Leica M 240 test see samples here

[Guy Mancuso]

Chuck you posted after me but you are correct. Learning great hand holding technique is crucial and this comes down to that learning curve of learning how to excel at it. Some of us like you mentioned can cheat near amazing slow shutter speeds and some seem to have had 30 cups of coffee before they go out the door. Im stretching that one but you folks get the idea.

 

[Stefan Steib]

Ok I know I am walking on thin Ice here, this is the Leica part of the Forum, but excuse my maybe naive question:

If a camera that was and is famous for fast and light speed photography will not deliver the full image quality (which is expensively paid for- mostly for this purpose !) at exactly this purpose, isn´t this kind of a paradoxon ?

We are talking here of maybe 7000 € for a body, maybe another 7-8000 € for a nocti- or summilux, still no autofocus, no stabilization.

I am also no parkinson patient, I have shot quite some meters of film and files out of hand. But I know where my limits are. 1/15th with a deep breath, some leaning to walls or other parts of existing "helpers" maybe doing bursts of some shots to get one "acceptable sharp" one, a good monopod maybe brings me down to a 1/4 sec. But that´s it. And of 10 of these shots 1-2 are pretty good, 3-4 are somehow acceptable if the motive is interesting and dominating the file and the other 5 are for the binch.......
None of these will be 100% unless a lucky shot 1 out of 100, by chance.
Add to this that me as a glass wearing photographer (since I´m 14) never became friends with the Leica M finder.

I would have loved to test a more mobile usage, but Leica could not deliver the EVF (maybe I will still get it for 1-2 days, there´s a small chance left) and on the weekend I will shoot people with it (Wasserburg Mideval festival). So lets see how it goes for portraits.

I am not testing a legend, I test cameras.

Regards
Stefan

 

[fotografz]

I've been shooting with a M for 40+ years now. My hand-held rangefinder technique is probably as good as it is going to get ... in fact, if anything it'll get worse.

Jono: Creative ... art ... you say Tomahto, I say Tomato.

The conundrum is that as the M acquires more and more resolution, the lenses get better and better and a LOT more expensive ... yet to realize what both camera and len$es are capable of, starts encroaching in on the purpose of the format and it starts becoming something else.

Not sure I'd agree with the concept of more meg with shake is mitigated by size even when printed ... if that were true you could hand-hold a MFD camera at lower shutter speeds off a tripod, and it'd be okay ... but it isn't. The S2 sensor isn't all that much larger than 35mm and @ 37 meg you really have to shoot much higher shutter speeds hand-held or it shows ... even on a regular sized print.

I made thousands of prints from a D700 and D3X ... and the D700 was more forgiving at normal print sizes ... perhaps due to higher expectations from the 24 meg camera ... however, when the end use expectations aren't met, or sometimes equalled by the lesser camera, you start questioning that application of the format using such a camera.

IMHO, 24 meg FF is probably a threshold for a hand-held spontaneous tool like the M.

- Marc

 

[jonoslack]

IMHO, 24 meg FF is probably a threshold for a hand-held spontaneous tool like the M.

- Marc

Well, let's hope they keep it that way then - because if you can't use it for hand held spontaneous shooting you may as well get a D800 or a medium format camera!

My rangefinder technique isn't bad - lots of practice, but in every situation I'd rather go for the motiv than the IQ. And in my world tripods are not compatible with catching that significant moment.

 

[Godfrey]

Ok I know I am walking on thin Ice here, this is the Leica part of the Forum, but excuse my maybe naive question:

If a camera that was and is famous for fast and light speed photography will not deliver the full image quality (which is expensively paid for- mostly for this purpose !) at exactly this purpose, isn´t this kind of a paradoxon ?
...
I would have loved to test a more mobile usage, but Leica could not deliver the EVF ...

1) The question is what you consider to be the "full image quality." Fast and light, speedy photographs of people, as in street and editorial photography, are rarely measured on the technical quality of maximum sharpness or the absolute limits of tonal capture. They are measured more on expression, 'the decisive moment', etc. The superb Leica lenses are not only very high resolution but provide beautiful rendering qualities for this work. A good look at any of the photographs famously taken by Leicas shows that only a small percentage of them ever exploit the maximum resolution capabilities of the camera, lens, and sensor/film. What they do have is a wealth of nuance and beauty in the rendering of blur vs sharp areas, lovely micro-contrast, etc etc.

Getting the technical max resolution from any camera and lens requires techniques that are more akin to today's technical camera usage. Hand-held work should never be judged on that standard, IMO.

2) Save half the money you'd spend on the Leica EVF and buy the Olympus VF-2. It is identical in all respects other than the name "Leica" on the front. Easily available for about $200. I've been using it with the Leica X2 for a year ... it's the same (only) EVF Leica offers so it will work perfectly.

G

 

[jlm]

i've been fiddling around with the mono, hand held, and the files and resolution are extremely compelling. as long as i can shoot at 1/25 or faster, what the combo of leica lens and mono sensor can produce can give you high resolution and..content is up to me!

why bother with the expense and trouble of leica lenses and rangefinder if you won't demand what they can produce? you can get quality content with far less expenditure.

i have other options if i want to use the tripod or catch those squirrelly grandchildren mid -flight

 

[Photojazz]

Really, in a way I wonder if the M 240 has become something that Leica M was not meant to become... Well, maybe the 240 is ok, but if it goes any further in the pixel race, it will become the S series small body, no longer a street photography oriented M. I think this is something the who's who at Leica should definitely keep in mind going forward with model design-

Doug

 

[segedi]

Back to the photos, well done Stefan!
Oldie 007 was my favorite of the set and certainly shows the abilities of M.

 

[Paratom]

Maybe my images are not as sharp as they could be (I never missed anything in this regard) however I shoot the S2 handheld all the time. I have exp time limited 1/250 and autoiso on up to ISO 800 and images are sharp.
I do not doubt a tripod can improve things, but in my case for many subjects I am like Jono-not a tripod type. (Could also have to do with a certain limited time for photography and that I am much more doing "casual shooting" and not really anything like serious (art) photography. If light gets low I even have shots with 1/30 from the S which are fine.
And even if this means to not achieve the latest little bit of sharpness - there are many other qualities which let you benefit from the high quality lenses and sensors (no matter if D800 or Leica M or S or other brands); Things like color, tonality and contrast/microcontrast.
I often bring a tripod and then don't use it.
I am sure that if I was a dedicated landscape or architecture photographer things would be different - but I don't see that free hand photography with higher MP cameras would "mess up" all advantages.

 

[jonoslack]

Just to turn this slightly on it's head.
We are kind of assuming that to get the best out of the M you need a tripod . . . . .
. . . . I've tacitly been agreeing with this, but I was looking through my chinese monochrom pictures last night. It was drab light and shooting at slow shutter speeds was often necessary.

I have a 6ft print of a photo of a bridge taken at 1/90th with the 75 'cron, I can look at it from 1ft away, and there is absolutely no sign of camera shake. So I looked at other similar exposures - 85% of them are fine - 15% show some weak signs of camera shake, but in most cases this doesn't have any affect on a 24" print - even assuming that the viewer wants to look from close up.

My landscape stuff is all handheld - here the light is mostly okay, so we're probably talking shutter speeds of 1/125 - 1/250th hand held - again, leaves at 100% are sharp as sharp.

I would contend that if a 6ft print is okay - then it's okay.

Look - we were on a beach in China, and there was a huge noticeboard about swimming. Amongst other things it said that you MUST wear a flotation device if you were going to swim out of your depth. It's certainly true that you would be less likely to drown if you wear a flotation device . . . .

. . ... . sure - on average - you get sharper pictures using a tripod - but to say that it isn't worth using a 24mp camera without one is suggesting a degradation which simply isn't borne out by the facts of my images (unless I'm going blind and stupid).

It's tough saying this - especially in a technical facing camera forum it's definitely going against all sorts of conventional wisdom, and leaves oneself very much open to the accusation of incompetence and stupidity - but here's me saying it!

all the best

PS - of COURSE I'm NOT saying that there aren't circumstances where a tripod is vital - just that in those circumstances I'd probably use a different camera

 

[Knorp]

PS - of COURSE I'm NOT saying that there aren't circumstances where a tripod is vital - just that in those circumstances I'd probably use a different camera

Mmmm, what camera would that be, Jono ? oke:

:angel:

Kind reagrds.

 

[jonoslack]

Mmmm, what camera would that be, Jono ? oke:

:angel:

Kind reagrds.

D800 / S2 / Other MF back of your choice.

:angel:

 

[Stefan Steib]

Jonoslack

You are right - pretty good ist mostly enough.
I am just saying that - for me - as I´m an old former 8/10 viewcamera shooter and doing focusing with a loupe for 25 years it´s kind of weird NOT to squeeze out every last bit of the gear I bought.

And - again attention dangerous statement- if I´d needed a superfast, action proof and autofocus camera with highest ISO possible I would probably NOT use a Leica M. Maybe a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4 ? Those deliver exactly what they are built (and paid) for.

I am curious, I always hear about the unique qualities and the bokeh and the organic look. But street Photography , Action and Sports are not done with Leica M´s today anymore......
I believe most if not all World press photos of the year from the last 10-15 years were not shot with Leicas ?

I see this M 240 as a fantastic camera - IF - it also would have an adequate AF and IS, probably a killer machine. At the moment for me there is something lacking to fullfil the claim that is made. It once WAS like this, but today ?

Searching cover, ducking off
Stefan

 

[Vivek]

There are still uses for the old mechanical cameras for fast captures.

I have been so tuned to anticipate the shutter lag of my mirrorless cameras that I have squeezed the shutter release on my MM a bit too early, many times and have missed some shots.

Such a thing will not happen when shooting pets and static objects.

Stefan, I understood your motive for the test shots on a tripod. The discussion got muddled with claims of missed moments, portability and such.

Can we get back to the IQ out of the MM that I believe was the initial point?

What about color fidelity?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

It was a good discussion though and maybe helped some folks understand certain things.

 

[jonoslack]

Jonoslack

You are right - pretty good ist mostly enough.
I am just saying that - for me - as I´m an old former 8/10 viewcamera shooter and doing focusing with a loupe for 25 years it´s kind of weird NOT to squeeze out every last bit of the gear I bought.

Well, I quite agree, but what I was saying that looking at a 6ft print from 1ft and having good edges isn't just 'good enough' - it's good, and it's taking advantage of the sensor.

And - again attention dangerous statement- if I´d needed a superfast, action proof and autofocus camera with highest ISO possible I would probably NOT use a Leica M. Maybe a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4 ? Those deliver exactly what they are built (and paid) for.
I am curious, I always hear about the unique qualities and the bokeh and the organic look. But street Photography , Action and Sports are not done with Leica M´s today anymore......

Absolutely - I quite agree - no question.
. . except street photography, not something I do a great deal of, but I still think that a rangefinder qualifies here.

I see this M 240 as a fantastic camera - IF - it also would have an adequate AF and IS, probably a killer machine. At the moment for me there is something lacking to fullfil the claim that is made. It once WAS like this, but today ?

Searching cover, ducking off
Stefan

No need for the cover - but for me, for travel, landscape, portrait, wedding and event photography, (and now with the M) nature, macro . . . it does a pretty good job and uses the best lenses in the world in a package which is much smaller than anything else.

I quite agree that in body IS would be nice - don't care much about AF - but of course, you do need to be able to manage a rangefinder . . which brings me to putting on my flameproof suit and saying:

I can't see why you would use an M(240) if you weren't going to use the rangefinder?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Stefan be interesting to hear of the CMOS sensor compared to the CCD of MF. Color, tonality and such.

 

[jonoslack]

Can we get back to the IQ out of the MM that I believe was the initial point?

What about color fidelity?

Vivek - Stefan - sorry, I've been seriously :OT:
I apologise.

I was in no way trying to criticise the initial post or it's intentions.

But as Guy says - it's an interesting discussion - but perhaps for another place.

I'll shuttup now.

all the bed

 

[Vivek]

Well, one other thing that really shocked me is the TTL flash on a Leica M (besides the metering which would the "classical" mode in the new M, if I am not mistaken). The TTL flash is quite accurate and is comparable to that of Nikon's iTTL (if not better).

Did you try the camera with any of the flashes, Stefan? Also, how do you find the primitive (but accurate) metering (not the one from live view off the sensor) compared to canon, etc?

 

[Paratom]

Jonoslack

You are right - pretty good ist mostly enough.
I am just saying that - for me - as I´m an old former 8/10 viewcamera shooter and doing focusing with a loupe for 25 years it´s kind of weird NOT to squeeze out every last bit of the gear I bought.

And - again attention dangerous statement- if I´d needed a superfast, action proof and autofocus camera with highest ISO possible I would probably NOT use a Leica M. Maybe a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4 ? Those deliver exactly what they are built (and paid) for.

I am curious, I always hear about the unique qualities and the bokeh and the organic look. But street Photography , Action and Sports are not done with Leica M´s today anymore......
I believe most if not all World press photos of the year from the last 10-15 years were not shot with Leicas ?

I see this M 240 as a fantastic camera - IF - it also would have an adequate AF and IS, probably a killer machine. At the moment for me there is something lacking to fullfil the claim that is made. It once WAS like this, but today ?

Searching cover, ducking off
Stefan

Stefan,
as a long time Leica M user I am pretty quick with the M-rangefinder. But I have allways also used AF cameras and I have to agree with you: I would welcome a good AF very much in the M system. But I would like to keep an optical viewfinder. Something like the Finder of the x-pro 1 would be prefect for my needs.
IMO the Nikons and Canons a great cameras (and I sometimes use a Canon 5dIII when I want fast AF) but I still prefer the overall IQ I get from the M9 (and I assume the M 240 is even better).
That's why I keep and use both at the moment.