eleskin
Well-known
I went from a film M6, to an M8, skipped the M9, bought a Nex 5n and am now using the excellent X-Pro 1. However, I need a full frame option for my extensive Leica M lens collection and when the M240 came out I was excited, but not by the price at $7k! I am seriously considering the A7r instead of the M240. I can no longer justify many thousands of dollars on cameras that become outdated so quickly. Leica, I feel is overpricing and overbuilding their cameras. It is senseless to build camera bodies that would last decades when the electronics suffer from digital rot and various failures. M lenses are a different story, and I have no problem plunking down hard earned money for Leica lenses (I buy used though). I feel an M240 like body built like the Fuji X Pro-1 with an A7r sensor offered by Leica at a much lower price would be a much better business model. They probably will never do that. So here, the A7r is the best choice I feel. So who else feels like me? Hesitating on an expensive and electronically outdated M240 and seriously considering the Sony based on image quality potential exclusively not camera feel.
MCTuomey
Veteran
No. I shoot RFs with OVFs. "Outdated M240"? I'm sure it'll be unshootable for your needs in a matter of months ... 
I know it's a long shot that you'll buy one, but if you do and when it outdates you please send the worthless paperweight to me.
I know it's a long shot that you'll buy one, but if you do and when it outdates you please send the worthless paperweight to me.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Outdated? What does that mean? Not enough of something or just no longer trendy. 24mp's is hard to outdate imo (so are 10mp's).
Anyway, I had a fondle of the a7.
Was excited about the platform but now... meh.
It won't improve my work or workflow. Staying with 5diesel and Fuji for digital.
Hoping for a 50mm fixed lens leaf shutter fuji in the next product cycle.
Anyway, I had a fondle of the a7.
Was excited about the platform but now... meh.
It won't improve my work or workflow. Staying with 5diesel and Fuji for digital.
Hoping for a 50mm fixed lens leaf shutter fuji in the next product cycle.
ktmrider
Well-known
Have five M mount lenses. Am still mostly film (have X100) but feel the need to become more modern, especially with the amazing technology available in new cameras. I am going around the world next summer and the Sony is certainly attractive although I am also looking at a used M9 or ME.
Of course, I may stay cheap and light and just carry the X100.
Of course, I may stay cheap and light and just carry the X100.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
I got a new M-E for the price of a used M9 and couldn't be happier about sticking with that outdated camera and giving the whole M240 thing a big miss.
When the dust settles in a couple of years I may look at picking up an A7 or similar.
When the dust settles in a couple of years I may look at picking up an A7 or similar.
thompsonks
Well-known
I accept your main points: "Leica, I feel is overpricing and overbuilding their cameras," and "M lenses are a different story."
I'd say 'overbuilt' only in the sense of added features and bulk. What I really wanted was the 'Mini-M' that Leica advertised and then flubbed (with the Vario).
So I'm stuck at M9 – likely to be the last of 40 years of Leicas for me (still have M4 purchased in '72).
I'll definitely consider other FF bodies for M lenses, but won't buy A7r until I see what Fuji offers in a year or so. Like several of my friends/colleagues, I'm currently enjoying X100s as an every-day, carry-around camera. It also eliminates the need for an M240 to reach higher ISOs.
I'd say 'overbuilt' only in the sense of added features and bulk. What I really wanted was the 'Mini-M' that Leica advertised and then flubbed (with the Vario).
So I'm stuck at M9 – likely to be the last of 40 years of Leicas for me (still have M4 purchased in '72).
I'll definitely consider other FF bodies for M lenses, but won't buy A7r until I see what Fuji offers in a year or so. Like several of my friends/colleagues, I'm currently enjoying X100s as an every-day, carry-around camera. It also eliminates the need for an M240 to reach higher ISOs.
Duane Pandorf
Well-known
Not in the same boat and I won't be buying anything Sony.
But I'd thought I'd at least show some comparisons of what you'd have if you buy into the Sony compared to a Leica.
But I'd thought I'd at least show some comparisons of what you'd have if you buy into the Sony compared to a Leica.
uhoh7
Veteran
The A7s will be be great for 50s and up
a number of 35s are good, but not all.
28s we are starting to get iffy, maybe the cron is ok on the edges by 5.6 Elmarit v3 could be OK.
Below 28, really good performance is not currently extant. It will be rare with RF glass. Tiny lenses 35 and below will need at least APS-H crop---if you want the corners sharp in the shot.
Maybe the zm18 is OK.
Now the centers on everything are outstanding.
If I had extensive RF collection 28 and below, I would grab a used M9 for 3500.
I don't see the M240 advantage---yet.
a number of 35s are good, but not all.
28s we are starting to get iffy, maybe the cron is ok on the edges by 5.6 Elmarit v3 could be OK.
Below 28, really good performance is not currently extant. It will be rare with RF glass. Tiny lenses 35 and below will need at least APS-H crop---if you want the corners sharp in the shot.
Maybe the zm18 is OK.
Now the centers on everything are outstanding.
If I had extensive RF collection 28 and below, I would grab a used M9 for 3500.
I don't see the M240 advantage---yet.
YYV_146
Well-known
Is the RF experience worth $5,000? For some people, yes. For me, certainly no.
I have film RFs I use when I want to shoot with an OVF, but digital cameras exist to get the job done...but I'd suggest the A7 over the A7r. From all accounts the A7 plays much better with RF lenses (even the 35mms) and the front curtain makes street work oh so much easier.
I have film RFs I use when I want to shoot with an OVF, but digital cameras exist to get the job done...but I'd suggest the A7 over the A7r. From all accounts the A7 plays much better with RF lenses (even the 35mms) and the front curtain makes street work oh so much easier.
YYV_146
Well-known
On the A7 the ZM18 has minor red corners, no smearing. The 12mm f5.6 has a little bit of smearing - but I guess it could be cropped down to about 15mm and still be plenty wide. The Leica 21/24mm Summilux, CV 21 1.8, Zeiss 15mm Distagon are all more or less okay, but with exaggerated falloff (this is what my friend in HK reported)
The 16-18-21 is perfect on both the A7 and A7r. I might be buying one myself - Leica apparently went with such a retrofocus design that the rear element is further away than some SLR lenses.
hepcat
Former PH, USN
There's really no decision to be made here. The question is: "how important is a coupled, coincident rangefinder for your shooting style?" If it fits your needs then the M-whatever is your camera. If you don't care how you focus and frame then any old mirror-less body will do the job for you, just pick whatever sensor suits you and buy that body. Why the angst?
Duane Pandorf
Well-known
Everybody is still trying to figure a way to make their VW Rabbit be a Ferrari.
Ansel
Well-known
I would say get neither, go back to the M6
back alley
IMAGES
i like rangefinders and i like digital…if i had the budget then i would get a new m-e, plain & simple.
at the moment i'm wondering about the new xe-2 fuji…i don't really need it…the xe-1 seems to be working fine for me and in fact…the x100 is the most fun of all of them.
should fuji make an x100 version that is full frame or monochrome or even with a 35mm lens on it (50 fov) then that would excite me more than anything at the moment.
this obsessive desire for a cheaper body that can use leica lenses is getting to be tired old news for me. clearly leica has no interest in creating one so why should other camera makers be held to task to do so?
at the moment i'm wondering about the new xe-2 fuji…i don't really need it…the xe-1 seems to be working fine for me and in fact…the x100 is the most fun of all of them.
should fuji make an x100 version that is full frame or monochrome or even with a 35mm lens on it (50 fov) then that would excite me more than anything at the moment.
this obsessive desire for a cheaper body that can use leica lenses is getting to be tired old news for me. clearly leica has no interest in creating one so why should other camera makers be held to task to do so?
burancap
Veteran
Definitely still on the dock ... until Fuji takes a shot across the bow.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Quite so. After all, why SHOULD Leica create one? And, indeed, is it feasible? Unless you or I (or anyone else on RFF) actually knows enough to create a cheap, top-notch full-frame body for Leica M lenses, and has the money to put their genius into physical form, maybe people should stop whining, snivelling and fantasizing.
Cheers,
R.
Duane Pandorf
Well-known
MCTuomey
Veteran
On the internet? Now that's a fantasy.
raid
Dad Photographer
I enjoy very much using RF focusing with the M8 and the M9. It is such a great set of cameras for my type of photography. This morning we had fog in Pensacola, so I drove to (outside) the fish market where I like to take photos of Pelicans and fishing boats. The M9 with the first version 35mm Summicron was quiet, and the birds allowed me to get close to them. The M8 was OK but louder (with the Rigid Summicron.) Both Leica lenses fit the Leica cameras perfectly.