Evaluating the New M

[charlesphoto]

Also keep in mind that very few of the great classic street images are in perfect focus. Of course shooting on 35mm film such as Tri-X masks a lot of focus imperfection. It's the crutch of these new super sharp super h-res sensors that imperfections show up strongly. Perhaps changing your processing might help - add some grain, convert to b&w, bump up the contrast and clarity, etc etc. All of that can help. And not shooting wide open.

 

[Vivek]

The sample images I have seen with the M240 so far show me nothing better than what I get already (maybe even more issues with color and focus). I am ready for a cleaner and higher ISO, a better and brighter screen and just maybe a camera that I can get more keepers. However not one of the comments I have read address this issue of MORE KEEPERS.

That is because they can be obtained from ANY cameras. I hope this is not considered as. Something aginst Jono because it is not.

What is so special about an M and where is it really useful for compared to DSLRs and mirrorless cams? The line is getting blurry every day andonce the likes of a FF NEX hits the streets, that line will vanish for good.

 

[jaapv]

Wel, C1 STILL has no Monochrom profile, not even the ability to read the DNG...:thumbdown:

Hi Chuck - I'm going to take issue with you here - The X-pro files are a completely separate and different animal (as were the DNG files from the MM). Those from the M are not - there is a Bayer filter and the demosaicing is standard.

LR, Aperture, C1 and everyone else will develop a camera specific profile using the information supplied by Leica, but the standard DNG conversion should (and does) work very well, especially if you remove the default sharpening and noise reduction algorithms (which aren't necessarily suited to a FF aa less camera).

The x-pro files are not DNG standard, and they don't use a Bayer filter - totally different.




Well, a lot of lessons have been learned - and there are resources to do it better these days. The launch of the M9 was actually pretty smooth - the IQ was good, and hardware issues were sorted fast - the MM was even better.

I imagine that releasing the DNG files isn't really to make users feel cuddly - but to find out if anybody can see a real gotcha in the files which hasn't been noticed elsewhere.

Let me put this a different way - if I can scramble the money together I'll be getting two bodies at the earliest possible moment.

all the best

 

[KeithL]

Hats off to Leica for introducing a potentially genre expanding camera, a camera that could now be used for applications that demand critical framing and focus. But wait, those hats need to go back on, duh, they forgot all about the ability to scroll live-view.

The new M Leica is now competing with a plethora of other cameras and as such will be a hard sell to all but the Leica die-hards.

 

[bab]

So Roger ?????? When I spent 6k on a 35mm 1.4 why wouldn't I want to shoot wide open in the street in low light to gain shutter speed and isolate my subject. I agree with you it takes practice but Roger I've been practicing for a long time. I can't say more to the fact that it my opinion for me its hard to nail the focus. You and Jono have your opinions also. It just occurred to me there might be an issue with the rangefinder system in today's technologically advanced world that might ease ones ability to focus the damm thing in lower light and keep it on plane. If your always shooting at 5.6 or +,- a stop then your not feeling my frustration. But having said this "Yes it creates an aesthetic and can create interest in a photograph ". you get the point. And by the way my 35mm 1.4 FLE is not AF and I was hoping Leica solved the focus shift with the floating lens element.

 

[iiiNelson]

So Roger ?????? When I spent 6k on a 35mm 1.4 why wouldn't I want to shoot wide open in the street in low light to gain shutter speed and isolate my subject. I agree with you it takes practice but Roger I've been practicing for a long time. I can't say more to the fact that it my opinion for me its hard to nail the focus. You and Jono have your opinions also. It just occurred to me there might be an issue with the rangefinder system in today's technologically advanced world that might ease ones ability to focus the damm thing in lower light and keep it on plane. If your always shooting at 5.6 or +,- a stop then your not feeling my frustration. But having said this "Yes it creates an aesthetic and can create interest in a photograph ". you get the point. And by the way my 35mm 1.4 FLE is not AF and I was hoping Leica solved the focus shift with the floating lens element.

Not trying to play devil's advocate but could be be that your copy of the lens isn't playing nicely with your body? I have a Nokton II (35/1.2) and when I do my part I have no problem focusing wide open. It's true that live view could alleviate your issues but maybe it's a deeper issue as well with your body or lens.

 

[bab]

Yep I guess I could send both in again for the third time...but I agree with you. Don't get me wrong sometimes I nail the image but there are other times when I'm confident I got it and get home pull them up and bam! passable but not quite there. Have the same issue with the Canon just more keepers. Read somewhere where Lecia supposedly has embedded a focus point? into the new S glass so when you slap it on any body its aligned! Interesting idea.

 

[glenerrolrd]

So Roger ?????? When I spent 6k on a 35mm 1.4 why wouldn't I want to shoot wide open in the street in low light to gain shutter speed and isolate my subject. I agree with you it takes practice but Roger I've been practicing for a long time. I can't say more to the fact that it my opinion for me its hard to nail the focus. You and Jono have your opinions also. It just occurred to me there might be an issue with the rangefinder system in today's technologically advanced world that might ease ones ability to focus the damm thing in lower light and keep it on plane. If your always shooting at 5.6 or +,- a stop then your not feeling my frustration. But having said this "Yes it creates an aesthetic and can create interest in a photograph ". you get the point. And by the way my 35mm 1.4 FLE is not AF and I was hoping Leica solved the focus shift with the floating lens element.

My point ...different than yours I believe ...is that you may be expecting too much from any FF camera system shooting wide open . As the resolution of our sensors increases it becomes painfully obvious that managing DOF has to be a priority . Shooting wide open obviously provides some wonderful aesthetic opportunities but at the cost of requiring exceptional accuracy in establishing the focus point . Its much more a function of the limited DOF than the focusing system utilized . (My basis is using the M9.D800E and S2 for the same type of street and travel ).

My reference to AF (generally considered easier to obtain accurate focus ) was to establish a benchmark for comparison . I can confirm its not easy to shoot the summiluxes wide open without losing some (too many?) captures to focus misses . But AF systems often don t give accurate enough focus for shooting wide open . (My benchmark would be the D800E or the D4) . You can spend a day reading Diglloyd s tests to see the number of factors affecting accurate AF.

My objective in street shooting is to "capture the moment " ...you can pull any portfolio off of Magnum and see the common emphasis ...its hard to achieve and I would never claim I am even any good at it . But I know for sure its folly to try to do this at f1.4 . My hit ratio is substantially better between f4-f8 . I shoot wide open plenty but I know it may take 3-6 captures to get one thats good enough .

So if we eliminate the possible problems (1)calibrated equipment and (2) technique and practice ...then we are left with either (3)eye sight/hand eye coordination or (4) unrealistic expectations .

Please don t think I am making light the difficulty in obtaining and holding accurate focus with a M . I ve had now 9 different digital M bodies since they were introduced and I appreciate how difficult it is too even know ..is it me or the equipment ? :chug:

 

[douglasf13]

That is because they can be obtained from ANY cameras. I hope this is not considered as. Something aginst Jono because it is not.

What is so special about an M and where is it really useful for compared to DSLRs and mirrorless cams? The line is getting blurry every day andonce the likes of a FF NEX hits the streets, that line will vanish for good.

What's special about an M9/MM/M240 is that you have a small rangefinder camera with a FF sensor. In buying an M9 last year, I may have actually gone a little backwards in terms of some IQ measurements compared to my other cameras, but it doesn't really matter to me in real usage. IMO, all of this live view stuff on the M 240 is just a bonus for a rangefinder user, rather than a reason itself to buy the camera. I'd buy an A99 and some ZA lenses if I really wanted an EVF-based, live view camera.

I think M is still all about the rangefinder.

 

[KeithL]

I think M is still all about the rangefinder.

Clearly it isn't.

 

[Vivek]

Clearly it isn't.

Exactly! :thumbs:

Added for emphasis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8arvEzHsA8

 

[edwardkaraa]

Clearly it isn't.

So what is it about? :ROTFL:

 

[erick.boileau]

I think M is still all about the rangefinder.

I hope not
for many users it is all about M lenses , with the new M I shall certainly never use the rangefinder

 

[douglasf13]

I hope not
for many users it is all about M lenses , with the new M I shall certainly never use the rangefinder

I don't know, I like M lenses and all, and I've certainly owned a lot of Leica, ZM and CV lenses for M mount, but, if I was in the market for a camera to primarily use with live view, I'm not sure I'd spend $7K on one from a company who doesn't have the expertise in electronics that some of the Japanese (and Korean) companies have. If that was what I was interested in, I'd likely just go buy a Sony A99 and Leitax some Leica R lenses, Zeiss ZFs, or even just use the native ZAs. Of course, size and weight may be the issue for some, so we'll have to see what the alleged FF NEX camera brings to the table.

I can understand that live view and movies will be useful for rangefinder users that need to use it occasionally, but I don't have a lot of faith in the M 240 as a liveview only instrument. We're already finding out the disadvantages like refresh rate, magnification zoom, etc. Leica's strength is in the mechanical elements.

 

[erick.boileau]

I don't know, I like M lenses and all, and I've certainly owned a lot of Leica, ZM and CV lenses for M mount, but, if I was in the market for a camera to primarily use with live view, I'm not sure I'd spend $7K on one from a company who doesn't have the expertise in electronics that some of the Japanese (and Korean) companies have. If that was what I was interested in, I'd likely just go buy a Sony A99 and Leitax some Leica R lenses, Zeiss ZFs, or even just use the native ZAs. Of course, size and weight may be the issue for some, so we'll have to see what the alleged FF NEX camera brings to the table.

I can understand that live view and movies will be useful for rangefinder users that need to use it occasionally, but I don't have a lot of faith in the M 240 as a liveview only instrument. We're already finding out the disadvantages like refresh rate, magnification zoom, etc. Leica's strength is in the mechanical elements.

I don't like at all rangefinders but you don't get actually a 24x36 small with that quality of lenses

the M240 is all what I need with its possibilities to use a 135 mm or a 21

 

[douglasf13]

I don't like at all rangefinders but you don't get actually a 24x36 small with that quality of lenses

the M240 is all what I need with its possibilities to use a 135 mm or a 21

I understand. A compact, FF mirrorless is desired by many. I'm just not sure that Leica is the best to deliver it. If Sony's alleged FF NEX comes, AND it works well with rangefinder glass, then we're really cooking, but I understand that there isn't anything else on the market like that, yet.

 

[erick.boileau]

I understand. A compact, FF mirrorless is desired by many. I'm just not sure that Leica is the best to deliver it. If Sony's alleged FF NEX comes, AND it works well with rangefinder glass, then we're really cooking, but I understand that there isn't anything else on the market like that, yet.

I agree for Sony , but when you open the box of the NEX-6 you regret at once your 600 €
Maybe Fuji ?

 

[algrove]

I don't like at all rangefinders but you don't get actually a 24x36 small with that quality of lenses

the M240 is all what I need with its possibilities to use a 135 mm or a 21

And R lenses like the 15/2.8 for fun and the longer R lenses like the 80-200, APO 180 varieties and APO 280's.

Also use the 1.4x and 2x APO's and you have many great HQ options for lenses. Leica does not use the term APO lightly.

 

[erick.boileau]

And R lenses like the 15/2.8 for fun and the longer R lenses like the 80-200, APO 180 varieties and APO 280's.

Also use the 1.4x and 2x APO's and you have many great HQ options for lenses. Leica does not use the term APO lightly.

Yes
And when I compare the files of the Sony NEX-6 with it's super-extra exmor sensor , I prefer the files of the M9

 

[douglasf13]

Yes
And when I compare the files of the Sony NEX-6 with it's super-extra exmor sensor , I prefer the files of the M9

Whose to say you wouldn't prefer FF exmor to the M 240? Sony doesn't give anything up to anyone in terms of CMOS technology. CCD is another matter, of course.