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!

Evaluating the New M

jonoslack

Active member
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.
Hi Douglas
Well the M isn't for sport. But if your after IQ with M lenses, then I'd be really surprised if Sony can do better.
And the crucial point about the M is that when you don't want to use it as a Mirrorless...... Then it also has a rangefinder. The nicest way of shooting.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Hi Douglas
Well the M isn't for sport. But if your after IQ with M lenses, then I'd be really surprised if Sony can do better.
And the crucial point about the M is that when you don't want to use it as a Mirrorless......
Jono, You and I are in for a surprise. Sony do have sensors that aren' the conventional Bayer matrix which do not require an AA filter. Look at their Cine Alta video cam. A version of this sensor might show up soon in their upcoming A58 (APS-C).
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jono, You and I are in for a surprise. Sony do have sensors that aren' the conventional Bayer matrix which do not require an AA filter. Look at their Cine Alta video cam. A version of this sensor might show up soon in their upcoming A58 (APS-C).
Hi Vivek.
The trouble with non Bayer CFAs is that they're too complicated to support in RAW so nobody bothers. It seems that even the MM with no filter is too much trouble for most companies. Fuji files are worse. Added to which, who is going to do specific vignetting corrections for Leica lenses?
All the best
 

douglasf13

New member
Hi Douglas
Well the M isn't for sport. But if your after IQ with M lenses, then I'd be really surprised if Sony can do better.
And the crucial point about the M is that when you don't want to use it as a Mirrorless...... Then it also has a rangefinder. The nicest way of shooting.
Oh, don't worry, I don't have any interest in using M cameras as anything other than rangefinders. Live view on an M doesn't really interest me at all. I'm just a little surprised that some users are interested in using the new M as only a live view camera, but to each his/her own.
 
Live view on an M doesn't really interest me at all. I'm just a little surprised that some users are interested in using the new M as only a live view camera, but to each his/her own.
Then how do you use easily, or just normally, a 135 Apo-telyt on the M ?
how do you use a 21 mm ?
 
I personally wouldn't use either of those lenses, but, if I did, I'd use an external finder for the 21 and maybe an eyepiece magnifier for the 135.
Then you will not use only the rangefinder
and the eyepiece magnifier 1.4 is not enough (for me) for the 135 mm

the focus peaking on EVF is a really great feature, you have not to wonder if it is in focus or not, it works alone
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Hi Douglas
Well the M isn't for sport. But if your after IQ with M lenses, then I'd be really surprised if Sony can do better.
And the crucial point about the M is that when you don't want to use it as a Mirrorless...... Then it also has a rangefinder. The nicest way of shooting.
Leica, a Fuji wannabe.

:ROTFL:
 

douglasf13

New member
Then you will not use only the rangefinder
and the eyepiece magnifier 1.4 is not enough (for me) for the 135 mm

the focus peaking on EVF is a really great feature, you have not to wonder if it is in focus or not, it works alone
You're were saying that you plan on only using liveview, and that's all that I had concern about, because electronics is not Leica's strength. If you're talking about occasionally using liveview with your lenses at the extremes, then it makes more sense to me. I would still use the rangefinder to focus for a 21 or 135, but, again, I'm not interested in those lenses, myself.

I've used live view and focus peaking extensively in several cameras. I started shooting the M9 precisely to get away from it, as I don't enjoy using it as my primary way of shooting.
 

douglasf13

New member
Me too
even if the score of Sony is better on dxomark
Jono is talking about oblique light rays with M lenses, not total IQ. It'll be interesting to compare the M 240 to Sony's 24mp FF EXMOR. The M9's CCD has a rather different look, but the M 240's CMOS is still a bit up in the air.
 
I've used live view and focus peaking extensively in several cameras. I started shooting the M9 precisely to get away from it, as I don't enjoy using it as my primary way of shooting.
If you shoot only with 35 or 50 mm I can understand , but many M users have a second camera
I want only one system , as good as possible , small and FF that I can take everywhere
Actually the M is the only way (for me)


Jono is talking about oblique light rays with M lenses, not total IQ. It'll be interesting to compare the M 240 to Sony's 24mp FF EXMOR. The M9's CCD has a rather different look, but the M 240's CMOS is still a bit up in the air.
As said before I am not sure that there is a noticeable difference between CCD and CMOS

the M240 CMOSIS without AA and M lenses is all what I need :)
 

douglasf13

New member
If you shoot only with 35 or 50 mm I can understand , but many M users have a second camera
I want only one system , as good as possible , small and FF
Actually the M is the only way (for me)
I completely understand, Erick. I'm certainly not saying that liveview isn't a useful tool to many, and I don't mind it being included on the M 240. I'm simply saying that our expectations from Leica's implementation should be reasonable, since their expertise is mechanical, not electronic. It's a pretty radical jump to go from the M9, which can barely clear the buffer in a reasonable time, to a full-fledged movie/live view camera in just a few years, especially when they're using a processor that is several years old. I'd imagine that's why we're seeing subpar EVF refresh rates, no scrollable magnification, etc.

p.s. in terms of sensors, getting an AA removed isn't that big of a deal, if that is the difference you're talking about. The EXMOR in the RX1 looks pretty good to me, AA or not.
 
I completely understand, Erick. I'm certainly not saying that liveview isn't a useful tool to many, and I don't mind it being included on the M 240. I'm simply saying that our expectations from Leica's implementation should be reasonable, since their expertise is mechanical, not electronic. It's a pretty radical jump to go from the M9, which can barely clear the buffer in a reasonable time, to a full-fledged movie/live view camera in just a few years, especially when they're using a processor that is several years old. I'd imagine that's why we're seeing subpar EVF refresh rates, no scrollable magnification, etc.
I agree with you on that point, but Leica has already an experience with the S2 and S
let's see ... anyway my M is already pre-ordered since nearly one year :) .... and I waaaaaaant it nooooow :deadhorse:


in terms of sensors, getting an AA removed isn't that big of a deal, if that is the difference you're talking about. The EXMOR in the RX1 looks pretty good to me, AA or not.
I am sure that the RX1 is a great camera but why they did it with a fixed lens ?
 
Top