Ororaro
Well-known
Do you remember when, in hopes of not going too far in numbers, Leica decided to stop the naming scheme? And then M became M240 instead of simply becoming M10?
🤡🥴😂😂
🤡🥴😂😂
Yeah, reason was Leica was still using the but for themselves(type 240) but not calling it by a number and people just starting using the number Leica was using (M type 240)... lol So Leica was like screw it and went back to the numbering...Do you remember when, in hopes of not going too far in numbers, Leica decided to stop the naming scheme? And then M became M240 instead of simply becoming M10?
🤡🥴😂😂
IIIe- the e for Electronic. Will be the Digital Barnack.I’m still waiting for the IIIe to come out.
IIIe- the e for Electronic. Will be the Digital Barnack.
The later X bodies are almost the exact same size and shape as the early Barnacks (length/width) but with the height of a IIIG. The earlier X bodies were a little smaller. The lens on mine is a lot bigger though. 😉
View attachment 4856779View attachment 4856780
I still have mine, glad I haven't sold it. 😉This photo shows exactly why I loved the Leica M-D typ 262 and would likely love the M11-D so much: without the LCD and the control buttons, there's just so much more space for your fingers when holding the camera in use!
Damn. I should never have sold the M-D...
G
No, it was called the Leica CL digital.Well, they sorta made one. It's called the Typ 109 but it fails the screw mount test 😉



I don’t know why. I just see . . .@Freakscene So, what you are trying to tell me is when you use the M240 at High ISO you do not ask everyone with a cell phone to please turn them off... "Hey! I'm shooting High ISO Here!"
Honestly- I have not seen banding on the M240 as bad as that. I wonder what the cause is- on the M9 there was a problem with some DC-DC convertors being out of spec, and others with using fast cards causing banding. I suspect the CMOSIS sensor was thinned "too much", but pure speculation.
View attachment 4857053
There was also the 262....was there a reasoning to the numbers?
They were fatter (as were the M8 and M9) than the film Ms. The M10 finally got it down to normal M size. I don't think the M fatties were offended.I feel the assignation of "fatties" to the M9 and M typ 240/256/262 versions is way over the top. The M10 and M11 slightly slimmer body is nice, but the difference is barely 2mm where you grip the camera — which *is* noticeable, but only "just".
G