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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       5              16       17       end
  

Archive 2013 · M240 Full Res Samples
  
 
naturephoto1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #1 · M240 Full Res Samples


zhangyue wrote:
What this is huge for many people. center focus will be enough for general landscape. but still?


I just glanced at the link and should have read it before on the forum.. That is truly extremely disappointing and may just be the final deal breaker for me to make a purchase of an M240. But, we will wait to see if this is resolved. If not, that makes things that much more likely that I will wait for the next FF mirrorless camera that will not require me to change all of my r mounts. Possibly the Sony NEX FF.

Rich



Feb 12, 2013 at 08:05 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · M240 Full Res Samples


I agree, I think I'm more disappointed to learn about this than to see the banding issues.

The discussion about non-scrollable live view starts here.

And a somewhat concise, if not entirely revelatory answer as to why, is here.

For me it won't be a deal breaker because there are a number of aspects about the M240 that are considerable improvements over the M9 for my work. Obviously we each will have our own needs and expectations.



Feb 12, 2013 at 08:39 PM
joe88
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #3 · M240 Full Res Samples


LV with center focus only? I think I am going to cancel my order for the M240. Might as well stick to my M9 and use the center RF patch for focusing If the new sensor is not capable of matching the performance of current 24Mp full frame sensors from the competition from Sony, etc, I think Leica could be in deep trouble. I hope they are able to work out the final kinks to banding, etc before releasing the camera.


Feb 12, 2013 at 08:47 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · M240 Full Res Samples


I have to say that, when I had the GXR, I only used magnified view at the center, when hand held. However, on tripod, it is more convenient to be able to scroll the magnified view around the frame.


Feb 12, 2013 at 08:50 PM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #5 · M240 Full Res Samples


rscheffler wrote:
I agree, I think I'm more disappointed to learn about this than to see the banding issues.

The discussion about non-scrollable live view starts here.

And a somewhat concise, if not entirely revelatory answer as to why, is here.

For me it won't be a deal breaker because there are a number of aspects about the M240 that are considerable improvements over the M9 for my work. Obviously we each will have our own needs and expectations.


Ron,

I have 16 R lenses. This is a big deal to me. One of the lenses is the 28mm f2.8 Super Angulon PC which I got in part for stitching images. I also come from using large format Linhof and other 4" X 5" cameras. It would be nice to use a T/S lens on the M240. But, I decided to go for the Super Angulon instead due to its performance. I can see that anyone coming into using an M240 with a Canon or Nikon T/S lens will find this to be extremely limiting to try to use these lenses without being able to move the magnified area to assure proper focus and tilt (or swing).

As an edit, the only way that I could see using the Canon or Nikon T/S lenses properly on the camera for the tilt or swing for the Scheimpflug effect would be to use a loupe on the LCD screen much like when we would do this exercise with our large format cameras.

Rich


Edited on Feb 12, 2013 at 09:21 PM · View previous versions



Feb 12, 2013 at 08:51 PM
joe88
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #6 · M240 Full Res Samples


I understand that not everyone will need to move focus point with Live view but even handheld, my aim was to shoot portraits with the longer lenses or say, a Nocti wide open and I was expecting to be able to get critical focus away from the center point.


Feb 12, 2013 at 08:54 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · M240 Full Res Samples


Rich, that was also what I was thinking - with a T/S lens, it would be difficult to accurately manipulate the plane of focus. Perhaps the only workaround is to rely on focus peaking, but I can anticipate that with any moderately wide lens where apparent depth of field will already be fairly deep, focus peaking might not be discerning enough to indicate the exact plane of focus. This is precisely the problem I have with peaking on NEX cameras and find I always have to zoom in to confirm accurate focus.

Edward, I have to say the scrolling feature on the GXR is initially quite unintuitive, which is somewhat surprising considering how great the camera's overall UI is. It could be because I don't use the camera much, then when I do, it's a steep relearning curve to figure out how to move the zoomed point off-center.

Joe, that is also a concern of mine. For example, the 50 Lux ASPH is a difficult focus and recompose lens at portrait distances and wide open, or nearly wide open. Or any lens where there is some field curvature... which seems to be nearly any vintage RF lens 'of interest.'



Feb 12, 2013 at 09:24 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #8 · M240 Full Res Samples


This is the kind of thing that I'm not surprised about in the M 240. If I was interested in a live view based camera, my bet would be on one of the top Asian makers every time. Electronics just isn't Leica's forte.


Feb 12, 2013 at 09:39 PM
Gary Clennan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #9 · M240 Full Res Samples


This would not be a deal breaker for me. I rarely - if ever - used this feature in the past. I suppose it would be a nice option but not a necessity.


Feb 12, 2013 at 09:46 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #10 · M240 Full Res Samples


douglasf13 wrote:
This is the kind of thing that I'm not surprised about in the M 240. If I was interested in a live view based camera, my bet would be on one of the top Asian makers every time. Electronics just isn't Leica's forte.


Unless one of those Asian cameras was the Nikon D800, which has the absolute worst LV implementation I have ever used.

It is shocking that so many seem to be screwing up their LV implementation since others (Sony, maybe Canon) seem to nail it.



Feb 12, 2013 at 10:09 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



CVickery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #11 · M240 Full Res Samples


Disappointing....greatly reduces the usefulness of live view in difficult focusing situations, and this is where I'd probably use it the most. Not necessarily a deal breaker, but it'll probably mean I'll stick with the M9 for longer, possibly even wait til the next model.


Feb 12, 2013 at 10:14 PM
ryankarr
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #12 · M240 Full Res Samples


rscheffler wrote:
Apparently this is a processor related restriction.


I thought the 240 used the same processor as the S2 and therefore was abnormally powerful?

Dissappointing, but not a deal breaker for me.




Feb 12, 2013 at 10:38 PM
joe88
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #13 · M240 Full Res Samples


I kind of suspected their processor was "weak" when Leica announced that the camera is unable to provide a separate HDMI feed for video because there is not enough "juice".

Lets hope the IQ and usability is miles ahead of the M9 to make it a compelling upgrade. I would also like to see how the buffer holds up in real shooting situations.



Feb 12, 2013 at 11:15 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #14 · M240 Full Res Samples


Ryan, good question. I re-read the numerous Photokina posts by Dave Farkas at Red Dot Forum and it's implied and stated that it's the same processor. It's not exactly clear whether that means it's the same 2009 processor as in the S2, or if both the new S and M share the same, but newer processor.

If indeed Leica is recycling the same circa 2009 processor in the M, it's a disappointment. It would be once again relatively old tech in a new body, like the M8 and M9, which IIRC, share the same processor.



Feb 13, 2013 at 12:53 AM
charles.K
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #15 · M240 Full Res Samples


I am surprised, but this is not a deal breaker for me either IQ, decent LCD, fast processor, zero buffer delay, high ISO performance and improved useability as a RF are high on my priorities.

Even with my previous DSLR's and presently RX1, I have not used the moveable LV focus. I find it time consuming and frustrating for normal shoots. There no doubt is a huge need for still shooting and for many this may well be a deal breaker!

I do hope the RF mechanism is further improved, in the stability of maintaining accurate calibration of both the focusing patch and frame lines. As nice as it is to have the LV, 95% of my shoots will still rely accurate RF focusing, and frame lines for composing. Love the fact of having a decent LCD for reviewing shots!

Leica do have to be mindful, that cams such as the RX1, now FF with an amazing image sensor are fast approaching, and overtaking Leica's traditional market base. The style of shooting and composition, I far prefer the RF style, but if a RX2 came out with interchangeable lenses with the provision for M lenses, this may change a lot of people decisions. I do hope the IQ and DR of the new M 240 image sensor, is at least on par and better than that of the RX1.

Edited on Feb 13, 2013 at 02:00 AM · View previous versions



Feb 13, 2013 at 01:08 AM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #16 · M240 Full Res Samples


Tariq Gibran wrote:
Unless one of those Asian cameras was the Nikon D800, which has the absolute worst LV implementation I have ever used.

It is shocking that so many seem to be screwing up their LV implementation since others (Sony, maybe Canon) seem to nail it.


I hear you. I just mean that, as Leica steps more and more into the electronic side of things, the differences will become noticeable. Rolex tried battery powered watches in the 70s, and that didn't exactly go over well.

I was at a pretty reputable Leica repair shop a few months back with my M9, and the son of the owner mentioned that he'd taken an M9 apart recently, and he couldn't believe just how archaic the internal electronics were. I understand that the M 240 should be a big step up in terms of electronics, but I have a hard time imagining that Leica can compete with Nikon/Canon/Sony etc. in this regard. If I was interested in a live view camera, I'd surely be shooting Sony. Of course, there are other things about the M 240 that may interest me.



Feb 13, 2013 at 01:48 AM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #17 · M240 Full Res Samples


I did a bit of digging and it turns out it's no secret that the Maestro processor is made by Fujitsu and from their Milbeaut line. This was pretty widely announced in 2008 when the S2 prototype was shown at Photokina that year. But, since then, I can't find any new press releases, etc. to indicate what changes, if any, there may be in the current Maestro processors compared to the one from 2008.

I guess it's pretty obvious Leica isn't going to manufacture their own processor, just as they aren't going to manufacture their own sensor. It would seem the Milbeaut processors aren't necessarily an odd choice either, seeing as how other brands such as Nikon and Pentax use them in their cameras as well... Perhaps the issue is how Leica's engineers integrate the various outsourced components?

And maybe it's intentional restriction of features... The M240 is already a big jump from the M9. Maybe there's some thinking to withhold features for future upgrades/models. I'm curious to see what the mid-cycle upgrade for the M240 will look like. I.e. whether it will be yet another cosmetic refresh or something with actual performance/capability improvements. By naming the camera simply 'M' it does imply Leica might recognize the need for more frequent, if incremental, updates than the major refreshes of the past.

Charles: the one aspect of any future FF mirrorless camera that has been the big question on all our minds is whether such a camera will have a sensor sufficiently optimized for good compatibility with RF lenses. We all know this is a multisided debate and seem to agree that many of the manufacturers don't have a vested interest in developing such a sensor to work better with some other brand's lenses. The only exception I could imagine is if a manufacturer broke down and realized that they'd have to create yet another line of FF lenses optimized for a short register distance in order to accommodate a much more compact system design. In that case they would likely have to adopt sensor toppings as seen in the M's CMOSIS chip, which then would coincidentally allow much better RF lens performance.



Feb 13, 2013 at 02:09 AM
jffielde
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #18 · M240 Full Res Samples


My M9 and MM show this behavior almost universally. The "continuous" mode is useless to me for this reason.


Feb 13, 2013 at 05:37 AM
Gary Clennan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #19 · M240 Full Res Samples


Very inteesting information indeed. Many thanks Ron!


Feb 13, 2013 at 06:59 AM
charles.K
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #20 · M240 Full Res Samples


Ron, thank you for this interesting research!!! Hopefully the processor will not date too quickly
Yes, completely agree, with the new evolution of great FF sensors, manufacturers will need to engineer the system to integrate with the decades of collected RF lenses. Of course Leica is the only player with the vested interest, but should Sony, or whoever get the design to work, it will open the market dramatically



Feb 13, 2013 at 10:04 AM
1       2       3      
4
       5              16       17       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       5              16       17       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password