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!

Anyone signed the petition?

V

Vivek

Guest
Apparently there is a campaign going on demanding that Leica bring back the CCD to their M line and drop the CMOS sensors!

Anyone for it? :)
 

Paratom

Well-known member
After comparing a M9 and M type 240 for months I finally decided for the new M and believe the CCD vs CMOS question is overrated (Just my opinion). IQ differences in direct comparison seemed to be much smaller and not allways in the same direction as I thought to remember.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
After comparing a M9 and M type 240 for months I finally decided for the new M and believe the CCD vs CMOS question is overrated (Just my opinion). IQ differences in direct comparison seemed to be much smaller and not allways in the same direction as I thought to remember.
Tom, It is not a simple case of IQ, it seems. In your experience, do the Mandler lenses hold their magic on the new M or the newer design lenses (AA 50/2, AA75/2 and the like) do better?
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Tom, It is not a simple case of IQ, it seems. In your experience, do the Mandler lenses hold their magic on the new M or the newer design lenses (AA 50/2, AA75/2 and the like) do better?
I do like the 35FLE, 35/2.0 Summicron asph, the 50 Summicron (not the latest version), the 50 APO Summicron a lot on the "new" M. For some reason I did like the 50/1.4asph better on the M9 but the 50 Summicron better on the M type 240.
I think it is because the 50/1.4asph draws a little more reddish color and the Summicrons more subtile rendition which seems to work very well with the new M.
I am not so much into old lenses, but these has been the case for the M9 allready. I sold my 75/1.4 long time ago and did not look back. I found f1.4 at 75mm in combi with slight focus shift hard to focus accurate.
 

baudolino

Active member
I agree with Tom on the 50 APO + M240 combination vs. 50 Lux + M9.
In fact, I sold my first M240 because I found it a bit lacking in "bite" with my old "trinity" of Elmarit 24Asph, 50 Lux and 90AA lenses - the lenses I liked a lot and used all the time on the M9. I use the M-P now and it sings with the 50AA (and also with the 35FLE, 75 Cron Apo, 28 Cron Asph & 135 Apo Telyt, in my experience). Of the above, the 28,50,135 are the only lenses I own now, and the 50Apo stays on the camera 90% of the time. As for the Mandler-era lenses, I liked them much more on the M9 (35Cron4, 28 Elmarit v.4 in particular; never liked the latest pre-apo 50 Cron, on any camera, due to its tendency to flare badly and produce a lot of moire on the M9).
So no, I am not signing the petition, quite the opposite. Leica, please bring an even better CMOS sensor (with IS and dust removal, if I may ask).
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Tom, It is not a simple case of IQ, it seems. In your experience, do the Mandler lenses hold their magic on the new M or the newer design lenses (AA 50/2, AA75/2 and the like) do better?
What is "better"? How are you evaluating these sorts of differences? Asking if the Mandler lenses "hold their magic on the new M" is like asking whether you prefer the rendering of a lens based on whether you're shooting with Kodachrome or Fujichrome. It doesn't make much sense to me.

I have used my Leica-R lenses designed by Walter Mandler on the A7. Also the 'Lux 35 v2. Far as I'm concerned, their magic is part of the lens, not the sensor. As long as the sensor does a good job of recording what the lens is transmitting, you get the lens magic. The rest is up to rendering work.

G
 

segedi

Member
I won't sign the petition because I think it would be a huge business mistake for Leica to go backwards instead of continuing to go forwards. I like my M240. It could be better. But I love that I can put an EVF on it when needed. No more frustration with longer lenses. And now I have accurate framing with wides.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Apparently there is a campaign going on demanding that Leica bring back the CCD to their M line and drop the CMOS sensors!

Anyone for it? :)
I didn't sign it but the M240 in combination with what the A7 series is is why I don't own a Leica anymore. I loved the M9 but I loathed the M240 (albeit in fairness I didn't buy one or live with one for extended periods of time.)

I believe many owners that suggest it is technically superior to the M9 in spec in pretty much every way but I found it subjectively inferior to the M9 in every possible way when it came down to output... Even more so when compared to the MM for grayscale imagery. Everything can't be measured quantitatively alone so I'd say there's room for both.

I would push for Leica to adopt a custom Sony sensor over the CMOSIS ones though if they intend to stay with CMOS. The Sony A7 results look closer to the M9 output than the M240 could hope to.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Well, I believe that the MM is the best digital M from Leica to date. :)
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Well, I believe that the MM is the best digital M from Leica to date. :)
I do as well even though I never owned one. Maybe I will someday though. I couldn't justify a grayscale camera being my main camera at the time but with being ecstatic overall with the FE system I always entertain the thought here and there.
 

aDam007

New member
CCD vs CMOS is a myth. There are far greater factors at play that determine IQ (however you want to translate the term IQ).

I'd rather Leica focus on giving us more reliable equipment.
I had a brand new S-system lens that was defective, and now my 1 week old S-006 is defective. I've had numerous problems with my M9 bodies (electronics) and M240 bodies (mostly RF problems, frame-lines).. A lot of lenses going out of alignment or not working to specs.
I really love the systems, and the quality I get from the M and now S, but I think they need to focus their efforts on fixing old problems for good, and making more reliable cameras for the future.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
IMO the posibility to be able to shoot up to ISO 3200 offers the photographer the freedom of choosing more often the F-Stop based on DOF requirement and not based on the amount of light available.
Specially for the range finder, where super accurate focusing of people isnt that easy, it is a big advantage IMO.
It also allows to mostly use the f2.0 lenses instead of f1.4, meaning smaller lenses which also makes sense for such system IMO.
The higher DR is a plus as well in favor of the newer M-sensor.
And color in artificial and mixed light seems more consistent.
When comparing the images from these 2 sensors I think its important to know they need to be handled different. I usually expose a little less with the new M, and sometimes also add a little contrast in the tone curve afterwards.
Also keep in mind that different software leads to different color. Quite a difference between LR, C1 and aparture IMO. For those who find color of the new M in artificial light a little pinkish might want to check out C1.

So while I have allways found the M9 (and the M8) and the MM great cameras, my vote for the best digital rangefinder goes for the M type 240.
 

turtle

New member
IMHO, it is already erroneous to be using the M240 as a reference point with regard to the Leica M's future. This is because it was the first generation of CMOS M and its successor is likely not that far away, judging by rumours of the announcement of the M240 Monochrom in a few days.

Lets look and see what is coming in the next gen M, as that will tell us how comprehensive a set of improvements Leica has been able to make on the existing CMOS platform. Maybe they will release a turkey, but I doubt it. I suspect there will be cries of 'not quite enough resolution - where are our 50MP... what, only 14 stops DR' etc, but more serious and sensible users will be quietly nodding at the improved integration of technologies and overall utility.

IMHO it is usually inexperienced photographers who cannot understand utility and the user's input when it comes to great images and instead fixate upon very specific imaging characteristics which they regard as crucial to their photography. I am not defending the M240 here - after all I bought a MM instead - but suggesting that Leica will surely make good progress, because they will not be ploughing their limited resources into reinventing the wheel, but making the existing one a lot better. I hope.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
As I am on the fence to buy back into Leica M with either a used M9 or a new M240, after reading this thread I think I will keep my breath for a while and wait for the next generation M240 (M260 or however it will be called).

I am a believer in CMOS and I trust Leica that they will enhance the capabilities of their sensor and processing engine in the next model - keeping resolution increase moderate (maybe around 30MP if at all), improve DR (>14 stops) and high ISO usability (fully useable ISO 6400) plus make the processing lot faster and add a higher resolution EVF option (>2.4MP). At the same time keep all the goodies of the current M240 such as battery life, excellent rangefinder etc. What I would like them to add is ultrasonic sensor cleaning, this cannot be so difficult but is a big advantage while using the camera in the field.

I keep fingers crossed ;)
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
As I am on the fence to buy back into Leica M with either a used M9 or a new M240, after reading this thread I think I will keep my breath for a while and wait for the next generation M240 (M260 or however it will be called).

I am a believer in CMOS and I trust Leica that they will enhance the capabilities of their sensor and processing engine in the next model - keeping resolution increase moderate (maybe around 30MP if at all), improve DR (>14 stops) and high ISO usability (fully useable ISO 6400) plus make the processing lot faster and add a higher resolution EVF option (>2.4MP). At the same time keep all the goodies of the current M240 such as battery life, excellent rangefinder etc. What I would like them to add is ultrasonic sensor cleaning, this cannot be so difficult but is a big advantage while using the camera in the field.

I keep fingers crossed ;)
I'm on the hook making the decision to either have my M9 sensor replaced or front the exchange money for a new M-P. They won't offer the exchange for a camera they've not even announced yet... ;-)

Personally, I've not seen much different between M9 and M typ 240 for my photography with respect to image quality; what I have seen (less moire, more resolution, more sensitivity, easier to process files) seems to be on the side of going for the new camera. Same goes for responsiveness and all the other benefits of the newer model.

My only concern is financial: the M-P will cost me a good bit out of pocket even though Leica's exchange value is quite a fair deal. That and the fact that I still do like the M9 anyway.

I'm going to the store to handle and do some test shots with an M typ 240 today, see if I can come to a decision.

G
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I'm on the hook making the decision to either have my M9 sensor replaced or front the exchange money for a new M-P. They won't offer the exchange for a camera they've not even announced yet... ;-)

Personally, I've not seen much different between M9 and M typ 240 for my photography with respect to image quality; what I have seen (less moire, more resolution, more sensitivity, easier to process files) seems to be on the side of going for the new camera. Same goes for responsiveness and all the other benefits of the newer model.

My only concern is financial: the M-P will cost me a good bit out of pocket even though Leica's exchange value is quite a fair deal. That and the fact that I still do like the M9 anyway.

I'm going to the store to handle and do some test shots with an M typ 240 today, see if I can come to a decision.

G
Godfrey,

would really love to hear your decision ....

Peter
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I'm on the hook making the decision to either have my M9 sensor replaced or front the exchange money for a new M-P. They won't offer the exchange for a camera they've not even announced yet... ;-)

Personally, I've not seen much different between M9 and M typ 240 for my photography with respect to image quality; what I have seen (less moire, more resolution, more sensitivity, easier to process files) seems to be on the side of going for the new camera. Same goes for responsiveness and all the other benefits of the newer model.

My only concern is financial: the M-P will cost me a good bit out of pocket even though Leica's exchange value is quite a fair deal. That and the fact that I still do like the M9 anyway.

I'm going to the store to handle and do some test shots with an M typ 240 today, see if I can come to a decision.

G
I think handling both and takin some images is a good idea.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Repeating this post from my "...time out..." thread.

>> Okay ... made my decision.

I stopped in at the camera shop and spent an hour and some with an M typ 240 and the three lenses that are the bulk of what I've been using on the M9—Summilux 35/1.4 v2, Nokton 50/1.5 (LTM), and Ultron 28/2. I set the 240 to JPEG+raw.

For each lens, I set the lens code to OFF and made twenty exposures are varying apertures, then set the lens code to the one I've been using on the M9 and made another 20 exposures. Then I made exposures to test all ISO settings with the Nokton 50. I turned on Live View and experimented with the focusing.

My impressions:

- The M 240 shutter and overall responsiveness is FAR better than the M9. Feels right, doesn't feel laggy or get blocked up with multiple single shots.

- The new viewfinder frame line illuminator is clean, crisp, and clear. Somehow, the view through viewfinder feels less cluttered. The rangefinder seemed about as crisp to align as with the M9, but overall the viewfinder experience is better.

- Now at home, I've imported all the exposures into Lightroom 5.7.1. Auto white balance in the JPEGs and raws is improved over the M9 in all the various shots, it's right on the money in most cases.

- All the shots where I was critically careful to set the focus and used ISO 1600 (high enough shutter speed) are bang on the money sharp, crisp, clean and noiseless. There is no banding apparent in any of the photos I made, even to the highest ISO setting.

- There's neither degradation nor loss in the rendering character of the 'Lux 35 v2 or Nokton 50. (They're no better than I see on film or on the M9, and no worse either.) Didn't really look hard for the Ultron, but it seems to be a less prone to color shifting.

- None of these three lenses, even with lens code set to OFF, show any color shifting. (The 28 and 35 show a very small amount with the M9.)

To me, this is a no-brainer. The M typ 240 is simply a better Leica M than the M9. As one ought to expect from an updated model ...

I've called Leica USA and confirmed that I'll take a black M-P on the exchange program. I'm mailing the check for it this afternoon ... They'll likely hold the check for two weeks or so, but eh? I don't use credit cards, and I'm not in a rush.

onwards!

G
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Godfrey,

thanks for your test and sharing your findings - I had the feeling this would be the result after all my own investigations too - great to hear that confirmed!

Also for me is now clear - no used M9, rather go for the M240 or wait till next release!

Peter
 
Top