I'm toying with the idea of replacing my Leica M9 with another digital Leica M, but I'm hesitating on what I would get instead.
I LOVE the output of the M9 in the right lighting conditions. It's magical, just importing the DNGs into lightroom and using the default Adobe Color profile. 90% of the time I leave it at that, and the other 10% of the time I tweak white balance and/or exposure slightly. I love that I don't have to do much if any post processing on the images to have something I like.
I don't love the haptics of the M9. It feels clunky, the shutter is something I don't love, and it's slow. Part of that is the charm of it, but I'm looking to use the Leica M camera more, and some of this holds me back.
I also don't love the output of the camera in less than ideal lighting conditions (mid day sun is a common one). My RX1 can produce nice images any time of day, but the M9 seems to struggle in these less than ideal lighting conditions.
I use the M9 primarily with the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.5, and love it. I also have the VM 50/1.5 that I also like but don't use nearly as much (35mm is my focal length).
My research suggests that perhaps an M262 or an M10-R might be the ticket. An M262 is much more in my budget, as would be a standard M10. That said, I'd really like the thinner body (not thicker like the M262), but the simplicity and focus of the M262 is appealing. (Has anyone used an M9 and M262 and can comment on the thickness differences?)
Additionally, I understand that the default output from an M262 or M10-R (using Lightroom and Adobe Color) might not be as appealing to me as the M9, but I'm fine settling on one profile/preset and importing the images with it applied by default to get closer.
I've read KJ Vogelius's site a lot and he went from an M9 to M262 and absolutely loves the M262. He also tried an M10, but apparently didn't ultimately like it as much as the M262.
Anyway, looking for advice here. The dream is a black paint M10-R (I like the black paint of the M9), but I can't afford that and won't be able to for a while. Not sure I'll actually do anything, but looking for opinions.
I’ve used the M8, M9, M9 Monochrom, M240, M10, and M10-R, as well as the SL, SL2, S006, and S007. I still love and shoot an M9-P for its unique, film-like color. I regret selling my M240, as it renders a modern yet distinct Leica signature. To me, the M9 feels more clunky than the M7, whereas the M240 feels much more mechanically refined.
I went from m8 all the way to m11/ev1 but got rid of it all and settled on M240 base and really happy. I do have the Epson RD1 for CCD fix and kept it cause I preferred the handling more than M8/M9.
steve.chang wrote:
I’ve used the M8, M9, M9 Monochrom, M240, M10, and M10-R, as well as the SL, SL2, S006, and S007. I still love and shoot an M9-P for its unique, film-like color. I regret selling my M240, as it renders a modern yet distinct Leica signature. To me, the M9 feels more clunky than the M7, whereas the M240 feels much more mechanically refined.
Good luck and happy shooting!
---------------------------------------------
ftllens wrote:
I went from m8 all the way to m11/ev1 but got rid of it all and settled on M240 base and really happy. I do have the Epson RD1 for CCD fix and kept it cause I preferred the handling more than M8/M9.
M10R would be my next favorite.
Thanks for the replies, both of you! Interesting that you both like the M240 after having used many of the newer M cameras. What would you say is the main reason? The output?
Can you also comment on the size difference between the M9, M240, and later M10+ series?
M240 is a step up from the M9 at addressing many of your concerns. Those are pretty much the same reasons I moved from the M9 to the M240 and still use it (for a variety of reasons, some of which are actually not in praise of the M240). But I think you would be better served by one of the M10 models due to even more refined sensor and electronics over the M9 than the M240 can offer.
I wouldn't get hung up on the look of the output. Lower DR sensors inherently produce punchier images. Applying a filter or custom profile to a wider DR image can do similar. Plus there are profiles like those from Cobalt designed to emulate the M9's characteristics, if you really want that sometimes. Otherwise, if you're using Adobe Color, you're basically letting Adobe decide.
If it was me, I'd strongly prioritize the user experience over post capture experience because post capture can be equalized.
I'm not sure the size differences between the various digital M bodies is that significant. I never thought so, but some definitely do. I mean, if you're in SF, head to the Leica Store and try out some of these cameras. Kick some tires! That's what the Leica Stores are for!
I moved from an M9 to an M10P.
Handling and practical use are much better in all points of view. Image quality is much better when the light conditions are not ideal (as you said, this is the weak point of the M9). In ideal conditions, it took me a bit of time to learn how to process images to my taste, but I am there now. So I now have no regret for the M9 anymore.
Thanks for the replies, both of you! Interesting that you both like the M240 after having used many of the newer M cameras. What would you say is the main reason? The output?
Can you also comment on the size difference between the M9, M240, and later M10+ series?
M240 is thicker than any other digital M bodies. Love the colors coming out with spherical M lenses.
Some samples from M240+KOB (default LR, minimal edit) KOB 1 KOB 2 KOB 3
One sample of M9+KOB for comparison (default LR, minimal edit) KOB4
I have somewhat the same question, I have an M9 that I like quite a lot, I don’t feel too annoyed by its limitations, it was the reason I got it in the first place.
The output is still magic, I have more keepers with it than with my more capable other cameras, that’s quite a feat.
That’s of course when the things are right and often it demands some work, the limitations are real.
I’m not too tempted by an M240, I feel the step up would be not that significant and would just end up regretting the M9, the M10 seems to be the only viable options, the M10-R is still too pricey.
M9 or M10 but still I’m not that drawn to the M10 to do the thing even though I think it would bring some serious capabilities on the real world use even if on paper it’s not that exciting.
I like the chonky m240 base but the main reason was user experience like Rscheffler stated. Output doesn't matter as much to me in terms because I can color match. DR is good enough and AI post is good enough where I can emulate pleasant highlight rolloff.
Due to this I just focus primarily on shooting experience. I do have X2D as fidelity capture system but use the M as primary.
M10 series has a good balance of both. I would go back to M10 before M11 mainly due to latency feel. I also like the shutter sound on the M240/262 series.
M-E 240 and M 246 user here. Never owned the M9 but tested it years ago in a photo store and wasn't too thrilled. Skipped the M9 and went straight to the M-E 240 as my first digital Leica M which I am still using as my main digital camera now. The M 240 series simply has the best price/quality ratio regarding used digital M camera prices and comes with best battery lifetime. Personally I like the color rendering of the M 240 based sensor which pronounces the blue and yellow/red tones similar to some color film. Not much post processing is needed when it comes to the color photos taken with this camera.
Biggest con of the M 240 series is the danger of clipping highlights due to the more limited dynamic range of the sensor. I got used to underexpose my photos a bit to make sure I don't lose highlight detail. In addition to this, the camera's back display is making the photo look darker than it really is - but you get used to it by checking the histogram and comparing with the look of the photo on the back screen.
Another thing to note is that only two color based M 240 based cameras use the larger 2 GB image buffer - the Leica M-E 240 and the M-P 240 (plus the monochrome M 246). Standard M 240 cameras only come equipped with 1 GB image buffer.
I'll add my experience with M digital bodies to the mix of responses here. I have used (and still do) the M9, M9M, M-D (M240), M10-R. Over the years I have had more keepers and images I am drawn to with the M9 than the other color M digital cameras I've used. I only shoot RAW. The limitations of the M9 are well known, such as restricted to lower ISO use, noisy shutter if you shoot in very quiet venues (which I do), not the best output when the lighting doesn't favor it (mid-day lighting for example). There are work arounds for some of these, but if you prefer to primarily use the RAW output for an M9 straight out of the camera with minimal work on the file, the M9 can be exceptional.
My use of the M-D (M240) variant (did not have a rear LCD screen) was fairly short lived, as the kind of work I did at that time, I needed to check the images often while shooting as it was a situation of needing to get the one-time shots for clients. I will say its output was my second favorite of all the digital cameras used, as its color output had its own signature that often was very attractive. in the early days of the M240 released, the images sometimes were extremely warm and certain ethnic skin tones were not naturally recorded but I feel over time with some firmware revisions, this has been somewhat addressed.
The M-D (M240) thicker body like other said, did not bother me and when all things taken into consideration, the regular variant of the M240 may be the best compromise of all the digital M cameras, if price, capability, output, quieter shutter and more is considered. I have often considered adding a M240 for my own personal use.
Lastly, I recently picked up a M10-R. The reason was primarily the need for both a higher ISO performing M camera along with higher resolution (due to the venues I shoot in and the need to often print very large format prints and the regular M10 would lack the high MP sensor of the M10-R. I haven't used it all that long so the jury for me is out regarding its output, but it appears to have the most neutral signature output of the M digital cameras I've used. That's not a bad thing but in some cases, its often emulates the output seen from of many other digital cameras on the market.
As others have said, post processing of images can always be done with any of these cameras, but I prefer to take a minimal approach and let the color science of each shine through.
Lastly it also depends on your use of the M digital camera and what capabilities are necessary for your type of captures. Theres no one right answer, just what ultimately feels right for you. Let us know how it goes.
rscheffler wrote:
I'm curious about this point. Did you notice a difference between M10 and M11 because of Leica's 'forced' live view metering system?
If both are on standby mode it's not as big difference. Here is example though [TS 9:57]:
?si=U7ZthDDJtu4NTMn1&t=597
It's mainly the start up for the first shot, m60 is like maybe a touch slower than m10d. i forget the md 262 startup speed but it should be similar to m10d. like retrofocus and others have mentioned the battery life is legendary, so i just leave my m on standby.
in the future the M10R [BP] will probably be one of the most desirable models though just due to the timeline of everything
retrofocus wrote:
Biggest con of the M 240 series is the danger of clipping highlights due to the more limited dynamic range of the sensor. I got used to underexpose my photos a bit to make sure I don't lose highlight detail. In addition to this, the camera's back display is making the photo look darker than it really is - but you get used to it by checking the histogram and comparing with the look of the photo on the back screen.
I agree about keeping an eye on the histogram, but this is even more true for the M9.
IMO the biggest downside of M240 image quality is how the DNG's blackpoint appears to be clipped incorrectly and can result in fairly strong green shift in shadow tones when pushing images in post. This kind of negates the benefit of aggressively protecting highlights. I've mostly only noticed it with aggressive pushes, but it can sometimes appear with normal processing. It appears to depend on ISO; worse at 800 than 200, for example.
Depending on the condition of your M9, you would have very little invested in an M262. Well kept, boxed M262 $2600-$2800.
I had the M10 and M262 at the same time. I elected to keep the M262 because the size difference was insignificant to me and I preferred the output and battery life of the M262. I still have it as my only rangefinder, along with a Q2 and Sony A7RIII.
The cost difference between the two gives you a bit left over for glass, accessories, or other fun stuff.
Both are great options, its just what your priorities are.
I've had the M8 so I know the haptics of the M9. I then had a M240 and finally the M262. Get the M262 if you can afford it. It's mainly a refinement of the M240, weight in particular but the shutter and buffer too, but I could be happy with both.
Thanks to all for the replies, very interesting opinions and I didn't expect so much general love for the M240 series.
I think it likely makes sense for me to start with an M262 (for the cheaper price) and then move to an M10 if I want a thinner body, or am otherwise not enjoying the M262. I do love the fact that the M240/262 has amazing battery life.
I think it also likely makes sense for me to try and hang on to the M9 if this "upgrade" experience doesn't work out. I do love the images from the M9 generally, and would hate to ditch it for something I potentially don't like as much.
Anyway, thanks again. Interesting to see the discussion here.
I hated the 240 with a passion I had two m9s two M 10 Rs never had desire to have a second M 240 I have owned every M digital it is the only one i hated. You think the M 9 is clunky the 240 for me was worse
I have an M9 (for 15 years now) and an M11 (for 3 years). I use the M11 24/7 for any time of year and any daylight. My M9 is now used only for color portraits. The CCD sensor's rendering is unique.
davidsee wrote:
I hated the 240 with a passion I had two m9s two M 10 Rs never had desire to have a second M 240 I have owned every M digital it is the only one i hated. You think the M 9 is clunky the 240 for me was worse
