kengai
Newbie
I have the M-P 240, which I use with pleasure and satisfaction. With the exit of the M10 it was considering whether to switch to place the M10. What do you think?
from M-P 240 to M10?
- Thread starter kengai
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 28
- Views 4K
user237428934
User deletion pending
Do it. German export oriented economy needs your money.
I'm a low iso shooter and enjoy the fantastic dynamic range of the 240 at base iso. From the samples of the M10 I downloaded it seems, that the camera is not better here. High Iso seems to be much better but I had about 10 shots above Iso 800 last year. I don't care about the slightly smaller body that has the same weight as the 240. Better viewfinder for 28mm lenses? Too bad I switched to 24mm as standard wideangle recently.
For me there is no valid reason to upgrade.
I'm a low iso shooter and enjoy the fantastic dynamic range of the 240 at base iso. From the samples of the M10 I downloaded it seems, that the camera is not better here. High Iso seems to be much better but I had about 10 shots above Iso 800 last year. I don't care about the slightly smaller body that has the same weight as the 240. Better viewfinder for 28mm lenses? Too bad I switched to 24mm as standard wideangle recently.
For me there is no valid reason to upgrade.
Popey
Member
I haven't seen the M10 yet, so can't say for sure. I'm minded to say no as I like the thickness of the 240 style body, the slimmer body is not a big draw for me. The only thing that might sway me is the 'improved' viewfinder with better eye relief. If I was still an M9 owner, then that would be an entirely different thing.
One thing I have learned is to say "never say never" 🙂
One thing I have learned is to say "never say never" 🙂
a.noctilux
Well-known
😛 if you ask, it's too late.
Wait list for M10 takes longer every day, so don't hesitate longer :angel:
narsuitus
Well-known
I have been waiting for a Leica digital that handles like my M6. I have handled the M240 and the M10 at Tamarkin Leica in Chicago. The M10 is the Leica digital for which I have been waiting. However, if I already had an M240, I would keep it.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Always best to skip evolutional upgrades.
The M10 is not remarkably different. The VF ... yes. But really worth the hassle and expense?
As well, You have the MP version of the 240..... A beautiful camera.
In your position, I would sit this one out.
The M10 is not remarkably different. The VF ... yes. But really worth the hassle and expense?
As well, You have the MP version of the 240..... A beautiful camera.
In your position, I would sit this one out.
Luke_Miller
Established
I think all of the changes in the M10 are good ones, but I doubt I will be replacing my M-240 with one. The form-factor of the digital Ms continues to evolve, with the M10 perhaps being the most extreme change. Thus few (if any) accessories from previous M models can be used. So one's cases, multifunction grips, eyepiece diopters & magnifiers, etc. , must be replaced with an M10 purchase. In my case these additional expenses on top of the M10 purchase price makes it not cost effective. I hope at some point Leica will standardize the form-factor going forward so the very expensive Leica accessories have a service life that exceeds a single model.
willie_901
Veteran
High ISO results are directly related to the signal-to-noise ratio at native ISO. There is one advantage to using native ISO. When the shutter is open, you can expose such that the sensor records the maximum possible signal.
The SNR is very high at native ISO simply because the signal level is very high. When you obey the light meter, the signal level decreases as ISO increases. Now the camera's electronic noise level becomes more apparent.
Compare a M240 DNG at native ISO (200) with one from the same scene with ISO set to 3200 (decrease the shutter time by 4 X). The effect of decreasing exposure (signal level) will be obvious. There is nothing inherently special about native ISO.
SNR also happens to determine the maximum dynamic range, which is only available at ISO 200.
When the dynamic range of the scene exceeds the dynamic range of the camera, even a 1 stop increase in SNR will improve shadow-region rendering at native ISO. This improvement is not exactly a game changer. For one thing often it is aesthetically useful to leave shadows regions dark.
Right now we don't know if the M10's SNR at 'native' ISO is significantly higher than the M240's. Even if it is higher, it is possible the difference is negligible. The M240's SNR is very good.
The data and test images I've seen indicate the M240 will display banding at 4 stops above 'native' ISO. Time will tell if the M10 does is displays less banding and less green shift artifacts at lower SNRs.
If differences in SNR are important to your projects, then its hard to say right now if the M10 is a significant upgrade compared to the M240. However it is clear the M240 and M10 do/will outperform the M9 and the differences are not trivial.
The SNR is very high at native ISO simply because the signal level is very high. When you obey the light meter, the signal level decreases as ISO increases. Now the camera's electronic noise level becomes more apparent.
Compare a M240 DNG at native ISO (200) with one from the same scene with ISO set to 3200 (decrease the shutter time by 4 X). The effect of decreasing exposure (signal level) will be obvious. There is nothing inherently special about native ISO.
SNR also happens to determine the maximum dynamic range, which is only available at ISO 200.
When the dynamic range of the scene exceeds the dynamic range of the camera, even a 1 stop increase in SNR will improve shadow-region rendering at native ISO. This improvement is not exactly a game changer. For one thing often it is aesthetically useful to leave shadows regions dark.
Right now we don't know if the M10's SNR at 'native' ISO is significantly higher than the M240's. Even if it is higher, it is possible the difference is negligible. The M240's SNR is very good.
The data and test images I've seen indicate the M240 will display banding at 4 stops above 'native' ISO. Time will tell if the M10 does is displays less banding and less green shift artifacts at lower SNRs.
If differences in SNR are important to your projects, then its hard to say right now if the M10 is a significant upgrade compared to the M240. However it is clear the M240 and M10 do/will outperform the M9 and the differences are not trivial.
a.noctilux
Well-known
Leica addressed this M10 to our subconscience of long time M users to buy it.
- my logical thinking refuse to "upgrade to M10"
- just by curiosity, 2 days after the M10 presentation, I took this new body in my hands in the shop, and I said to my wife who was with me "it's nice but not enough differences to replace one of my M240/262
- some days later, after fondling my old analogue Ms, my decision changed (subconscience 😱 )
...
- I went to the shop to put myself in the wait list 😱 hoping it will be available soon
- my logical thinking refuse to "upgrade to M10"
- just by curiosity, 2 days after the M10 presentation, I took this new body in my hands in the shop, and I said to my wife who was with me "it's nice but not enough differences to replace one of my M240/262
- some days later, after fondling my old analogue Ms, my decision changed (subconscience 😱 )
...
- I went to the shop to put myself in the wait list 😱 hoping it will be available soon
bherman
bherman
There is no doubt that Leica has addressed either some of the shortcomings, or have responded to what their customers have been asking for since the M240 was announced in 2012.
For those of you who are looking to get into the Leica M system, the M240s on the second hand market can be gotten for well under $4k for one in 'mint' condition, so unless you must have a new one, or there are compelling reasons for you to buy an M10, the $2.5k difference can buy you a pretty nice lens.
-Brad
For those of you who are looking to get into the Leica M system, the M240s on the second hand market can be gotten for well under $4k for one in 'mint' condition, so unless you must have a new one, or there are compelling reasons for you to buy an M10, the $2.5k difference can buy you a pretty nice lens.
-Brad
a.noctilux
Well-known
Yes agree with you that now it's the right moment for M240 family buyers.
But the OP already use with pleasure his M-P 240 and ask to replace with M10 or not.
But the OP already use with pleasure his M-P 240 and ask to replace with M10 or not.
kengai
Newbie
We must also consider that now ranks higher than 240 when it comes out the M11!
Huss
Veteran
It's actually about a $3.5K difference, seeing M240s are selling for about $3K now.
What is very very interesting is that the prices of the M9 series do not seem affected by the M10. People seem to see the CCD sensor as a real alternative to the M10.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
All that says to me is that M9 prices have been bottomed out for a while now, dropping further only very slowly as time goes on and the cameras in the field get older and more used. The M9 is now replaced by two generations newer bodies.
People buying at that end of the market are generally not in the market for a new camera that's three to four times the price, so a new model introduction doesn't change the price of what they're looking at by much. This is borne out by looking at several other new camera introductions that have superceded models two to three generations older. The one generation down used prices are deflated, but the older models' prices generally don't change much: they're already bottomed out.
G
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
I will wait for the used one, 240 still works
danielsterno
making soup from mud
IMO- and to many conclusions above, I think the "perfect qualified candidate" is someone who isn't "upgrading per say" versus a possible first Leica digital buyer possibly coming from a film Leica, or a M8/M9, or always wanted one and wants some of the attributes of the M10. Meaning most who own a 240 may not justify the cost. Me; coming form a M5/M5 and no M digitals, the M10 is a lot closer to my specs (cost aside!)....
jsrockit
Moderator
Many people upgrade to each new M each time one is released.
Alm3000
Member
I LOVE my Chrome M-P 240, I don't mind the higher ISO's. It looks rather film like. The thickness difference aspect is just marketing bull****. (On a personal note, Leica peddling that thickness aspect in all those contrived photographer testimonial commercials makes it feel cheap and want this body even less, yes there is a difference, but they seem to be pushing that because they have very little else.) Also, the finder difference between .68x and .72x is negligible, IMO. I really miss using my M6 Classic with .85x finder. So much flare, but that magnification was sooo great to use, compared to the .68x I have now. However, If I was in the market and had to choose, I would wait for the M-P version of the M10. I can't stand that red dot and i hate taping things up.
brennanphotoguy
Well-known
How is the thickness difference just marketing bull****? It's visibly narrower and getting a digital M to film M thickness was really high, if not the highest, on people's wishlist for the next M. The viewfinder is also noticeably different/better especially when put side by side for comparison. Judging by your comment you've not seen one in person yet and are drinking the same kool-aid M9 owners had when the M240 was released.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Have you held or looked through the M10 yet?
The viewfinder is obviously, incontrovertibly different, and better, than the M typ 240 viewfinder: more eye relief, easier to focus, easier to see wide-angle frame lines. Even without being .85x, it's a notable improvement.
And the M10 body is quite obviously slimmer as well. The LCD takes back a bit of that slimming work, but even though it's only two to three mm, the M10 feels rather different in the hand: more like the M-D 262 or a film M does. When you put one down and pick the other up, the M typ 240 cameras feel thick and the M10 feels thinned by a good bit. If you prefer the thicker feel, well, that's up to you.
... To call the work put into making the body thinner and improving the viewfinder "marketing bs" is both incorrect and disrespectful to all the users who requested a thinner digital M, as well as to Leica.
G
Similar threads
