Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/03/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] m9 vs m240?
From: images at comporium.net (Tina Manley)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 17:11:27 -0500
References: <CANiFQ-1O0-hzvh3-H0yziXkrxb9v8bTDxL_gBOvMLa1T26OB6w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+yJO1AbUenNXb7qWSYsFb6Jjvg3aF7+xAed-D9NJXPgLb0w6w@mail.gmail.com> <CAJCexzD5AL+TbXL-229qXJfwZbDbThFy2y2oyNbRXLkiCUbOxg@mail.gmail.com>

That would be a hard choice.  The SL is bigger and heavier - but not much.
The high ISO is much better.  The shutter is slightly quieter. The camera
is water-sealed.  It is more like a small DSLR than a digital M, though. It
would be worth trying both!!

Tina

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Akhil Lal <alal at nyu.edu> wrote:

> Just a thought, perhaps the SL might be a more versatile alternative to the
> 240?
>
>
>
> On Thursday, March 10, 2016, Tina Manley <images at comporium.net> wrote:
>
> > Kyle -
> >
> > Your main problems are all solved with the M240.  Wakes up instantly, ISO
> > up to 6400 is awesome, instant read time on display, very quiet shutter,
> > very fast shutter response.
> >
> > I still loved my M9, until it got sensor corrosion and was replaced with
> > the M246, but the M240 is a no-brainer if you want a working, efficient M
> > digital.
> >
> > Tina
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 4:31 PM, kyle cassidy <leicaslacker at gmail.com
> > <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'm thinking about upgrading from the m9 to the 240 ...
> > >
> > > my main problems with the 9 are:
> > >
> > > 1) sloooow wakeup time. i'm often like "take the picture! take the
> > > picture!" (mashes button, nothing happens, nothing happens ... bird
> flies
> > > past ... long pause ... click!)
> > >
> > > 2) noisy iso -- anytying over 400 is almost useless
> > >
> > > 3) slow read time to the back of camera display
> > >
> > > 4) shutter is NOISY
> > >
> > > 5) slooow shutter winding time.
> > >
> > > my m9 is doing ... ok, but i'm wondering if the 240 is appreciably more
> > > awesome. i don't care about sapphire crystals or titanium body parts or
> > > snake skin covers or whatever... just the things that make the camera
> > work
> > >
> > > thoughts?
> > >
> > > kc
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Leica Users Group.
> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tina Manley
> > http:// <http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/>www.tinamanley.com
> > http://socialdocumentary.net/photographer/tinamanley
> > http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.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
>



-- 
Tina Manley
http:// <http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/>www.tinamanley.com
http://socialdocumentary.net/photographer/tinamanley
http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/


In reply to: Message from leicaslacker at gmail.com (kyle cassidy) ([Leica] m9 vs m240?)
Message from images at comporium.net (Tina Manley) ([Leica] m9 vs m240?)
Message from alal at nyu.edu (Akhil Lal) ([Leica] m9 vs m240?)