Rangefinderforum.com

Rangefinderforum.com (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/index.php)
-   Leica M10, 240 family, M-P, M60 (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=207)
-   -   M240: Current Price vs Reliability (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=167769)

bayernfan 02-27-2019 15:15

M240: Current Price vs Reliability
 
It seems M240 prices are still declining. When they dip below $2300, I'm seriously considering the purchase of one from a reputable dealer.

A question to those that have used/owned an M240 over an extended period of time: Is the camera a smart purchase at that price, or am I setting myself up with a reliability/repair disaster?

Your feedback is helpful!

Mackinaw 02-27-2019 16:17

I bought my M240 (used) back in 2014. It's worked flawlessly over the past five years. All kind of weather too, winter cold to summer heat. So, no complaints from me. It's my go-to digital camera.

Jim B.

vladimir 02-27-2019 16:23

Ultimately your choice, but I would stay away from any ageing Leica bodies, rangefinders especially. If you have any M mount lenses and want to use them get yourself a Fujifilm X-T3 and a Fujifilm M to X mount adapter. I’ve had bad experience with M9 and M9P, M 240 was trouble free, but I sold it after using it for 2 years to finance SL. The SL has been a trouble free after two years of usage. For travel and walk around I use X-T3.

ktmrider 02-27-2019 16:30

Have a MP240 which I purchased used about 14 months ago. It is my only digital and has worked fine. I have no desire to upgrade to an M10. I would recommend a purchase.

Rob-F 02-27-2019 16:42

I don't have an M240, but several here at RFF who have had an M240 call it their workhorse camera, free of problems.

bayernfan 02-27-2019 20:46

poll added for those that want to cast their vote. thanks for the feedback so far, gents.

d_c 02-28-2019 00:30

I've not heard of any inherent issues with the M240, such as M9 owners have had to contend with regarding sensor decay, so I would say that it is definately worth considering. If it was me I would probably only be looking at newer examples though and I would keep in mind the cost of an additional battery.

raid 02-28-2019 03:28

The M240 is in my opinion a great bargain for what you get. This camera works well and is very capable. The only negative aspect that is worthy mentioning is its size and weight. It is like the M5 of digital Leica cameras. You get used to it.

shawn 02-28-2019 04:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by d_c (Post 2872283)
I've not heard of any inherent issues with the M240, such as M9 owners have had to contend with regarding sensor decay, so I would say that it is definately worth considering. If it was me I would probably only be looking at newer examples though and I would keep in mind the cost of an additional battery.

When I bought my m240 used it came with a spare. The cost of replacement batteries is expensive (no aftermarket versions) but at the same time the need for spare batteries is much lower on the m240. If you are using the RF and not chimping a lot it will easily go over a 1000 shots on a charge. I go weeks without changing/charging a battery.

As a price point I bought mine in August for $2600 in great shape with all the original boxes, spare battery, EVF and a ThumbsUp grip.

Shawn

Out to Lunch 02-28-2019 05:09

A yesteryear camera but if you want the digital rangefinder experience, go for it. Money/performance wise, it is, in my honest opinion a bad investment. There are many more versatile cameras available today. If you are invested in M-mount lenses, just buy the appropriate converter.

Godfrey 02-28-2019 06:44

Ignore all the tripe about adapting lenses. While many of the fly by night camera-du-jour options like Sony and Fuji can be used, nothing uses M-mount lenses as well as a Leica M camera, and the imaging results with my M-P 240 blew away the results with my Sony A7 so resoundingly I sold the Sony immediately. It's not about the stupid specifications, it's about the imaging.

I have had exactly zero problems with either the M-P 240 or M-D 262. Zero. The Sony locked up about twice a week... Piece of crapola.

G

raid 02-28-2019 06:49

I don't own any "crapola cameras", so I cannot judge non-Leica cameras. It makes sense that a Leica digital camera works best with Leica lenses.

Luke_Miller 02-28-2019 06:54

Mine has performed flawlessly. IMO It was Leica's attempt to create a system camera and it has features that are not in the M10. With the M10 Leica returned to trying to create a digital body that was the same thickness as the film bodies. Going thin required some compromises. Some of those compromises are loss of video, the ability to host the Multi-Function Grip which adds the ability to connect a TTL flash while using the EVF, and smaller battery with worse battery performance. I have not moved to the M10 due to its improvements (better rangefinder, EVF, and ISO performance) not being sufficiently important to me. I may move to the M10-P to get its new shutter.

Regarding M lenses and adapters - if you like wides the M offers the best image quality at the edges/corners. Better even than the SL, but not dramatically so. With other mirrorless bodies performance suffers until you get to normal focal lengths.

Ted Striker 02-28-2019 07:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by vladimir (Post 2872224)
Ultimately your choice, but I would stay away from any ageing Leica bodies, rangefinders especially. If you have any M mount lenses and want to use them get yourself a Fujifilm X-T3 and a Fujifilm M to X mount adapter. Iíve had bad experience with M9 and M9P, M 240 was trouble free, but I sold it after using it for 2 years to finance SL. The SL has been a trouble free after two years of usage. For travel and walk around I use X-T3.


Taking FF lenses from Leica and putting them on a crop camera radically changes their presentation. I would never, ever do that. I'd but the much cheaper APS-C lenses. Using Leica lenses on a Fuji camera just wastes their amazing corner performances.

Out to Lunch 02-28-2019 07:16

Huff and Puff.

Ko.Fe. 02-28-2019 08:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Striker (Post 2872353)
Taking FF lenses from Leica and putting them on a crop camera radically changes their presentation. I would never, ever do that. I'd but the much cheaper APS-C lenses. Using Leica lenses on a Fuji camera just wastes their amazing corner performances.

Agree. IMHO. Normal lenses on crop sensors is so yesterday from previous century :).
And RF lenses on EVF cameras is gimmicky.

bayernfan 02-28-2019 08:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godfrey (Post 2872347)
Ignore all the tripe about adapting lenses. While many of the fly by night camera-du-jour options like Sony and Fuji can be used, nothing uses M-mount lenses as well as a Leica M camera, and the imaging results with my M-P 240 blew away the results with my Sony A7 so resoundingly I sold the Sony immediately. It's not about the stupid specifications, it's about the imaging.

I have had exactly zero problems with either the M-P 240 or M-D 262. Zero. The Sony locked up about twice a week... Piece of crapola.

G

Yes, I've been down the adapted road as well. Did not enjoy the experience. Told myself the only way I'll use M lenses on digital is on a digital M. Plus, I strongly dislike EVFs and rear screens.

Huss 02-28-2019 09:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Wijninga (Post 2872327)
A yesteryear camera but if you want the digital rangefinder experience, go for it. Money/performance wise, it is, in my honest opinion a bad investment. There are many more versatile cameras available today. If you are invested in M-mount lenses, just buy the appropriate converter.

Wrong. I recently bought a Nikon Z7 with adapters and my Leica M lenses give much better results on my M240.

slantface 02-28-2019 09:52

I just bought a used M262 and so far I'm VERY happy with it. Not being able or wanting to buy new, I had to purchase used. But if you can find the right camera at the right price, I say go for it! I should say I was resistant to buy an M9 due to sensor/age considerations, but didn't have any real concerns with the M240/M262 in the same sense.

Emile de Leon 02-28-2019 12:46

New M240 is 20% off now..
Wonder when they will come out with a new M250..

Ccoppola82 02-28-2019 13:24

I grabbed an mp240 a couple weeks ago and have been really enjoying it. I got it because I typically carry an m6 and an Xpro2. I got the itch to try a digital Leica and found a price I was ok with. First impressions were that I like the overall IQ of the Leica more, I like using it more. It’s fractions of a second difference for me to frame up and focus the Leica vs the Xpro, the Xpro actually being slower due to either moving the AF point, or check the peeking in the OVF lower window EVF. The mp240 is just a more fluid and seamless experience for me, plus the battery is fantastic. I think the ISO 1600+ the Xpro2 has an advantage, and I do like being able to use film presets for JPG. They work well and offer customization of their color space. Maybe heresy, but I like JPG for quick snap and post stuff. I’ll likely only keep one camera though, and it’s likely going to be the MP240 because I have a bunch of M glass and it works as a film/digital system with my m6. We shall see though, because I’ve been genuinely happy with the Xpro2. Very fun camera to shoot.

Darthfeeble 02-28-2019 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Wijninga (Post 2872354)
Huff and Puff.

LOL! You nailed it.

newsgrunt 02-28-2019 14:38

anecdotally, the prices for the M240 and M-P don't come near the resale value of for example, the MP. Considered a used M-P for work but passed. Was tempted by a .58 bp MP but missed that one. Guess much will depend on whether or not, one intends to sell it at some point.

filmtwit 02-28-2019 15:52

The M240 is far more reliable then the M9 or M8.

peterm1 02-28-2019 17:10

I am toying with the idea of getting one for myself. I have an M8 with which I have a love / hate relationship due mainly to the very pokey viewfinder and the poor dynamic range of its sensor but am increasingly tempted by the M240 due to its substantial technical improvements.

On the outside, I particularly like its ability to mount an EVF though it looks ugly with one so mounted. But that aside, this facility would allow me to adapt and use a range of vintage MF lenses from Nikon, Canon, Zeiss etc for the pennies it usually costs for the purchase of the relevant lens mount adapters for each lens marque. Plus, I even already own the correct (Olympus branded) EVF to mount on the M 240. (Incidentally in all seriousness that EVF is pretty damn good - for example, I think it is better by far than the built in EVF on my NEX 7 and that is a later camera than the ones which normally use this EVF. I can see why Leica were happy to rebrand it and use it on their camera.

On the whole, I have to say that I think that makes great sense - to buy a $3000 AUD + camera body just because it gives me a chance to use a $100 EVF that I already own. Right? Right?.................... Help me out here please. Right? :)

raid 02-28-2019 17:15

Get it, Peter. Enjoy life.

Rob-F 02-28-2019 19:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterm1 (Post 2872534)
I am toying with the idea of getting one for myself. I have an M8 with which I have a love / hate relationship due mainly to the very pokey viewfinder and the poor dynamic range of its sensor but am increasingly tempted by the M240 due to its substantial technical improvements.

I had an M8.2 and I can't figure out what you mean by "pokey viewfinder." Also I didn't happen to notice a poor dynamic range (not saying it isn't). I did find the color was excellent--vivid and saturated! One of my reasons for changing to the M9 was to be able to manually enter the lens ID. And I'm happier with the non-cropping sensor.

I liked the M8.2 best with the 28mm and 21mm lenses. The 28 gave a 37mm equivalent which was very useful, and the 21 gave a perfect 28mm field. I got some good shots with the 75mm Summicron on it, too.

Well, I think you should get the M240! Everyone says it's great!

Dante_Stella 02-28-2019 20:20

The M240 is really unsurpassed as Leica's system M camera - performing, at least at a minimal level, everything that modern digital cameras do. The cheap EVF (you can use Olympus), the inbuilt digital level (3D), and long battery life are big plusses. Also, it is the only Leica M that can take a grip that does GPS, off-camera TTL flash without blocking the shoe, shoot tethered, and be powered by AC. And yes, you may want to take a quick video - which with the M240 does not mean reaching for a phone or a second camera. Shockingly, you can use the rangefinder to focus even for movies.

As to responsiveness, I find it hard to shoot an M8 or M9 anymore because they are sluggish in every way compared to the M240 and onward - and since the latest version of the firmware and using 95mb/sec SD cards, my M240 has not malfunctioned. And M240 series is still being sold, which means that you have at least 10 years that it can be serviced before it starts down the road to being a doorstop.

The M10 has marginally better viewfinding and marginally better high iso performance but it is decontented in a lot of ways, and until Leica makes a 36MP camera, it's not really that compelling to me.

Dante

peterm1 02-28-2019 20:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2872535)
Get it, Peter. Enjoy life.


Thanks Raid. When I tell my wife I will blame you. You are safe (just) you are on the other side of the world. As for me though...........................

peterm1 02-28-2019 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob-F (Post 2872553)
I had an M8.2 and I can't figure out what you mean by "pokey viewfinder." Also I didn't happen to notice a poor dynamic range (not saying it isn't). I did find the color was excellent--vivid and saturated! One of my reasons for changing to the M9 was to be able to manually enter the lens ID. And I'm happier with the non-cropping sensor.

I liked the M8.2 best with the 28mm and 21mm lenses. The 28 gave a 37mm equivalent which was very useful, and the 21 gave a perfect 28mm field. I got some good shots with the 75mm Summicron on it, too.

Well, I think you should get the M240! Everyone says it's great!

In relation to the M8's finder I am referring primarily to the fact that the M8 finder magnification is, what, (?) something like 0.68x, where the M3 was 0.91x. I used the M3 a lot and loved it. I just find it difficult to focus my M8 accurately (my eyes are not the best) unless using wider lenses stopped down, and this is not my preference.

The M240 is, I think, back up to 0.85x magnification according to what I read somewhere (??) This would help me tremendously especially as I tend to prefer lenses longer than 50mm where that magnification would help accuracy, more particularly because I like to shoot wide open more possibly than is healthy for my peace of mind - I miss too many images. In any event any increase in magnification is a plus for me.

The dynamic range issue I referred to is primarily a feature of CCD devices compared with CMOS sensors. I found this limiting with the M8 though naturally I always shoot in DNG format and convert in post to minimize the issue. I found that deliberately under exposing helps reduce blown highlights but in general prefer later devices which can handle a wider dynamic range. It always bugged me, having come from a film Leica that Leicas had a reputation of being designed to excel at "available light" photography but the M8 often was not able to cope with the large range of brightness found in available light conditions. Thereby reducing the very advantage most often claimed for this type of camera. (A lesser disadvantage but a disadvantage none the less is the shutter noise which is nothing like the polite "click" of any film based mechanical Leica M. People buy expensive camera partly for their highly engineered "feel"....detract from this feel and people become less willing to part with their hard earned "readies".

As to the color of M8 images, I quite readily agree with you. The M8 produces very nice color and when I first started shooting with mine was blown away by it in this respect. It is a major reason why I have persisted with the M8.

These are a few of my early M8 images and from memory I did not do much to them in post other than a bit of sharpening and general tidying up. These are undoubtedly nice, rich and sumptuous colors, though maybe there is a little color ast in some images due to the artificial and sometimes mixed lighting in each.

Through a glass darkly 3 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Through a glass darkly 6 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Adelaide food market 1 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Adelaide food market by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

Danny by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

A small album of them here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/life_i...57625130934544

willie_901 03-01-2019 06:05

In my view the M-240 offers a high level of value for anyone who owns M/LTM mount lenses, enjoys using a traditional rangefinder and is interested in digital imaging.

While the M-240 data stream is dated, the analog dynamic range and low-light sensitivity is similar to the X-Pro 2 and newer m4/3 bodies. As a user of the former I can tell you this level of technical (signal-to-noise) performance is more than adequate.

While signal-to-noise ratio is a significant indicator of digital imaging performance, there are other factors (such as the sensor coverglass, IR filter layer, color-filter and micro-lens arrays' properties) are important as well. The M-240 is well above average in these areas.

bayernfan 03-01-2019 08:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterm1 (Post 2872563)
In relation to the M8's finder I am referring primarily to the fact that the M8 finder magnification is, what, (?) something like 0.68x...

The M240 is also 0.68x. Something to consider. I feel that 0.68x is perfect for the 35mm framelines, which is my preferred focal length.

Nice images made with the M8!

Regarding the poll, I'm honestly surprised by the fact that so many recommend the M240. It seems to be a reliable camera.

John Lawrence 03-01-2019 10:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by bayernfan (Post 2872672)
The M240 is also 0.68x. Something to consider. I feel that 0.68x is perfect for the 35mm framelines, which is my preferred focal length.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as I know what you say is correct, but looking through the viewfinder of my recently acquired 240 with a 50mm lens, appears (to me anyway) to be more like looking through a 0.85x finder. Really not sure why this is, and I'm only comparing it with my 0.72 and 0.85 film Leicas.

John

taemo 03-01-2019 10:57

if you're in the market for a ~2500US$ digital RF camera, then the M240 is your best option but if all you want is a good digital camera within that price range, then there are better options.

If budget permits or you are willing to wait another year or so, then IMO M10 is the digital RF camera to get with its slimmer size and ISO dial, but if those dont matter to you then the M240 is a great digital RF camera.

Huss 03-01-2019 11:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by taemo (Post 2872705)
if you're in the market for a ~2500US$ digital RF camera, then the M240 is your best option but if all you want is a good digital camera within that price range, then there are better options.

If budget permits or you are willing to wait another year or so, then IMO M10 is the digital RF camera to get with its slimmer size and ISO dial, but if those dont matter to you then the M240 is a great digital RF camera.

I prefer the extra features and much better battery life of the M240
vs the M10. The fact that it is thousands cheaper is a bonus.
Didnt some M10s have issues w the iso dial?

shawn 03-01-2019 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterm1 (Post 2872534)
I am toying with the idea of getting one for myself. I have an M8 with which I have a love / hate relationship due mainly to the very pokey viewfinder and the poor dynamic range of its sensor but am increasingly tempted by the M240 due to its substantial technical improvements.

On the outside, I particularly like its ability to mount an EVF though it looks ugly with one so mounted. But that aside, this facility would allow me to adapt and use a range of vintage MF lenses from Nikon, Canon, Zeiss etc for the pennies it usually costs for the purchase of the relevant lens mount adapters for each lens marque. Plus, I even already own the correct (Olympus branded) EVF to mount on the M 240. (Incidentally in all seriousness that EVF is pretty damn good - for example, I think it is better by far than the built in EVF on my NEX 7 and that is a later camera than the ones which normally use this EVF. I can see why Leica were happy to rebrand it and use it on their camera.

On the whole, I have to say that I think that makes great sense - to buy a $3000 AUD + camera body just because it gives me a chance to use a $100 EVF that I already own. Right? Right?.................... Help me out here please. Right? :)


Yes, you can adapt many lenses to the M240. There are limitation though compared to other cameras. The EVF is OK, not great. It can zoom for focus checking, but only at the center focus point. There is a fairly long shutter lag when using live view. It is quite a bit more noticeable than using other mirrorless options. For static subjects not an issue but for dynamic subjects it could be. There is also a fair amount of blackout after taking the shot and the live view coming back.

Not saying you can't do it but if adapted lenses are you main reason for getting one you could do more with less. If this is just a bonus compared to all the other advantages with RF lenses then go for it.

Shawn

peterm1 03-01-2019 12:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by shawn (Post 2872714)
Yes, you can adapt many lenses to the M240. There are limitation though compared to other cameras. The EVF is OK, not great. It can zoom for focus checking, but only at the center focus point. There is a fairly long shutter lag when using live view. It is quite a bit more noticeable than using other mirrorless options. For static subjects not an issue but for dynamic subjects it could be. There is also a fair amount of blackout after taking the shot and the live view coming back.

Not saying you can't do it but if adapted lenses are you main reason for getting one you could do more with less. If this is just a bonus compared to all the other advantages with RF lenses then go for it.

Shawn

OK thanks that is useful to know and did not know it.

I would say that some of those limitations do not worry me too much but other(s) could be deal breakers depending on how bad they are in practice. How much would I use non Leica glass on an M240 - not sure. But it is definitely an attraction and something that would draw me to the M, although I certainly have other cameras with which I can work in that way as an alternative. Though I would like to do it with at least a few of my favorite vintage lenses when the mood takes me. And I have some old Leica and Canon glass in LTM which I adapt to M mount using the LTM - M adapter but am reluctant to actually use on my present M8 camera as I do not think they are necessarily well calibrated enough for that purpose. This need not be such a consideration if the M 240 functions well in live view mode as I can use focus peaking, image enlargement etc.

Zooming to the centre focus point only does not worry me - I usually do this anyway with other cameras and prefer it.

VF blackout is not necessarily a killer if its not so long as to be "stupid long" in which case it would annoy me.

But a long shutter lag when using live view (and I presume you include in this when using the accessory EVF) is a potentially much more serious issue given that one traditional reason for using an M is it is suppose to have little shutter lag. Surely that issue would, if bad enough, mean that the M is not really usable for non RF lenses where live view must be relied upon to frame and focus. Trust bloody Leica to have something freaky like this to mess things up - why on earth would there be long shutter lag given we are not talking AF lenses?

If anyone has views on this aspect of the M's usability I would like to hear them.

Bill Clark 03-01-2019 13:41

Quote:

M240: Current Price vs Reliability
Too bad this needs to be asked.

Won’t say any more.

Rob-F 03-01-2019 14:44

If I were thinking of getting an M240, I believe the greater size and weight that has been reported might be the issue for me. But as I'm a wide-angle kind of guy (mostly), a .68 finder is OK with me. I keep waiting for them to come out with a digital model with the .58 finder!

What is the widest frameline on the M240? If it's 28mm, it can't be a 0.85 finder.

Actually, I have noticed that some ergonomic issues that seem off-putting when handling/fondling/examining a camera are not a problem when actually using it. My M9 is bulkier than mp M6; but when it's time time to use it, I just pick it up and shoot. So maybe the M240 would be like that, too.

shawn 03-01-2019 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterm1 (Post 2872726)
And I have some old Leica and Canon glass in LTM which I adapt to M mount using the LTM - M adapter but am reluctant to actually use on my present M8 camera as I do not think they are necessarily well calibrated enough for that purpose. This need not be such a consideration if the M 240 functions well in live view mode as I can use focus peaking, image enlargement etc.....

But a long shutter lag when using live view (and I presume you include in this when using the accessory EVF) is a potentially much more serious issue given that one traditional reason for using an M is it is suppose to have little shutter lag. Surely that issue would, if bad enough, mean that the M is not really usable for non RF lenses where live view must be relied upon to frame and focus. Trust bloody Leica to have something freaky like this to mess things up - why on earth would there be long shutter lag given we are not talking AF lenses?

The liveview with zoom is actually handy with RF lenses (M or LTM) as it can be used to help calibrate them. I've found it very helpful when tweaking a few lenses that way.

The longer shutter lag is just from the camera closing the shutter and then opening it again. It is slow enough that it could be an issue for dynamic subjects. Much slower than other mirrorless cameras I've used. I just took 5 shots of a digital stopwatch at the 10,20,30,40,50 second marks. The recorded time varies but is around .4 to .6 seconds after the marks. Black out time is about 3 seconds after taking the shot.

EDIT: This was using liveview with the EVF....

Shawn


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:24.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.