I’d love to ask the local crowd for some advice on a decision I’m currently wrestling with. I’ve been shooting with the M11‑P for three years now. I like the camera, but I still feel that the photos from my previous M240‑P were more enjoyable for me — and definitely easier to work with in post. So I’m considering selling the M11‑P and going back to the M240‑P. At the same time, I’m a bit worried that I might be idealizing my past experience with the M240, and that I’d end up regretting the move once I actually switched back. Has anyone here gone through a similar back‑and‑forth? What was your experience after returning to the older body?
I am using since 2019 the M-E 240 (plus I later purchased a used M 246 which is great, too). I never used a newer Leica M camera body than this, so I can't comment on comparing M11 with M 240. The M11 gives you more resolution but image files might look flatter in DNG/RAW since it uses a Sony sensor. I own a Sony E-mount camera and second this experience when comparing its 36 MP sensor with the one in my M-E 240. I need less PP to do with files from my M-E 240. Regarding color gamut, the M 240 files are IMO more film-like: more cyan sky and nice increased saturation on orange tones. Sometimes reminds me on Kodak Ektar film without suffering blue/purple shadows which occurs with this film.
If I ever upgrade to a newer Leica M camera body, then I will still keep my M-E 240. It is hard to let it go if you like more color punch and a bit more contrasty original files. I see the M 240 series sitting nicely in the space between M9 and M10. Better menu and camera performance than the M9 (you can get the same coloration even from the M 240 based CMOS sensor) and the M10 which already uses a more modern sensor which is flatter in RAW output.
I have my M10R ... and sometimes miss my M10-P. I have an M246 and while the M11 calls to me at times, so does the M10-P. The main thing regarding the files (size is obvious) is the amount of "lift" you can do with them. If you are looking for more lift, or higher ISO performance, you may notice the difference. That said, the M240-P is a solid camera (imo).
Will it be your only camera, or is it going to be your "M" camera as part of your overall kit with other bodies, too?
Maybe you prefer the DNG files straight out of the M240. The color palette is distinct compared to the M11, as is the tonal curve. I also prefer the unprocessed images from the M240 and M10 over the M11, but one advantage of the M10-R and M11 is their higher highlight latitude, meaning there's extra information in the green channel that can be recovered. The M10 has less of that headroom, and the M240 even less. So as long as you're careful to preserve more of the highlights, you likely won't miss the M11, unless you specifically need that high megapixel sensor for your work.
I think you’d probably regret it, but whatever makes you happy. You’re talking about two completely opposite ends of the digital Leica spectrum. I doubt you’ll find much support for the idea beyond the usual “Shoot whatever makes you happy.”
jhonzatko wrote:
Hi everyone!
I’d love to ask the local crowd for some advice on a decision I’m currently wrestling with. I’ve been shooting with the M11‑P for three years now. I like the camera, but I still feel that the photos from my previous M240‑P were more enjoyable for me — and definitely easier to work with in post. So I’m considering selling the M11‑P and going back to the M240‑P. At the same time, I’m a bit worried that I might be idealizing my past experience with the M240, and that I’d end up regretting the move once I actually switched back. Has anyone here gone through a similar back‑and‑forth? What was your experience after returning to the older body?
I just ditched my M10-P for another lens, and only using my M9. As good as the rendering of M10-P, the files from M9 just makes me happy. If my M9 ever do stop working in the future I'll still get an M-P240, which is probably the last body to have that classic Leica rendering.
I will miss the silent shutter and fast operating speed of the M10-P though.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Maybe you prefer the DNG files straight out of the M240. The color palette is distinct compared to the M11, as is the tonal curve. I also prefer the unprocessed images from the M240 and M10 over the M11, but one advantage of the M10-R and M11 is their higher highlight latitude, meaning there's extra information in the green channel that can be recovered. The M10 has less of that headroom, and the M240 even less. So as long as you're careful to preserve more of the highlights, you likely won't miss the M11, unless you specifically need that high megapixel sensor for your work....Show more →
+1. Highlight clipping is the biggest culprit with the M 240 series, agreed. There is a bit more latitude to push shadows but this is also much more limited to more modern sensors. My M 246 has about one stop better highlight details and avoiding clipping than my M-E 240. My now 12 years old A7R sensor beats both cameras easily in pushing shadows and highlight details. As you stated also above, the color gamut of the M 240 is distinct and more film-like - some like it others don't (I really like it since I also enjoy film photography).
Nothing on earth would make me go back to the M240, the M9 or even worse the M8 (and I had 2 of. them) . The M10 if I had no choice, it was a fine camera. Never tried the M10-R.
But of course, this is just me. Shoot with what you like.
I recently upgraded to a M10 from M240 about 2/3 months ago and as I organize photos I definitely see that the M240 colors out of camera are like 90% there when it comes to my editing, I slap on a preset at like 40% and a lot of the times I'm done if I exposed correctly. That said now that I'm on the M10 and it's my only stills camera I can't go back to the 6400 iso ceiling, dynamic range in the highlights, the banding in the shadows, and being able to easily still find accessories for the M10. If I were in your shoes I'd probably sale the M11, buy a M10 and a M240, or M10 and film M.
i love my ME 240 and M262 and will use them until they die , i have Q2 but always prefer the images from my M cameras even when i use a 28mm f2,8 elmarit version 2 [ 1970's] v the Q2 for whatever reason.
For me, the only thing that's special about the M9's CCD sensor is the rendering. The others cameras are pretty much the same. The M11 stands out for its wide dynamic range, and after color correction, I have no desire to trade it for another model.
If I were shooting landscapes, I'd just buy an X2D for natural color.
People have already commented a lot on the image quality and range, which I think really also depends on how much time you want to spend editing, or how dialed in your workflow already is.
Outside of that, I own a M240-P -- love the battery life, but don't love the unavailability of new batteries. On the flip side, I do wonder if the extra weight and chunkiness are worth the tradeoff, and the fact that it is a digital machine... which means there is potentially some expiration date down the line.
retrofocus wrote:
+1. Highlight clipping is the biggest culprit with the M 240 series, agreed. There is a bit more latitude to push shadows but this is also much more limited to more modern sensors. My M 246 has about one stop better highlight details and avoiding clipping than my M-E 240. My now 12 years old A7R sensor beats both cameras easily in pushing shadows and highlight details. As you stated also above, the color gamut of the M 240 is distinct and more film-like - some like it others don't (I really like it since I also enjoy film photography)....Show more →
This is the dilemma I have with "upgrading" from my Leica M-D (based on the M240 sensor) to the newer M11-D. The only real issue I have with the M-D is highlight latitude, the M10-R and M11 series simply have more dynamic range, so blown highlights are less of a concern there.
Because of this, I've learned to meter the M-D specifically for the highlights (like shooting slide film). In A mode, I'd just point at a bright area, half press to lock exposure, then recompose. But since I shoot manual exposure, I have to point the internal meter at a bright area (not the light source itself, like the sun) until I get a solid dot, then recompose and shoot. This usually gives me a slightly underexposed image, but it's the most consistent way I've found to protect the highlights, and honestly, part of why I still stick with the M-D typ 262.
