Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/03/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Leica Camera received so many customer complaints regarding the 1m setting on the M8 that they changed it to 2m on the M8.2 and offered it as an upgrade on M8's. I welcome the decision to make the M 2m. I shoot much more often at 2 to 3m than 1m especially with my 75. I dislike frequently finding too much space around my subjects ;-) Impossible to please everyone of course. On Mar 14, 2013 11:14 AM, "Henning Wulff" <henningw at archiphoto.com> wrote: > I just remembered another thing I don't like about the new M240. > > The frame lines are set for accuracy at 2m. That just plain sucks. I now > have an M8, set for nearest focussing distance, an M9 set for 1m and the > new M set for 2m. Heads are going to roll. Image wise, definitely. I will > be chopping a lot. On the 75mm, the difference between nearest focussing > distance and 2m is huge. Since 1960 I've gotten used to and been happy with > Leica M framelines showing as much or more than I'll be getting on my > pictures. And now I'll be getting less sometimes??? This is a mess. I never > had problems with the 'nearest focussing distance' setup, and this will > definitely cause problems. > > Henning > > > On 2013-03-13, at 1:02 PM, Henning Wulff <henningw at archiphoto.com> > wrote: > > > To the list of things I don't like should be added: > > > > The baseplate thing. Yes, they did now make the tripod socket part of > the body, and it is centered, but now you can't change card or battery when > the camera is on a tripod. I suppose they expect you to use the > multi-function grip in that instance, as that is also where hdmi out and > other sockets are. I hardly ever use an M on a tripod, but now that it has > macro and tele capability, I'm sure it will be used on a tripod more than > before. > > > > Why not have regular doors for battery and card, and have done with the > baseplate? It's a stronger and better made baseplate now, but it still is a > clunky thing you would like an extra hand for when changing battery and > card. When the M3 and M2 came out there was at least a plausible reason for > the baseplate, and at least with the M4 they fixed the need for a fourth > hand, but today the affectation of the removable baseplate is just silly. > > > > Henning > > > > > > > > On 2013-03-13, at 10:44 AM, Henning Wulff <henningw at archiphoto.com> > wrote: > > > >> I use fast cards in all the cameras; at the moment class 10 cards seem > to be the optimum as far as price/cost goes. I tried faster cards, but the > difference was miniscule. Class 6 cards are now no less expensive than > Class 10, but are definitely slower in various cameras. > >> > >> I should also mention that I agree with much of what Steve Huff said. > I'm hardly a fan of his and his style, but he has got most things right. To > counter some of his over the top enthusiasm, I should mention a couple of > gripes I have with the new camera. > >> > >> 1. It's too big. It has gotten heavier and a millimeter thicker. Not > much, but bigger again than the film M's. The general excuse is that the > sensor/LCD/control pack needs the additional thickness. Yes it does, but > all that means is that the distance from the lens flange to the LCD has to > be greater than the distance of the lens flange to the back of the film > cameras. Why not have the lens flange more exposed? Have it stick forward a > couple of millimeters and have the camera body the same size as an > M2-6(pre-TTL)? Obviously the larger battery has to go somewhere, but it is > packaged back to back with the SD card, so if it's just the battery, it > could fit in the thickness of an M4. I know it's probably stuffed full, but > let's work a little on miniaturization. Take a look at an RX-1; that has a > body that's a lot smaller than an M2. After all that I have to say that > using it for 30 minutes makes it disappear into your hands, and you notice > neither the thickness nor the weight > p > > ar > >> ticularly. > >> > >> 2. Exposure compensation doesn't work well. Now you have to hold in the > button on the front where the rewind lever was on film Leicas, and turn the > thumb wheel, all while holding the camera to your eye. Contortionists in > the crowd? The M9 could do this with just the rear wheel; much easier. For > those that say they never used exposure compensation and they often > accidentally moved the M9 dial, I say why not make this an option. Also > make the use of the movie button an option. I'm not going to use this for > movies, so repurpose it. This should be fixable via firmware. > >> > >> 3. The new shutter release threads, about which I've written before. > >> > >> 4. The electronic viewfinder (I got hold of a used Olympus one) while > quite sharp and with decent colour, is _really_ laggy. A lot different than > essentially the same viewfinder in the Olympus OM-D. It's useable, but > certainly not state of the art. That they should have gotten right, as that > is technology that has been available for a while. I doubt this is fixable > via firmware. However, there is a slight upside to this. It means that for > longer lenses, using magnified view doesn't cause as bad jitters due to > lack of stabilization as with a faster refresh. Of course, that also means > that the refresh for focussing isn't any faster than 30fps. > >> > >> Regarding image quality, I'm with Steve Huff also. It has amazing > quality, and while different than that of the M9, I would definitely say > that the new M is better. I profile all my cameras with a Colorchecker > Passport, so I get consistent output from all cameras, and I'm not > dependent on Adobe's profiles. The new M handles a much bigger dynamic > range, and doesn't produce nastiness in blown highlights. In fact, > highlights seem to roll off as well as on the Olympus OM-D, and that is > high praise. In other respects of course the M image quality is a lot > higher than that of the OM-D. Wide angle lenses behave better than on the > M9, and even the 12mm Cosina is useable again. > >> > >> Henning > >> > >> > >> > >> On 2013-03-13, at 10:05 AM, "Jim Nichols" <jhnichols at lighttube.net> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Henning, > >>> > >>> Owning neither the M8 nor M9, I'm just a casual observer. However, > from what I have read, wait times can be card dependent. Are you using the > fastest cards available for the M9? > >>> > >>> Jim Nichols > >>> Tullahoma, TN USA > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henning Wulff" < > henningw at archiphoto.com> > >>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 11:59 AM > >>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica M240 > >>> > >>> > >>>> I sometimes shoot 7 shots in 15 seconds, all single shot. Then I get > to wait, and if the next good moment comes up 5 seconds after the last > shot??? It's just a slow camera. > >>>> > >>>> Henning > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 2013-03-12, at 1:59 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> That does not sound right, as (what I call) single shots I have > never hit the buffer. If you mean 'many' (about 7 or 8) shots in 4 secsonds > on single shot mode that is different... > >>>>> > >>>>> john > >>>>> ________________________________________ > >>>>> on behalf of Henning Wulff [henningw at archiphoto.com] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I would say that that major improvement in the new M is the speed. I > never have to wait for the camera, as I do with the M9. If I do single > shots, which is 99% of the time, I really can't outshoot it, whereas the M9 > often required me to wait 30 seconds until the buffer cleared, which is a > long time. Reviewing shots is also much faster. > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Leica Users Group. > >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Henning Wulff > >>>> henningw at archiphoto.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Leica Users Group. > >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Leica Users Group. > >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >>> > >> > >> > >> Henning Wulff > >> henningw at archiphoto.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Leica Users Group. > >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >> > > > > > > Henning Wulff > > henningw at archiphoto.com > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >