paachi
DOF Luster
Hi Guys
Back here on the forum after a long hiatus. I have been a long time rangefinder user; I recently upgraded to the Leica M-P Typ 240 and needed some advise.
I am not a professional photographer but I do take it seriously and enjoy it quite a bit. My main styles of shooting are street and portraiture. My current kit is an Epson R-D1 with a 40 Summicton, 15 Heliar and 90 Elmar-C. I have been using the Epson for nearly 8 years. It has serviced me more than well. I love shooting with it, limitations and all. However recently it has been showing its age
1. The sensor is only 6MP so sometimes when I need to crop the image it doesn't lend to a lot of flexibility
2. The APS-C sensor size meant DOF and wide angle challenges
3. Battery life and 2GB memory limit precludes any serious usage for mission critical stuff
Summarily I felt it was he right time to realize a 10 year dream and move up to a Leica. I just purchased a Typ 240 M-P with a 35 Summicron ASPH a few days back. Here is the challenge..with the caveat that I have used the camera for only a few days, I am really struggling to bond with the camera or its images. Some of my gripes are
1. The M-P images don't look as pleasing to my eye as my RD1 images. They lack the film like feel I think I got from the Epson
2. The camera itself feels a lot less analog and detached from the minimalism gestalt of Leicas (I also have an M2 for film duties). My RD1 I bonded with right from the first moment and every time I pick it up its like meeting an old friend again
3. The menus are IMO overtly complicated. Just too many options and not structured well. The person who came up with the button layout needs a swift kick in the arse
4 Handling the camera is also a bit more of a focussed effort than my fits-like-a-glove RD1/ M2. Granted the price of the Leica plays a very big role in it. I have added a ThumbsUp grip and have a Luigi case with the wooden grip en route that's probably going to make things better and potentially bulkier as well
So heres where I need advice from you guys..
1. Should I give it more time to learn how to use the M and adapt to it?
2. I can make my peace with points 3, 4 (though for the price I feel really shouldn’t have to) but points 1 and 2 are my main sticking points. Can they be improved upon with better technique and time
3. Should I sell it and go for an M9/ M9P? Before buying the M-P 240, I did a ton of research and tried an M9’s hands on as well. I did like its images (somewhat similar to my R-D1 but a lot noisier) and the menus were a lot simpler. Once I held the M-P in my hand I didn’t like the M9s build and the shutter sound + action. Finally what pushed me over the edge on the M-P was the sensor issues. I plan to own and use the camera for a long time (~10 years) and I didn’t want something which could/ will conk out and Leica won’t support it
4. Should I stake it out with my R-D1 for a few more years until the right range finder comes along? DSLRs and faux RFs (Fuji/ Oly) are not an option for me. I like the gestalt and process of image making in an analog range finder.
Please find below a few images. Direct Jpegs from the Leica with no adjustments, tweaked DNGs converted to Jpegs and some shots taken a while back with the Epson. One point to note is that all the Leica shots are with the 35 Summicton ASPH and all Epson images are with the 40 Summicron.
Would love to get thoughts form you guys on what to do next..
Series 1 Leica M-P + 35 Summicron in morning sunshine:
1. Direct Jpeg from M-P
2. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
3. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
Series 2 Leica M-P + 35 Summicron in morning sunshine:
1. Direct Jpeg from M-P
2. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
3. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
Series 3 Epson R-D1 + 40 Summicron:
1. ERF -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
2. ERF -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
3. ERF -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
Many Thanks!
PK.
Back here on the forum after a long hiatus. I have been a long time rangefinder user; I recently upgraded to the Leica M-P Typ 240 and needed some advise.
I am not a professional photographer but I do take it seriously and enjoy it quite a bit. My main styles of shooting are street and portraiture. My current kit is an Epson R-D1 with a 40 Summicton, 15 Heliar and 90 Elmar-C. I have been using the Epson for nearly 8 years. It has serviced me more than well. I love shooting with it, limitations and all. However recently it has been showing its age
1. The sensor is only 6MP so sometimes when I need to crop the image it doesn't lend to a lot of flexibility
2. The APS-C sensor size meant DOF and wide angle challenges
3. Battery life and 2GB memory limit precludes any serious usage for mission critical stuff
Summarily I felt it was he right time to realize a 10 year dream and move up to a Leica. I just purchased a Typ 240 M-P with a 35 Summicron ASPH a few days back. Here is the challenge..with the caveat that I have used the camera for only a few days, I am really struggling to bond with the camera or its images. Some of my gripes are
1. The M-P images don't look as pleasing to my eye as my RD1 images. They lack the film like feel I think I got from the Epson
2. The camera itself feels a lot less analog and detached from the minimalism gestalt of Leicas (I also have an M2 for film duties). My RD1 I bonded with right from the first moment and every time I pick it up its like meeting an old friend again
3. The menus are IMO overtly complicated. Just too many options and not structured well. The person who came up with the button layout needs a swift kick in the arse
4 Handling the camera is also a bit more of a focussed effort than my fits-like-a-glove RD1/ M2. Granted the price of the Leica plays a very big role in it. I have added a ThumbsUp grip and have a Luigi case with the wooden grip en route that's probably going to make things better and potentially bulkier as well
So heres where I need advice from you guys..
1. Should I give it more time to learn how to use the M and adapt to it?
2. I can make my peace with points 3, 4 (though for the price I feel really shouldn’t have to) but points 1 and 2 are my main sticking points. Can they be improved upon with better technique and time
3. Should I sell it and go for an M9/ M9P? Before buying the M-P 240, I did a ton of research and tried an M9’s hands on as well. I did like its images (somewhat similar to my R-D1 but a lot noisier) and the menus were a lot simpler. Once I held the M-P in my hand I didn’t like the M9s build and the shutter sound + action. Finally what pushed me over the edge on the M-P was the sensor issues. I plan to own and use the camera for a long time (~10 years) and I didn’t want something which could/ will conk out and Leica won’t support it
4. Should I stake it out with my R-D1 for a few more years until the right range finder comes along? DSLRs and faux RFs (Fuji/ Oly) are not an option for me. I like the gestalt and process of image making in an analog range finder.
Please find below a few images. Direct Jpegs from the Leica with no adjustments, tweaked DNGs converted to Jpegs and some shots taken a while back with the Epson. One point to note is that all the Leica shots are with the 35 Summicton ASPH and all Epson images are with the 40 Summicron.
Would love to get thoughts form you guys on what to do next..
Series 1 Leica M-P + 35 Summicron in morning sunshine:
1. Direct Jpeg from M-P
2. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
3. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
Series 2 Leica M-P + 35 Summicron in morning sunshine:
1. Direct Jpeg from M-P
2. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
3. DNG -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
Series 3 Epson R-D1 + 40 Summicron:
1. ERF -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
2. ERF -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
3. ERF -> Tweaks in LR3 -> JPG
Many Thanks!
PK.
thegman
Veteran
I'd say give it another chance for a couple of weeks or a month, it's not going depreciate much in that time. If you still don't like it, then sell, it's just a camera, you don't owe it your time.
ferider
Veteran
I almost never use the Menus. I have video and live view off, classic light meter mode on, and control slowest shutter speed via user profiles.
So my camera feels like an M7, with changeable ISO (via Set button) and play and delete capability. Couldn't be any simpler than this, really - you might want to think which features to use and ignore the rest
Personally I like the heft (I mostly use the RRS grip), but I'm a big guy and understand that it's too heavy for some.
Regarding the image quality, try to pull up the shadows or shoot in low light, it's amazing what this camera can do in the dark. The colors are more muted than M9 or RD1, but that's easy to fix in post. I think of it like a Portra vs. Velvia machine ....
All that being said, it's not worth it if you don't like it.
Roland.
So my camera feels like an M7, with changeable ISO (via Set button) and play and delete capability. Couldn't be any simpler than this, really - you might want to think which features to use and ignore the rest
Personally I like the heft (I mostly use the RRS grip), but I'm a big guy and understand that it's too heavy for some.
Regarding the image quality, try to pull up the shadows or shoot in low light, it's amazing what this camera can do in the dark. The colors are more muted than M9 or RD1, but that's easy to fix in post. I think of it like a Portra vs. Velvia machine ....
All that being said, it's not worth it if you don't like it.
Roland.
Photos look Ok. If you think the Leica is complex try a Oly M43 or something with a program dial and not a shutter dial. I got 2 RD1's. Nothing like them. Closest is the digital Leica. Good luck!
uhoh7
Veteran
It will take several months of shooting to learn to use the camera in the way you enjoy and same for the editing. Many who initially hated the 240 now swear by them.
Sure a clean M9 with a fresh sensor (you see them often), for about 3500, might be a better fit.
But shooting full frame must be awful nice after years of RD1 APS-C.
Sure a clean M9 with a fresh sensor (you see them often), for about 3500, might be a better fit.
But shooting full frame must be awful nice after years of RD1 APS-C.
BLKRCAT
75% Film
I think your m stuff doesn't look bad. It is different though. Could be the whole CMOS vs ccd thing others have mentioned.
segedi
RFicianado
I bought an M 240 and sold it after a couple of months. And then had a chance to review my captures. And bought one again. It does take some getting used to. But I really enjoy it now.
I setup the menus and created a couple of user profiles and now don't fuss with them much. I typically leave ISO on auto and shoot in manual mode. I can pick the correct shutter speed and aperture for the situation and let the camera pick the ISO, gives control and proper exposure.
The thumbs up will help immensely; I went for a thumbie instead so I can use the EVF with some adapted lenses.
But had the former and it works well.
You have a fantastic combo and my mind already said, 35mm, when I saw your previous lens lineup. And your images, especially the dog, should give you some comfort in your decision. They ain't bad!
I setup the menus and created a couple of user profiles and now don't fuss with them much. I typically leave ISO on auto and shoot in manual mode. I can pick the correct shutter speed and aperture for the situation and let the camera pick the ISO, gives control and proper exposure.
The thumbs up will help immensely; I went for a thumbie instead so I can use the EVF with some adapted lenses.
But had the former and it works well.
You have a fantastic combo and my mind already said, 35mm, when I saw your previous lens lineup. And your images, especially the dog, should give you some comfort in your decision. They ain't bad!
Manuel Patino
Established
I too went from the RD-1 to the M240. I agree that the RD-1 is a delight to use and if it was as modern (FF sensor, live view, large display, etc.) it would beat the M240 hands down. But.... It just isn't the camera that the M240 is. I will suggest that you keep shooting with it and if you want more of a film look, you might try using the Perfect Suite 9 or the Silver Efex pro software that works from LR. You might really like the development options it will give you for your B&W images.
arseniii
Well-known
I feel your struggle... I'm in the same situation as you are but with a 5d mk iii. It's a love/hate relationship. My advise, stick to it as long as you can until you know for sure that you are not bonding with it! After a month or two you'll get to learn all the goods and bads of it and the decision will come easier. Good luck!
JoeV
Thin Air, Bright Sun
I think one of the biggest challenges to getting a consistent style with digital cameras is the post-processing part of it. Back in the film era, the look was a combination of the characteristics engineered into the emulsion, along with the development process which, with color, was pretty standard.
Not so today. There are almost too many options to choose from as a photographer deciding on how to post-process a file.
Perhaps you can examine your previous work, glean some understanding of the signature of the images that pleased you, and work on emulating each attribute in a new post-processing workflow.
Myself, I like semi-wide to wide angles of view and a bit of vignetting in the corners, along with an S-curve applied. Generous mid-tone contrast, highlights that don't clip and just enough shadow detail.
~Joe
Not so today. There are almost too many options to choose from as a photographer deciding on how to post-process a file.
Perhaps you can examine your previous work, glean some understanding of the signature of the images that pleased you, and work on emulating each attribute in a new post-processing workflow.
Myself, I like semi-wide to wide angles of view and a bit of vignetting in the corners, along with an S-curve applied. Generous mid-tone contrast, highlights that don't clip and just enough shadow detail.
~Joe
tomtofa
Well-known
It seems like you need to find a PP scheme for the M that works as comfortably as the one you clearly have with the RD1, if you can and if the best results you get from it are worth it to you.
The handling is kind of the same - if you get it set up you won't need the menus much, and the handling is just a matter of whether you can adjust to the unique 'lead soapbar' that is a digital Leica.
You could update to the last version of the RD1 and get past the card issues, but you're still left with 6MPX and the APS-C/DOF limitations.
The M8 will have the same unfortunate shutter, but 10MPX and only a 1.3 sensor crop, for a lot less money than an M9, to say nothing of an M240, if you really want the Leica experience . . .
The handling is kind of the same - if you get it set up you won't need the menus much, and the handling is just a matter of whether you can adjust to the unique 'lead soapbar' that is a digital Leica.
You could update to the last version of the RD1 and get past the card issues, but you're still left with 6MPX and the APS-C/DOF limitations.
The M8 will have the same unfortunate shutter, but 10MPX and only a 1.3 sensor crop, for a lot less money than an M9, to say nothing of an M240, if you really want the Leica experience . . .
Godfrey
somewhat colored
My impressions and perceptions are totally different from yours. The M-P fits my hands better than my M4-2 does, has a better viewfinder, and works at least as smoothly. It's finally the camera I'd hoped the M9 would be but wasn't. For reasons I don't quite understand, the M-P feels tauter, smaller, and lighter than my M9 did. I fitted the standard Leica Protector half-case, and that's enough for me.
This is all very personal, but as others have said, perhaps you're diving in a little too fast.
I didn't touch many of the options on the M-P for a couple of weeks, basically just set up presets so it would the same way I use the M4-2 with B&W film and shot with it as an RF camera. This is basically how I worked with the M9 as well.
I don't spend a lot of time in the menus: when I swap lenses, I just SET the appropriate preset and start shooting with no further ado. My usual B&W film setting is using the Orange filter and neutral tone, pretty much how I use the M4-2 all the time. I'll adjust ISO and sometimes swap from B&W to Vivid color. On Vivid color, it reminds me of the M9's color rendering, but the Auto white balance is ALWAYS more accurate.
After a couple of weeks I started using the Live View occasionally. Now I've integrated Live View into my shooting workflow depending on what lens I have fitted and what I'm trying to do. I find it helps in some circumstances.
When it comes to raw files, be aware that you need Lightroom 5.7 to have up-to-date camera calibration profiles for the M-P ... LR3 will process the DNG files, but it doesn't have dedicated camera profiles that match the M-P.
So... My advice is to slow down, forget what you know about exposing and processing R-D1 and B&W images, and use the M-P as simply as possible for a bit. As you feel comfortable and adventurous, try other settings: reach out so you know what it can do, then decide what you want and just do that. Upgrade LR to 5.7 (the code comes in the M-P box so it doesn't cost anything) and work on your raws in the right environment. And if after a few weeks of that you find you just don't like it, well, sell it and move on. Life's too short...
G
This is all very personal, but as others have said, perhaps you're diving in a little too fast.
I didn't touch many of the options on the M-P for a couple of weeks, basically just set up presets so it would the same way I use the M4-2 with B&W film and shot with it as an RF camera. This is basically how I worked with the M9 as well.
I don't spend a lot of time in the menus: when I swap lenses, I just SET the appropriate preset and start shooting with no further ado. My usual B&W film setting is using the Orange filter and neutral tone, pretty much how I use the M4-2 all the time. I'll adjust ISO and sometimes swap from B&W to Vivid color. On Vivid color, it reminds me of the M9's color rendering, but the Auto white balance is ALWAYS more accurate.
After a couple of weeks I started using the Live View occasionally. Now I've integrated Live View into my shooting workflow depending on what lens I have fitted and what I'm trying to do. I find it helps in some circumstances.
When it comes to raw files, be aware that you need Lightroom 5.7 to have up-to-date camera calibration profiles for the M-P ... LR3 will process the DNG files, but it doesn't have dedicated camera profiles that match the M-P.
So... My advice is to slow down, forget what you know about exposing and processing R-D1 and B&W images, and use the M-P as simply as possible for a bit. As you feel comfortable and adventurous, try other settings: reach out so you know what it can do, then decide what you want and just do that. Upgrade LR to 5.7 (the code comes in the M-P box so it doesn't cost anything) and work on your raws in the right environment. And if after a few weeks of that you find you just don't like it, well, sell it and move on. Life's too short...
G
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I have to admit I still struggle a bit with my 240 occasionally. I find the inaccuracy of the frame lines annoying and I find the files a lot harder to process to my satisfaction than my Merrils or D700.
As Godfrey says though, life's too short ... if you can't get along with it move on. It's only a camera.
As Godfrey says though, life's too short ... if you can't get along with it move on. It's only a camera.
paachi
DOF Luster
Thanks a lot for the responses everyone. It looks like the universal recommendation is to give time to unlearn the R-D1 and learn the M-P, discipline myself to set and forget the menus and as Godfrey said add incremental steps to my workflow.
Maybe I do need to temper my expectation of the speed at which I will adopt a new system.
Not going to give up on the M-P and will try to relearn my RAW workflows and lock away the R-D1 for a few months. The main difference in the RAW work flow was how the Epson ERF files were handled by Lightroom vs. how DNGs are handled. I am keen to see how vintage lenses draw on the M-P..that will tell me if its more a lens challenge or a RAW workflow challenge. My 50 Summilux comes in today (hopefully) and I will take it out for a spin tonight.
I will keep you guys posted on my progress with more posts and images. Infact I took a stab at tweaking two photos with a clean slate approach. The goal was to get the color pics to look like Velvia and B&Ws to look like Tri-X 400. Would love to get your critique on them.
On a final note..I feel that rangefinders are like an air-cooled Porsche (for Porsche nerds I equate them to M2 = 1972 RS; R-D1 = 89 3.2 Carrera; M-P = 993 Turbo S). Quirky, tough to master and will punish if you treat them w/o respect. You have to spend time learning them but once you master them the rewards are immense..just a thought
Taken around 1-2:00 PM in daylight and shadows by the M-P + 35 Summicron
Once again many thanks!
Best,
PK.
Maybe I do need to temper my expectation of the speed at which I will adopt a new system.
Not going to give up on the M-P and will try to relearn my RAW workflows and lock away the R-D1 for a few months. The main difference in the RAW work flow was how the Epson ERF files were handled by Lightroom vs. how DNGs are handled. I am keen to see how vintage lenses draw on the M-P..that will tell me if its more a lens challenge or a RAW workflow challenge. My 50 Summilux comes in today (hopefully) and I will take it out for a spin tonight.
I will keep you guys posted on my progress with more posts and images. Infact I took a stab at tweaking two photos with a clean slate approach. The goal was to get the color pics to look like Velvia and B&Ws to look like Tri-X 400. Would love to get your critique on them.
On a final note..I feel that rangefinders are like an air-cooled Porsche (for Porsche nerds I equate them to M2 = 1972 RS; R-D1 = 89 3.2 Carrera; M-P = 993 Turbo S). Quirky, tough to master and will punish if you treat them w/o respect. You have to spend time learning them but once you master them the rewards are immense..just a thought
Taken around 1-2:00 PM in daylight and shadows by the M-P + 35 Summicron
Once again many thanks!
Best,
PK.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Your photos look good. Whether they achieved what you were looking for, I cannot say as I was never a Velvia fan and even my appropriation of the Tri-X look is tainted by too many years of loving XP2 Super... I've always been more of an Alfa Romeo and Mercedes guy too.
Older lenses do beautifully on the M-P. My lens kit includes Hektor-M 135/4.5, M-Rokkor 90/4, and Summilux 35/1.4 v2, in addition to the Nokton 50/1.5 ASPH (LTM) and the new Elmar-M 24/3.8 ASPH. I fit the occasional old R and Nikkor lens on it occasionally too. It's the RF wides that take the most effort to make work well with digital sensors, thus the new Elmar 24mm. That's lenses from 1960 to the present...
G
Older lenses do beautifully on the M-P. My lens kit includes Hektor-M 135/4.5, M-Rokkor 90/4, and Summilux 35/1.4 v2, in addition to the Nokton 50/1.5 ASPH (LTM) and the new Elmar-M 24/3.8 ASPH. I fit the occasional old R and Nikkor lens on it occasionally too. It's the RF wides that take the most effort to make work well with digital sensors, thus the new Elmar 24mm. That's lenses from 1960 to the present...
G
MCTuomey
Veteran
Buying a new camera and then trying to align it with how you shoot your old camera or your old camera workflow doesn't make sense to me. You bought the M240 for more resolution, to go full frame, and for longer battery life, all of which, for your needs, are lacking with the RD1. The M gives you all three. So, you need to take the time to align your shooting habits and workflow with the M. Be patient, work with your new gear, adapt, and learn, I say. After you've given it a good go, one measured in months not weeks, if it doesn't make you happy, then it's probably time to sell.
If you truly want simpler menus, less buttons, SOOC higher saturation, the M9 fits that bill and still gives you full frame goodness and better batt life. But you lose the refinements of the M240 vs the M9, like a quieter shutter, faster write speeds, better high iso performance, better LCD, improved weather-resistance, better & more versatile metering, live view, and so forth.
M240 raw files are generally more of an open palette than those of the M9. Skills in post are more a factor in final results with the M240 than with the M9. I did some comparative M240/M9 images (same subject, same light) shot with a color checker. Setting WB using the checker proved to me that you can get very nearly equivalent files in terms of color balance from the M240. That's just a starting point though.
If you truly want simpler menus, less buttons, SOOC higher saturation, the M9 fits that bill and still gives you full frame goodness and better batt life. But you lose the refinements of the M240 vs the M9, like a quieter shutter, faster write speeds, better high iso performance, better LCD, improved weather-resistance, better & more versatile metering, live view, and so forth.
M240 raw files are generally more of an open palette than those of the M9. Skills in post are more a factor in final results with the M240 than with the M9. I did some comparative M240/M9 images (same subject, same light) shot with a color checker. Setting WB using the checker proved to me that you can get very nearly equivalent files in terms of color balance from the M240. That's just a starting point though.
paachi
DOF Luster
@Godfrey: Thank you for the kind words. How do you like the M-Rokkor 90/4 on the M-P? I have a 90/4 Elmar-C which my understanding is that is the same/ similar lens. I never bothered with it on the R-D1 because of the focusing challenges due to a low EBL
@MCTuomey: Thank you for the advice on the M-P raw files. After these inputs I started tweaking the RAW files from a clean slate and was able to achieve much better saturation and tones. The street singer and saxophonist images are my efforts post feedback.
@MCTuomey: Thank you for the advice on the M-P raw files. After these inputs I started tweaking the RAW files from a clean slate and was able to achieve much better saturation and tones. The street singer and saxophonist images are my efforts post feedback.
thompsonks
Well-known
A possibility: You don't seem to be getting the shadow and highlight detail that others achieve with either M9 or M240. Quite a few of the posted images look over-exposed to me – or alternately, not treated gently enough in LR/ACR/PS. I suggest working with exposure and post-processing more carefully, before 'blaming the camera.'
Kirk
Kirk
MCTuomey
Veteran
Greens show too much yellow and the skin tones show too much red, I think. I'm viewing on an iPad however.
On the sax busker pic, I'd custom WB using the eyedropper on the mid-tone grey squares on his flannel shirt. At least for a fresh starting point. Could do same for the karaoke guy pic on the shadier sections of his tee-shirt.
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
I find it easier to process old files, and to speed up the learning of a new camera I use raw samples from the web. As you don't have a memory of the moment you've taken the picture it's easier to process it "properly" rather than trying to recreate the afterimage. Next step is to make a preset so that you can make your pictures look in a certain way, so they fit together. Of course not one for everything but a couple for different setup/occasion/whatever. And don't push it, go back to once edited photos and you gonna see them different, sometimes it take couple days to make them look satisfying.