SaveKodak
Well-known
If you're following my previous thread about selling my RX1R2 (still have to list that one) for an M. Well, I did so, and I've been shooting my M for personal work and now as of last Saturday, professional work. My D750 saw about 2k shots, my Zeiss Ikon saw 2 rolls of XP2, and my Rolleiflex saw 3 rolls of Portra 400 and XP2. My M shot about 1k images. I was booked for 8 hours but they added an extra last minute so I shot for 9 hours. I went through 1 battery in the M, so I was glad to have an extra for the end of the night.
1. RF focusing is easier than using a focus screen in a manual focus 35mm camera. It's easier to nail focus with my Zeiss M primes than it is with my ZF 50mm Planar. By far.
2. The metering and AE lock system are a bit confusing. I kept going in between wanting to meter it like a film camera with a handheld 308S, and wanting to use Auto-ISO and AE. I really wish it had an AE lock button like my Ikon. I'm so used to using the half-depress as meter activation so it's weird to have it AE-L. Sometimes it seems like it ignores my max-exposure setting, sometimes not. I'm still deciding how I want to best make use of this. The internal meter is accurate enough, but when using high ISO I tend to want to nail the exposure, instead of using ETTR as I would with my Nikon.
3. The Zeiss 35mm Distagon is the best 35mm lens I've ever used. Holy buckets it's glorious. Get one.
4. The screen is not helpful for exposure in daylight. It's really hard to see. I often use it just to know if my exposure is way off, but it washes out in all but dim lighting. Leica and their fanbase has a fraught relationship with screens I know, so I guess I'm thankful that it's better than the M9s screen.
5. The Nikon SB-22s is a wonderful flash for Leica. It's small, and has a very good 'thyristor' Auto mode. Cheap too, check it out.
6. I should get the EVF. If only for my 50mm C Sonnar, tempestuous mistress that it is, it will be nice to have. I did not have any problems focusing my 1.5 optimized C Sonnar, but I avoided trying to use it at any other aperture, which is limiting. It's a very ugly accessory, but it will be worth it.
7. .9 ND filters are your friend.
8. If you have it on a Holdfast Money Maker, try not to whack it into things. I did that a few times. Oops.
9. It's dumb that Leica doesn't allow for real coding of Zeiss and CV lenses. Come. On. I don't really 'need' to know what lens I used, but I'd like to. Manual coding is just an extra step I don't need during a busy wedding.
10. High ISO is still tricky. You can get usable images at 3200 but if you try to change exposure at all in LR banding is quite clear. From what I hear the Q still has this problem at certain high ISOs. You really have to nail exposure at these settings. Noise I can handle, but banding is just banding and nobody wants it in their images. From ISO 100-800 though, very very clean. Maybe I should just put the M away after the light gets this low.
Overall, many of my favorite images from the day were taken on the M. I'm quite smitten. I'm still sad to sell my RX1R2, because that sensor and lens are also just magical together with many subtle qualities. However, the ZM 35/1.4 is a more than worthy replacement. The M is far from perfect, but I like the compositions that I make when I use it, and how I treat exposure (most of the time) with its manual controls.
Oh one last thing. The VSCO slide-film emulation pack combined with the M, is a match made in heaven for travel pictures. For my weddings I'm really enjoying the Mastin Labs Portra 160 (for Nikon, no Leica profiles yet) preset. The Mastin Labs "Ilford" pack is also top notch, but I haven't explored it quite as much.
1. RF focusing is easier than using a focus screen in a manual focus 35mm camera. It's easier to nail focus with my Zeiss M primes than it is with my ZF 50mm Planar. By far.
2. The metering and AE lock system are a bit confusing. I kept going in between wanting to meter it like a film camera with a handheld 308S, and wanting to use Auto-ISO and AE. I really wish it had an AE lock button like my Ikon. I'm so used to using the half-depress as meter activation so it's weird to have it AE-L. Sometimes it seems like it ignores my max-exposure setting, sometimes not. I'm still deciding how I want to best make use of this. The internal meter is accurate enough, but when using high ISO I tend to want to nail the exposure, instead of using ETTR as I would with my Nikon.
3. The Zeiss 35mm Distagon is the best 35mm lens I've ever used. Holy buckets it's glorious. Get one.
4. The screen is not helpful for exposure in daylight. It's really hard to see. I often use it just to know if my exposure is way off, but it washes out in all but dim lighting. Leica and their fanbase has a fraught relationship with screens I know, so I guess I'm thankful that it's better than the M9s screen.
5. The Nikon SB-22s is a wonderful flash for Leica. It's small, and has a very good 'thyristor' Auto mode. Cheap too, check it out.
6. I should get the EVF. If only for my 50mm C Sonnar, tempestuous mistress that it is, it will be nice to have. I did not have any problems focusing my 1.5 optimized C Sonnar, but I avoided trying to use it at any other aperture, which is limiting. It's a very ugly accessory, but it will be worth it.
7. .9 ND filters are your friend.
8. If you have it on a Holdfast Money Maker, try not to whack it into things. I did that a few times. Oops.
9. It's dumb that Leica doesn't allow for real coding of Zeiss and CV lenses. Come. On. I don't really 'need' to know what lens I used, but I'd like to. Manual coding is just an extra step I don't need during a busy wedding.
10. High ISO is still tricky. You can get usable images at 3200 but if you try to change exposure at all in LR banding is quite clear. From what I hear the Q still has this problem at certain high ISOs. You really have to nail exposure at these settings. Noise I can handle, but banding is just banding and nobody wants it in their images. From ISO 100-800 though, very very clean. Maybe I should just put the M away after the light gets this low.
Overall, many of my favorite images from the day were taken on the M. I'm quite smitten. I'm still sad to sell my RX1R2, because that sensor and lens are also just magical together with many subtle qualities. However, the ZM 35/1.4 is a more than worthy replacement. The M is far from perfect, but I like the compositions that I make when I use it, and how I treat exposure (most of the time) with its manual controls.
Oh one last thing. The VSCO slide-film emulation pack combined with the M, is a match made in heaven for travel pictures. For my weddings I'm really enjoying the Mastin Labs Portra 160 (for Nikon, no Leica profiles yet) preset. The Mastin Labs "Ilford" pack is also top notch, but I haven't explored it quite as much.
dugrant153
Established
I'm really glad to see this review. While I don't have enough change to grab an M240, I do use my Leica M6 during weddings and absolutely love the images coming out of it when combined with the CV 35mm F1.2 (I can only imagine what the Zeiss images would look like!).
Hucking around Canon 1 series cameras makes you really appreciate the small and light factor that comes with these rangefinder cameras.
Hucking around Canon 1 series cameras makes you really appreciate the small and light factor that comes with these rangefinder cameras.
gavinlg
Veteran
Yeah I enjoyed this review too. Would love an m240 to play with.
jim0266
Established
Thanks for the SB-22s flash tip.
I rented the ZM 35/1.4 Distagon just to check it out. I already own the ZM 35/2.8 Biogon. Your comments mirrored my observation. Mine arrives Thursday! Until the end of the month Zeiss lenses have rebates. With 4% cash back from the big NY shops, the Distagon is now $2k. Compared to the Leica 35 Lux it's a steal.
Other than the Sonnar what other Zeiss glass is in your stable?
Thanks for the post.
I rented the ZM 35/1.4 Distagon just to check it out. I already own the ZM 35/2.8 Biogon. Your comments mirrored my observation. Mine arrives Thursday! Until the end of the month Zeiss lenses have rebates. With 4% cash back from the big NY shops, the Distagon is now $2k. Compared to the Leica 35 Lux it's a steal.
Other than the Sonnar what other Zeiss glass is in your stable?
Thanks for the post.
SaveKodak
Well-known
I also took advantage of the Zeiss rebates. I picked up the 50mm C Sonnar, the 28/2.8 Biogon, and the 35/1.4 Distagon. I then got a used ZI from KEH, and after that a friend offered me his M at a price too good to refuse. I don't think I'll need any other lenses for the M. Keeping it limited is a good thing IMO. If the focus shift of the Sonnar ends up being too much I'll swap it for the 50mm 1.5 Nokton, or the 50/2 Planar. But for now I am loving the Sonnar rendering.
brennanphotoguy
Well-known
I hear the 50/1.4 ASPH is pretty dope. You should get that instead.
jim0266
Established
The 50/1.4 ASPH is sweet. The problem is finding a good copy. I went through 5 copies until I found one that was dead on when focusing wide open. I rented two copies of the Distagon and both had zero focus shift at 1.4.
SaveKodak
Well-known
Too shmarp.
brennanphotoguy
Well-known
Isn't that the look we all strive for?
YYV_146
Well-known
I've never heard of the 50mm Lux ASPH having focus issues en masse. Individual copies sure, but the two I owned both focused perfectly fine.
It is a sharp lens, but with some field curvature. IMO for weddings the VM 50mm F1.5 strikes a nice balance between the Lux and the C-sonnar.
It is a sharp lens, but with some field curvature. IMO for weddings the VM 50mm F1.5 strikes a nice balance between the Lux and the C-sonnar.
SaveKodak
Well-known
The CV may be. OTOH the images that I am seeing from the ZM are quite striking. They have this beautiful softness w/o an actual lack of detail. The EVF I just ordered should take care of the shift. 1.5 optimized versions have quite extreme shift at 2-4, the price you pay I suppose.
rscheffler
Well-known
The 50 Lux ASPH has a gentler rendering wide open compared to even f/2. More SA throughout the image that takes some edge off the sharpness. It does have peculiar field curvature characteristics that can make it challenging to use in the f/2.8-4 range before depth of field compensates, particularly with subjects placed off-center in rule of thirds compositions.
I use an M240 along with a Canon 1DX for weddings. It's quite an "odd couple" type pairing, but the opposites of each system work well for what I want.
IMO, the metering of the M240 is easily thrown well off by extremes within a scene, such as a bright background or a very dark central subject. I use it on classical center weighted because I don't want the battery drain and delays of the new advanced off-sensor metering option. Perhaps that's to be expected of traditional center weighted metering, but I find it difficult to trust when the lighting is tricky. And I also rely on auto-ISO at times. I've set it to 4x shutter speed to keep the longest shutter speed relatively short because I find camera shake induced image softness is fairly quick to become apparent. I've also set maximum ISO to 1600. Technical testing by Jim Kasson a couple years ago established that shooting at ISO 1600 and pushing to 3200 in post was as good or slightly better than shooting ISO 3200 in-camera.
That said, I feel similarly to you and when it gets really dark, I end up using the DSLR a lot more for its generally better high ISO performance.
Also note that the M240 changes behavior between ISO 1000 and 1250, in that the buffer depth drops to half at 1250 and the fps rate also drops by about half. The camera will feel less responsive as a result.
Images from base ISO to 1000 are also susceptible to the green shadows problem. Leica does something to DNGs at these ISOs to clip the blackpoint unevenly, which will result in a green cast in shadow tones if the files are pushed in post. The more they're pushed, the more apparent it becomes. Also, the higher the ISO, the less you have to push to see this. There is a Lightroom plug-in available to minimize the effect, but the author's site appears to be offline at the moment (?)
The EVF experience is a compromise. Yes, it will help you hit focus with focus shift prone lenses and longer lenses that are more difficult to focus well with the RF. But it's a laggy shooting experience. Very laggy. And you can only zoom in on the center of the image. Otherwise, it works and can be useful, but you have to be willing to work within its limitations. Obviously it also isn't an option with a flash or radio slave in the hot shoe, though you can use rear screen live view. I do like the tilt capability of the EVF...
Coding of lenses... if you get the Match Technical coder kit, you can hand code the appropriate 6-bit code to your ZM lenses in the shallow groove of the lens mount. Maybe overpriced for what it is (all you really need from the kit is the small plastic template that sits on the lens mount to guide application of the markings). It generally works, but my experience with some ZM lenses was that depending on the ambient brightness, particularly if sunlight is directly shining on that part of the lens mount, that sometimes the camera will not recognize the code. For some lenses this isn't critical because they don't really need the coding to eliminate color shift, but other lenses do benefit from it. Probably not the 35 Distagon or 50 Sonnar, but the 28 might. I would look into hand coding because at least for me, I inevitably forget to change the manually set in-camera code when changing lenses, particularly in more hectic situations, such as weddings.
I use an M240 along with a Canon 1DX for weddings. It's quite an "odd couple" type pairing, but the opposites of each system work well for what I want.
IMO, the metering of the M240 is easily thrown well off by extremes within a scene, such as a bright background or a very dark central subject. I use it on classical center weighted because I don't want the battery drain and delays of the new advanced off-sensor metering option. Perhaps that's to be expected of traditional center weighted metering, but I find it difficult to trust when the lighting is tricky. And I also rely on auto-ISO at times. I've set it to 4x shutter speed to keep the longest shutter speed relatively short because I find camera shake induced image softness is fairly quick to become apparent. I've also set maximum ISO to 1600. Technical testing by Jim Kasson a couple years ago established that shooting at ISO 1600 and pushing to 3200 in post was as good or slightly better than shooting ISO 3200 in-camera.
That said, I feel similarly to you and when it gets really dark, I end up using the DSLR a lot more for its generally better high ISO performance.
Also note that the M240 changes behavior between ISO 1000 and 1250, in that the buffer depth drops to half at 1250 and the fps rate also drops by about half. The camera will feel less responsive as a result.
Images from base ISO to 1000 are also susceptible to the green shadows problem. Leica does something to DNGs at these ISOs to clip the blackpoint unevenly, which will result in a green cast in shadow tones if the files are pushed in post. The more they're pushed, the more apparent it becomes. Also, the higher the ISO, the less you have to push to see this. There is a Lightroom plug-in available to minimize the effect, but the author's site appears to be offline at the moment (?)
The EVF experience is a compromise. Yes, it will help you hit focus with focus shift prone lenses and longer lenses that are more difficult to focus well with the RF. But it's a laggy shooting experience. Very laggy. And you can only zoom in on the center of the image. Otherwise, it works and can be useful, but you have to be willing to work within its limitations. Obviously it also isn't an option with a flash or radio slave in the hot shoe, though you can use rear screen live view. I do like the tilt capability of the EVF...
Coding of lenses... if you get the Match Technical coder kit, you can hand code the appropriate 6-bit code to your ZM lenses in the shallow groove of the lens mount. Maybe overpriced for what it is (all you really need from the kit is the small plastic template that sits on the lens mount to guide application of the markings). It generally works, but my experience with some ZM lenses was that depending on the ambient brightness, particularly if sunlight is directly shining on that part of the lens mount, that sometimes the camera will not recognize the code. For some lenses this isn't critical because they don't really need the coding to eliminate color shift, but other lenses do benefit from it. Probably not the 35 Distagon or 50 Sonnar, but the 28 might. I would look into hand coding because at least for me, I inevitably forget to change the manually set in-camera code when changing lenses, particularly in more hectic situations, such as weddings.
SaveKodak
Well-known
I'll have to check out that Match Technical kit. Thanks for the tip on that one.
I just can't justify the cost of Leica lenses for me personally. When I look at the price tag on Leica's 50/1.4 I just think nope nope nope. I'm sure it's a lovely piece of glass though. I wanna spend a few months with the C Sonnar and decide what to do. If I do change it'll be between the Planar and the Nokton. The Planar might be a little to clean/sharp for my taste. I tend to use a 50 as an RF portrait/detail lens. I'm ok with my wides being sharp and modern but I like my 50s to have a lot of character.
I'm going to 'try' and train myself to shoot it like I do my film cameras, and use it in manual as much as possible with my 308S. When I'm shooting something where I need to be 'speedy' there is always my Nikon. I'm never gonna be faster than a D750.
The only problem I'm having is that I like the 240 so much that I am ignoring my poor Zeiss Ikon!
I just can't justify the cost of Leica lenses for me personally. When I look at the price tag on Leica's 50/1.4 I just think nope nope nope. I'm sure it's a lovely piece of glass though. I wanna spend a few months with the C Sonnar and decide what to do. If I do change it'll be between the Planar and the Nokton. The Planar might be a little to clean/sharp for my taste. I tend to use a 50 as an RF portrait/detail lens. I'm ok with my wides being sharp and modern but I like my 50s to have a lot of character.
I'm going to 'try' and train myself to shoot it like I do my film cameras, and use it in manual as much as possible with my 308S. When I'm shooting something where I need to be 'speedy' there is always my Nikon. I'm never gonna be faster than a D750.
The only problem I'm having is that I like the 240 so much that I am ignoring my poor Zeiss Ikon!