SaveKodak
Well-known
I put together a ZI kit recently with the Zeiss discounts available now. I have the 50/1.5, the 35/1.4, and the 28/2.8. My compact digital is an RX1R2 (I shoot weddings and have Nikon digital equipment that only gets used for work projects), which has been a phenomenal performer in every regard. But it occurs to me that by selling it I'm most of the way to a used M. Does anyone think that my ZM 35/1.4 is an adequate replacement for the 35/2 Sonnar? Or does anyone think that the worse ISO performance and lack of AF are worth putting up with for the joy of using my three ZM lenses on the best available DRF that will take them?
Is the EVF on the M comparable to the EVF on the RX1R2? (I could then use it with slightly more confidence for work, or to close focus using filters).
Frankly I've been astounded with the little RX1R2 and I'd be sad to see it go. OTOH, this lovely ZM 35/1.4 is fantastic on film, do I need 2 35s in a compact camera? Probably not... But I've been prone to GAS induced mistakes before... Any advice would be welcome.
Is the EVF on the M comparable to the EVF on the RX1R2? (I could then use it with slightly more confidence for work, or to close focus using filters).
Frankly I've been astounded with the little RX1R2 and I'd be sad to see it go. OTOH, this lovely ZM 35/1.4 is fantastic on film, do I need 2 35s in a compact camera? Probably not... But I've been prone to GAS induced mistakes before... Any advice would be welcome.
mcfingon
Western Australia
I can answer on the viewfinder part, if indirectly. I have an A7S Sony and an Olympus that uses the same add-on viewfinder that the M240 does, and I can say the Sony viewfinder is much better quality. It is larger and more contrasty making it much easier to focus and assess picture tonality.
Yes, I would make the sale. The Leica will be more fun to use.
SaveKodak
Well-known
That's sort of what I'm thinking. It will be a lot more fun to use generally.
But I just spent 3 months talking up the Rx1R2 and how great it is.. :bang: My girlfriend will correctly tell me I'm a crazy person haha.
What are some things to look for when shopping for a used M?
But I just spent 3 months talking up the Rx1R2 and how great it is.. :bang: My girlfriend will correctly tell me I'm a crazy person haha.
What are some things to look for when shopping for a used M?
rscheffler
Well-known
The M240 shouldn't be too much different from shooting the ZI, just that it's digital. How has the ZI worked for you so far? Giving up AF means you just have to work a bit harder for your images, but the ZM35/1.4 will be fabulous on the M240, which will resolve more detail than most film emulsions in the ZI. And the M240's simplified ergonomics might be more enjoyable than the RX1's menus.
IMO, one doesn't buy an M240 specifically for EVF live view shooting. It's not going to be at the same level of resolution, refresh rate and overall execution (some lag, only center area focus) as current good EVFs/live view. But it's very useful for accurately framing wide lenses, if that's needed from time to time, or precise focusing with lenses that can be tricky, like the 50/1.5 due to its focus shift characteristics.
From my experience, RF focusing with wides is faster and more accurate than with live view. In other words, you can think of live view and the EVF as an alternative to auxiliary wide angle optical finders - focus with RF, compose with EVF or live view. With longer lenses the EVF can be useful for confirming focus, but it will slow down the entire shooting process and is typically best for static subjects. But it also opens the door for adapting non-RF lenses to the M240 from pretty much any system, including Nikon... Maybe you won't want to use a 70-200/2.8 on it, but other lenses and systems become a doable option.
If you consider the live view capability of the SL, I think it hints at what we'll see in the next M.
IMO, the best thing going for the RX1 is the 35 Sonnar. It's one of the best ~35mm lenses I've ever used. I love its rendering and wish there was an M-mount version available. The ZM has its own character and is extremely sharp, but doesn't seem quite as smooth as the Sonnar.
IMO, one doesn't buy an M240 specifically for EVF live view shooting. It's not going to be at the same level of resolution, refresh rate and overall execution (some lag, only center area focus) as current good EVFs/live view. But it's very useful for accurately framing wide lenses, if that's needed from time to time, or precise focusing with lenses that can be tricky, like the 50/1.5 due to its focus shift characteristics.
From my experience, RF focusing with wides is faster and more accurate than with live view. In other words, you can think of live view and the EVF as an alternative to auxiliary wide angle optical finders - focus with RF, compose with EVF or live view. With longer lenses the EVF can be useful for confirming focus, but it will slow down the entire shooting process and is typically best for static subjects. But it also opens the door for adapting non-RF lenses to the M240 from pretty much any system, including Nikon... Maybe you won't want to use a 70-200/2.8 on it, but other lenses and systems become a doable option.
If you consider the live view capability of the SL, I think it hints at what we'll see in the next M.
IMO, the best thing going for the RX1 is the 35 Sonnar. It's one of the best ~35mm lenses I've ever used. I love its rendering and wish there was an M-mount version available. The ZM has its own character and is extremely sharp, but doesn't seem quite as smooth as the Sonnar.
borge
Established
The M240's LV implementation is not something you buy it for... It's an added bonus for the few times you need it, but otherwise the camera should always be shot with an optical viewfinder. The RX1R2 has a much better sensor than the M240, so be prepared for a step down in IQ and post-processing headroom. I would do it in a heartbeat, but then again, I could never live with a EVF-only camera. I've tried many times, and it's just not fun! The M240 will "feel" more like a real camera.
rscheffler
Well-known
Pretty much what you'd check in any other camera... that the shutter speeds seem to be OK, meter works, clear view through the viewfinder, that the rangefinder is focusing your lenses correctly and the frame lines change to the right ones for each lens... check live view and make sure it's OK. And that you have some sort of short-term return option should it suddenly go south after walking out the door.
But, you have the convenience of being only ~1 hour from Leica headquarters in NJ. I've prearranged with them for same-day M240 RF calibration when passing through the area, but otherwise they say their M240 turnaround is around a week (lenses take considerably longer).
From a pro shooter perspective, IMHO the most lacking aspect of using Leica is their service support. Should something require servicing, you're often facing lengthy turnaround times. As mentioned, they try to get M240s out the door faster, but it's the lenses that can be a painful process if you don't have backup options. However, in your situation shooting Zeiss glass, you'll not have to deal with this, until you start adding Leica lenses. That said, the lenses are robust and don't typically need much servicing. My point is, if you're used to Canon CPS or Nikon NPS type service, you will probably find Leica's service periods and lack of loaners, ill suited for working photographers.
SaveKodak
Well-known
Yeah but as for service and support it's probably roughly the same as with my RX1. I wouldn't imagine Sony gives out loaners or anything. That's what keeps me shooting Nikon for my pro stuff.
The RX1 is in many ways a minimalist argument that I quite enjoy. One lens and sensor quite perfectly mated. Where as the Leica is a system of many parts. I guess I just have to decide what's more important to me and my photography.
The RX1 is in many ways a minimalist argument that I quite enjoy. One lens and sensor quite perfectly mated. Where as the Leica is a system of many parts. I guess I just have to decide what's more important to me and my photography.
BillBingham2
Registered User
How does Sony compare to Leica may more be the question/issue.
Any thoughts or experience?
B2 (;->
SaveKodak
Well-known
I think Sony uses Precision Camera, same as Pentax and Elinchrom. Reports have been a mix, like anything you read online. I myself have always been a pretty big M9 and M8 detractor, but I have to say I have been impressed that Leica has kept these things shooting to this day. Sony will most likely drop support sooner. Of course I don't think of digital cameras as long term investments like Film bodies. But it's nice to know I'd get years out of even a used M240 if well cared for.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Have to agree, Leica is standing behind their products pretty well.
This digital space is really hard to use the same approaches we used for backup cameras in the Analog days. Used to be pick up a Nikkormat if you were just starting out, perhaps an old beater F. Film was film and it didn't matter as long as we could use the same glass.
Now the camera has the film built in and picking up a M9 to back up a M240 changes everything (read lots of your post workflow and quality of output, perhaps not everything).
In the film days if you didn't rotate your film bodies it was OK, if I could afford two bodies I would rotate them once every two weeks to keep the frame counts even and low.
B2 (;->
This digital space is really hard to use the same approaches we used for backup cameras in the Analog days. Used to be pick up a Nikkormat if you were just starting out, perhaps an old beater F. Film was film and it didn't matter as long as we could use the same glass.
Now the camera has the film built in and picking up a M9 to back up a M240 changes everything (read lots of your post workflow and quality of output, perhaps not everything).
In the film days if you didn't rotate your film bodies it was OK, if I could afford two bodies I would rotate them once every two weeks to keep the frame counts even and low.
B2 (;->
YYV_146
Well-known
Agree with everyone here that the shooting experience is not comparable. The EVF on the M240 is ~2-3 generations out of date so it won't compare to the RX1RII EVF.
However, I would wait a bit for the M purchase since rumors are that Leica has something in the pipeline to be announced later this year. Even if the new M is out of your price range, prices for M240s will probably fall by a lot...
However, I would wait a bit for the M purchase since rumors are that Leica has something in the pipeline to be announced later this year. Even if the new M is out of your price range, prices for M240s will probably fall by a lot...
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Breathe deeply and think carefully before spending money.
I know a lot of folks are in love with the Sony RX1r II. I've never been convinced by it, personally, because I find its ergonomics don't suit me well. I'm much happier with the Leica X typ 113 for a fixed-lens 35mm FoV camera and don't have any need to think about the Sony. I use the X mostly for casual shooting, friends and family, etc.
I don't know the lenses you have and/or how well they work on the Leica M typ 240 sensor. Probably okay at least, most likely excellent. The EVF for the M/M-P is an older generation model, identical to the Olympus VF-2 EVF; it works well, but it's not up to the latest tech built into the Sonys now (or other cameras, notably the Olympus VF-4 viewfinder or E-M1 body, and certainly not on par with the Leica SL viewfinder). The Leica M is primarily a rangefinder camera, however, and there's a reason the EVF viewfinder is an optional accessory. I use it only occasionally.
My in-love-with combination is a Leica M-P typ 240 fitted with 1972 Summilux 35mm v2. That, the Summarit-M 75mm, and the WATE make a complete M kit for me, although I have a few other lenses too. Carrying just the M-P + 'Lux 35 is common, and always a pleasure. I often carry it alongside my more common system camera (the SL with Leica R lenses) for a compact alternative when the need arises.
Think about what you are trying to achieve and let the moment's excitement and anticipation pass. Then do what you want to do.
G
I know a lot of folks are in love with the Sony RX1r II. I've never been convinced by it, personally, because I find its ergonomics don't suit me well. I'm much happier with the Leica X typ 113 for a fixed-lens 35mm FoV camera and don't have any need to think about the Sony. I use the X mostly for casual shooting, friends and family, etc.
I don't know the lenses you have and/or how well they work on the Leica M typ 240 sensor. Probably okay at least, most likely excellent. The EVF for the M/M-P is an older generation model, identical to the Olympus VF-2 EVF; it works well, but it's not up to the latest tech built into the Sonys now (or other cameras, notably the Olympus VF-4 viewfinder or E-M1 body, and certainly not on par with the Leica SL viewfinder). The Leica M is primarily a rangefinder camera, however, and there's a reason the EVF viewfinder is an optional accessory. I use it only occasionally.
My in-love-with combination is a Leica M-P typ 240 fitted with 1972 Summilux 35mm v2. That, the Summarit-M 75mm, and the WATE make a complete M kit for me, although I have a few other lenses too. Carrying just the M-P + 'Lux 35 is common, and always a pleasure. I often carry it alongside my more common system camera (the SL with Leica R lenses) for a compact alternative when the need arises.
Think about what you are trying to achieve and let the moment's excitement and anticipation pass. Then do what you want to do.
G
SaveKodak
Well-known
I decided to go for the Leica. I agree with many of the above that it will simply be a lot more fun to use, which is in addition to it being a more versatile tool. I'm not one for big MP numbers, but I do appreciate the Sony's dynamic range. However after borrowing an M for a time, the sensor really has more than enough to work with as long as your exposure isn't completely ridiculous.
Plus, as stated in another thread, Leica may have lost some of it's big money luster. A friend of a friend is selling me his black M 240, in pretty good shape minus some brassing, for $2,900.00. I think I can easily sell my like new Sony kit for at or near that price.
I'll miss that little 35/2. What a gem. Maybe Sony will be 'real cool' and do what Pentax did, make it in an M mount limited edition... If only...
Haha in truth I know I'll learn to love the ZM 35/1.4 just as much. Plus the 28/2,8 Biogon just sings on the 240. I am really looking forward to using this kit.
Please anticipate many dumb-question threads from the guy who just got his first Leica.
Plus, as stated in another thread, Leica may have lost some of it's big money luster. A friend of a friend is selling me his black M 240, in pretty good shape minus some brassing, for $2,900.00. I think I can easily sell my like new Sony kit for at or near that price.
I'll miss that little 35/2. What a gem. Maybe Sony will be 'real cool' and do what Pentax did, make it in an M mount limited edition...
If only...Haha in truth I know I'll learn to love the ZM 35/1.4 just as much. Plus the 28/2,8 Biogon just sings on the 240. I am really looking forward to using this kit.
Please anticipate many dumb-question threads from the guy who just got his first Leica.
neonart
Established
I used an RX1R for about 8 months and found it to have amazing image quality, but not a lot of fun. I had enjoyed rangefinder photography for years on film, M8 & RD-1. I sold the RX1R and used some of those funds to buy an M240.
It's been a couple of years and I've never enjoyed photography as much. The RX1R felt like a computer that took great photos. The Leica feels like a camera that allows me to enjoy photography, challenges my creativity and skills, and has let me experience some of the most individually unique lenses in the world.
I think you'll love your M. Just give yourself a couple of weeks to get to know it well.
It's been a couple of years and I've never enjoyed photography as much. The RX1R felt like a computer that took great photos. The Leica feels like a camera that allows me to enjoy photography, challenges my creativity and skills, and has let me experience some of the most individually unique lenses in the world.
I think you'll love your M. Just give yourself a couple of weeks to get to know it well.
SaveKodak
Well-known
To bring this story to a close, I am now selling my M 240. I really like the camera and most of what it can do. Once I figured it out it was perfectly reliable and the image quality really did have certain aspects that were different or better than what I got out of my Nikon (but not really better than what the RX1RII puts out). The files are very high in resolution (meaning pixel level sharpness, they seem 'sharper' than my Nikon files, and combined with ZM lenses, it's a joy to see them.
However a few things have led to my decision to sell it. It ultimately did not contribute to my professional work in a significant way. I made some portfolio worthy portraits with it and the 35/1.4 Distagon, but these were a very small percentage of shots. The fact that I had to put the camera away in low light was a big problem. Here in NYC rooms and weddings are often ultra-low-light. I need a decent 6400 ISO. It can have grain like noise, but banding is a big problem with the 240 at these levels. I also picked up an M4 in great condition, and got a Pacific Image Primefilm XA scanner. I was shocked at how high quality and fast this scanner can be. My Provia scans are 33 megapixels and have very low noise. I will always prefer film so for personal work, that's the direction I'm headed. The last and most important thing is that I have to buy a car now. My gf and I are moving from Brooklyn to Maine next Spring, and so that means I have to make some sacrifices to put a down payment on a lightly used Subaru. Like all matter in the Universe before the Big Bang, the Leica contains a highly concentrated reasonably priced car.
So in answer to my original question, should I have sold my RX1RII for the M 240? Honestly, I still don't know. They are both really amazing compact reportage devices. My 35/1.4 Distagon is only 'just' better than the 35/2 Sonnar. The BSI sensor that Sony developed is truly remarkable too. I can say that in a very roundabout way, the M 240 led me back to a kit I really like (the M4 and 35/1.4 Distagon and film), and confirmed for me that when it comes to my wedding work, I should really stick to the best workflow related solutions (Nikon for me). My forthcoming car will allow me to finish the photo projects I've wanted to work on but have been limited as to carrying out (like photographing the off season in rockaway beach with a 4x5). You don't really know where a camera decision is going to take you, I personally have no regrets. In a few years if I have some expendable income, I would absolutely buy a digital Leica again. My 240 is in the classifieds now.
However a few things have led to my decision to sell it. It ultimately did not contribute to my professional work in a significant way. I made some portfolio worthy portraits with it and the 35/1.4 Distagon, but these were a very small percentage of shots. The fact that I had to put the camera away in low light was a big problem. Here in NYC rooms and weddings are often ultra-low-light. I need a decent 6400 ISO. It can have grain like noise, but banding is a big problem with the 240 at these levels. I also picked up an M4 in great condition, and got a Pacific Image Primefilm XA scanner. I was shocked at how high quality and fast this scanner can be. My Provia scans are 33 megapixels and have very low noise. I will always prefer film so for personal work, that's the direction I'm headed. The last and most important thing is that I have to buy a car now. My gf and I are moving from Brooklyn to Maine next Spring, and so that means I have to make some sacrifices to put a down payment on a lightly used Subaru. Like all matter in the Universe before the Big Bang, the Leica contains a highly concentrated reasonably priced car.
So in answer to my original question, should I have sold my RX1RII for the M 240? Honestly, I still don't know. They are both really amazing compact reportage devices. My 35/1.4 Distagon is only 'just' better than the 35/2 Sonnar. The BSI sensor that Sony developed is truly remarkable too. I can say that in a very roundabout way, the M 240 led me back to a kit I really like (the M4 and 35/1.4 Distagon and film), and confirmed for me that when it comes to my wedding work, I should really stick to the best workflow related solutions (Nikon for me). My forthcoming car will allow me to finish the photo projects I've wanted to work on but have been limited as to carrying out (like photographing the off season in rockaway beach with a 4x5). You don't really know where a camera decision is going to take you, I personally have no regrets. In a few years if I have some expendable income, I would absolutely buy a digital Leica again. My 240 is in the classifieds now.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Buy subaru, keep gf happy. Make money with regular Nikon DSLR. To me, it feels nice for you! Nice and simple!
And my respect for using of M4 !!!!
You are not the first photog I read or heard from about let go of M240. I hope one day I'll be able to afford one used one
And my respect for using of M4 !!!!
You are not the first photog I read or heard from about let go of M240. I hope one day I'll be able to afford one used one
Sounds reasonable SK.
kipkeston
Well-known
What about something in between? The A7RII with M adapter for example?