Tim Ashley about the Leica M (240), it is a keeper!

[BJL]

Hehe...glass is of course an afficionado's term, meant to convey one's appreciation of the finer subtleties in optical design.

But it comes across instead as ill-informed snobbery, like using the both less accurate and more obscure "strobe" when referring to a photographic flash unit.

When I want to be a real snob, I use the word objective, since technically a "lens" is only an individual piece of "glass" that forms part of a photographic objective. This seems appropriate here, given that the corresponding German word is objektiv.

[Telecaster]

But it comes across instead as ill-informed snobbery...

Indeed, thus the smiley in my post!

-Dave-

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Just a general comment. The Leica is a small full format camera with interchangeable lenses that also are small. So it is a small but powerful system. It can also be adapted to almost any lens and has a modern CMOS sensor having live view. So I would say it is pretty much unique.

Best regards
Erik

[Telecaster]

Hi,
Just a general comment. The Leica is a small full format camera with interchangeable lenses that also are small. So it is a small but powerful system. It can also be adapted to almost any lens and has a modern CMOS sensor having live view. So I would say it is pretty much unique.

Erik, that's a great description of the Olympus OM-D EM5 (and other M43 cameras) too! Its "full format" isn't as large as the 35mm format, but then again both M43 and 35mm are tiny compared to 4x5" sheet film. "Full" is relative. There are only a handful of lenses I own that I can't mount on the OM-D5.

-Dave-

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

There are some aspects of full format:

1) A wide angle is still a wide angle

2) A larger format collects more photons and will therefore have less noise

3) A larger format needs less magnification for a given print size and therefor will have better MTF if an equivalent lens is used

Let's put it this way, I have a P45+, a Sony Alpha 99, a Sony Alpha 77 and a Sony RX100 and I can see that results are better with larger formats. On the other hand the difference may be smaller than what I would expect.

I am not sure that the Leica lenses are as good as presumed. I have seen some suggestion that for instance the Sigma macro lenses can hold their own against any Leica lens, but I don't know. But a lens for a cropped sensor needs to be d____d good match an excellent lens on a much larger sensor.

Best regards
Erik

Erik, that's a great description of the Olympus OM-D EM5 (and other M43 cameras) too! Its "full format" isn't as large as the 35mm format, but then again both M43 and 35mm are tiny compared to 4x5" sheet film. "Full" is relative. There are only a handful of lenses I own that I can't mount on the OM-D5.

-Dave-

[Telecaster]

There are some aspects of full format:

1) A wide angle is still a wide angle

2) A larger format collects more photons and will therefore have less noise

3) A larger format needs less magnification for a given print size and therefor will have better MTF if an equivalent lens is used

Sure, I get all that. And that logic doesn't stop once you get to the 135 wunderformat either. You can mount Pentax 67 lenses on 35mm-format Pentax SLRs, for example, and experience an even greater loss of field-of-view than 35mm-format users have to deal with when using their lenses on APS-C cameras. "Full frame" doesn't have any magic properties, as I'm sure you know.

Let's put it this way, I have a P45+, a Sony Alpha 99, a Sony Alpha 77 and a Sony RX100 and I can see that results are better with larger formats. On the other hand the difference may be smaller than what I would expect.

I can tell you that my OM-D5 beats the pants off my c. 2007 Nikon D300. Resolution, dynamic range, noise control...all better with the Oly. I wouldn't expect the same outcome with a D7100, though. No matter...the Oly is--for me, right now--more fun to use than a D-SLR. Once achieving better image quality starts to become work...that's where I stop.   

I am not sure that the Leica lenses are as good as presumed. I have seen some suggestion that for instance the Sigma macro lenses can hold their own against any Leica lens, but I don't know. But a lens for a cropped sensor needs to be d____d good to match an excellent lens on a much larger sensor.

There's plenty of mystique involved when it comes to anything Leica. Objectivity is hard to come by. IMO Michael is more clear-headed than most in this regard, and the LuLa archive of his comments over the years (even going back to the film era, if that stuff is still available) is well worth perusing. Some of my favorite lenses have the Leitz or Leica name on them, but again there's no magic involved.

-Dave-

[duane_bolland]

Lloyd Chambers is not impressed:

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2013/20130628_1-LeicaM240-lockup.html

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes, he is obviously not impressed. It's alway nice to have different views.

Best regards
Erik

Lloyd Chambers is not impressed:

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2013/20130628_1-LeicaM240-lockup.html

[TMARK]

Lloyd Chambers is not impressed:

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2013/20130628_1-LeicaM240-lockup.html

Two things:  he obviously received a bad copy (like my second M8), and firmware could fix many of the implementation issues. My thoughts are if you are going to use it like a Nex7, just use a Nex7. Japanese electronics usually beat the Europeans. Leica excels with mechanics, although his copy puts this statement in doubt.

[PhotoEcosse]

Amateur Photographer gave the Leica a very poor review last week. Basically suggesting that Leica had "missed the point".

But I don't imagine that Leica enthusiasts will worry too much about what AP says.

[eronald]

Digilloyd is complaining about lockups similar to those which bedevilled my M8.
I don't understand why they can't just buy the electronics from Panasonic, after all the shutter and the electronic viewfinder are both Japanese, I guess.

Edmund

[ErikKaffehr]

Pride? NIH?

Japanese firms cannot develop camera firmware? Neither can German firms?

Erik

Digilloyd is complaining about lockups similar to those which bedevilled my M8.
I don't understand why they can't just buy the electronics from Panasonic, after all the shutter and the electronic viewfinder are both Japanese, I guess.

Edmund

[eronald]

Pride? NIH?

Japanese firms cannot develop camera firmware? Neither can German firms?

Erik

The issues with the M series lockups seemed to be basic battery/power problems - the worst issues possible because they are deadly in usage, need hardware fixes, and need years of development to get right.

Edmund

[bcooter]

Two things:  he obviously received a bad copy (like my second M8), and firmware could fix many of the implementation issues. My thoughts are if you are going to use it like a Nex7, just use a Nex7. Japanese electronics usually beat the Europeans. Leica excels with mechanics, although his copy puts this statement in doubt.

Leica needs to decide what they want to be.

A fashion statement, a throwback to the past, or a photographer's tool.

What I've seen from the cmos M doesn't impress me and has all the issues of the M series with parallex and high lens prices.

In fact when I bought into the 4/3's system with Gh3(s) and Olympus OMD's I bought adapters for my Leica lenses thinking they would be amazing and they underperformed the pana and olympus lenses by a wide margin.

Maybe (probably) there is a lot going on behind the curtain to correct CA and sharpness of the pana zooms and Oly primes, but the end result is surprising.

Saying all of this, I like traditional cameras, real f stops and a shutter dial.  I firmly planed to buy a 240 to replace my M8, but now I don't think I'll go there.  In fact if I was going to buy any Leica it would be the S system and even then I'm not sure if it tethers well or at all and I haven't given it much research.

I just finished the first leg of a long lifestyle gig, shooting stills and motion and shot about 75% with the 4/3 system cameras.  They don't have the actual detail of my Canons, or contax, (almost equal to the M-8) but the small and fast form factor, just changed the way I worked.   Looking at a session I did with the Olympus and my 1dx, the 1dx had more detail, not more dr, but was harder to color and didn't have the same spontaneous look as the Olympus.

I'm really sold on the 4/3's system cameras and even though olympus needs one more generation to get it right, it's still an interesting camera with great lenses.

The Panasonic gh3 (though not near as pretty as the Oly) has about everything right.

Well actually they both need in camera nd's as the fast lenses and a 4000th shutter speed requires nd's to get to some desired looks.

IMO

BC

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

The 4/3 system has only half the size of a traditional 135 format. That really means that lenses need to be twice as sharp. Olympus and Panasonic make lenses that are much sharper than traditional 135 lenses.

Best regards
Erik

Leica needs to decide what they want to be.

A fashion statement, a throwback to the past, or a photographer's tool.

What I've seen from the cmos M doesn't impress me and has all the issues of the M series with parallex and high lens prices.

In fact when I bought into the 4/3's system with Gh3(s) and Olympus OMD's I bought adapters for my Leica lenses thinking they would be amazing and they underperformed the pana and olympus lenses by a wide margin.

Maybe (probably) there is a lot going on behind the curtain to correct CA and sharpness of the pana zooms and Oly primes, but the end result is surprising.

Saying all of this, I like traditional cameras, real f stops and a shutter dial.  I firmly planed to buy a 240 to replace my M8, but now I don't think I'll go there.  In fact if I was going to buy any Leica it would be the S system and even then I'm not sure if it tethers well or at all and I haven't given it much research.

I just finished the first leg of a long lifestyle gig, shooting stills and motion and shot about 75% with the 4/3 system cameras.  They don't have the actual detail of my Canons, or contax, (almost equal to the M-8) but the small and fast form factor, just changed the way I worked.   Looking at a session I did with the Olympus and my 1dx, the 1dx had more detail, not more dr, but was harder to color and didn't have the same spontaneous look as the Olympus.

I'm really sold on the 4/3's system cameras and even though olympus needs one more generation to get it right, it's still an interesting camera with great lenses.

The Panasonic gh3 (though not near as pretty as the Oly) has about everything right.

Well actually they both need in camera nd's as the fast lenses and a 4000th shutter speed requires nd's to get to some desired looks.

IMO

BC

[stevesanacore]

Hi,

Just a general comment. The Leica is a small full format camera with interchangeable lenses that also are small. So it is a small but powerful system. It can also be adapted to almost any lens and has a modern CMOS sensor having live view. So I would say it is pretty much unique.

Best regards
Erik

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but why don't some people admit that we also just want 'things' because of the look and feel? Why are some photographers so nuts and bolts when it comes to cameras? I learned long ago that when I buy or use a new camera or lens that I lusted after, it motivates me and I go out and get better shots. Sounds silly but we are very psychological creatures, especially us creatives. There are intangibles beyond specs that can make one camera be much more productive with a photographer than another.

There is also my love for a full size 35mm sensor - I don't care how good the others are - but when I try and travel with only a 4/3rds or APS camera, I just don't like the feel of the camera or of the images. It could be psychological but it feels real to me. I felt the same why back in the film days when I used Hasselblads, I tried moving to the then new 645 cameras but it just didn't feel the same.

I think the Leica M is a unique camera whose specs just don't tell the whole story. What's most important is the images we produce, not the camera that captures them. I think most of us would agree that any of the new digital cameras we speak of here will produce superb images. So for me, it comes down to what camera or lens makes me the most inspired to work that keep me shooting.

Price is irrelevant, if you can afford the M system, then it doesn't have any bearing on choosing it. Look at the way we buy cars. Not only on specs but for look and feel. All cars can take us to the grocery store or across the county but some of us buy Ford Escapes and others buy Range Rovers.

IMO (lusting for an M, can you tell?)

Steve

[OldRoy]

Hehe...glass is of course an afficionado's term, meant to convey one's appreciation of the finer subtleties in optical design. My 50mm Summicron isn't just a lens...it has an element containing Lanthanum, for Barnack's sake!

 

-Dave-

I've noticed that the real aficionados tend to refer to it as a "lense"...
Roy

[AlfSollund]

Hi,

The 4/3 system has only half the size of a traditional 135 format. That really means that lenses need to be twice as sharp. Olympus and Panasonic make lenses that are much sharper than traditional 135 lenses.

Best regards
Erik

Both Olympus and Panasonic makes great consumer grade lenses, but I kind of doubt the "twice as sharp". Can you please point us to a test showing a Oly or Pana lens that has twice the resolution figures for same aperture of a given Leica lens with same focal length.

[Telecaster]

Both Olympus and Panasonic makes great consumer grade lenses, but I kind of doubt the "twice as sharp". Can you please point us to a test showing a Oly or Pana lens that has twice the resolution figures for same aperture of a given Leica lens with same focal length.

Personally I can't quantify this with a precise figure, but I can back up BC's experience of using Leica lenses on M43 cameras. I ended up getting a Fuji X-E1 for the M lenses...the same photosite count (16mp) spread over a larger sensor area just works out better, for whatever reason.

Oly and Panasonic are making some very impressive lenses for M43. I also hope that another camera generation from Oly will refine the remaining rough edges of the system. A built-in switchable ND filter would be great for starters. Off-topic...sorry.

-Dave-

[kers]

Both Olympus and Panasonic makes great consumer grade lenses, but I kind of doubt the "twice as sharp". Can you please point us to a test showing a Oly or Pana lens that has twice the resolution figures for same aperture of a given Leica lens with same focal length.

See the interesting MTF from two lenses from Nikon- the 1,4 85mm afs nikkor - one of the sharpest FF lenses you can buy and the new 1,2 32mm 1 Nikkor  - this is the 85mm lens for the 1 nikkor system.

it shows that the 1 nikkor lens is much sharper-; it is much easier to make good lenses for a smaller sensor.