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?
🤡🥴😂😂
🤡🥴😂😂
I'm waiting for the 229 missing models between the M9 and M240 after the M10 and M11 were announced.
Miles.
Beamsplitter
I’m still waiting for the IIIe to come out.
35photo
Well-known
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...
kshapero
South Florida Man
I loved my 240 M-P. Just dandy. Replaced by an M10. Just dandier.
IIIe- the e for Electronic. Will be the Digital Barnack.
dexdog
Veteran
I am not a Leica guy, but a digital Barnack would be cool. I have a lot of LTM lenses, none are from E. Leitz Wetzlar, they are still fun to use.
chuckroast
Well-known
Well, they sorta made one. It's called the Typ 109 but it fails the screw mount test
shawn
Veteran
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.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
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
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
I still have mine, glad I haven't sold it.
cboy
Well-known
There was also the 262....was there a reasoning to the numbers?
JohnGellings
Well-known
I think they realized those fatties were not worthy of the M10 name, so they waited until they had a proper sized M to use M10.
JohnGellings
Well-known
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
Freakscene
Obscure member
There is a genus of Australian snakes in the genus Vermicella, known as bandy-bandy because they are black snakes with white bands around their bodies. Those typ 240 series cameras are also bandy bandys, but their bands are sometimes mesh, or other patterns.
Leica bandy bandy.
Reptilian bandy bandy.
Leica bandy bandy.
Reptilian bandy bandy.
@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.
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.
Freakscene
Obscure member
I don’t know why. I just see . . .
Do you have a 2D FFT routine handy? Would be nice to know the frequency.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
On a more realistic note, I believe the M typ 240, 256, and 262 naming were derivative of the internal nomenclature for the engineering project that they resulted from, where the M9 and later M10, when they had gotten over the (somewhat ludicrous) notion that all of them would be referred to as simply "Leica M", just caught up with the proper marketing name sequence.
Having had M9, M-P typ 240, M-D typ 262, and now M10-R and M10 Monochrom, 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
JohnGellings
Well-known
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.