I'm not particularly new to Leica cameras but I was surprised by just how much I liked the first Leica M digital camera I've owned. So much so that I picked up a second one from Leica Store Miami (don't worry, no links....) when they got in another one which had recently been CLA'd by Leica. So, let me explain why.
My first Leica rangefinder cameras was a IIIf which was one of the older, screwmount bodies. It came with a lovely, tiny 50mm f3.5 Elmar lens that collapsed into the body when not in use. That model was discontinued in 1955. So, about as old as I am. It was tricky to shoot with quickly because the focusing patch/ rangefinder window and the viewing/composing window were two completely separate, small, dim windows. The composing window didn't have frame lines, the presumption was that if you were using this camera you were probably using it with the 50mm lens and any other lens you decided to use on the camera you would most probably decide to use a separate finder for. The optical finders for various focal lengths would fit in the cold shoe on the top of the camera. The routine for taking a photograph, after setting the exposure controls, would be to look through the rangefinder window to focus and then to switch your eye either to the camera's viewfinder window (50mm) or to switch your eye over to the shoe mounted optical viewfinder for the angle of view matching the lens.
Not quite the whip it up to your eye, let the camera set every setting and focus for you faster than you can blink methodology we now "enjoy." But truthfully, the old process was slow enough to cause many lost photographic opportunities. In between a bunch of SLRs I replaced the IIIf with a classic, Leica M3. That body is legendary. The finder would either make you swoon these days or make you dismissive. Why? You'd love it if you shoot standard lenses because for the 50 and 90mm users its finder images are big, and brilliant and the bright lines for each frame are easy to see and gorgeous. The viewfinder had a high magnification. But you'd hate it if you were a confirmed 28 or 35mm shooter because this camera didn't have frame lines for those focal lengths and even looking to the edges of the finder you were unable to fully assess a 35mm lens' coverage, much less that of a 28mm. This camera may have been the one that formed me into a 50mm lens advocate...
I owned many newer cameras Leica such as the M4 and a trio of different M6 cameras (.85. .72, and .55) but none of them felt as good in day to day use as the M3.
When Leica introduced its first M digital camera, the M8, I was reviewing camera gear for Studio Photography Magazine and Leica got me a test camera and some lenses as soon as the camera became available. That camera was loud, had a cropped frame, the finder lines didn't match the focal lengths of M lenses very well, and, did I mention that the shutter was quite loud? The camera also had a sensor that was too sensitive to infrared light. Leica had to start handing out IR filters to compensate for the IR overkill. I gave that camera a hard pass and started diving into DSLRs from Nikon and Canon.
Leica then came out with an M9. It was a full frame camera and many of the faults of the M8 were corrected with the new model. It was very pricey at the time (at least for me) and after I reviewed it I sent it back but... with a bit of regret. By using it over the course of several weeks for a review I got reacquainted with the unique pleasure of using a direct optical viewfinder camera, and also the advantages of focusing normal and slightly wide angle lenses with a rangefinder. Still, I was glad to have taken a pass on that model as well after a fault emerged in the sensor construction. The edges of the CCD sensor started to deteriorate and corrode and the cameras had to be sent back to Leica for a complete sensor replacement. Unfortunate pain in the ass for users who depended on that model.
From the point of the Leica M9 review until just a couple of years ago my mind was focused on doing all the domestic things that usually keep people from buying expensive and unnecessary luxury items. Things like saving up for the kid's college expenses, paying the mortgage and saving up for retirement. Sure, I still bought cameras and lenses but nothing as flagrant and indulgent as new, M series digital cameras and their attendant lenses. I fell out of touch with the brand. Until after the "adulting" dust settled.
Just this past Fall I took a deep breath and started looking longingly at the M series Leicas.
Sure, most people liked the newest models. The M11s or the just recently discontinued M10s. But there were great photographers here and there that sang the praises of an older model; the M240. In some quarters the M240 was regarded as something of a milestone when it came to design and build. Leica is helping people chase super high resolution with newer models but I was certain that for street photography and general art photography the 24 megapixels of the M240 were fine. Maybe even optimal. The one knock against the M240 is that the sensor tech and performance originating from a 2012 era CMOS sensor is not great when it comes to high ISO performer. It gets noisy at settings above 1600.
Leica purists in some circles spurned the M240 because it came with video capabilities and they saw this as demonic and at odds with the "purity" of the M system. I guess I now fall into the camp of: If you don't want to use it just don't push the video button....
What I found when I got a very clean, nearly mint, recently Leica CLA'd M240 of my own was a very, very solid camera that's a bit chunkier than the old film Ms. The only dimension that's bigger than on the traditional film Ms is the depth of the body, and it doesn't impact me in the least. The M240 was one of the last standard models available in a glossy black paint finish over brass top and bottom plates. Newer M cameras (excluding special editions and silver models) have a black anodized finish over an alloy. The traditional brass construction shows a beautiful, warm brass/gold finish wherever paint wears off (edges, around strap lugs) while later units just show cold, gray metal.
Most of the things about the M240 are part and parcel of the Leica tradition. The finder window is brilliantly clear and the optics are superb. The rangefinders do a wonderful job with lenses of 50mm or wider focal lengths. The solidity of the body and the lack of a mirror or a bouncy shutter make the camera very easy to handhold at slower shutter speeds than one might be used to. And the M takes a wide range of really good and really small lenses. Not just from Leica but also from Voigtlander and Carl Zeiss. And any number of Chinese lens makers...
If you need to adapt non-rangefinder lenses the camera makes it easy by providing live view. A first in the Leica M line of cameras. You can even mount an EVF to the accessory shoe if you want to work with the camera disguised as a familiar mirrorless camera. One advantage of NOT using live view or the movie mode is that this is the first mirrorless digital camera I have used that has nearly infinite battery life (hyperbole alert....). I've used the camera for days at a time without sucking all the power out of the battery. I have a back up battery I've never had to use while out photographing.
The camera feels wonderful to use. It's a nice blend of thoroughly modern mixed with the DNA of the original, nearly seven decades old M3 film camera. The first M mount body. And if you've shot with a film M Leica in the past picking up and using an M240 is like getting back on a bicycle. If you learned to ride a bicycle...
Contrary to popular (photo populist?) opinion owning a very useful Leica M digital camera doesn't need to be frightfully expensive. I just picked up a second body for $2400 that's in like new condition. The place I generally buy M series stuff from often has cameras that have, within the past year, returned from Leica Wetzlar service where they are exhaustively cleaned, lubricated, adjusted and brought up to "like new" condition. They even come back from Leica with a one year warranty. I like the assurance of all that so I'm willing to pay one or two hundred dollars more. Peace of mind.
The other thing that can keep the price of ownership down is the wide availability of used lenses and also lenses from non-Leica lens makers like Voigtlander and Carl Zeiss. My current favorite lens for the M system is the Voigtlander 50mm f2.0 APO Lanthar lens which I purchased originally to use with my SL2 mirrorless Leica camera via an adapter. It's the finest 50mm lens I've ever owned. Brand new they are about $1,000. So, my price of entry to the system I really always wanted to be shooting with was about $3400. Far cheaper than the top of the line Sony, Canon or Nikon cameras. Especially when paired with the top of the line standard lenses from them.
The real benefits I see in using M series Leicas are: The direct, optical viewfinder window is a wonderful way of looking at the world. You are basically looking through a clear window and you have to have a mental construct of how things like depth of field, color temperatures, etc. will affect your final image without being able to see it while looking through the optical finder. Without the trappings. It's a very thoughtful way of seeing and reacting and making a photograph. Everything else is like watching TV. Second, most of the lenses designed for the M system are very high quality optics and because they are designed without autofocus mechanisms or image stabilization electronics they are much, much smaller. They present a really streamlined profile on the cameras. And the biggest benefit of these fully mechanical (and mechanically uncomplicated!) lenses is the reliability and ruggedness they bring to the mix. Also a peace of mind attribute.
So, is the M240 camera obsolete and passé? Must we rush to buy the latest and greatest new high resolution miracle cameras? It's always a personal choice. A rangefinder camera is wonderful but it's not without its limitations. If you really need long lenses, super fast autofocusing, complete electronic nanny features and tons of fine-tuning potential then you'd be much better off with one of the latest C.N. or S. cameras and lens lines. If you are a methodical and slow worker for whom the actual process of taking a photograph is a large part of the pleasure then the Leican M might be just what you are looking for.
I won't be dishonest and say that I can use a Leica M240 for everything. It would make a bad film scanning platform. It's not my first choice for a flash-heavy event shoot. Can't really make it work the way I'd like for long lens theater photography. But for walking around in the capitol cities of the world making photographs of architecture, decor, life, art etc. I find it most satisfying. And the images I get from the raw files (compressed or non-compressed DNGs) are every bit as good as anything I see from other cameras with the exception that I won't be pressing these cameras into high (nose bleed area) ISO shooting. Even there though technology is your friend. The new DeNoise feature in Lightroom makes 3200 and even 6400 readily accessible to M240 users and the only downside is the extra processing time needed to implement it.
Obsolete? No. Vintage? Almost. But at a time when people are seeking out decades old film cameras in order to use 35mm film the M240 is vastly better when it comes to image quality, speed of use and the ability to retain value. I see the M240 as a wonderful gateway into the Leica M system. If you buy one and try it out but then decide it's not for you it's probable that even a year later you'll be able to sell it for just about what you paid for it. Once these older Leicas find a "value floor" their pricing seems to stabilize and remain constant for years.
As I wrote above, they are not for everyone. But I feel fortunate that I can now translate all the handling pleasures and haptic intimacy I once developed for the older film M camera with a new, digital manifestation. And I'm very happy when I use them. YMMV.
All files below were done with the M240 and the Voigtlander 50mm APO. Love the colors and the sharpness.
Added: Since writing this I have added a +2.0 diopter to one of my 240s. It's perfect. Also bought one more, new battery just in case they become rare/hard to get. All set for a year of fun-tography.
5 comments:
I understand your “soft spot” for the M240, Kirk. I recall finding it to be a breathe of fresh, productive air following somewhat quirky earlier implementations of the digital M. It was a bit hefty but still handled well. It had the cleanest range of image files thus far. It was, in fact, good enough for me to use almost exclusively for a project at the Field Museum of Chicago (https://www.kentanaka.com/time-in-glass#1) in quite dim light with a glorious (since discontinued) 24mm Summilux-M. It was with some reluctance I let mine go for the M-10R.
So have fun with that M240! It’s a terrific tool very much still a performer among its successors.
To me, the M240 is neither obsolete nor vintage. If we’re talking about manual-focus rangefinders, the latest and greatest don’t offer enough over the M240 to warrant the expense.
As for noise north of ISO 1600, I’m not sure it matters. To many young photographers, who came into the hobby or profession in the digital era, the presence of any noise at all ruins an image. For those of us who arrived during the film era, some noise proudly states “this is a photograph” - particularly with black and white. It’s really a matter of personal taste - or client demands. But if the M240 is being used for personal enjoyment, I submit the noise level is not an issue. I’ll bet I would shoot confidently even at ISO 3200.
I don’t know if I’ll get back into Leica Ms (I still have an original M4 film camera from 1967). But, if I did, the M240 would be at the top of my list.
I wonder if you have ever used an epson R-d1. After an m3,m4 and m6 I went to that and stil use it sometimes today. Stil with my old elmars and summicrons from my film cameras. The result is still stunning. Wished that the m8 was more like that one.
About an hour before my M8 was delivered, I saw (I think on Luminous Landscape) a picture of the Vienna Symphony Orchestra all dressed in burgundy tuxedos. It turns out that certain fabrics, apparently included in tuxedos, completely reflect infra-red light. The result was less than delightful. Note to s.c. -- I still have an R-D1, in good working condition, and I believe it has a Voitlander 35 on the front end, although I haven't looked at it for a year or so. 6mp, if I remember correctly, and not bad, at that. I'm not a big camera guy, but for camera fans, it was fun to play with. What sellers call near-mint examples sell on e-bay for near $2,000-$2,500. I think I paid around $3,000 in 2004. According to Google, that would be the equivalent of $4,831 today.
All my favorite photographers used Leicas. I totally bought into the rangefinder mystique and tried seriously for nearly 40 years to get comfortable with Leicas and never could do it. I gave up and sold my last one around 2010. I'm a zoom lens-SLR photographer, like it or not. That's what I am, so I'll just have to live with it.
Post a Comment