Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica General Discussion / News / Rumors

View Poll Results: What is the Overall Best Value in Digital Rangefinder Cameras?
Epson RD1 family - all models 55 17.74%
Leica M8 / 8u 65 20.97%
Leica 8.2 20 6.45%
Leica M9 65 20.97%
Leica M9-P 10 3.23%
Leica MM 18 5.81%
Leica ME 20 6.45%
Leica M240 aka M aka M10 41 13.23%
Leica M-P 11 3.55%
Leica M60 5 1.61%
Voters: 310. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 03-31-2015   #81
Frontman
Registered User
 
Frontman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 東京日本
Posts: 1,659
Not on your list, but I just got a Fuji X100T. It doesn't have a true optical rangefinder, but I was surprised that it has a digital split-image focusing aid. I have had it only for a couple days, and can't put it down.

In regards to the cameras on your list, the Epson RD1 is the best value in regards to cost/performance, and even more so in regards to reliability.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-24-2015   #82
rbelyell
Registered User
 
rbelyell is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,338
yes, epson is by far the best value. its by far the easiest to operate in every conceivable way one wants to measure that category. its by far the most reliable. its by far the easiest to DIY adjust. its by far the cheapest to fix. and ump-teen years later it still performes better at iso 1600 than its competitors. theres no miore, no color shift, no corner shift nor focus shift. i'm not knocking the m8/9 and the images they produce, but if you go category by category, and then divide by price, its hard to see a way to a different conclusion. i will run mine into the ground and then buy another one. just for the 1:1 vf and the user-set frame lines alone, i honestly would not consider any of the alternatives, even if 'value' were not the criterion we're discussing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-03-2015   #83
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 43
Posts: 17,533
I'd say the M9.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-14-2015   #84
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,367
Reviewing this thread, my response from the beginning of the year seems right on. My M9 needed a sensor replacement and I opted for the M-P upgrade. I could not be happier than I am with the M-P: to me, this is the digital Leica M finally fully realized and modernized with excellent capabilities that extend its versatility and quality, a camera on par with my film Ms of the past and present.

I expect to be shooting with it for years to come.

G


Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
Leica M (typ 240)

Why is it the best value?

- Its sensor produces better results with a wider range of Leica M-mount and threaded-mount lenses than any of the others. It is also eminently useful with the full range of Leica R lenses, which are outstanding quality.

- Both its hardware and firmware is under ongoing development for future products. (While Leica is working on the M9/M9-P/M-E/M Monochrom sensor issue, I don't think there are any new products intended for release based on that series technology. The M (typ 240) is what new products that aren't just a cosmetic treatment will be based on going forward.)

- Its reliability and repair history is better than all prior Leica digital M models as well as the Epson R-D1 models.

- Parts and service for the M (typ 240) will be available for a long time to come; there are limits on both for the Epson and M8 series cameras already.

- The M (typ 240) is more versatile, more sensitive, and more robust than any of the prior models. (Video capture, weather sealing, GPS interface, Live View, etc etc all enhance and expand upon the capabilities of the basic Leica M camera model.)

Sometimes, the best value costs more. :-)

BTW, why not put the correct and proper name for the Leica M (typ 240) in the list as well as all three nicknames? And you missed the Leica M Edition 60 (typ 240) in the list.

G

... When I upgrade from the M9 to the typ 240 series, I'll go with the M-P model because even if it is a bit more expensive than the M, the durability of the LCD cover glass, reinstatement of the frame line selector lever, and improvements in buffering space and speed will be worth the additional money for a long term purchase.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-14-2015   #85
MCTuomey
Registered User
 
MCTuomey's Avatar
 
MCTuomey is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: U.S.
Age: 62
Posts: 3,135
Most imaging potential for the money I'd say M8/8u/8.2.

Most value in use for the money I'd say a used M240.

And the M9/MM cameras are somewhere in the middle.

And now there's the Q which may change the entire M value proposition.
__________________
--Mike (confirmed midget imagist on stilts)

The photographer chances upon a scene that fascinates him. He longs to be a part of it ... recording the scene and including within it his vicarious representative, the participating observer. --- Geoff Dyer

Gear: more than enough, film and digital

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-13-2015   #86
swatch
Registered User
 
swatch is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 70
1st full frame sensor rangefinder camera M9

market price of digital camera always go down ( c/p ratio goes up ) but being 1st is valuable in history
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2015   #87
Canyongazer
Canyongazer
 
Canyongazer's Avatar
 
Canyongazer is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Hill Country, Texas
Posts: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vickko View Post
I have an M9 that I love, but gotta admit, the Pana GF1 is used the most.
While not a real RF, I've gotta agree, Vick.

The GF1 or GX1 w/ the 20mm 1.7 is one heck of a good---and cheap---image machine.
It's best to keep the ISO below 800 but, OTOH, it performs quite well at f2 and there is little or no need to stop down past f4.

OK, upon further reflection, really good and really cheap.

small and light, too, :-)
__________________

Panasonic GX1, 20mm 1.7

Fuji XE-2, X Pro 2,
w/ 18-55 Fuji
12mm Zeiss,
16mm 1.4, 35 1.4, 56mm 1.2 Fuji
Fuji X100s

Nikon F
Nikon D800e with 6 primes and
a zoomer (70-200 f4)

In Memoriam: Mamiya 7ll with 50, 80 and 150 mm lenses---The best camera I've ever owned.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-17-2015   #88
jarski
Registered User
 
jarski is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,270
voted M9, especially now when Leica has worked solution for the sensor issues they had earlier this year.

but seen couple appealing offers on M8.2 lately, prices are finally coming down a bit? a Sony effect perhaps, used A7's with appealing prices available (obviously no RF, but large sensor for M-lenses).
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2015   #89
jamin-b
Registered User
 
jamin-b is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
here are some recent shots in Nepal, not by me, from that "no value" camera, the M8.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/top.../1112#12794251

In my opinion, the M8 is the most underrated camera today. The thinnest filter stack ever over the sensor, and very modest 1.3x crop, I have seen so many jaw dropping images from that machine.....

No, I don't own one, and like you I covet FF, but I would never discount the M8 myself. At 1500 or so, it is a fantastic value, if results trump specs on paper, or romantic thoughts of what was meant to be.
I own an M8, and totally agree. Bought mine 2nd hand for $1300 a few years back and have never had any issues (besides the ocassional ugly purple "black" clothing . It's been great enough to allow me to withstand the lures of GAS (at least with respect to newer Leica digital RFs )
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2015   #90
ray*j*gun
Registered User
 
ray*j*gun's Avatar
 
ray*j*gun is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia area
Posts: 2,298
I have an M8u and its been excellent. Any image improvement from the FF Rf's is not worth trading up IMO.
__________________
Raymond
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2015   #91
froyd
Registered User
 
froyd's Avatar
 
froyd is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,886
Is the M8 lighter than the M240? I had a chance to handle one lately and boy, what a beast that is! Sure, smaller and lighter than many other FF alternatives, but a bit of a heifer for an M-system camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-26-2015   #92
jchfriis
Registered User
 
jchfriis is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by froyd View Post
Is the M8 lighter than the M240? I had a chance to handle one lately and boy, what a beast that is! Sure, smaller and lighter than many other FF alternatives, but a bit of a heifer for an M-system camera.
Yes, the M8 is indeed lighter, about the same as the film cameras. Here are the measurements according to Leica:

M8: 139x80x37 mm. 545g plus battery 41g= 586g (According to my kitchen scale it is 600 g.)
M240: 139x80x42 mm. 680 g. I don't know if that includes the battery
M7: 138x79.5x38 mm. 610 g.
MP: 138x77x38 mm. 585 g.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-29-2015   #93
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by froyd View Post
Is the M8 lighter than the M240? I had a chance to handle one lately and boy, what a beast that is! Sure, smaller and lighter than many other FF alternatives, but a bit of a heifer for an M-system camera.
No kidding. But there are users who claim they like it that way

Unconditional love for the 240 I guess
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-29-2015   #94
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fingerpuk View Post
This thread is making me re think my Leica wants, and instead get an R-D1.
Do what suits you, but having had R-D1, M9, and M-P, I'd never pick the Epson over any of the Leicas.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-30-2015   #95
astro8
Registered User
 
astro8's Avatar
 
astro8 is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 54
Posts: 541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fingerpuk View Post
Thinking the R-D1 would be a cheap way in until I can get a decent Leica.
Yes and why not? I don't see much of a downside. You may find like I and many others do, that the R-D1 is a good fit.
__________________
-Greg

My RFF Gallery

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-07-2015   #96
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,954
I find the M 4/3 cameras overall a great bargain. I use the (older) Olympus E-P2 and E-PL1 12MP cameras with IS and 10X magnified focusing aid. I am going to look for the habitat of some local crabs at Pensacola Beach today. I need some photos of crabs in their habitat for my daughter's science project. We received some tips from a Professor where to find them, and she told us that we would need sneakers and shorts and that we may have to wade ... etc. I will not take my M8 or M9 there. My iPhone is useful then, and my two M 4/3 will provide me with a 15mm and a 400mm view as specialized cameras for today's walk. The E-PL1 cost me $150 new and with warranty from Tamarkin. This is a great deal.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

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

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

Old 09-07-2015   #97
rbelyell
Registered User
 
rbelyell is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fingerpuk View Post
Thinking the R-D1 would be a cheap way in until I can get a decent Leica.
well, since youve been given permission to 'do what suits you', may as well give this god-awful idea a try. but be careful, you may end up like alot of us idiots who actually enjoy the rd1 better than the leica alternatives.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2015   #98
Alberti
Registered User
 
Alberti's Avatar
 
Alberti is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Holland
Posts: 240
For simplicity M8. It is a lovely camera, maybe ought to buy one again for my wife - - -
- I just bought an secondhand MM for all the reasons mentioned. And I expect its value to remain high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
However, it's [X100] not a rangefinder camera.
G
You are right. Though in some aspects the X100 is nice, it always under-delivers in quality and my wife still has trouble with her "automatic focus X100" - even though the viewer is nice & bright - her main reason to buy it.
__________________
Leica aficionado
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-14-2015   #99
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 40
Posts: 2,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwj View Post
M60

Its the only one that has some chance of holding any value. Everything else would be worthless soon.

Now, for actually using, I'd say a 240, but then, what do I know!

Michael
When I was in Iraq I loved the 240 that was mounted on my HMMWV. It's an updated M60 anyways. I hated the performance of the M9 in the desert. The sand and dust always caused that thing to jam. The favorite of everyone in my platoon was the "Ma Deuce," the M2HB. It made everyone duck when the "shutter" was actuated. I carried my own M2 and M4, both made by Leica.

As for the list that Stephen posted, I've owned the RD1, M8 and M9. As a working photographer, the thing that matters for me is that the gear works. The only camera out of those three that worked without fault, was the RD1. The camera could be free but if it isn't reliable, it has no value as far as I'm concerned.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-15-2015   #100
Kent
Finally at home...
 
Kent's Avatar
 
Kent is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 46
Posts: 1,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austerby View Post
I think the M8 is best value: it has it's limitations, particularly around ISO, but delivers wonderful files and image quality, especially in monochrome. It's so good that I've not found its successors to offer substantive improvements for me so I've stuck with it.

On a simple price/image capability measure it has to provide the best ratio, in my opinion at least.
I'd like to second that. Exactly my thoughts.
__________________
Cheers, Kent
_______
Main Cams: Nikon, Fuji, Leica, Olympus, Pentax, Panasonic, Canon
Main Lenses: Nikkor, Leica, Fuji, Voigtländer, Sigma, Pentax, Tamron, Samyang etc.
Click me...
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-15-2015   #101
Tonkatsu-Dog
Registered User
 
Tonkatsu-Dog is offline
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Meguru-ku Tokyo
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
When I was in Iraq I loved the 240 that was mounted on my HMMWV. It's an updated M60 anyways. I hated the performance of the M9 in the desert. The sand and dust always caused that thing to jam. The favorite of everyone in my platoon was the "Ma Deuce," the M2HB. It made everyone duck when the "shutter" was actuated. I carried my own M2 and M4, both made by Leica. As for the list that Stephen posted, I've owned the RD1, M8 and M9. As a working photographer, the thing that matters for me is that the gear works. The only camera out of those three that worked without fault, was the RD1. The camera could be free but if it isn't reliable, it has no value as far as I'm concerned. Phil Forrest
Ha! Took me a while to connect, my 240 jams sometimes and I miss a shot here and there... Luckily it's only a camera..
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-01-2015   #102
Peter Wijninga
Registered User
 
Peter Wijninga's Avatar
 
Peter Wijninga is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 2,864
I spent this summer in Vietnam and made a lot of pictures. I took the Leica M-E and the Epson R-D1x with me. Both cameras produce a signature like output. This said, the Epson provided the more reliable results. The Leica was OK in its own right but was finicky and much harder to handle.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2015   #104
sniki
Registered User
 
sniki's Avatar
 
sniki is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 58
Posts: 268
Epson RD1; give honour where honour is due: they were the first to conceive this.
__________________
sniki
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2016   #105
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,954
I agree that the M8 is a good deal for what it can deliver in a quality package. I use this camera each week.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

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

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

Old 01-18-2016   #106
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
 
Dante_Stella's Avatar
 
Dante_Stella is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,475
The M240 has the most capabilities, the highest resolution, the best high-ISO capability, the only TTL viewing option, the best metering, the best TTL flash system, the best battery life, and the best chance of being around in 10 years. And there are more independent people who can service Leicas than anything.

I don't see how you can even put an RD-1x in the "value for the money" category - it is a 6.1Mp camera with the biggest crop of them all. Even on a price-per-pixel basis, the M240 kills it. Hell, the M8 kills it.

And there can be a big difference between a 1.5 and a 1.33 crop when it comes to fast wides. For example, don't want to be stuck with a 21mm f/4.5 lens (from your 15/4.5), or a 30mm f/4 lens (from your 21/4).

D
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2016   #107
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 8,167
What's wrong with a Summilux 21?
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-18-2016   #108
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 8,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchfriis View Post
Yes, the M8 is indeed lighter, about the same as the film cameras. Here are the measurements according to Leica:

M8: 139x80x37 mm. 545g plus battery 41g= 586g (According to my kitchen scale it is 600 g.)
M240: 139x80x42 mm. 680 g. I don't know if that includes the battery
M7: 138x79.5x38 mm. 610 g.
MP: 138x77x38 mm. 585 g.
The common Internet error. The M240 is exactly the same size as the M8 and M9. Leica foolishly included the thumbrest/wheel into the official figures giving rise to the "fat-camera-myth".
__________________
Jaap








jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #109
Baby of Macon
Registered User
 
Baby of Macon is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 180
Hands up, I know its not a rangefinder, but hands down the best value in cameras with that form factor is a secondhand X Pro 1 - 300 Euro seems to be the going rate for a mint example. I bought a second body recently at retail for that amount. It offers better IQ and reliability than an M8 which, though great value for money secondhand, is still crippling if you don't already own the glass to go with it.
__________________
The eye sees only what the mind allows it
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #110
wpb
Registered User
 
wpb is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 182
M8/40 Rokkor CLE.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #111
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
A cropped sensor represents no value at all, in my opinion.
Would be curious to hear why?
I am actually very curious in general why "cropped" sensor is considered as something inferior to "full frame". Other than usage of 'legacy glass", which is questionable in my simple mind anyway, what else is inferior about it?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #112
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post

In fact the whole idea to start with is rather asinine. If we want to talk about results, any $200 point and shoot can do 95% of what any Leica M(x) can do in decent light. Let's not kid ourselves here. The soccer mom with a Nikon D3200 has more technical image quality and value in her camera than an M8 or M9, if all we compare things to are the "results," given a constant photographer.

I am one of those that values the experience as much as the results, and sometimes those two things do coincide. To be frank, I have hardly shot my M9. I've shot more with my M6, but have shot 10x more with my Nikon SP. And I prefer shooting 4x5 to any 35mm camera in many situations. What has more value? What I enjoy has more value.
Agree 100%.

Let me also add that, in the past, while fiddling with new gear or shooting questionable film instead of taking sure shots, I lost irreplaceable moments with my kids growing up, more than I can count... I regret this now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #113
Baby of Macon
Registered User
 
Baby of Macon is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Would be curious to hear why?
I am actually very curious in general why "cropped" sensor is considered as something inferior to "full frame". Other than usage of 'legacy glass", which is questionable in my simple mind anyway, what else is inferior about it?
Depth of field is different on a cropped sensor camera and, ceteris paribus, the photo sites on a cropped sensor will be smaller than an FF for the equivalent number of megapixels with potential, and I stress potential, implications for dynamic range.

But copped sensors can be made to work extremely well and, albeit not on rangefinders, for some applications, the effective increase in focal length of the lenses used can be very helpful e.g sports, wildlife etc.
__________________
The eye sees only what the mind allows it
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #114
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Would be curious to hear why?
I am actually very curious in general why "cropped" sensor is considered as something inferior to "full frame"....
Having shot 100,000 + on APS-C and 100,000 + on FF, the reason is pretty obvious: results.

The debate has been fought everywhere, and you can look up all the arguments. For general photography, there is no comparison. FF is of course better, and Medium format is better than full frame, but very expensive and less versatile with the lenses.

If you really want to know for your skeptical self there is only one way: shoot them both alot at the same time. Maybe you won't care about the differences. That's OK.

But you will be the exception among those with the choice. Of course the size and weight factor will trump the quality at times even among the sensible
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #115
MIkhail
Registered User
 
MIkhail's Avatar
 
MIkhail is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
Having shot 100,000 + on APS-C and 100,000 + on FF, the reason is pretty obvious: results.

The debate has been fought everywhere, and you can look up all the arguments. For general photography, there is no comparison. FF is of course better, and Medium format is better than full frame, but very expensive and less versatile with the lenses.

If you really want to know for your skeptical self there is only one way: shoot them both alot at the same time. Maybe you won't care about the differences. That's OK.

But you will be the exception among those with the choice. Of course the size and weight factor will trump the quality at times even among the sensible
Have no intentions to fight this debate... not having shot 100,000 pictures ... Just give me 25-30 years and I will get back with you on that :-)

I see each (APS-C, full frame and Medium format) as its own thing, never occurred to me to compare it.
Usually I look thru viewfinder, what I see is what I deal with.
I don’t care how one would call it or what the other lens/camera combo would give me at that moment. But it’s just me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #116
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby of Macon View Post
...But copped sensors can be made to work extremely well and, albeit not on rangefinders, for some applications, the effective increase in focal length of the lenses used can be very helpful e.g sports, wildlife etc.
With something like a Speedbooster or Lens Turbo II you don't get the effective increase in focal length but you do get more light gathering ability.

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #117
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
I see each (APS-C, full frame and Medium format) as its own thing, never occurred to me to compare it.
Seriously? Do you compare how a 28 looks with a 50 on the same body? How on earth could you ever choose which to use without comparing them?

I'd contend that of course you do, and you also compare all your platforms, but it's so innate you pass straight to the "being"

Now, all this said, I'm a big fan of the crop M8 which makes fantastic images. And obviously you will see interesting photography from many different platforms, holgas, cellphones, even m43

But day in day out I prefer the M9 and A7 full frames to my former crop cameras, except they are much bigger.


DSC00745 by unoh7, I'd very much like a FF this size, and it could be done.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #118
nasmformyzombie
Registered
 
nasmformyzombie is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ~47.6° N, 122.3° W
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante_Stella View Post
The M240 has the most capabilities, the highest resolution, the best high-ISO capability, the only TTL viewing option, the best metering, the best TTL flash system, the best battery life, and the best chance of being around in 10 years. And there are more independent people who can service Leicas than anything.

I don't see how you can even put an RD-1x in the 'value for the money' category - it is a 6.1Mp camera with the biggest crop of them all. Even on a price-per-pixel basis, the M240 kills it. Hell, the M8 kills it.

And there can be a big difference between a 1.5 and a 1.33 crop when it comes to fast wides. For example, don't want to be stuck with a 21mm f/4.5 lens (from your 15/4.5), or a 30mm f/4 lens (from your 21/4).

D
There are no ‘value for the money’ examples in digital rangefinders. The Epson RD family has an ancient 6.1 MP sensor with a monster 1.5 crop, as well as a very uncertain future in terms of product support. The M8 has a 10.3 MP sensor with a 1.33 crop, and needs either a 6 bit coded lens or an IR-cut filter in front of the lens to function properly in many situations. The M9 has sensor corrosion issues. The M240 is a superior camera but how many hobbyists like myself can plop down $6000-$7000 on a camera? OK, maybe a used one for $4000, digital rot being what it is. Either way, it's out of the reach of many hobbyists.

In 2003 I purchased a new M7, and I paid about $2200 for it (at the time Leica prices were admittedly at lows we will likely not see again). A good used example today can be had for about $1500-$1700. Compared with digital the M7 is a steal. A digital camera purchased in 2003 is a laughable paperweight today, provided it's still in one piece.

Don't get me wrong, many photographers enjoy their RD-1, their M8 or their M9. I thoroughly enjoy perusing photos posted here on RFF taken with these cameras. However, factoring cost, to refer to any of these digital rangefinders as providing value for the money as their technologies age, their issues persist and their depreciated values continue to plummet is absurd.

A better poll might be which digital rangefinder(s) do you own and which do you enjoy using most.

Rant over.
__________________
It is during our darkest moments that we must focus to see the light.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2016   #119
Lss
Registered User
 
Lss is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by nasmformyzombie View Post
There are no ‘value for the money’ examples in digital rangefinders.
Well, there is no such thing as a cheap digital rangefinder. While some fully functional Epson R-D1 units are at least approaching that level in comparison to what many camera buyers are spending, their technology is already decade old as you point out. That may or may not matter for the potential buyers.
__________________
Lasse
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-03-2016   #120
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIkhail View Post
Usually I look thru viewfinder, what I see is what I deal with.
I don’t care how one would call it or what the other lens/camera combo would give me at that moment. But it’s just me.
It's not just you.
  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 08:55.


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.