn't care about the aesthetics of the camera, only the photos I take with it, I'll have to confess that I actually do care, and perhaps more than I'd like to admit. On the other hand, I do rather like the black paint on my M240, so I guess I'm OK. I'll be even more OK, I'm guessing (again), once I've used it enough for a bit of tasteful brassing ('till now only on the Thumbs Up device I have permanently attached). But it's early weeks yet...

...Mike

(P.S. - for that g*damn much money, I think I'm allowed to care how the d*mned thing looks!)
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.

Last edited by mfunnell : 06-12-2014 at 05:31. Reason: P.S.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2014   #111
Johann Espiritu
Lawyer / Ninja
 
Johann Espiritu's Avatar
 
Johann Espiritu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfunnell View Post
While I find myself thinking that I shouldn't care about the aesthetics of the camera, only the photos I take with it, I'll have to confess that I actually do care, and perhaps more than I'd like to admit. On the other hand, I do rather like the black paint on my M240, so I guess I'm OK. I'll be even more OK, I'm guessing (again), once I've used it enough for a bit of tasteful brassing ('till now only on the Thumbs Up device I have permanently attached). But it's early weeks yet...
It took me about six months of (almost) daily use for brassing to start on my black paint M240. It did start to look much better then!

On the original topic (image quality), and having owned an M8, M9 and now an M240, I have to agree with a lot of the posts that the M9 had the best output in good light. There is indeed a nice film-y look to the DNG's. It took me a while to learn how to process the M240 DNG's to look more like the M9's (TIP: use the Clarity slider), and now I'm starting to bring them closer to each other in look. Alien Skin Exposure helps a lot too.

In low light, high ISO situations, though, the M240 does shine!
__________________
“One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten is an experiment, and one hundred is a style.”

My Flickr

manilacamerastyle
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2014   #112
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johann Espiritu View Post
(TIP: use the Clarity slider)
I'm not quite sure about this. I never owned an M8 or M9, so I'm not trying to emulate anything, but I've found (YMMV, and your taste might vary too) that M240 RAW (ie. DNG) files, in many circumstances, can fall apart rather quickly (again to my taste) with over-use of the Clarity slider (at least in comparison to, say, my original Canon 5D RAW files). To my taste, you may be right in some circumstances but I'd also caution "be very careful with this one".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johann Espiritu View Post
In low light, high ISO situations, though, the M240 does shine!
I have certainly found it so. In my experiments so far I've found photos up to ISO 3200 to be easily handled, rather better than I'd expected:

This has had (by my previous expectations) rather little in the way of post-processing (simply taking the standard PS CS6 / ACR default noise reduction; which at lower ISO values I simply reduce to zero) yet is completely useable without further work. I've found this an added bonus, given that I'd been led to believe that the M240 was horridly noisy at high ISO compared to cameras which I'm more familiar with yet find, in fact, worse. Perhaps, again, that's a matter of tastes varying.

...Mike
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-12-2014   #113
Monochrom
Registered User
 
Monochrom's Avatar
 
Monochrom is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,025
I really understand why someone would keep his M8 instead of going into an m9 or m240...the m8 is that good.

Perhaps the only thing is keeping me from getting an m8 again is the fact I really use the full frame sensor and can´t live without my redscale elmar.
My lens choice, 50mm and 28mm. Both for depth of filed and angle.
__________________
M9 Vc 28/3.5 Ltm 5/3.5
Leica IIIF Black Paint
Fuji Gf670
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #114
Cyriljay
Registered User
 
Cyriljay's Avatar
 
Cyriljay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 227
I am using my M8-up dated after shutter broken, as my Digital and all I know is lot of people are arguing to own the latest Leica that come to the market is the best and even whiteout knowing the full potential of a camera they used as previous they defend what they have in their hand. Briefly M8 make best colour photos and best B&w than the M9 or MM series .

You can see the Photos around you see in the internet and compare them and consider the talks of people who are talking . Compare your own pictures. I am comparing Mine always to the pictures I see of others. That is how i justify. M8 Is a good camera. I never change it But Planing to go for for a M Monochrome as it a different camera. :-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #115
Cyriljay
Registered User
 
Cyriljay's Avatar
 
Cyriljay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 227
M8 is no doubt a good camera. I know lot of folks are defending their cameras they have in their hand like as I do.. Ha Ha . But the truth is according to my experience as a sole Digital camera owner M8 Leica, I learned M8 camera is unique and has a special colour and B&W rendering and it is more pronounce and different than M9 and MM cameras. It non arguable what ever thinks others says my photography in colour and B&W Looks better than the Colour that I see from others who uses M9 or MM . I never want to change my camera to update as what some keep changing to the latest camera to improve the photography. I did it 16years ago buying my M6 after going for all cameras since 1985 and it is still my best camera.

All of you know M6 ....it is still more competent and efficient as the New M monochrome.
And the next change I did was bought my Hasselblad after my Bronica Sq - SQ-A .. So I bought my M8 4years ago still I love this camera,
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #116
Cyriljay
Registered User
 
Cyriljay's Avatar
 
Cyriljay is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
The framelines on the M8 and M8.2 are not essentially different. RF framelines can only be 100% accurate at one given distance. As the lens is focussed to infinity, they will get too narrow. Experienced users compensate for this. Normally one would expect framelines to be accurate at the shortest focussing distance, to avoid accidentally cut off edges. And that was the way it was on the M8. As the M8 attracted quite a few new users that were not familiar with the phenomena and protested, Leica decided to take a chance and shift the optimum accuracy from 1 m. to 2 m. As this is closer to the usual shooting distance of 3 m. and less pronounced at infinity, the gamble paid off in far less complaints. But the "zoom" effect of the field of view in relationship to the framelines is unaltered. And now the framelines are too wide at closest focussing distance on the M8.2. So on the M9 they reverted to 1 m. And you know what? Nobody even noticed...
When I got my m8 upgraded in to M8.2 they have( Leica Slomes ) adjusted my frame lines and It was mentioned in the details of service . I have immediately noticed form my photos the difference and Of course better than than the M8 I had before . It is not funny and they are much better. I read lot of people who are Leica photographers ... are mentioning about M.8 frame lines are better and far more better than M9 .

Am I missing some thing here . it is really funny..
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-12-2015   #117
Manuel Patino
Registered User
 
Manuel Patino is offline
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 164
M240 hands down. The others wont even come close at high ISO. They don't even offer ISO 6400 and certainly wont give even marginal results at much lower ISO numbers.
I shoot dancers in dimly lit clubs at 1/90 f1.4 ISO 6400 and get very usable images (granted, B&W), but that is just out of the question with the other cameras. Maybe a carefully constructed test at native ISO with equivalent lenses might allow for an argument, in real life there is no contest IMHO.

This is a JPG right out of the camera.

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2015   #118
colonel
Registered User
 
colonel is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
M240 hands down.
I agree

I am curious where you photograph was shot (i.e,. which country and which town) ?

best rgds
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-14-2015   #119
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
As soon as I tried the M9, I thought the image quality had gone from 'almost 35mm' to 'for all practical purposes, 35mm'. I didn't WANT to think that. I didn't WANT to buy an M9. But between the image quality, and getting all my old focal lengths back, buying the M9 was something I felt I had to do. Bear in mind, of course, that I can put it through the business, so it's not just a toy. But I found the difference impressive http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subsc...%20review.html

Cheers,

R.
Thank you for providing the link, Roger. I enjoyed going over the write-up and the posted images. I agree 100% with your final conclusions. I have an M8.2 and an M9, and they make a wonderful combo. I do not need shutter speed to be 1/8000.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-15-2015   #120
Manuel Patino
Registered User
 
Manuel Patino is offline
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by colonel View Post
I agree

I am curious where you photograph was shot (i.e,. which country and which town) ?

best rgds
It was shot in Atlanta, Georgia USA. And I don't know what the Farsi (?) characters on the wall read
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:51.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.