Leica Back to my old friend

VINCETAN

Top Veteran
Aug 19, 2013
Been using the Olympus E-M5 Mk II lately and really enjoyed it with its amazing 40-150 f2.8 lens. What's not to like, it is fixed aperture, allows macro and AF. Like it so much that I started contemplating on a complete switch. I started think about how nice it would be to be able to just point and shoot.

Yesterday, we took a trip to Boston and I decided to bring my old friend with me. The Leica M 240. I figure, maybe one last dance as they say. Carried only the 24 Elmarit-ASPH and the 50 Lux ASPH. There is just something about using a rangefinder that is special. The color seems to be nicer also straight out of the camera. Conclusion is that there is a place for the Oly, it is the soccer game that my kids will be in. But the M will stay for most of the other situation.

L1003456.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr

View attachment 11180L1003422.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr

L1003517.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr

View attachment 11182L1003497.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr

L1003477.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr
 

VINCETAN

Top Veteran
Aug 19, 2013
Dave,

I have to do some fudging with LR to get the right color (for my eyes).

First pic was straight out of the camera without adjustment. The other 2 I have to make some due to the harsh light (noon time).

Vince


I'm loving the colors from the M240 Vince! Was there an WB issue before that Leica fixed already?
 

VINCETAN

Top Veteran
Aug 19, 2013
If I could get this colour from mine I would be very happy! I bought a whi-bal card but still struggle sometimes.
Thanks, I find that my M 240 produces better color than the Olympus E-M5 Mk II that I just got. However, I still like to tweak it just a bit more to get the color the way I like. I used both LR5 and Photoshop to adjust. I also started using Topaz Lab ReMask to mask area to have better control.
 

hepcat

New Member
Aug 19, 2014
Eastern Iowa
I feel just the same way about my M9. BTW, I started with an M8 and bought the UV/IR cut filters... I subsequently bought the M9 and left the filters on the lenses when I used it. The colors with those UV/IR cut filters are absolutely out-of-this-world SOOC with the M9. Get one and try it with your M240. It might just make that little extra difference you're looking for.
 

rflove

Veteran
Jul 13, 2014
I still have my OM-D EM-1 and the 12-40 f2.8 lens (other lenses too). And yes, the Oly is a formidable combo, but it just cannot come close to the M240 with any of my Leica lenses. The only place where the Oly is superior is for the long tele lens shooting. For some reason the M240 will not give me sharp photos of the moon with any lens I try. So far I tried the 70-200 Vario Elmar R and the 135mm Tele - Elmar with no luck...

For everything else, the M240 with the 50mm Lux or 35mm Cron, 28mm Elmarit, 90mm Elmarit, etc., really shines.
 

VINCETAN

Top Veteran
Aug 19, 2013
I still have my OM-D EM-1 and the 12-40 f2.8 lens (other lenses too). And yes, the Oly is a formidable combo, but it just cannot come close to the M240 with any of my Leica lenses. The only place where the Oly is superior is for the long tele lens shooting. For some reason the M240 will not give me sharp photos of the moon with any lens I try. So far I tried the 70-200 Vario Elmar R and the 135mm Tele - Elmar with no luck...

For everything else, the M240 with the 50mm Lux or 35mm Cron, 28mm Elmarit, 90mm Elmarit, etc., really shines.
I am in the hunt for either the Lumix 12-35 2.8 or the Oly 12-40 f2.8. I agree with you in regards to tele. I have the Oly 40-150 f2.8 and that thing is amazing. I actually sold my Nocticron because I ended using the Oly more as it is more flexible albeit a little big for a m4/3. Plus the macro is a great bonus.

I have yet to try the M lens on the Oly. Been to lazy and busy. Plus the E-M5 Mk II interface is not that great for adapted lens.



Some shot with the Oly 40-150. For macro and flowers, it is actually pretty good.

_8220018.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr

_8270008.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr

But for people, I find it lacking.

_8220048.jpg by VINCE, on Flickr
 

VINCETAN

Top Veteran
Aug 19, 2013
Carl,

The 42 is a lovely lens and I enjoyed it but with the overlap and the limited funds, I ended up selling it. My main purpose for the m4/3 is my daughter's soccer game which will start tomorrow. The 40-150 is better lens for that. Maybe after soccer, I can go back to the 42 and get rid of the 40-150. In the meantime, I just got (again) the 25mm summilux.

The M 240 will also be staying in my bag. Every time I use it, there is just something special.

Vince
 

christilou

Legend
Jul 13, 2010
Sunny Frimley
I sent my M240 away for a valuation but in the end asked for it back. I feel I should just keep it. It does produce some unique pictures from time to time, i.e. when I manage to get everything to come together, which is rare!)
 

rflove

Veteran
Jul 13, 2014
Dave

I think it is. Very different. Just seems to be more involved.

Vince
For me, there are a couple of big reasons which explain the "uniqueness" of shooting with the Leica M. First, it it's reminiscent of shooting with film back in the day. For one thing, unless you use the "live view" feature, you don't really know how the shot will look like until after you've shot it. Particularly because the RF finder is not a view through the lens.... Secondly and probably the most important difference between shooting the Leica vs other digital cameras is that one gets to shoot with the Leica glass.... True, you can use Leica lenses adapted to other cameras (I have a EM-1 Oly and several adapters and use the Leica lenses with the EM-1), but it's just not the same... The Leica sensor and the MAESTRO firmware are made to take advantage of the "best lenses in the world". Other cameras just don't produce the same effects (there are exceptions of course).

I sent my M240 away for a valuation but in the end asked for it back. I feel I should just keep it. It does produce some unique pictures from time to time, i.e. when I manage to get everything to come together, which is rare!)
I'm thinking that you might benefit from more experience with the M240. When I got my first RF digital camera (Epson RD-1) I had a heck of a time getting things "just right". Frankly, I rarely ever did. However, I became quite enamored with the whole RF experience and shot a lot of photos with that wonderful camera. Then I got the M240 and paradoxically, I found I had as much trouble getting things "just right" as I did with the RD-1. It was alarming at first since I dropped a load of cash to get into the "Leica experience" and thought I had wasted much $$.... Fortunately I just continued to shoot with the Leica and the Leica lenses and at some point, it became very easy to get capture wonderful images with it.

I will say however, that in order to gain the mastery over the Leica outfit, I pretty much stopped shooting with the EM-1 or the Sigma DP2-M and concentrated on the M240. Sure, the EM-1 is a wonderful camera and produces lots of good photos. And the DP2-M can produce amazing images albeit far more rarely than even the M240. The Sigma is far more difficult to shoot with that the Leica ever was.

Anyway, I would encourage you to take the Leica everywhere and leave the other cameras at home. Get out and shoot lots and lots of photos paying attention to the results and making small adjustments of exposure to get the shots you want. The Leica is fairly easy to hold steady with practice and shots at 1/30 come out very well a lot of the time. I would also shoot a bit in the underdeveloped side as you can easily recover highlights in LR, but once you blow the highlights, you cannot recover from that. Good luck with you M240 :)
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom