The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Leica M 240 test see samples here

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Stefan,

Indeed a wonderful file at this ISO!

I shot a number of portraits for my daughter and her fiancé ... now husband with a couple of camera/lens combinations. My overall favorite in rendering was the Summarit 75 2.5 on the Monochrom ... and I prefer their overall smaller profile.

The 90 and indeed the 135 non-Summarit would work well with the focus function of the new Leica M ... at my age the 75 is the longest I can focus consistently in any light without live-view.


Bob
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Bob

that´s the other strong point for the 240 - other than Tim Ashley who loves the Viewfinder I can really ONLY work satifactory with liveview. Whereas then the hit/miss rate for me is 100/0 !
I have never ever before found such an easy focusing device with such exactness and even stopped down showing the focus marks through the image precisely - and - in a good viewing quality !

The bitter point for Leica may be - that shooting it out of hand will probably leave you always with shaken images - unless you have full sunlight and maybe 1/500 and shorter. The Resolution is so good it has evolved into a tripod device (as are nearly all Digital cameras over 20 Mpix -with no IS lenses available - if you use them with best quality setting and a bit stopped down).

Regards
Stefan
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Stefan,

When one realizes the advantages of good tripod-based capture it seems
a step down to handhold....if not a tripod for me then a monopod and timer for 95% of my photography .... any camera any light.

But I do not shoot action or sports so it is not a detriment to my preferred style of shooting.

Bob
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
I would say the M240 is definitely comparable to a P25+ or a P30+ from the resolution. Maybe even better as the lenses seem to be fully on par with the 24 Mpix of the M. The DR is outstanding on the same level as the best Backs today like IQ180 or Credo 80 or Hasselblad H4d50MS.
I have used Digital backs and scanbacks from day one back in 1994 to today and about anything in between, I do consulting for customers who buy systems and I calibrate and set them up, I also write articles about it now . My favourite back of all times is and will be the P45+. I love this.

The Leica Liveview is the best Liveview I have seen so far , better than my Canon´s I use, even with magic lantern. The rate of hits for 100 % sharp images is nearly 100 % if you use the focus indicators at the working aperture. Amazing ! This is definitely superior to medium format.
This is a cmos I would wish to exist in double the size with maybe 50 MPix. A wet dream.........

I am right now testing the first ever made Novoflex EOS to Leica M adapter with a Mirex TS and several of my favourite lenses (e.g. the Mamiya 4/80mm Macro) and I have some more Novoflex adapters like the OM and Nikon to M, + a Novoflex TS Bellows with a Schneider 4/90mm, so the next days I will be pretty busy.

Regards
Stefan

 

jonoslack

Active member
Bob

that´s the other strong point for the 240 - other than Tim Ashley who loves the Viewfinder I can really ONLY work satifactory with liveview. Whereas then the hit/miss rate for me is 100/0
Hi there Stefan
Great images.

Tim actually found focusing with the rangefinder more accurate than with live view. He also found that for lenses without focus shift it was better to focus wide open using Live View. Sean Reid has done some testing and also thinks you should stop down with live view.

I'm inclined to agree with Tim, that with practice the rangefinder is best. The new improved M rangefinder even works well with the 135 APO for me. On the other hand I'm with you on live view: focus at the Aperture you want to use.

I'm not getting camera shake with the M any more than with the M9, of course using a tripod would yield sharper results but I lose the will to live if I use a tripod, so I'll continue using the lovely new M hand held, and mostly with the optical rangefinder.
 

Photojazz

Member
The bitter point for Leica may be - that shooting it out of hand will probably leave you always with shaken images - unless you have full sunlight and maybe 1/500 and shorter. The Resolution is so good it has evolved into a tripod device (as are nearly all Digital cameras over 20 Mpix -with no IS lenses available - if you use them with best quality setting and a bit stopped down).
I have noticed this same thing true with Nikon D800E at 36 mpx. I have shot a lot of Nikons, and it seems the most sensitive I have shot to camera shake. That includes the D3X, D3S, D700, D3, D2Xs, and D2X.

At least you are in the right country to actually put your hands on a M 240. Not seen a vapor of one where I am here, but then we don't even have a Leica store. sigh...
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
... but I lose the will to live if I use a tripod ...
No drama there, eh Jono? ];-)

I haven't been as rigorous about it as I was a few years back, I guess I'm getting into the blur world, but I tend to use a tripod with almost any camera whenever great detailing is essential to my photographic aim. It's almost more important with ultra wide angle lenses then with telephotos as wides rest on the depth of their detailing to be successful in many cases.

Ah well. Lovely photos of the Alvis, Stefan! The M 240 looks wonderful. But it's another year and some on for me at least, if I decide to go that way. (I'm having too much fun shooting 6x6 film at present, and the M9 is still a baby. ;-)

G
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-known member
All very nice - in the real wprld - it is VAPORWARE Leica - at the moment it is fanboy gear - forum fodder - vapourware DELUXO - by the time it comes out next year some time - the fanboys will be selling - after they have been given the heads up - regarding the next model - which will be even better ..

sorry to be a wet blanket :poke:
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Jono
The tripod thing is kind of self supporting for me, I can carry the camera better and safer mounted on a tripod when I walk around like on the Oldtimer shooting. Then - next people somehow appreciate you when you take your stuff seriously - I had this maybe 20 times during this shooting, visitors (also car owners) coming up to me, see leica M nod their heads, watch me setting my tripod and walked off showing signs of agreement , kind of yes you have to do it like that. I did not once have someone telling me I should not photograph. The bonusfactor of the Leica is like a Porsche 911 face showing up behind you on highway, you just go to the right lane....
;)

Photojazz
The Nikon D800E is actually also a MF camera using a smaller chip.
I would tend to make a whole new definition and say every camera beyond a certain net resolution or over 20 Mpix on fullformat 24x36 maybe "MF".
The lines are blurred now, the results look very similar and I am sure using a tripod does make more difference than maybe 10 or 20 Mpix more and a larger chip area ?

Peter
Leica has built a new production line in Solms and I am pretty sure they are building plenty of them, they are just sucked off the dealers shelves in hyperspeed...... :)

Greetings from Germany
Stefan
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Stefan, I take it the Novoflex EOS to M adapter is limited to lenses with an aperture ring, so not for use with TS-E lenses?
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Yes - no electronic coupling. But for me that is nearly all I need as my Hartblei lenses fit now, the Mirex fits now and also my enlarger lenses fit.

I am trying to get a uniform adaption/Lens scheme over all the cameras I use. That works now from (a soon to be bought-I hope) Nex 7 followup- to my canons, now the M (although this is for the test only) and my HCam-B1.

Regards
Stefan
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I would tend to side with Jono on the subject of tripods, etc.

As these cameras continue to jack up the meg count and attendant resolution, I wonder if they aren't leaving behind their original intent, or at least re-defining it?

Perhaps a difference is between Image Quality (scientific) and Image Qualities (creative)?

Jono and a few others may well have the steady hands and control of a sniper that's required, but not many have that ... especially in the midst of spontaneous opportunities that these cameras built their reputation on, and were designed for.

Personally, I noted this when my Nikon's reached 24 meg ... okay with VR lenses to a degree, but on the edge of challenging without it. So, I opted for the 24 meg A900 and A99 where ALL captures from any lens are stabilized with in-camera Steady-Shot technology.

Now when I hear "approaching MFD IQ", and all the attendant alterations in shooting methodology required to accomplish that, it sends up red flags. In a way, it carries a negative connotation rather than a positive one ... because I am well aware of what is necessary to get the most from a MFD camera. So you end up with a few of the MFD benefits and none of the rest ... all while losing more and more of the spontaneity one expects from a 35mm DSLR, or especially a FF Rangefinder.

35mm DSLRs at least offer a choice of lower meg sensors, but this M240 is one of a kind with no FF CMOS, live view recourse. I'm sure 24 meg is still doable, and I applaud Leica for not taking it further ... but it'll be interesting to see what comes next.

While it is great that one can perch a tiny mobile spontaneous camera on top of an unwieldy, less mobile tripod and approach MFD quality (which is debatable on a creative aesthetic level, if not the resolution based argument), the question then becomes ... at what creative cost?

- Marc
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Marc

I am with you about the shift of usage. But you are of course not forced to do what I have done. It´s just the way to squeeze out the last bit of quality of this camera lens combo. If you don´t do this you can of course use 400 or 800 ISO (or more) and shoot out of hand most of the time. You will just not reach the full res of the camera.

That´s probably also something which should be next step for Leica and all the others who don´t have this: In Body stabilization ! Will probably lift average resolution more than additional megapixels !
At the moment I see at least 50 % if not more of customer images NOT shot from tripod are shaken. Adobe somehow tries to address that with the new CC PS, but this seems to take plenty of CPU power and thus it is definitely preferrable to use camera stabilization.
That way all the nice old lenses would also gain quality used digital.

Again- shere huge MPIX are not the goal anymore, usability is definitely more important. If I have a Dodge Viper with Bicycle Tires it won´t work.

Regards
Stefan
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Stefan, I see the problem with folks like you doing tests. Tripod? What next? A fluid head with dampening mechanism and stabilizer gyro head?

Talk about expensive gear!
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The best I can do, Stefan, is a Sachtler ENG (aluminum and not the later carbon) tripod. I think it will support that Arri head though. :)
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Here is the crux of the issue with upping the megapixels on anything over 18mpx that you will not find in ANY marketing materials is to get the most out of them than a extremely good number of users should not even buy them because most folks will not use the techniques to draw the best from them. My D800e is a classic example of that. I need the best glass I can get my hands on to start and I need the best techniques live view, manual focus tripod bound 3 second delay on mirror up to draw the absolute the best file I can squeeze out of it. Now seriously has anyone seen that whole description of technique in a Nikon marketing piece. Not a chance and it is deceiving to the soccer Mom buyer. I know bad description but you know what I'm saying here.

Although a M is maybe even worse in this as a M never really had the intentions of being tripod bound. But folks on this forum in this level of shooting are aware of that and if they want to squeeze every drop out of it than we know how to get there but it certainly is not in the marketing and even more so with a Leica RF since its history of use was never really meant to be on a tripod given the style of camera. The 240 enters a little diffrent level since its focusing accuracy can be improved beyond RF now with live view. This throws in a new element of thinking on the new M.

Now at one time working as a Pro I bought in to the whole M8 idea hook line and sinker in respect as it was my primary and secondary cam. In the end the limitations of it outside its issue was proven to be a little bit of a stretch for me. Now having said that I now with the 240 could actually make it work in more shooting situations than I could with the M8. So this brings in new thinking and uses for a M that before seemed way to tough to deal with. Now this is from someone that shoots many diverse type of jobs and maybe if I was more specialized it could make it a great choice. Or lets put it this way I have a better shot at pulling it off with a 240 than I did a M8.

I still would like to test the 240 myself given I come from shooting many MF backs and the Nokons. I won't argue the 240 abilities but I'm sure its threading closer to MF but again I would not wet your dreams over that comment either as the same thing is being said over a 36 mpx Nikon with good glass. Now are we closer with the 240 and D800 to MF than we where before these products . No question we are but on the same hand we need to take these new products to a higher level of technique to get there as well. Believe me the D800 is much harder to shoot to get quality than shooting a lower Mpx DX body.

So where does all this new tech take us. In reality between us folks here and our more advanced level of a shooter, the answer really is you better up your game folks to get to that level and more importantly to squeeze out what they are capable of as well. you don't see any of what I just described in any marketing material. This is not a have too either as you can shoot these handheld but you still need to up your game or many shots will be crap too. That's from a technical POV.

Guess a good saying here is this as these OEMs keep giving us better options and Mpx to work with we have some fundamental changes to make to get the best out of them as well. Once again poor technique will lead to even lessor quality as a low Mpx cam can hide our mistakes these new breds will not do that.
 

JohnBrew

Active member
New here, but I thought I'd toss in my 2 cents. I've shot my D800 @ 1/8 sec. with no shake, hand held. But I believe it is because the Zeiss 50 Macro balances perfectly. Anything else I need a higher speed or tripod. I've rarely shot any M on tripod, but a recent trip and trying to shoot a pano hand held with M8.2 resulted in an unusable mess. Not sure I want the new M, but I'm still open to the idea.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
So where does all this new tech take us. In reality between us folks here and our more advanced level of a shooter, the answer really is you better up your game folks to get to that level and more importantly to squeeze out what they are capable of as well. you don't see any of what I just described in any marketing material. This is not a have too either as you can shoot these handheld but you still need to up your game or many shots will be crap too. That's from a technical POV.

Guess a good saying here is this as these OEMs keep giving us better options and Mpx to work with we have some fundamental changes to make to get the best out of them as well. Once again poor technique will lead to even lessor quality as a low Mpx cam can hide our mistakes these new breds will not do that.

:thumbs:

This is the sort of things why I love this forum for its rich (useful) contents. :)
 
Top