Ccoppola82
Well-known
I grabbed an mp240 a couple weeks ago and have been really enjoying it. I got it because I typically carry an m6 and an Xpro2. I got the itch to try a digital Leica and found a price I was ok with. First impressions were that I like the overall IQ of the Leica more, I like using it more. It’s fractions of a second difference for me to frame up and focus the Leica vs the Xpro, the Xpro actually being slower due to either moving the AF point, or check the peeking in the OVF lower window EVF. The mp240 is just a more fluid and seamless experience for me, plus the battery is fantastic. I think the ISO 1600+ the Xpro2 has an advantage, and I do like being able to use film presets for JPG. They work well and offer customization of their color space. Maybe heresy, but I like JPG for quick snap and post stuff. I’ll likely only keep one camera though, and it’s likely going to be the MP240 because I have a bunch of M glass and it works as a film/digital system with my m6. We shall see though, because I’ve been genuinely happy with the Xpro2. Very fun camera to shoot.
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
LOL! You nailed it.
newsgrunt
Well-known
anecdotally, the prices for the M240 and M-P don't come near the resale value of for example, the MP. Considered a used M-P for work but passed. Was tempted by a .58 bp MP but missed that one. Guess much will depend on whether or not, one intends to sell it at some point.
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
The M240 is far more reliable then the M9 or M8.
peterm1
Veteran
I am toying with the idea of getting one for myself. I have an M8 with which I have a love / hate relationship due mainly to the very pokey viewfinder and the poor dynamic range of its sensor but am increasingly tempted by the M240 due to its substantial technical improvements.
On the outside, I particularly like its ability to mount an EVF though it looks ugly with one so mounted. But that aside, this facility would allow me to adapt and use a range of vintage MF lenses from Nikon, Canon, Zeiss etc for the pennies it usually costs for the purchase of the relevant lens mount adapters for each lens marque. Plus, I even already own the correct (Olympus branded) EVF to mount on the M 240. (Incidentally in all seriousness that EVF is pretty damn good - for example, I think it is better by far than the built in EVF on my NEX 7 and that is a later camera than the ones which normally use this EVF. I can see why Leica were happy to rebrand it and use it on their camera.
On the whole, I have to say that I think that makes great sense - to buy a $3000 AUD + camera body just because it gives me a chance to use a $100 EVF that I already own. Right? Right?.................... Help me out here please. Right?
On the outside, I particularly like its ability to mount an EVF though it looks ugly with one so mounted. But that aside, this facility would allow me to adapt and use a range of vintage MF lenses from Nikon, Canon, Zeiss etc for the pennies it usually costs for the purchase of the relevant lens mount adapters for each lens marque. Plus, I even already own the correct (Olympus branded) EVF to mount on the M 240. (Incidentally in all seriousness that EVF is pretty damn good - for example, I think it is better by far than the built in EVF on my NEX 7 and that is a later camera than the ones which normally use this EVF. I can see why Leica were happy to rebrand it and use it on their camera.
On the whole, I have to say that I think that makes great sense - to buy a $3000 AUD + camera body just because it gives me a chance to use a $100 EVF that I already own. Right? Right?.................... Help me out here please. Right?
raid
Dad Photographer
Get it, Peter. Enjoy life.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I had an M8.2 and I can't figure out what you mean by "pokey viewfinder." Also I didn't happen to notice a poor dynamic range (not saying it isn't). I did find the color was excellent--vivid and saturated! One of my reasons for changing to the M9 was to be able to manually enter the lens ID. And I'm happier with the non-cropping sensor.
I liked the M8.2 best with the 28mm and 21mm lenses. The 28 gave a 37mm equivalent which was very useful, and the 21 gave a perfect 28mm field. I got some good shots with the 75mm Summicron on it, too.
Well, I think you should get the M240! Everyone says it's great!
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
The M240 is really unsurpassed as Leica's system M camera - performing, at least at a minimal level, everything that modern digital cameras do. The cheap EVF (you can use Olympus), the inbuilt digital level (3D), and long battery life are big plusses. Also, it is the only Leica M that can take a grip that does GPS, off-camera TTL flash without blocking the shoe, shoot tethered, and be powered by AC. And yes, you may want to take a quick video - which with the M240 does not mean reaching for a phone or a second camera. Shockingly, you can use the rangefinder to focus even for movies.
As to responsiveness, I find it hard to shoot an M8 or M9 anymore because they are sluggish in every way compared to the M240 and onward - and since the latest version of the firmware and using 95mb/sec SD cards, my M240 has not malfunctioned. And M240 series is still being sold, which means that you have at least 10 years that it can be serviced before it starts down the road to being a doorstop.
The M10 has marginally better viewfinding and marginally better high iso performance but it is decontented in a lot of ways, and until Leica makes a 36MP camera, it's not really that compelling to me.
Dante
As to responsiveness, I find it hard to shoot an M8 or M9 anymore because they are sluggish in every way compared to the M240 and onward - and since the latest version of the firmware and using 95mb/sec SD cards, my M240 has not malfunctioned. And M240 series is still being sold, which means that you have at least 10 years that it can be serviced before it starts down the road to being a doorstop.
The M10 has marginally better viewfinding and marginally better high iso performance but it is decontented in a lot of ways, and until Leica makes a 36MP camera, it's not really that compelling to me.
Dante
peterm1
Veteran
Thanks Raid. When I tell my wife I will blame you. You are safe (just) you are on the other side of the world. As for me though...........................
peterm1
Veteran
In relation to the M8's finder I am referring primarily to the fact that the M8 finder magnification is, what, (?) something like 0.68x, where the M3 was 0.91x. I used the M3 a lot and loved it. I just find it difficult to focus my M8 accurately (my eyes are not the best) unless using wider lenses stopped down, and this is not my preference.
The M240 is, I think, back up to 0.85x magnification according to what I read somewhere (??) This would help me tremendously especially as I tend to prefer lenses longer than 50mm where that magnification would help accuracy, more particularly because I like to shoot wide open more possibly than is healthy for my peace of mind - I miss too many images. In any event any increase in magnification is a plus for me.
The dynamic range issue I referred to is primarily a feature of CCD devices compared with CMOS sensors. I found this limiting with the M8 though naturally I always shoot in DNG format and convert in post to minimize the issue. I found that deliberately under exposing helps reduce blown highlights but in general prefer later devices which can handle a wider dynamic range. It always bugged me, having come from a film Leica that Leicas had a reputation of being designed to excel at "available light" photography but the M8 often was not able to cope with the large range of brightness found in available light conditions. Thereby reducing the very advantage most often claimed for this type of camera. (A lesser disadvantage but a disadvantage none the less is the shutter noise which is nothing like the polite "click" of any film based mechanical Leica M. People buy expensive camera partly for their highly engineered "feel"....detract from this feel and people become less willing to part with their hard earned "readies".
As to the color of M8 images, I quite readily agree with you. The M8 produces very nice color and when I first started shooting with mine was blown away by it in this respect. It is a major reason why I have persisted with the M8.
These are a few of my early M8 images and from memory I did not do much to them in post other than a bit of sharpening and general tidying up. These are undoubtedly nice, rich and sumptuous colors, though maybe there is a little color ast in some images due to the artificial and sometimes mixed lighting in each.
Through a glass darkly 3 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
Through a glass darkly 6 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
Adelaide food market 1 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
Adelaide food market by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
Danny by Life in Shadows, on FlickrA small album of them here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/life_in_shadows/albums/72157625130934544
willie_901
Veteran
In my view the M-240 offers a high level of value for anyone who owns M/LTM mount lenses, enjoys using a traditional rangefinder and is interested in digital imaging.
While the M-240 data stream is dated, the analog dynamic range and low-light sensitivity is similar to the X-Pro 2 and newer m4/3 bodies. As a user of the former I can tell you this level of technical (signal-to-noise) performance is more than adequate.
While signal-to-noise ratio is a significant indicator of digital imaging performance, there are other factors (such as the sensor coverglass, IR filter layer, color-filter and micro-lens arrays' properties) are important as well. The M-240 is well above average in these areas.
While the M-240 data stream is dated, the analog dynamic range and low-light sensitivity is similar to the X-Pro 2 and newer m4/3 bodies. As a user of the former I can tell you this level of technical (signal-to-noise) performance is more than adequate.
While signal-to-noise ratio is a significant indicator of digital imaging performance, there are other factors (such as the sensor coverglass, IR filter layer, color-filter and micro-lens arrays' properties) are important as well. The M-240 is well above average in these areas.
bayernfan
Well-known
The M240 is also 0.68x. Something to consider. I feel that 0.68x is perfect for the 35mm framelines, which is my preferred focal length.
Nice images made with the M8!
Regarding the poll, I'm honestly surprised by the fact that so many recommend the M240. It seems to be a reliable camera.
John Lawrence
Well-known
I'm not disagreeing with you, as I know what you say is correct, but looking through the viewfinder of my recently acquired 240 with a 50mm lens, appears (to me anyway) to be more like looking through a 0.85x finder. Really not sure why this is, and I'm only comparing it with my 0.72 and 0.85 film Leicas.
John
taemo
eat sleep shoot
if you're in the market for a ~2500US$ digital RF camera, then the M240 is your best option but if all you want is a good digital camera within that price range, then there are better options.
If budget permits or you are willing to wait another year or so, then IMO M10 is the digital RF camera to get with its slimmer size and ISO dial, but if those dont matter to you then the M240 is a great digital RF camera.
If budget permits or you are willing to wait another year or so, then IMO M10 is the digital RF camera to get with its slimmer size and ISO dial, but if those dont matter to you then the M240 is a great digital RF camera.
Huss
Veteran
I prefer the extra features and much better battery life of the M240
vs the M10. The fact that it is thousands cheaper is a bonus.
Didnt some M10s have issues w the iso dial?
shawn
Veteran
I am toying with the idea of getting one for myself. I have an M8 with which I have a love / hate relationship due mainly to the very pokey viewfinder and the poor dynamic range of its sensor but am increasingly tempted by the M240 due to its substantial technical improvements.
On the outside, I particularly like its ability to mount an EVF though it looks ugly with one so mounted. But that aside, this facility would allow me to adapt and use a range of vintage MF lenses from Nikon, Canon, Zeiss etc for the pennies it usually costs for the purchase of the relevant lens mount adapters for each lens marque. Plus, I even already own the correct (Olympus branded) EVF to mount on the M 240. (Incidentally in all seriousness that EVF is pretty damn good - for example, I think it is better by far than the built in EVF on my NEX 7 and that is a later camera than the ones which normally use this EVF. I can see why Leica were happy to rebrand it and use it on their camera.
On the whole, I have to say that I think that makes great sense - to buy a $3000 AUD + camera body just because it gives me a chance to use a $100 EVF that I already own. Right? Right?.................... Help me out here please. Right?
Yes, you can adapt many lenses to the M240. There are limitation though compared to other cameras. The EVF is OK, not great. It can zoom for focus checking, but only at the center focus point. There is a fairly long shutter lag when using live view. It is quite a bit more noticeable than using other mirrorless options. For static subjects not an issue but for dynamic subjects it could be. There is also a fair amount of blackout after taking the shot and the live view coming back.
Not saying you can't do it but if adapted lenses are you main reason for getting one you could do more with less. If this is just a bonus compared to all the other advantages with RF lenses then go for it.
Shawn
peterm1
Veteran
OK thanks that is useful to know and did not know it.
I would say that some of those limitations do not worry me too much but other(s) could be deal breakers depending on how bad they are in practice. How much would I use non Leica glass on an M240 - not sure. But it is definitely an attraction and something that would draw me to the M, although I certainly have other cameras with which I can work in that way as an alternative. Though I would like to do it with at least a few of my favorite vintage lenses when the mood takes me. And I have some old Leica and Canon glass in LTM which I adapt to M mount using the LTM - M adapter but am reluctant to actually use on my present M8 camera as I do not think they are necessarily well calibrated enough for that purpose. This need not be such a consideration if the M 240 functions well in live view mode as I can use focus peaking, image enlargement etc.
Zooming to the centre focus point only does not worry me - I usually do this anyway with other cameras and prefer it.
VF blackout is not necessarily a killer if its not so long as to be "stupid long" in which case it would annoy me.
But a long shutter lag when using live view (and I presume you include in this when using the accessory EVF) is a potentially much more serious issue given that one traditional reason for using an M is it is suppose to have little shutter lag. Surely that issue would, if bad enough, mean that the M is not really usable for non RF lenses where live view must be relied upon to frame and focus. Trust bloody Leica to have something freaky like this to mess things up - why on earth would there be long shutter lag given we are not talking AF lenses?
If anyone has views on this aspect of the M's usability I would like to hear them.
Bill Clark
Veteran
Too bad this needs to be asked.
Won’t say any more.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
If I were thinking of getting an M240, I believe the greater size and weight that has been reported might be the issue for me. But as I'm a wide-angle kind of guy (mostly), a .68 finder is OK with me. I keep waiting for them to come out with a digital model with the .58 finder!
What is the widest frameline on the M240? If it's 28mm, it can't be a 0.85 finder.
Actually, I have noticed that some ergonomic issues that seem off-putting when handling/fondling/examining a camera are not a problem when actually using it. My M9 is bulkier than mp M6; but when it's time time to use it, I just pick it up and shoot. So maybe the M240 would be like that, too.
What is the widest frameline on the M240? If it's 28mm, it can't be a 0.85 finder.
Actually, I have noticed that some ergonomic issues that seem off-putting when handling/fondling/examining a camera are not a problem when actually using it. My M9 is bulkier than mp M6; but when it's time time to use it, I just pick it up and shoot. So maybe the M240 would be like that, too.
shawn
Veteran
The liveview with zoom is actually handy with RF lenses (M or LTM) as it can be used to help calibrate them. I've found it very helpful when tweaking a few lenses that way.
The longer shutter lag is just from the camera closing the shutter and then opening it again. It is slow enough that it could be an issue for dynamic subjects. Much slower than other mirrorless cameras I've used. I just took 5 shots of a digital stopwatch at the 10,20,30,40,50 second marks. The recorded time varies but is around .4 to .6 seconds after the marks. Black out time is about 3 seconds after taking the shot.
EDIT: This was using liveview with the EVF....
Shawn