Buy Leica M-E late 2015?

It IS an M9 variant...
Who cares about a screen, they are only useful for reading menus and checking composition. To look at the image one needs a monitor anyway. (but yes, the M240/262 one is a bit nicer)
 
jaapv said:
It IS an M9 variant...
Who cares about a screen, they are only useful for reading menus and checking composition. To look at the image one needs a monitor anyway. (but yes, the M240/262 one is a bit nicer)
Click to expand...

I care about a screen when buying a digital camera, I suspect most people do, they're a quite useful part of the camera and one of the biggest differences between film and digital.

It's also insulting to customers to offer a screen that was out of date by a number of years when it was released in 2009, let alone when they RE-introduced it as a M-E(and M9-P) 3 years later and charged an exorbitant price for the body.
 
No, it is not insulting. First off, how can a commercial product being insulting? Why do you feel insulted? Just buy something else if you don't like it. That is how capitalism works.

I'm sure the screen was a off the shelf product. It wasn't leading edge, true, but to be insulted is a bit strong.

Anyway, here are the figures:
M9-p: 2.5", 230,000 pixels.
M(240): 3", 920,000 pixels.
M-e (220): 2.5", 230,000 pixels.
So yes, the M-E has the same old TFT as the M9.
 
jaapv said:
It IS an M9 variant...
Who cares about a screen, they are only useful for reading menus and checking composition. To look at the image one needs a monitor anyway. (but yes, the M240/262 one is a bit nicer)
Click to expand...

I agree completely. Even with a very good LCD on my D810 it is only usable (as you pointed out) for "menus and checking composition" plus (I would add) the histogram is useful for checking exposure. I found the LCDs on my M8.2, and M9 to be good enough for those purposes. The one on my M-240 is bigger and better, but no more useful.
 
Agreed, I don't look at photos on the camera itself and don't like image preview, so the low-res screen is ok for me.

And yeah, the M-E is an M9 with no preview lever.
 
Landberg said:
I cant decide. I always shoot tri-x 400 at 400. So the ISO settings in the M-E is not that bad for me.
Click to expand...

Been photographing with the M-E for 3 years next month. Not giving it up anytime soon. It happens to be in the shop for the new sensor and can't wait to get it back. However in the mean time I have an M240 loaner. Nice camera. But there's something about the M9/M-E.
 
phatnev said:
Does the M-E have the new M240 LCD screen or the god awful one from the M9?
Click to expand...

I shoot both A7.mod and M9 daily. Which LCD do I prefer? The M9, believe it or not. First, it's small and very tough. Since I drag my cameras on motorcycles in the backcountry, hiking even mountain biking, that means something. Second, the M9 LCD shows exactly what you need to know: the frame and the focus. It's better at showing focus than the Sony LCD, which very often will lead you to believe your shot is fine when in fact you missed the target. Zooming on either will show the focus, but even that move is easier on the M9.

What the Sony does offer is the ability to tilt. 🙂
 
uhoh7 said:
It's better at showing focus than the Sony LCD, which very often will lead you to believe your shot is fine when in fact you missed the target.
Click to expand...
I had the same experience going from the KonicaMinolta Dynax 7D (2.5"; 207,000 pixels) to the Sony A900 (3"; 921,600 pixels). At first it drove me insane, these days I turn off the instant review and trust myself and the camera 😎
 
phatnev said:
I care about a screen when buying a digital camera, I suspect most people do, they're a quite useful part of the camera and one of the biggest differences between film and digital.

It's also insulting to customers to offer a screen that was out of date by a number of years when it was released in 2009, let alone when they RE-introduced it as a M-E(and M9-P) 3 years later and charged an exorbitant price for the body.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. This was the only LCD available at the time ( and still is) in the size Leica required. Believe me, some experts on LUF did the digging and could only confirm it. Nor is the price exorbitant. Yes, it is expensive, but the profit made is industry-conform. In other words, it is expensive to build as well.
 
I got it 2 days ago. Great IQ, really bad lcd but I come from years of analog Leica so I don't use it anyway, but for the price it sure is bad! The viewfinder is great!
 
Enjoy your camera, I have a M8 and I just love the rangefinder focusing in it, out
of all the camera's I own the photos in that are always sharp, unless I focus wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ko.Fe.
M9 (M-E 220) in filmish mode?
Replies
0
Views
259
Ko.Fe.
Ko.Fe.
S
Normal price for leica m2
Replies
13
Views
697
Freakscene
Freakscene
D
Trade GR II for GRIIIx
Replies
0
Views
165
dkreindler
D
J
  • Article Article
Leica Cameras of the Future: A Long-time Leica Fan’s Wish ListAn upgraded M EV1, a Leica I (Model A) replica, a slim retro compact!
Replies
3
Views
311
neal3k
neal3k
J
  • Article Article
The Leica as a work of ART: Selling the image of elegant exclusivity
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Pioneer
Pioneer
Back
Top Bottom