Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Tim Ashley about the Leica M (240), it is a keeper!  (Read 6980 times)
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7239


WWW
« on: June 14, 2013, 06:33:55 PM »
ReplyReply

http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2013/6/leica-m240---executive-summary-final-thoughts-conclusion-is-it-a-keeper
Logged

K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2013, 10:56:36 PM »
ReplyReply

A Leica enthusiast likes the new Leica and justifies it's absurd cost because he's already so heavily invested in Leica glass. Wow, there's a revelation.  Shocked
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7239


WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 18, 2013, 11:24:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Hmm, have you read the article series, looked at all the images or are you just jumping conclusion?

Best regards
Erik


A Leica enthusiast likes the new Leica and justifies it's absurd cost because he's already so heavily invested in Leica glass. Wow, there's a revelation.  Shocked
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1648



WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2013, 06:12:15 AM »
ReplyReply

A Leica enthusiast likes the new Leica and justifies it's absurd cost because he's already so heavily invested in Leica glass. Wow, there's a revelation.  Shocked

The Leica M240 is overpriced and flawed.

Im not a Leica enthusiast, have never owned a Leica, have no investment in Leica lenses and yet I await my copy of the camera with the enthusiasm I usually reserve for making images.

 Shocked
« Last Edit: June 19, 2013, 06:15:15 AM by KLaban » Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2013, 10:01:09 AM »
ReplyReply

The Leica M240 is overpriced and flawed.

Im not a Leica enthusiast, have never owned a Leica, have no investment in Leica lenses and yet I await my copy of the camera with the enthusiasm I usually reserve for making images.

 Shocked


So true. 
Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 720


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2013, 11:09:32 AM »
ReplyReply

What i do not understand in the Tim Ashley article:
 first he writes "  
Question: if I thought the camera likely wouldn't please me, why did I buy it? Answer: because I own a lot of Leica glass and because, having put my Phase One IQ180 up for sale and making the switch to the Nikon D800E, I was frustrated by the extreme difficulty involved in finding wide lenses for that camera that could resolve, across the frame, the resolution the sensor promised. So I hoped that somehow the new Leica would pull a rabbit out of the hat."

a little later he describes the problems of some leica wide angles like the 18mm elmar- :
"
The 18mm F3.8 Super-Elmar has strong and complex distortion and requires F11 to tighten up the corners, by which time diffraction has taken its toll on the rest of the frame. Fairly strong astigmatism means that the Leica Look is not at its strongest in this lens. Everything else is good: bokeh, correction of colour shading and fringing, predictability of focus. Overall, useful but not wonderful."

This lens costs about the same as the 21mm Zeiss + the 14-24mm Nikkor both doing a every good job at 36MP

( and then the Leia lenses still cannot prove themselves at 36MP)
Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5120


« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2013, 01:24:28 PM »
ReplyReply

What i do not understand in the Tim Ashley article ...
Read on! He effectively acknowledges that the lenses are not a good enough reason, and replaces that reason with:

a) The by now notorious practice of comparing _per pixel_ sharpness to that of a camera with a higher pixel count (Nikon D800), so that the images from the M are being viewed at smaller size, biasing the comparison in its favor.

b) The inferiority of his results with live view focusing on this camera to his results with its traditional range-finder focusing, which he seems to misinterpret as the superiority of its RF manual focusing over all alternatives, whereas it is probably a specific difficulty of live view focusing on a RF camera being done stopped down, as I noted in http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=79548.0 (If indeed the Nikon D800 also _forces_ live view focusing to be done stopped down, then that might add to the poor experience that these M vs D800 reviewers have of live view manual focusing!)

c) Dismissing its somewhat worse noise at higher ISO as less important for him.
Logged
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1648



WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2013, 07:42:03 AM »
ReplyReply

What i do not understand in the Tim Ashley article...

If you've a need to understand then why not ask him directly?

http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2013/6/leica-m240---executive-summary-final-thoughts-conclusion-is-it-a-keeper
Logged

ariliquin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2013, 05:34:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Nice images, BUT.....

Is it just me, or are the Sigma DP images really just MORE, in every way.

Just seems to me the sigma images have more details, better resolution, even better colour in some respects.

Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2013, 08:16:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Nice images, BUT.....

Is it just me, or are the Sigma DP images really just MORE, in every way.

Just seems to me the sigma images have more details, better resolution, even better colour in some respects.



The Sigma images are great, but they scream "DIGITAL", which is fine, not knocking it.  The new M files are closer to D800e files, which I like.  The M9 has that crip CCD look without being TOO digital.  While I've never fooled with a DPM, its not a camera that could replace an M, for me.  For others it works great.
Logged
AlfSollund
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2013, 08:23:54 AM »
ReplyReply

What i do not understand in the Tim Ashley article:
 first he writes "  
Question: if I thought the camera likely wouldn't please me, why did I buy it? Answer: because I own a lot of Leica glass and because, having put my Phase One IQ180 up for sale and making the switch to the Nikon D800E, I was frustrated by the extreme difficulty involved in finding wide lenses for that camera that could resolve, across the frame, the resolution the sensor promised. So I hoped that somehow the new Leica would pull a rabbit out of the hat."

a little later he describes the problems of some leica wide angles like the 18mm elmar- :
"
The 18mm F3.8 Super-Elmar has strong and complex distortion and requires F11 to tighten up the corners, by which time diffraction has taken its toll on the rest of the frame. Fairly strong astigmatism means that the Leica Look is not at its strongest in this lens. Everything else is good: bokeh, correction of colour shading and fringing, predictability of focus. Overall, useful but not wonderful."

This lens costs about the same as the 21mm Zeiss + the 14-24mm Nikkor both doing a every good job at 36MP

( and then the Leia lenses still cannot prove themselves at 36MP)
With all due respect I believe that some have missed the conclusion. Perhaps the discussion that you are referring to are a bit misleading in the sense that they are considered as conclusions (and might be for some if this is really important)?

I believe one should look at the main  conclusion:
"The Final Word

 The M240 was going to be all about the glass and Live View. The the sensor would be 'good enough' and the rangefinder would be halfway to obsolete. But with the exception of my prediction that the ergonomics would be the usual Leica mix of amazing and daft (they are) I was wrong, wrong, wrong.

 I have never been this wrong about a camera.

 The M240 is all about the extreme accuracy of the rangefinder and the gorgeous performance of the sensor. Together, they make an unbeatable combination. And given that this combination is very small and light too, I now use it more than anything. I can live with all its quirks and rough edges: most of them are 'dealable with' in firmware and none of them is a deal-breaker.

 The D800 is relegated to jobs for which it has very specific skills (speed of focus, higher ISO work, long or zoom lens work) and the IQ180 is back from my dealer unsold, now married to an Alpa STC and Rodenstock 40HR and used for whenever I need huge output size and have the time to work for it. The RX1 also has its niche purposes and I continue to carry it from time to time.

 I am very lucky to have all of these cameras; but I know which one will be getting the most use in the foreseeable future.... except, it has to go back now, to have its strap lugs replaced.

 Well, this is Leica"
Logged

-------
- If your're not telling a story with photo you're only adding noise -
http://alfsollund.com/
duane_bolland
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 55


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 25, 2013, 12:29:44 PM »
ReplyReply

This reminds me of the famous quote from last year's presidential election: Is this just math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  Tim Ashley appears to be unduly forcing himself to like this camera.  He lists 16 things he doesn't like about the camera, and yet somehow ends up buying one.  Is this justification you do as an owner of many Leica lenses to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  I would never consider a Leica if for no other reason than the battery and memory card being hid under the base plate.  Even if the body cost only $1000, I don't think I could tolerate that design. 
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2013, 01:14:22 PM »
ReplyReply

This reminds me of the famous quote from last year's presidential election: Is this just math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  Tim Ashley appears to be unduly forcing himself to like this camera.  He lists 16 things he doesn't like about the camera, and yet somehow ends up buying one.  Is this justification you do as an owner of many Leica lenses to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  I would never consider a Leica if for no other reason than the battery and memory card being hid under the base plate.  Even if the body cost only $1000, I don't think I could tolerate that design. 

You can get a replacement baseplate that gives access to the battery and memory card.
Logged
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 973


WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 25, 2013, 01:27:23 PM »
ReplyReply

+1

This reminds me of the famous quote from last year's presidential election: Is this just math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  Tim Ashley appears to be unduly forcing himself to like this camera.  He lists 16 things he doesn't like about the camera, and yet somehow ends up buying one.  Is this justification you do as an owner of many Leica lenses to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  I would never consider a Leica if for no other reason than the battery and memory card being hid under the base plate.  Even if the body cost only $1000, I don't think I could tolerate that design. 
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #14 on: June 25, 2013, 01:41:33 PM »
ReplyReply

This reminds me of the famous quote from last year's presidential election: Is this just math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  Tim Ashley appears to be unduly forcing himself to like this camera.  He lists 16 things he doesn't like about the camera, and yet somehow ends up buying one.  Is this justification you do as an owner of many Leica lenses to make yourself feel better, or is this real?  I would never consider a Leica if for no other reason than the battery and memory card being hid under the base plate.  Even if the body cost only $1000, I don't think I could tolerate that design. 

I think the only valid "justification" is that the person who can afford the camera likes it.  Essentially Tim's conclusion is that, despiote its numerous flaws, he likes the camera. 
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 763



« Reply #15 on: June 25, 2013, 02:01:58 PM »
ReplyReply

This sort of thing is hardly uncommon amongst Leica afficianados. (I say this as someone who's been using Leica M cameras for 40 years now but who is no fanboy.) Fondness for the rangefinder aesthetic and regard for the M system lineage can override short-term objectivity. As long as the enthralled enthusiast can afford it, no harm done.

I tried out an M240 early last month...soon found myself wishing it were an M2 (but with a sensor instead of a film gate) instead of what it was. Passed on it despite the fine & dandy IQ. Still looking for a suitable digi platform for all my M & LTM lenses...

-Dave-
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #16 on: June 25, 2013, 02:10:41 PM »
ReplyReply

This sort of thing is hardly uncommon amongst Leica afficianados. (I say this as someone who's been using Leica M cameras for 40 years now but who is no fanboy.) Fondness for the rangefinder aesthetic and regard for the M system lineage can override short-term objectivity. As long as the enthralled enthusiast can afford it, no harm done.

I tried out an M240 early last month...soon found myself wishing it were an M2 (but with a sensor instead of a film gate) instead of what it was. Passed on it despite the fine & dandy IQ. Still looking for a suitable digi platform for all my M & LTM lenses...

-Dave-

What was it that you didn't like, as compared to the M2?  No hostility intended!  And what are you looking for in a digital platform for M lenses?  I hope that the next generation of the Fuji Xpro will be IT.  That being said, I can't really fault the M9, MM, or M240 for anything, at least for my shooting.  Despite all the odd issues, the M9 is my favorite current camera.
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 763



« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2013, 03:24:49 PM »
ReplyReply

What was it that you didn't like, as compared to the M2?  No hostility intended!  And what are you looking for in a digital platform for M lenses?  I hope that the next generation of the Fuji Xpro will be IT.  That being said, I can't really fault the M9, MM, or M240 for anything, at least for my shooting.  Despite all the odd issues, the M9 is my favorite current camera.

Great, LuLa blew away my post 'cuz I hit the timeout limit.   Huh  I'll be damned if I'm gonna rewrite it.

But, forgetting all the lost stuff I wrote about the M240...I also have my eye on Fuji's X system. I've used the Epson/Cosina RD-1 extensively, so no concerns about fronting an APS-C sensor with M & LTM lenses. We'll see what the MF options are like in the next-gen X-Pro & X-E bodies.

Grrrrr...

-Dave-
Logged
250swb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2013, 04:18:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Tim Ashley makes some reasonable points, not that I am tempted by the M. But I wish he wouldn't use the moronic term 'glass' when he could be more accurate and call a lens a lens (of which one of the components and design is....glass).

Steve
 
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2013, 10:36:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Great, LuLa blew away my post 'cuz I hit the timeout limit.   Huh  I'll be damned if I'm gonna rewrite it.

But, forgetting all the lost stuff I wrote about the M240...I also have my eye on Fuji's X system. I've used the Epson/Cosina RD-1 extensively, so no concerns about fronting an APS-C sensor with M & LTM lenses. We'll see what the MF options are like in the next-gen X-Pro & X-E bodies.

Grrrrr...

-Dave-

Yes, the main problem with the Fuji for me is th manual focus operation and the location of the AF point selection, although h latest FW seems to have addressed AF point selection. I had an x100. Loved it. Except th manual focus ability and AF point selection.  Looks lik the x100s addressed these issues. If these features find themselves in an XPro2 I will certainly get one.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad