Ming Thein's M 240 review is live.

Jubb Jubb said:
I'm really not impressed with the images, they look sub standard to what the current M9/M8 puts out presently. Images feel flat.
Click to expand...

It would help your understanding of Mr. Thein's review if you spent a few moments perusing his blog, or if you were a regular reader, like myself. The Leica M240 photos he posted are very much in the style of the way he post-processes all of his images. He has a particular style that works well with one of his specialties, that being watch photography, of which he is noted as being one of the world's best. He also offers a service to the up-and-coming photographer in the way of technical and business advice within his blog.

Joe
 
segedi said:
Oh boy, I was thinking of canceling my pre-order... but now... I might just have to signup for Reid Reviews again even though the format (flash) is awful. The content is good and I'd like to hear his comparisons as well.
Click to expand...

His review contains detailed studio shot comparisions of the M9 , M240 (aka M10) and later on also B&W conversions of both in comparison to the MM (which still holds an edge vs the M240).

IMPORTANT: everything is based on pre-production M240 and without existing LR4.3 color profile. He has tested various prototypes and the differences between firmware versions are more obvious than between the different sensor types (CCD vs CMOSIS).

Godfrey said:
I can't get past Sean's delivery mechanism. I had a subscription for a year and will not renew it. Makes trying to read his articles too much of a struggle.

G
Click to expand...

I totally agree, I most likely will also not renew but to make his site copy proof, I guess he has to do it this way (but I'm no software expert...😉).
 
airfrogusmc said:
There will probably be a new M-E with a CMOS sensor at some point in the not to distant future.
Click to expand...


That would be good ... but I have to wonder if Leica think that way! Maybe the ME is just a stop gap until they can convince buyers to choose the MM or the 240?
 
Maybe I missed it but I didn't see anything about the buffer size, something that was just ridiculous on the M9. Hopefully they addressed this in the M10 <cuz that's what I'm calling it 😉 >
 
If I understand it correctly, from this review and various hints from other reviewers, Leica has sacrificed some of the low iso IQ in the M in order to get the higher iso, and probably CMOS sensor related LV and video. It seems the M9 remains the king of low iso color and sparkle. Even Ming Thein places the M between the M9 and D800E in terms of color quality.

I wish leica would have stuck to the original plan of offering 2 bodies, an M9 upgrade with CCD sensor, and a mirrorless body with CMOS, EVF, LV, video and all the bells and whistles.
 
swoop said:
It's because I'm a bit sensitive to the use of language where he says it's thicker presumably because of the new LCD or thumb grip. To presume means he's essentially guessing it's because of the LCD or thumb grip and doesn't know which. All you'd have to do is hold it against an M9 to be certain.
Click to expand...

Maybe this is more precise, here's what Jonoslack said in his piece:
There has been much talk about the camera being bigger than the M9. In fact it is around 100gms heavier, and about 0.6mm thicker (putting the base plates together, the M9 base plate is about the thickness of the metal narrower than the M).
Click to expand...
 
Am I the only one that is still very worried about the colors coming from the new M? I mean I still see CMOS written all over these pictures, and to my subjective eye they seem to lack the punch of the M9 files.
I'm trying to convince myself it must be me, since everybody seems to be really happy about the pictures, but I find them lacking. Basically the pictures by Jean Gaumy now featured in LFI still scare me as they seem to point out the flatness of the new M files. None of the pictures in the other reviews have alleviated my concern. I mean I have the means and really the hope to buy this camera but I can't get beyond this problem.

But I'm starting to wonder if it's just me. I feel like the only one seeing that the emperor is not wearing any clothes. 🙂

Btw, let me just add a thanks for the great review. Wonderful work!
 
swoop said:
It's because I'm a bit sensitive to the use of language where he says it's thicker presumably because of the new LCD or thumb grip. To presume means he's essentially guessing it's because of the LCD or thumb grip and doesn't know which. All you'd have to do is hold it against an M9 to be certain.
Click to expand...

I follow Ming's blog and to the best of my knowledge he does not currently have an M9 to be able to hold right next to the new M. According to Jono Slack (his impressions of the new M is available on his blog at http://www.slack.co.uk/slack/Leica_M.html), the difference in the thickness of the M9 and new M bodies is less than the difference in the thickness of the baseplate's metal. The different control layout and thumb rest seem to make the new M much nice to hold in his opinion.

Jono says the weight difference is 100g too, I still believe that's mostly due to the much larger battery.

swoop said:
He also mentioned that the spot and metering modes only worked with the shutter open, so it's the sensor doing the measuring like any EVF camera. And the center weighted mode works like any traditional M, measuring light off the shutter blades. Also when using the spot and matrix modes he said there's a noticeable lag as the shutter closes to begin taking a photo.
Click to expand...

Of course it's the sensor doing the metering for spot and matrix modes. It's the most accurate way to do the metering, with the light falling on the actual capture device. And of course this must be done with shutter open, which implies a shutter close cycle to operate making the exposure. Why is that a hack? The center weighted metering system is the traditional M reading off the shutter curtains, what's wrong with that?

What were you expecting? DSLR type metering systems? The Leica rangefinder camera does not have a focusing screen to use for spot and matrix metering evaluation ...

Read Jono's report on the new M. I like his approach to the camera ... he treats it as two cameras: the traditional rangefinder camera (which it is) and the modern Live View camera (which it is) coalesced into one body. I think it's a picture of the camera at a different level.

G
 
pieter said:
Am I the only one that is still very worried about the colors coming from the new M? ...
Click to expand...

I dunno. I see excellent photos from both Ming and Jono, and nothing too different from what I see coming out of my own M9.

In my opinion, image processing has a far greater influence on colors and such than CCD vs CMOS sensor technology at this point in time. Remember that no one's got a production release camera calibration curve for the new M yet either.

(Although why someone doesn't just shoot a picture of an Xrite Color Checker with it and use their Passport software to nail a camera calibration profile I have no idea ... That would take all of five minutes. Whenever I'm doing work that requires the most accurate results, I create a camera calibration profile this way for the light I'm using. The rest is all image processing and adjustment to taste.)

Godfrey
 
Keith said:
That would be good ... but I have to wonder if Leica think that way! Maybe the ME is just a stop gap until they can convince buyers to choose the MM or the 240?
Click to expand...

Who knows what Leica will do I have the MM and would love to have an M camera with the new CMOS but without a lot of the other bells and whistles the new M has. Like the M-E is the M9 now.
 
pieter said:
Am I the only one that is still very worried about the colors coming from the new M? I mean I still see CMOS written all over these pictures, and to my subjective eye they seem to lack the punch of the M9 files.
I'm trying to convince myself it must be me, since everybody seems to be really happy about the pictures, but I find them lacking. Basically the pictures by Jean Gaumy now featured in LFI still scare me as they seem to point out the flatness of the new M files. None of the pictures in the other reviews have alleviated my concern. I mean I have the means and really the hope to buy this camera but I can't get beyond this problem.

But I'm starting to wonder if it's just me. I feel like the only one seeing that the emperor is not wearing any clothes. 🙂

Btw, let me just add a thanks for the great review. Wonderful work!
Click to expand...
The concerns you are voicing are wholly due to choices in post processing, influenced by the fact that the software houses have not yet produced profiles for the camera. In fact, the colours and look are very close to the M9.
The M9 colours could only be described as horrible in the first weeks. This is already much better.
 
swoop said:
He also mentioned that the spot and metering modes only worked with the shutter open, so it's the sensor doing the measuring like any EVF camera. And the center weighted mode works like any traditional M, measuring light off the shutter blades. Also when using the spot and matrix modes he said there's a noticeable lag as the shutter closes to begin taking a photo.
Click to expand...

Swoop : Thanks for pointing this out. I somehow missed it. This in combination with the loss of the frame line selector (which I already knew about) are very negative arguments for me. My whole photography meeting is based on an educated guess looking at the lightmeter and compaing the darkest and lightest areas!
 
Interesting to see the Red Dot is back on the camera. Does that mean there may well be an M-P to follow in 6 months or so sans red dot? So then there will be an MP and an... erm, M-P in the Leica line up! 😀
 
clayne said:
So glad my M4 is in no need of upgrade - have fun dropping 10k$ on a new flippin' body, dudes! 🙂
Click to expand...


Did not know there was a digital M4.

You must be referring to the regular film M4. The one with the faulty sensor, which "burns" each time a picture is taken, and must be replaced for each and every frame.



PS- An M4 costs way more than a Canon, Bessa, or FSU rangefinder, so it's not hard to understand why some people would pay twice the price of a digital pro body for a top-of-the-line Leica product . And I speak as an M4 owner myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom