Is MM experience good enough if your other camera is M240

R

rogazilla

Level 2 Newb
Local time
1:20 PM
Joined
Apr 9, 2014
Messages
70
as owner of M240 but never owned or used M9, will the original MM feel out dated and sluggish?

Anyone who uses M240 and MM care to chime in?

Is the weight difference enough to notice?
 
Honestly... the original MM is the best camera I've ever used. I'm not sure where the "out dated" feeling would come from but the experience is certainly no more outdated than my M3 or M2. Is it sluggish? It depends. If you warrant 10 frames in a few seconds to actually get a decent shot, maybe. Otherwise, at least the MM turns on when it should, unlike the 240 which seems like a coffee break later.

I seriously don't notice the weight with the 240/MM/M film camera. It comes down more to the lens you stick on it; there's your real weight.
 
As a former owner of the first Monochrom and a current owner of the Monochrom 246, I think the first one is definitely a capable and satisfying camera. You won't be disappointed.

Having said that, I can also say that the 246 feels like a leap forward -- bigger buffer, larger/better screen, quieter shutter, beautiful viewfinder and more accurate viewfinder framing (particularly for longer lenses like the 90mm), better ergonomics, better quality images at higher ISO's, the ability to shoot video (if one is so inclined), LiveView, the option to use an EVF, multiple metering options, better shadow and highlight rendering, and I'm sure a number of other things that I'm forgetting. Of course, whether one 'needs' those improvements is debatable (and if one even considers them 'improvements'), but for me they all add up to a better camera.

I'm sure I would have been perfectly happy if Leica had not come out with a second version of the Monochrom. But I'm glad they did.
 
That is good to know.

The outdated comment is mainly on execution of the camera. While I would expect a leica to function like a leica, such as when I push the shutter I expect it to take a picture. I do want to ask owner of the MM because even the A7 being much newer more fancy in technology there is always this sluggish feeling to it. Even just a delay here and there when I push the shutter. The M240 doesnt have this problem but I can't help but want to make sure MM isn't like that. I don't spray and pray so the question is not aim towards continuous shots. Just want to make sure the general operations is what one would expect.

From the above comment, sounds like it turns on faster too? That's a plus!

I do see an advantage of the 246 namely I can share batteries with the 240... But other than that, I dont use video or live view.

Are there any known quirk to the original MM?

Vince, based on your comment, I would assume if price is not part of the discussion. presented MM and 246 today, you would buy the 246?

Roger
 
If they were both presented at the same time as new cameras side-by-side, I'd still prefer the 246. The 246 is actually cheaper than what the first Monochrom was when it was new.

I don't think the original Monochrom turns on any faster than the 246 -- initially I did have an issue with the 246 taking what seemed to be a long time to 'turn on', but I found out that it came down to the cards I was using. I'm sure it's similar to the M240, but I spoke with one of the service managers at Leica NJ, and he recommended using cards that had a minimum of 95mb/s write speed. Definitely made a difference, and since then the 246 is as fast as any other camera for 'start up'.

The one issue I had with the original Monochrom that I did not like was its relatively small buffer (8 frames I believe). If you did 8 continuous RAW shots - even if you paused briefly between each shot - it would buffer buffer buffer buffer buffer buffer buffer for what seemed like forever. The camera was basically a paperweight until it could process those 8 shots, meanwhile all this exciting stuff was happening in front of you and you couldn't do a thing about it. So that is one thing I do not miss with the old camera.

The other issue is the potential 'corrosion' problem, but Leica seems to have gotten that sorted out, so I wouldn't be too concerned about that issue.

So really, I think you'd be perfectly happy with the original Monochrom and it would produce fantastic imagery, but all things being equal and if I had to choose, I'd go with the second version.
 
I carried both my M240 and original Monochrom (borrowed) with me on a two-week driving/photography trip last spring. I also never owned an M9 or MM, moving from the M8 to the 240.

The biggest challenge I faced using the MM was the difference in frame line calibration versus the M240. I'm so used to feeling how a scene is going to be framed with the 240 lines, that I found myself struggling greatly to get framing right with the MM. For a set shot, I could take a bunch of exposures until I got it just right, but for capturing 'the decisive moment,' it was a struggle.

I also like to use the old 15mm Voigtlander (thread mount) for black-and-white. With the M240 I can use live view and really take advantage of the close-focus capability of that lens. With the old MM, I'm focusing by scale, and personally I'm not very good at that. YMMV.

That said, the output of the original Monochrom is still gorgeous, but even if I found one at a good price, I think I'd be happier with the M246 as a dedicated black-and-white camera.

For now, the M3 and a roll of HP5 is my Moncochrom.
 
Never had the MM but went for the M246 late last year in addition to the M9 I've been using for 5 years now. For what it is worth, I am really enjoying the 'upgrades' onto the M240-platform (if you will) as compared to the 9 (and by implication the MM, I guess). I intend keeping the M9 for color (it has been my 1st Leica and there is a bit of an emotional bond with that, too, I will admit). At gun point though, I would let go of it in favor of what the M246 represents (minus the color, obviously) if that makes sense.
 
I recently replaced my M9 with the M240, which I now shoot alongside my (original) MM. I have the appropriate Leica M grip on each. I do find the heavier weight of the M240 noticeable, but not objectionable. While the M240 is a superior camera in most respects to my M9 - I prefer the handling and aesthetics of the M9 (and Monochrom) bodies. I have not experienced the slow startup of the M240 that others have reported. I'm using the smaller SD cards from my M9 and (without measuring) startup times are the same between my M240 and Monochrom. Since the MM has better high ISO performance than my M240 I have not found a need to replace it with the M246. I'm sure the M246 is a superior camera to the MM, but I would miss the look and feel of my MM.
 
tightsqueez said:
Honestly... the original MM is the best camera I've ever used. I'm not sure where the "out dated" feeling would come from
Click to expand...

From a purely objective (things one can measure) frame of the reference the MM is out-of-date in terms of its signal-to-noise ratio and analog dynamic range when the shutter is open. Also it is not ISO invariant. ISO-invarience is a characteristic of newer camera technologies. however, the MM SNR varies strongly as ISO increases. That is, the read noise increases as exposure decreases (or ISO increases) and signal amplification is used to fulfill the light. This means shadow regions will render better using DNG files recorded at ISO 640 and below. Then the appropriate global brightness can be achieved during post production instead of in-camera via electronic signal amplification.

But those are just facts about one aspect of the camera. They are incomplete and insufficient to determine if a camera is "the best camera I've ever used".

In terms of feelings, many photographers believe the MM is an excellent camera. The unquantifiable benefits of ownership far out-weigh things one can measure. The subjective joy of usage and the resulting images could never be outdated.
 
jpfisher said:
I carried both my M240 and original Monochrom (borrowed) with me on a two-week driving/photography trip last spring. I also never owned an M9 or MM, moving from the M8 to the 240.

The biggest challenge I faced using the MM was the difference in frame line calibration versus the M240. I'm so used to feeling how a scene is going to be framed with the 240 lines, that I found myself struggling greatly to get framing right with the MM. For a set shot, I could take a bunch of exposures until I got it just right, but for capturing 'the decisive moment,' it was a struggle.
Click to expand...

I thought the viewfinder are the same magnification. Do you mean the inaccuracy of the frame line?
 
Vince Lupo said:
The one issue I had with the original Monochrom that I did not like was its relatively small buffer (8 frames I believe). If you did 8 continuous RAW shots - even if you paused briefly between each shot - it would buffer buffer buffer buffer buffer buffer buffer for what seemed like forever. The camera was basically a paperweight until it could process those 8 shots, meanwhile all this exciting stuff was happening in front of you and you couldn't do a thing about it. So that is one thing I do not miss with the old camera.
Click to expand...

Is this 8 frame within 30 seconds? 1 minutes?
 
My original MM seems to be an even better camera than my M9-P. The shutter release and the shutter feel and sound seem smoother. Don't underestimate the strange benefit of the absolute restriction to black and white of using such a camera.
 
Luke_Miller said:
I recently replaced my M9 with the M240, which I now shoot alongside my (original) MM. I have the appropriate Leica M grip on each. I do find the heavier weight of the M240 noticeable, but not objectionable. While the M240 is a superior camera in most respects to my M9 - I prefer the handling and aesthetics of the M9 (and Monochrom) bodies. I have not experienced the slow startup of the M240 that others have reported. I'm using the smaller SD cards from my M9 and (without measuring) startup times are the same between my M240 and Monochrom. Since the MM has better high ISO performance than my M240 I have not found a need to replace it with the M246. I'm sure the M246 is a superior camera to the MM, but I would miss the look and feel of my MM.
Click to expand...

Hello Luke,

in your opinion MM is a good companion to the M240?

Roger
 
rogazilla said:
Hello Luke,

in your opinion MM is a good companion to the M240?

Roger
Click to expand...

I believe so. Controls and handling are similar enough to not be an issue. High ISO is a bit better with the MM. My impression is the MM resolves slightly more detail than the M240. After viewing Sean Reid's comparison of the MM, M240, and M246 I believe the primary advantage of the M246 is the significant improvement in high ISO performance.
 
I own a 240 and subsequently purchased the MM when they were heavily discounted when the 246 was released. No regrets and enjoy using both cameras. They are different tools and both are capable of helping produce wonderful images.

Everyone is different but for me I can enjoy different cameras that do not have the exact same features/functionality. Variety in life is good!
 
seakayaker1 said:
I own a 240 and subsequently purchased the MM when they were heavily discounted when the 246 was released. No regrets and enjoy using both cameras. They are different tools and both are capable of helping produce wonderful images.

Everyone is different but for me I can enjoy different cameras that do not have the exact same features/functionality. Variety in life is good!
Click to expand...

Thumbs up!

Sounds like both would be good choice. saw some high iso testing the MM1 is better than 240 but that 246 ones are pretty unreal.

Thanks everyone for chiming in. I called around and there is 1 local store has an MM used. I think for handling and feel, need to go try it out myself!
 
I have a new M 262 (M-P without live view and video) and I have an original MM I bought new (waited 6 months) and it now has over 40K clicks and I still love my original MM. It is better at 6400 ISO than my M 262 is. The 262 is lighter than the M-P and quieter. The new MM is really a great camera but I like the old on so much I have no desire to upgrade. I will shoot with it until I can no longer get it repaired if or when it needs it.
 
rogazilla said:
I thought the viewfinder are the same magnification. Do you mean the inaccuracy of the frame line?
Click to expand...

The 240 series frame lines are optimized for 2 meters, the M9 series for 1 meter. At mid to far distances this leads to more accurate frame lines, a bit more inaccurate compared to the M9 series frame lines for close up shots.

For slow startup times on the 240 series make certain your cards are formatted in the computer as exFAT, then format as usual is the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom