M240 Full Res Samples

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

Pre-order new Rokinon 16mm f/2.0 ED AS UMC lens

Pre-order new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens

Bower 35mm f/1.4 price dropped to $379

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 … 16 17 end

M240 Full Res Samples

Lee Saxon
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #1 · M240 Full Res Samples

carstenw wrote:
I don't think the best MFDBs rank well behind the D800, it is all within a stop or so, and several stops above many other current popular cameras.

Fair enough, but I contend that given their massive photosites and the massive price difference merely matching the D800 represents failure.

Jan 31, 2013 at 09:01 AM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · M240 Full Res Samples

snowboarder wrote:
Bijltje wrote:
All more gimmicks for the customer who sees the M as an mirror-less camera and doesn't give a thing about the rangefinder.

that would be me I guess

me too.

Jan 31, 2013 at 09:12 AM

thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · M240 Full Res Samples

I'm unlikely to use live view except with the EVF and an adapted tele or tilt/shift lens. I probably won't use video for more than a laugh. Neither feature being present robs me of the rangefinder experience in any way if I ignore them. I don't need live view for very accurate focus (unlike with plastic AF lenses in other systems) since my rangefinder and lenses are accurate. Hooray for a proper distance scale.

Jan 31, 2013 at 09:35 AM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · M240 Full Res Samples

Lee Saxon wrote:
carstenw wrote:
I don't think the best MFDBs rank well behind the D800, it is all within a stop or so, and several stops above many other current popular cameras.

Fair enough, but I contend that given their massive photosites and the massive price difference merely matching the D800 represents failure.

The D800 is clearly a disruptive camera for the MF segment, not something which was expected and I am sure it has caused some (I don't know if this is significant though) lost sales, but overall I don't think that the true value of the MFDB segment lies in having the best dynamic range and resolution anyway, at least in the low- to mid-range of the MFDB spectrum.

One point of the MFDB is that the sensor is larger, and the lenses render quite differently. You also see this in film, in case you read those threads. It is just a gentler, more relaxed look and feel, compared to which the 135 format DSLR look is tense and strained, with a few exceptions. Granted, the 33x44mm and 36x48mm sensors which are most common don't make the most of the lenses, and even the 645 format sensors are still at the low end of medium format; I prefer 6x6 and 6x7 myself. Still, there is a difference there which can be worth it for some types of shooting.

Secondly the leaf shutter lenses allow a much more flexible workflow for flash photography, especially in-studio, where the size and weight of the equipment doesn't matter so much. It is an open question if LED lighting will kill the flash studio lights for most uses (not stop-motion type use), but we are not there yet, and won't be until they can make 1000W LED panel lights in systems with a full set of modifiers. With the kinds of budgets available to large fashion productions and similarly complex tasks, the price of the camera and lighting equipment is just not a factor.

Overall, I think that just as is the case with mirrorless cameras vs. DSLRs, DSLRs cannot truly replace the MFDB, only reduce its market size.

Edited on Jan 31, 2013 at 08:10 PM · View previous versions

Jan 31, 2013 at 10:53 AM

Bijltje
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · M240 Full Res Samples

thedigitalbean wrote:
Bijltje wrote:
Why shouldn't they? A CMOS sensor is used to be able to offer video, live view and an EVF. Not the thinks the traditional M user really wants or needs.

Live view and an EVF will make the new M a powerhouse in compact landscape photography now that critical focus is easily achievable. It will also allow many of those who have abandoned the M due to poor eyesight issues to come back to it.

All more gimmicks for the customer who sees the M as an mirror-less camera and doesn't give a thing about the rangefinder.

Leica rightfully isn't married to the concept that the M must solely remain a tool for myopic luddites. They correctly recognize the places where technology can be used to be important tools for photographers and are bringing those tools to the M to make it a better photographic tool. They are doing NOTHING to take away from the M's rangefinder heritage.

This same gimmick nonsense was spouted all over these forums for every major advancement in DSLRs. People kvetched when Live View was first introduced, deemed it a gimmick from P&S cameras but now the number of professional landscape and architectural photographers that use it for critical focus is amazing. These guys wouldn't give it up.

The CCD sensors had some big advantages like great performance on low ISO's.

Nope, not anymore and hasn't been true for a little while. The Sony EXMOR sensor in the D800 is capable of the same great low ISO performance of something like an IQ medium format back. Real world dynamic range is about the same. Color discrimination is more a function of the CFA than the sensor and even there the D800 stacks up very favorably to most CCD sensors.

I think its more than normal many M users want to see the new M CMOS sensor can catch up or even pass that existing M9 CCD sensor, or that all those new features and advanteges like better high ISO performance means we have to live without the M9's low ISO performance.

The M9's low ISO performance isn't great when compared to most modern cameras. It still produces nicer (nicer in terms of what I would say is enjoyable to process in post) files than the Canon's but both in terms of color discrimination and dynamic range its outclassed by wide margin by the D800 sensor.

I know several M shooters and all are happy that Leica is demonstrating an ability to be innovative, to make better tools for photographers while remaining faithful to the rangefinder heritage.

Maybe I wasn't really clear, with great low ISO performance I don't mean the best dynamic range, or clearest files, or best color discrimination.
I mean the M9 at low ISO's gives really nice files with an specific own look. Same or even better with the M8. The M8's sensor scores really bad on performance, but I loved the files it gave me on low ISO's. Real own specific look with great colors.

With CMOS camera's I never really seen that look straight out the camera. Sure there were some great ones out there like the canon 5D classic and 30D (especially with canon's own RAW software) but most of the time they all look a bit alike to me.

I hope leica is able to keep that own specific look with their new CMOS sensor which set them apart from all the other manufactures. Nice for nikon their D800 has a great sensor, but if the M's CMOS sensor sucks it doesn't help at all.

Further U find not needing the new features gimmick nonsense?
Why is it so hard to understand people like the range finder camera as it is? Its quite common now on so many fora to shout the leica M rangefinder is outdated and should change to fit the needs of many others.
Why the urge to do so when there are so many great camera's out there which do fit all those needs?

I agree some of the new features might be nice to have, thats why I also ordered the new M myself. But it should not influence the rangefinder camera it is.
All ready it means a fatter/ bigger camera and the loss of the frame line selector. I really hope this is as far as they go.

About the range finder being not precise, I have no problem at all focusing the 50/0,95 nocti on my m9p. Focussing my MF lenses on the nex takes much more time.

Jan 31, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Bijltje
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · M240 Full Res Samples

sebboh wrote:
snowboarder wrote:
Bijltje wrote:
All more gimmicks for the customer who sees the M as an mirror-less camera and doesn't give a thing about the rangefinder.

that would be me I guess

me too.

Jan 31, 2013 at 12:18 PM

cuonghuutran
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #7 · M240 Full Res Samples

@Bijltje, Yes, that M8 or M9 look. I know it when I see it because it costs me an arm and a leg and a kidney :-)

Jan 31, 2013 at 04:16 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · M240 Full Res Samples

Looks like RX-1 sister..

Jan 31, 2013 at 04:49 PM

edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · M240 Full Res Samples

IMHO, it is true that the M9 files have clarity and sparkle and natural looking color, but this has nothing to do with CCD vs CMOS. Both sensor types can produce all of the above. The clarity and sparkle are due to the lack of AA filter and the exceptional quality of Leica and Zeiss lenses that most M9 owners use. The natural color is a function of the CFA (color filter array) design, which coincidentally also affects high iso noise performance. CFA designed for maximum low iso quality will be too dense to produce good results at high iso.

cuonghuutran wrote:
I am moving to M9 from CMOS world because of the clarity and sparkling and yet natural looking color and gradation of M9 photos. Yes, I miss low light performance, live view, long battery life of 5D Mk2 (with spectacular Leica R lenses like 90mm AA or 180mm 2.8 APO or 28-90mm zoom). But M9 is just jaw dropping and makes the move definitely worthwhile. I hope photos from M240 can match or exceed M9 in clarity and sparkling. If not, I am happy to stay with M9. So far the early samples are well ... early samples :-).

Jan 31, 2013 at 05:06 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · M240 Full Res Samples

edwardkaraa wrote:
CFA designed for maximum low iso quality will be too dense to produce good results at high iso.

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see if the M 240 is truly trying to compete at high ISO with the other FF cameras out there. If so, it could mean a different CFA philosophy, which would likely lead to a different "look."

Jan 31, 2013 at 06:03 PM

artur5
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · M240 Full Res Samples

me too.

You're wrong, Leica Ms aren't mirrorless..

- But yes, even if I've been a Leica M2-M6-M7-M8 user, I believe that a mechanical rangefinder isn't anymore the best focusing solution for a modern digital camera.

Jan 31, 2013 at 06:20 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · M240 Full Res Samples

Someone will have to shoot a color checker chart with both to compare the differences.

While there seems to be a fair amount of grumbling (at LUF) over the subjective value of the sample images, from a technical perspective, my feeling is the sample DNGs hold promise. The color quality seems good, the files are malleable and in no way that I have noticed, worse than the M9.

Someone at LUF pointed out there is a bit of pattern noise when pushing 3, 4 or 5 stops. I tried it as well, and can see it in the dark areas of the flower photo, but 'normal' pushing of shadow values a couple stops seems very decent. So, maybe the CMOSIS sensor isn't quite up to that of the Sony sensors when pushing shadows. There also seems to be a bit of angst that the result isn't a clear improvement over the M9. In some respects, I'm relieved, because it means using an M9 alongside the M240 will very practical (other than the battery difference).

Jan 31, 2013 at 06:26 PM

edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #13 · M240 Full Res Samples

douglasf13 wrote:
edwardkaraa wrote:
CFA designed for maximum low iso quality will be too dense to produce good results at high iso.

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see if the M 240 is truly trying to compete at high ISO with the other FF cameras out there. If so, it could mean a different CFA philosophy, which would likely lead to a different "look."

Leica folks have repeatedly stated the new M is optimized for best low iso IQ. However, in the 2 raw files in question, there are certain signs the CFA are indeed different from the M9. I feel that the files are easier to work with, which may indicate lighter CFA. As the suede had mentioned in a post about the A900, if my memory is correct, dense CFA will produce RGB channel peaks that are further apart while light CFA will produce peaks that are almost coinciding.

Jan 31, 2013 at 06:28 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · M240 Full Res Samples

rscheffler wrote:
Someone will have to shoot a color checker chart with both to compare the differences.

While there seems to be a fair amount of grumbling (at LUF) over the subjective value of the sample images, from a technical perspective, my feeling is the sample DNGs hold promise. The color quality seems good, the files are malleable and in no way that I have noticed, worse than the M9.

Someone at LUF pointed out there is a bit of pattern noise when pushing 3, 4 or 5 stops. I tried it as well, and can see it in the dark areas of the flower photo, but 'normal' pushing of shadow values a couple stops seems very decent. So, maybe the CMOSIS sensor isn't quite up to that of the Sony sensors when pushing shadows. There also seems to be a bit of angst that the result isn't a clear improvement over the M9. In some respects, I'm relieved, because it means using an M9 alongside the M240 will very practical (other than the battery difference).

I hadn't thought about pushing the CMOS. If the sensor design is more like Canon's CMOS, or the Nikon cameras without Sony CMOS (D700, D3, D3s, etc.,) then push processing the files in post won't be a great option compared to raising ISO in-camera. I'm enjoying keeping my M9 set at ISO 160 in all conditions, and I'm not sure that I'd want to go back. I'll be interested to see tests in this regard, or maybe even a DxO Mark chart will give a good indication.

Ultimately, I'm trying to squash my internal gearhead, and I'm thinking of the M9 as a certain film that I can stick with for a while, rather than obsessing about the IQ improvements coming with the new M 240 "film," but we'll see. Committing to the 50 Summicron collapsible has also helped that process along, a bit, so things like the 50 AA aren't as tempting. If you're shooting professionally for a client, all of these advances may make a difference, but, for personal art, it's a matter of picking a paint and paintbrush and just going with it...famous last words! I'm sure I'll have an M 240 and 50 AA in a year.

Jan 31, 2013 at 07:56 PM

joe88
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #15 · M240 Full Res Samples

Agree, lots of "grumblers" on the sample images and M240 especially on LUF. Patience doesn't seem to be a virtue anymore. Can't we wait till Leica is ready to release the official sample pics?

If someone wants the "CCD" look, then they can buy a M9 or ME. Seriously, the last thing I am concerned about the M240 is color. Personally I am more interested in operational improvements such as the extra buffer, Live view, improved high ISO, weather sealing on the 240.

So maybe there will still be a market for 3 Leica M bodies after all?

1. ME for those who shot low ISO and/or want to maintain the CCD color and look
2. M240 for those that want better high ISO, DR, live view and other conveniences.
3. Monochrom for B&W shooters

Jan 31, 2013 at 08:08 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · M240 Full Res Samples

joe88 wrote:
Agree, lots of "grumblers" on the sample images and M240 especially on LUF. Patience doesn't seem to be a virtue anymore. Can't we wait till Leica is ready to release the official sample pics?

If someone wants the "CCD" look, then they can buy a M9 or ME. Seriously, the last thing I am concerned about the M240 is color. Personally I am more interested in operational improvements such as the extra buffer, Live view, improved high ISO, weather sealing on the 240.

So maybe there will still be a market for 3 Leica M bodies after all?

1. ME for those who shot low ISO and/or want to maintain the CCD color and look
2. M240 for those that want better high ISO, DR, live view and other conveniences.
3. Monochrom for B&W shooters

Yeah, I think that makes sense. In my dream world, what I'd love is a new digital "MP" for less money than the M 240 that has the weathersealing, data throughput and silent shutter of the M 240, still has the frame lever, but removes the LCD in order to make the body thinner (and has no USB port, like the M-E,) and they could put an ISO dial on the back. Heck, they could even throw on a film advance lever, with auto advance being enabled in the menus, if you want it (you could still use the advance lever simply as a thumb rest.) I'm sure I'm in the minority, though, and I'm not saying such a thing would sell.

Jan 31, 2013 at 08:28 PM

artur5
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · M240 Full Res Samples

I think there's a market for another Leica body : M 240 minus rangefinder + integrated EVF.
Technically, not a M anymore, therefore only por 'non-purists'

-people who don't care for rangefinders but wants a FF mirrorless for their manual RF or SLR glass.
That camera should be smaller, lighter and cheaper than a M-240 ( maybe..

) .

Jan 31, 2013 at 08:49 PM

douglasf13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · M240 Full Res Samples

artur5 wrote:
I think there's a market for another Leica body : M 240 minus rangefinder + integrated EVF.
Technically, not a M anymore, therefore only por 'non-purists'

-people who don't care for rangefinders but wants a FF mirrorless for their manual RF or SLR glass.
That camera should be smaller, lighter and cheaper than a M-240 ( maybe..

) .

I think that market is better left to the Asian camera makers. Once you remove all of the mechanical aspects of the camera, you're sitting right in the wheel house of the Asian camera makers like Sony and Samsung, especially when you consider the likely cost difference.

Jan 31, 2013 at 09:05 PM

zhangyue
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · M240 Full Res Samples

joe88 wrote:
Agree, lots of "grumblers" on the sample images and M240 especially on LUF. Patience doesn't seem to be a virtue anymore. Can't we wait till Leica is ready to release the official sample pics?

If someone wants the "CCD" look, then they can buy a M9 or ME. Seriously, the last thing I am concerned about the M240 is color. Personally I am more interested in operational improvements such as the extra buffer, Live view, improved high ISO, weather sealing on the 240.

So maybe there will still be a market for 3 Leica M bodies after all?

1. ME for those who shot low ISO and/or want to maintain the CCD color and look
2. M240 for those that want better high ISO, DR, live view and other conveniences.
3. Monochrom for B&W shooters

+1 for most what you say. But the biggest complain I have is its shutter. In recent trip along with M3, and shutter on M3 like a music to me compare my M9's hopeless shutter design. I am sure it is even worse than my pretty suck D700, at least D700 has the snap.

I was in church at Savannah and embarrassed to take picture with people pray there with M9, which is famous for quiet operation.

Jan 31, 2013 at 09:15 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #20 · M240 Full Res Samples

Doug, I agree (with your post #16 above) and I guess that was kind of the point I was trying to make. At the moment, the M240 files don't make me feel I really need to move on from the M9. Instead, as Joe stated, it's the operational improvements of the 240 that will feed that desire.

Artur, sounds like the Fuji XE1 vs. X Pro 1. If that ever happens with Leica, and no reason to think it couldn't, my guess is it will be timed similarly to the MM and ME relative to the M9. In other words, when the M240 is nearing end of life. I was really surprised how quickly Fuji released the XE after the XP, but maybe XP sales weren't living up to expectation? For Leica, the danger would be seriously eroding the M240 unless the EVF only option was quite similar in price. It would also work if in a few years there still isn't a FF MILC on the market. We've all been predicting one will come, but so far hasn't.

Also, I'm not yet convinced an EVF based system can be manually focused as critically and as quickly as a rangefinder. I guess we'll see how Fuji's new implementation in the X100s works in real life.

Jan 31, 2013 at 09:32 PM

1 2 3 … 16 17 end
FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 16 17 end