Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/03/13

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

Subject: [Leica] What I don't like about the new M (was Leica M240)
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 18:59:37 -0700
References: <F4A78B27-7673-48AA-82D9-F7B809AC7574@me.com> <6C0C8D0D-427B-45E4-8748-8D585DD4B6A1@archiphoto.com> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E9B6FB2EC0@WhizzMAIL01.whizz.org> <834F2D15-FA08-418C-9B35-FF9A0126C84C@archiphoto.com> <C010CEAE93D44BDDA0FCCC0356ECB3F4@jimnichols> <3C77A1E2-AEF5-4DC4-AB6D-D05CCEA4AF95@archiphoto.com> <AAA20E59-572C-4A8E-8A1D-99347FCAE99E@archiphoto.com> <0057AEC1-8C3A-48E4-AC25-3CD9D1C09C51@archiphoto.com> <CAE3QcF7TRzmyLAtF=JWmArzeRhFCDVhRFJYS3L0jp8AchxVd-A@mail.gmail.com>

I shoot more at 2m than at 1m, but when the finder lines, as in the M8, is 
set at the shortest focussing distance for each lens (not 1m), I never cut 
off important parts. Now it's a bit of a crap shoot when using various 
bodies. Grrrr....

Rangefinder framelines are not accurate. Live with it. Now it's all over the 
place. THAT'S whats annoying.

Henning


On 2013-03-13, at 6:39 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 



In reply to: Message from gerry.walden at me.com (Gerry Walden) ([Leica] Leica M240)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Leica M240)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Leica M240)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Leica M240)
Message from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] Leica M240)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Leica M240)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Leica M240)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] What I don't like about the new M (was Leica M240))
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] What I don't like about the new M (was Leica M240))