Official Talk Leica thread

Messages
135
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
I'm not so sure I really want to touch the whole festering boil that's M240 vs M9 image quality

but if I purposefully underexpose a little in camera and set a custom WB I'm not sure they're a million miles apart

View attachment 265416

The other thing said of course is that "people come out with tomato faces and it can't be fixed"

View attachment 265418

Again, I'm not convinced, although that took more PP that it might have done with the m9 (although it's iso 1250 so gawd knows how it would have come out on the m9!!)

this is iso 3200 (max until you reach the push values)

View attachment 265419

there's zero NR applied to this (and a rather optimistic 40/0.7/65/20 sharpening setting as I applied that to a bunch of base iso images and this one slipped though!!) and no edits except a custom WB, because indoor yellow lighting..

I don't present these images as proof of anything or even anything other than snaps just to test my new cam in different scenarios... but so far I'm not seeing anything that makes me think 'uh-oh.. what have I bought...'

Which is a good thing :)
and finally...

because I'm getting bored, so lord knows how you all feel!

Here's a selection of throw away crap, that is straight as imported into LR (my import setting is basically more sharpening, zero NR, the adobe lens profile and the embedded camera profile) with zero additional edits (no WB, shadow recovery etc)

View attachment 265421


View attachment 265422


View attachment 265424

Sure if these were in any way keepers we'd edit them!

But this is what I'm getting straight out of the box, and it's really not a million miles off the m9 in feel and vibe (even if not the exact colour profile and tone curve)

In case it's of interest.. I'm liking more the embedded profile and I tend to run it -0.3 EV in bright light

Oh and to the other M9 owners...

The M240 has 2meter framelines! Fk man the 35 ones look like a 28 in there!!!!
Good examples there Adam, maybe the opener of another long blog article ;)

I have never had a view in the M9 v M240 sensor thing, when I came to Leica I went M9 because I liked the fact it still had a brightframe window so looked like a Leica. I read lots about the "filmic" look of the M9 compared to the 240 and M10 and of course the poor high ISO capability of the M9 but I was used to the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and rarely went above 800 ISO anyway so I dipped my toe in with the M9 and was enamored enough to get another 2. I toyed with the idea of an M240P for the ability to use live view for landscapes with grad filters, polarisers etc but in the end didn't bother. I also had a play with 2 of the M10 variants on my one and only Leica store visit in London recently but chose not to bother. In the end I resolved that my M9s fit the bill of general photography/travel/documentary (and fit it well for me) when travelling for that I will take my Fujifilm X-T2 along for landscape/low light/bad weather etc so have all bases covered. For landscape specific trips I use my GFX 50S and take the X-T2 as back up/recce camera but still pack 1 M9 with 35mm Summicron for carry around.

Apologies for the long winded ramble but I suppose what I am really saying really is that one size doesn't fit all.
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
Good examples there Adam, maybe the opener of another long blog article ;)

I have never had a view in the M9 v M240 sensor thing, when I came to Leica I went M9 because I liked the fact it still had a brightframe window so looked like a Leica. I read lots about the "filmic" look of the M9 compared to the 240 and M10 and of course the poor high ISO capability of the M9 but I was used to the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and rarely went above 800 ISO anyway so I dipped my toe in with the M9 and was enamored enough to get another 2. I toyed with the idea of an M240P for the ability to use live view for landscapes with grad filters, polarisers etc but in the end didn't bother. I also had a play with 2 of the M10 variants on my one and only Leica store visit in London recently but chose not to bother. In the end I resolved that my M9s fit the bill of general photography/travel/documentary (and fit it well for me) when travelling for that I will take my Fujifilm X-T2 along for landscape/low light/bad weather etc so have all bases covered. For landscape specific trips I use my GFX 50S and take the X-T2 as back up/recce camera but still pack 1 M9 with 35mm Summicron for carry around.

Apologies for the long winded ramble but I suppose what I am really saying really is that one size doesn't fit all.
hi Paul

it sounds that you have everything covered with the cameras you do have, especially the 50s for the landscape work

i think that in core functionality all the Ms are basically a muchness, sure the 10 offers more than 240 or the 9, but if one has non-L cameras that are better suited to specific tasks then the lure of the newest shiniest M dulls quickly
 
Messages
4,280
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
hi Paul

it sounds that you have everything covered with the cameras you do have, especially the 50s for the landscape work

i think that in core functionality all the Ms are basically a muchness, sure the 10 offers more than 240 or the 9, but if one has non-L cameras that are better suited to specific tasks then the lure of the newest shiniest M dulls quickly
Not sure about that one. ;)

Off course cost comes into it but the M10 series is now the pinnacle of M bodies, both in terms of physical size for the long term (ie film camera owners) and technology in terms of much better ISO performance, touch screen, quiet shutter (M-10P), performance overall and tricks such as connecting WiFi and such like.

I do find the size thing an odd one I have to say, compared to my M6 it’s almost the same dimensional size - I think the M10-P is a smidge bigger, but I think this corresponds more to M6TTL/M7 size, but that is totally negated by the weight difference. The M6 fits perfectly in hand and balances beautifully, whereas the M10 is just so much heavier (obviously given what’s in it, I don’t feel it’s such a balanced camera in hand.

I have to say I thought hard about an older M, but all things told the small updates add up to one big update.

I plan on keeping my M-10P for a long, long time and the only way for me was the P. Of course, it’s a big investment but even over let’s say 10 years of ownership, which I would expect to be reasonable for the camera it works out at a reasonable annual investment.
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
Not sure about that one. ;)

Off course cost comes into it but the M10 series is now the pinnacle of M bodies, both in terms of physical size for the long term (ie film camera owners) and technology in terms of much better ISO performance, touch screen, quiet shutter (M-10P), performance overall and tricks such as connecting WiFi and such like.

I do find the size thing an odd one I have to say, compared to my M6 it’s almost the same dimensional size - I think the M10-P is a smidge bigger, but I think this corresponds more to M6TTL/M7 size, but that is totally negated by the weight difference. The M6 fits perfectly in hand and balances beautifully, whereas the M10 is just so much heavier (obviously given what’s in it, I don’t feel it’s such a balanced camera in hand.

I have to say I thought hard about an older M, but all things told the small updates add up to one big update.

I plan on keeping my M-10P for a long, long time and the only way for me was the P. Of course, it’s a big investment but even over let’s say 10 years of ownership, which I would expect to be reasonable for the camera it works out at a reasonable annual investment.
well.. yes, but the sonys for example offer even better iso and dynamic range or even a completely silent shutter

so if one owns cameras from many brands the lure of the latest greatest M diminishes... (because the best M ever isn’t the best ever camera)

Leica also have a habit of giving then taking away... the m9 lost the sapphire screen that m8.2 owners got as standard (but they could get back with the m9p), the 240 lost the beloved colour signature that the m9 had and gained weight. The m10 lost the electronic level that every m240 had (but m10p owners got back), the battery life on the m10 is CIPA rated as worse than the m9 (200 v 350).

But ultimately none of this really matters... because the M is a muchness to one another, if you’ve use one (even a film one from say the m6TTL onwards) then you know how to use any of them. If you draw pleasure and satisfaction from rangefinder photography then every M can give you your fix and they all take the same lenses!

If the M10 was available in my budget - aka if i’d waited 3+ more years :D I wouldn’t have hesitated, it’s the best M ever, with ISO and colours being reason enough. But on the other hand the older Ms still have their charm, their signature colours, pros compared to the newer model and ultimately, anyone chasing industry leading performance within class probably isn’t shopping in the Leica store as that’s not what the brand is all about!

People fall in love with the M and keep it a long time. This is by far the biggest attraction of the product. A high up front cost followed by years of contentment, and as long as the joy lasts the VFM is undeniable. But you don’t need the latest one to feel the pleasure.
 
Messages
3,439
Name
Immo
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, I find the present discussion most interesting! - I stick to my M9 (10th anniversary coming up), because I am happy with what it does. Its limitations are compensated by other cameras I own.

High iso, tilt screen, level, shutter speed, IS I find in my SONY A7R2s. And for high performance AF I use a NIKON D800.

I envy all, who have all their requirements covered by an M. In a way, this reminds me of people who have all their driving requirements satisfied by just one car,
such as my "little" sister with her PORSCHE 911.

Others, like me, need more than one car (or camera), or must make compromises ... ---

Being just a hobbyist, life is easy. I take a camera, go to a nice place or event, take my pics, go after that to a nice restaurant, and have fun ...

So a walk in the park in Wiesbaden/D (Leica M9 - ZEISS Biogon 2,8/25 f 2,8) (before going to CHEZ MAMIE) :


L1021299_DxO-z25b-28-tp.jpg
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,280
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
Discussion is always good and as individuals our choices are all individual and valid.

I find switching between systems always makes me think what If and so prefer to stick to one solution. When I bought my Leica I could have kept hold of my Nikon D750 set up but in truth I’d always find myself in a should I have used different when out and about with a camera in hand. I have enough trouble with lens choice :LOL:

In other news I’ve just bought a 40mm f2 Summicron - half the price of the 50mm I was looking at. Reviews I’ve read are promising albeit a little compromising as to whether it brings up 35mm or 50mm frame lines. For the money though it’ll be an interesting journey for a little while.
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
When I got the m9 I figured it would be a kinda ‘sunny sunday sports car’ type purchase and the x-pro2 (a kinda family saloon type camera) would do the brunt of my work.

when i realised that i’d used it twice in 2 years, lent it to someone for 4 months and only missed it once (and completely forgot about it the rest of the time) I realised just how into the M I’d become

That said the m9 is just a little bit too limiting as a single main camera, plus I was getting a bit scared of wearing it out and the associated repair costs..

..and so enter the m240 giving me some more modern practicalities!
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
I keep telling mrs Adam that wine makes angels of us all...

But she's not having it!

M1000438.LR.jpg

(the trouble with grab shots is that you forget you have an ND filter and auto ISO on and end up with 1/25 at 3200... I'm surprised it's not more blurry!)
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Messages
3,439
Name
Immo
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, my 24/25mm lenses. (Lineup from my SONY adapting days, with E > M adaptor, lenshood):


24mm-Objektive.jpg



From left to right:

-LEICA Elmar-M, 3,8/24 asph. Slower than the Elmarit, I cannot see performance differences in (my) normal use.

-LEICA Elmarit 2,8/24 asph. I like it better than the Elmar. It is more "high-end", like its 21mm brother. I bought both to find out which version works better with SONYs.
(Both work the same. The relatively weak performance is due to the comparatively thick SONY sensor stack.)

-MINOLTA MC-W Rokkor 2,8/24. I have not used it for years. A good lens. MINOLTA cooperated with LEITZ/Leica when desgning lenses for the R.

-ZEISS Biogon 2,8/25. Same performance as the Leica 24s above in my hands.

-ZEISS Batis 2/25. A good lens, with AF. Lights can show onion rings, however. I do not like its bulk and sleek design. But this does not speak against the lens,
more against my "retro-taste" ... ---
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,625
Edit My Images
Yes
I keep telling mrs Adam that wine makes angels of us all...

But she's not having it!

View attachment 265657

(the trouble with grab shots is that you forget you have an ND filter and auto ISO on and end up with 1/25 at 3200... I'm surprised it's not more blurry!)
I know that the bloke is popping down to do something... but he could be really drunk....

So you find that it tends to shoot slow too ? I tried to set the limiting speed to 1/30 (or 1/60) but it seemd to tend to use the iso priority and ignore my speed request on auto...
Feel and handling I like (although I tend to miss the focus without the evf, on 50mm, focussing on the eye, got the ear in focus... looked ok on the screen though....)

All setting completely out of the window when shooting the fireworks at new year...
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
So you find that it tends to shoot slow too ? I tried to set the limiting speed to 1/30 (or 1/60) but it seemd to tend to use the iso priority and ignore my speed request on auto...
Feel and handling I like (although I tend to miss the focus without the evf, on 50mm, focussing on the eye, got the ear in focus... looked ok on the screen though....)
I've only had it a week, so there's plenty of things I've yet to discover!

I did find two annoyances today...

The first is no doubt user error, but...

I thought I'd play with setting up the user profiles, namely to create different variants of auto ISO (eg 200-3200 / 200-800 / auto ISO and SS = 1/2xFL)

It seemed to work, but somehow it reset* all my other settings back to default (losing my DNG, red framelines, custom file names, copyright info entries)

I haven't got my head around that... I don't think it's a fault, just something I don't understand how to use yet (although to be fair I think I just lost the will to care)

*I don't mean reset like a system crash, more like it only had all my settings in a 'current' live profile and going to a user profile defaulted a lot of values

The other one is that I took a shot on auto ISO 200-3200 and aperture priority, the camera picked ISO200 and 1/1500. It was a bit overexposed, so I selected 1/2000 and shot again, and the camera selected ISO 3200!!

That can't be right... not sure why it would do this... If the camera thinks that 200 and 1/1500 is cool and the gang, then manually selecting 1/200 should've made it select ISO 250 (more or less) not add 4 more stops of iso!

I've found the focusing to be fine... I haven't tried it with the 7artisans yet (I haven't used that lens since I got the 50 'lux to be honest), something about the OVF seems better than the m9, the only listed difference is that the 240 framelines are calibrated for 2m and the m9 is 1m, which makes the 35mm lines fill more of the OVF, but it seems that the 240 is a bit easier to focus.. a bright focusing patch perhaps or a sharper OVF. I'm not sure....

The other OVF thing I've noticed is that (due to the 1m calibration) the m9 is very conservative with the framing, you nearly always get more than you expected in the frame, but the 240 keeps catching me out by being moderately accurate :D that leeway of don't worry it'll be fine I used to enjoy with the m9 when things got a bit tight against the framelines isn't there on the 240!

I'm happy with it though!

I took some indoor shots of people at 3200 today and they look fine.

In his review Ming Thein said it feels several generations ahead of the m9 (not merely one) and I have to say I agree, everything* about it is a bit nicer, especially the shutter, which is far nicer to press than the m9 which is a bit notchy feeling in comparison

*I think I like more the m9 colours and native tone curve, but the 240 isn't terrible to my eye, not by any stretch of the imagination!
 
Last edited:
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
Mrs Adam, went off to do something and left me alone for a couple of hours, so I went exploring and here's 3 snaps from the day!

They're all with the 35mm summarit, a lens that everyone told me I'd regret not getting a 35 cron instead, but two years later and I really haven't, and the cost saving to cron was significant!!

Anyway here's the pics!

M1000513.LR.jpg


M1000530.LR.jpg

M1000543.LR.jpg
 
Messages
2,625
Edit My Images
Yes
Nice pics :)

Yeah I found it over exposed a lot. Try changing the exposure from classic to digital, I think it helps a bit although the weird iso trying to be as high as possible sometimes creeps in.
A manual or some said it calculates the classic via the grey stripes, and digital it takes well dunno... 'cause the sensor isnt exposed. I tried the hald press to lock exposures but that didnt seem to work. Manually selecting iso to 200 with light/sun seems to be ok, with a -1/3 on exposure... still gets it wrong sometimes... a second quick shot adjusting the speed with fixed iso can do the trick.

Careful with the iso on 'last used' option, as that gets weird...
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
Nice pics :)

Yeah I found it over exposed a lot. Try changing the exposure from classic to digital, I think it helps a bit although the weird iso trying to be as high as possible sometimes creeps in.
A manual or some said it calculates the classic via the grey stripes, and digital it takes well dunno... 'cause the sensor isnt exposed. I tried the hald press to lock exposures but that didnt seem to work. Manually selecting iso to 200 with light/sun seems to be ok, with a -1/3 on exposure... still gets it wrong sometimes... a second quick shot adjusting the speed with fixed iso can do the trick.

Careful with the iso on 'last used' option, as that gets weird...
thank you :)

I’m ok with the classic metering (its all you get on the m9) and the shot-to-shot and shutter lag is terrible in ‘mirrorless’ mode

I tend to always run -1/3 ev at low iso, I think it makes the colours nicer...

I have it set too “last used iso in manual” mode, I might need fo look at that

thanks very much
 
Messages
3,439
Name
Immo
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, on my walk in the Kurpark in Wiesbaden/D - I had 2 hours till Chez Mamie opened (Leica M9 - ZEISS Biogon 2,8/25 f 8) :


L1021329_DxO-z25-tp_bearbeitet-1.jpg



L1021329_DxO-z25b-c-tp_bearbeitet-1.jpg


The quality of the crop is not embarrassing, I would say, taking the resolution of the M9 into account and that is was hand-held (without IS) .

A higher res camera with IS will be better in cases like this, of course ... ---
 
Last edited:
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
Went for a little stroll today!

My legs are really feeling it (Porto is neither smooth nor flat)

Here's 6 of the better ones, from a pretty poor bunch it has to be said... I only went out because the weather forecast is a bit dire for the next few days and I'm going to the UK for a bit next week so I thought I'd better get out because it could be a while before I'm some where dry again!

Touristy ones!! :D

M1000879.LR.jpg

M1000887.LR.jpg

M1000913.LR.jpg
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
Oh yeah notes on the above (this thread is like a chat between 4 people, so I treat it like I'm in bar speaking with my mates)

All the above 6 images are from the M240 and 50mm summilux ASPH

I'm really starting to fall for the '240.. but still early days with it.

The internet horror stories of ghastly AWB, constant lock ups, harsh banding at high ISO and dreadful images compared to the M9 aren't really my personal experiences...

Of course it's had umpteen FW updates since it came out, so I'm probably coming too it from a happier place than those that bought one when it was released

It's also not lost on me that it's not like the M9 (or the fuji, the sony etctetc) ALWAYS makes great AWB, great colours or system glitches because no camera does

I am finding that the 240 files like a little more PP than the M9 ones, but it's not that much different... Although I do find that WB is something I tweak more than the M9... the 240 files are pretty malleable really...

Overall the 240 reminds me of the X-Pro1 !!!! they're approximately as complicated as each other in terms of menu stuff, the EVF and focus aids are pretty woeful but adequate for occasional use. The 240 has more DR than the Fuji X-Pro1 (and the X-Pro2 in fact, but that's so close you'll not really notice)

I think I like the 50 'lux more on the 240 than the M9... to be honest when I effectively swapped (and added money too of course) the 50 'cron for the 'lux I have to say that the resultant M9 images did lose some of their organic, filmic erm cliche-ic charm.. almost like a modern ASPH (and alleged APO) lens makes a cleaner image than a design-not-changed-in-decades-nonASPH lens... ;-) The 240 just seems to get a bit more out of the 'lux.. maybe it's the higher res of the sensor, or the micro lens... meh don't care.. happy me :)
 
Messages
555
Name
Adam Bonn
Edit My Images
No
no PF.JPG

This is an area where the 50 'lux always impresses me...

See the purple fringing?

No me neither!!

Many other optics I've had would have chronic chromatic aberration here... which isn't beyond the wit of wo/man to resolve, but it can be a PITA...

To be fair the 50 'lux isn't exactly pocket change... so it's nice to see where all that beer money went..
 
Top