Two hours in with the Leica M240. How do I like it so far? What do the files look like? How are the batteries? Would I do it again?

The Leica M240 arrived from the Leica Store Miami yesterday. I started charging the two batteries that came with it. The packing of the product was impeccable. The camera came in the original box along with all the original cables, manuals, and other materials. In addition to an extra battery there was also an accessory thumb grip. Nice. The guys at Leica Store Miami do a great job curating the used equipment the sell. Their standards for accepting used gear are high and that means when you buy used gear from them you get a well inspected, well considered product. This is the fifth Leica camera body I've bought from them in two years and I'm still impressed by their service. 

(Disclaimer: I don't work for them, am not sponsored in any way by them, don't get any free gear and don't even get a mild discount. I asked for one. It was not forthcoming..... just so you know). 

What the heck is a Leica M240? It's Leica's first big attempt to bring the M series rangefinder cameras into a modern field of cameras. It's a well built rangefinder camera in the tradition of the Leica M3 and subsequent film models. It's full frame as was its predecessor, the Leica M9 but where the M9 had a Kodak CCD imaging sensor the M240 was fitted with a full frame, 24 megapixel, CMOS sensor that is NOT a Sony product. The sensor was designed and produced by two European companies. Details from Wikipedia here: 

The M uses a CMOS 24-megapixel (6,000 × 4,000 pixels) image sensor designed for Leica by the Belgian company CMOSIS,^[5] and made by STMicroelectronics in Grenoble.^[5] The pixels are on a 6 x 6 µm² grid.

The move to a CMOS sensor allowed for the inclusion of video capabilities but more importantly it made the M240 the first Leica full frame rangefinder camera to feature live view. Which opens up other features such as more advanced metering and the ability to use punch in magnification for fine focusing.

Except for special editions the M240 was the last M series rangefinder camera in the family to use brass for the top and bottom plates. Cameras after the M240 used aluminum alloy, which is lighter, but doesn't give you that nice warm brassiness when the finishes wear off on the edges of the camera. The brass cameras feel denser and more stout. 

To keep up with the new features unleashed by the CMOS sensor Leica gave the M240 a much bigger battery that the ones found in previous or newer models. If you choose not to use the live view and video features this bigger battery translates into a much improved battery life. When I was out shooting this morning I didn't take along a spare battery --- on purpose. I wanted to see what one of the two batteries I'd been sent would do in a long walk scenario. I switched off live view and even shut off the automatic review on the LCD screen. I left the camera on from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. It was set to go to sleep after 30 seconds of no action on my part but the joyous and exhilarating thing I found out first is that it wakes up in less than a second. A light touch on the shutter button and you're ready to go.

The second thing I found out was that in spite of shooting nearly 200 exposures in the raw/DNG format and chimping nearly every shot the battery still had 85% of its charge left in the tank. Nice. Really nice. 

When I was getting ready to leave the house this morning I knew I wanted to use the Voightlander 50mm f2.0 APO lens on the camera this morning. I had several reasons for this. First, I wanted to shoot a bunch of stuff close and wide open so I could make sure the rangefinder calibration with right on the money. It was. Second, I spent a couple of years back in the 1980s shooting with nothing but a 50mm lens on the Leica M3 rangefinder I had back then. It was a 50mm Summicron. Also an f2.0. A bit of nostalgia for sure, but also a nod toward the fact that I'm now wearing glasses and wanted to see the rangefinder patches clearly, as well as the edges of the 50mm frame lines. Too wide a lens and I'd have to ditch the glasses to take it all in.

The camera and lens together are wonderful. Made for each other it seems. If I knew I'd never accept another commercial job I was rush out and find a couple more pristine M240 cameras, sell everything else, sell everything in the studio and never look back. Getting an M camera back in my hands was like walking back into my Grandmother Tuck's kitchen and smelling cookies baking and peaking into the oven to catch a glimpse of a perfect roast... Like coming home.

I have four lenses to use with the M240. Two are Zeiss (28 Biogon and 35mm f2.0 Planar) and two are Voigtlander lenses. One of the VMs is the ridiculously good 50mm f2.0 APO Lanthar lens and the other is the 40mm f1.4 Nokton "Classic." All four are good, semi-modern lenses and they are a delight to use without the need for adapters which end up adding to their size. 

I thought I'd have a much longer learning curve to get back into the saddle but by the time I arrived back home for lunch, around 1:30, I felt like I knew every square inch of the camera, how to set it up and most importantly --- how to use it. Don't know about anyone else but I find rangefinder focusing quicker and easier than any ANY AF camera I've ever used. It just feels natural. 

So, what do the files look like? Well, I've included a bunch below. A couple have adjacent files which are 100% crops. I think the files are nice and detailed but I didn't expect less. There is more noise at ISO1600 and ISO3200 than on a more modern sensor but not much different than the sensor in the SL cameras. And with the new A.I. noise reduction in Lightroom it's easier to fix the noise than it is to talk about it. 

Would I do it again? Meaning buy an M240 after having played with this one? You've got to be kidding. I'm already on the prowl to add a second nearly similar body - -- the Leica M-P. It's an upgraded version of the M240 with a two GB buffer and twice the speed of the M240. The body is pretty much the same. As is the look of the files. But it's also a bit stealthier --- with no red status logo on the front. I will do it again. Count on it. 

Should you buy one? Naw. You should shun them whenever you see one on the market. And then you should send me a quick note with the name and address of the seller. As quick as you can. 

No animals were harmed in this transaction or test. No bank accounts or investment accounts will collapse as a result of this expenditure. The universe will not implode (any time soon). Just thought I'd share my first time back with an M in a long time. And my first ownership of a digital M camera. It's fun. 

Now, you know, you can click on the images below in your browser if you want to see them enlarged...

B. Having breakfast in the kitchen. Reading. Always reading. 

A 100% crop of the above image one above. 

Post St. Patrick's Day? 

clutter collage. 

It's always fun to walk down the back alleys. Well, maybe not at 2 in the morning...

But around the UT campus the best impromptu "murals" are to be found off the 

streets and in the alleys.

Good dynamic range chops.

The current state of print journalism on the UT campus. 

click in because I think this random photo shows off the 3D characteristics at least of the lens.

While out on the walk I went to the Humanities Research Center (aka: The Harry Ransom Center) to see a new show of very old books. I was the only visitor in the galleries this morning. But it was fascinating to see how well preserved some books from as far back at the 1300s were. 

Most books disappear before they age into permanence. Writers hope for immortality

but damn few see it. The first published book of John Milton's "Paradise Lost" was under glass in a case this morning. Amazing. 

Yes. The Leica M240 does fine at ISO 1600. With an assist from noise reduction in Lightroom.

But you would have had to look into the shadows under the table to really see the noise 

originally in the file. 

A section on the importance of the cover art. In some cases books were produced 

with the content merely being filler for the design and craftsmanship of the covers. 

 The first published volume of Shakespeare's plays....

Exterior. HRC. At UT Austin. Also home of the Gernsheim collection of photography. 

World class collection, indeed. 

the Ellsworth Kelly Chapel on the campus at the Blanton Museum. Exterior. 

From the HRC I headed over to the Blanton Museum of Art to take in two new shows. One is a collection of Mayan art from the Los Angeles museum and the other is a show using articles from the Blanton's permanent collection to create a keen dialog about climate change. Both are worth seeing. 

One upstairs and one downstairs. No freebies today. I had to pay the full "senior" fare of $12. 

this was my favorite modern image in the climate change exhibit.

I ended my visit to the Blanton with a quick visit to the Battle Sculpture Collection. It's a favorite of mine. The entire collection used to be housed on the second floor of the HRC but this small handful of replica sculptures are all that remains visitable by the public. And I'm a sucker for statues. Very fun to photograph and they never move when you don't want them to....

Obviously, a tight crop of the image one above. 

"Alley Art. #1"

"Alley Art. #2"

Trying my timid hand at street photography. Got a rangefinder. Just had to try...

Subjective for sure but... my best shot of the day.

More from and about the M240 to come. 

Please stay tuned. Please consider commenting. 

Please consider doing it authentically instead of advancing

some passive aggressive agent. 

As they say:

have a nice day.

 

What sort of camera madness have I participated in today? Oh, I remember, I swam the masters workout and then headed to Precision Camera to buy a brand new camera. I really, really needed one. Hmmm.

The Nikon D750 with the reasonably good 24-120mm zoom lens.

August is a dangerous month. Fraught with all kinds of odd impulses. Way too hot for rational thought to prevail. What's a guy going to do? But let's set this up first and at least give me a chance to rationalize yet another zany and seemingly inexplicable camera purchase (full price, no special dispensation for brilliant blog writers...).

I've been playing diligently with video this year and I'm mixing with bad company. These video guys make photographers look like depression era shoppers. And when they add stuff to their "carts" the prices seem astronomical to me. According to them you can buy a Sony FS7, 4K super 35 video camera for a bit less than than $9,000 but in their opinions the camera requires another three or four thousand dollars invested in cages, follow focus stuff, monitors, memory cards and such before you can really, you know, use it. And then you'll need a lens. Or lenses.

These days all the video guys are excited and fidgety about the newest Sony camera, the A7R-2 and they are lining up only to be told that it's now effectively backordered. Amazon.com had them yesterday but today they are saying "deliverable in one to two months." But you know how those guys over at Precision Camera are always looking out for my best interests so they took it upon themselves to place me at the top of the pre-order list for the Sony A7R-2. Yesterday they called and let me know that they'd gotten a handful in and they had one with my name on the box. Did I

A new strategy for buying cameras. Circa 2009.

Ceiling detail from the Alexander Palace in Pushkin, just outside of St. Petersburg, Russia. 1995.

If you were alive and shooting in the time of film you worked with the presumption that you would buy camera bodies and lenses and then use them until the little cogs and gears were worn down to nubins, then you would sell them all to your first assistant and retire. The image on the left was shot in the time of non obsolescence with the epitome of that breed of camera, the Hasselblad medium format film camera. This shot is most likely from an SWC/M wide angle camera but we didn't have exif in those days so I'll never know. Film was the thing that got outmoded but we could remedy that by buying newer and better film. Although sometimes the film was merely newer.

I caught myself being stupid over the last four years. I was using a film business model in the acquisition and retention of camera bodies. I was buying digital SLR's as though they would last a lifetime. In one sense, they might. The Kodak DCS 760's that I adore are well made and seem to go on forever. But what i really mean is that every two years there is either a doubling of resolution or the introduction of a "can't live without" feature that compels us to rush out and buy another body.

So I looked in the drawer and there were generations of cameras. Fuji S2's S3's and S5's (and I couldn't bear to get rid of them because i'd gotten "magic" files with each of them.....) Nikon d300's, d2x's, and D700's. Old lenses that were purported to be magical, like the Nikkor 50mm 1.1.2 and the 105mm 2.5 and so many more that hadn't be used in years. Like the 28mm f2 that I bought because all the reviews raved about it. It never focused well on a D2x so it sat in the drawer.

We are quoted a price to trade in our older bodies that seems laughably low so we keep them and justify this by calling the body a "back up".......as though we'll go back and use the antiquated thing in the uncomfortable case that our main (and brutally expensive) main body dies prematurely. We won't.

When budgets were rising and work was plentiful the strategy was relatively harmless because we could assuage our longings for more and our nostalgia for the recently retired cameras by shrewd applications of massive cash flow. And are we really doing anyone a favor with all the equipment overkill anyway?

I don't think so and here's why: Since the beginning of the recession over two years ago clients have moved relentlessly to the web. I hardly need to tell anyone here that you don't need four or five thousand pixels on a side to make a good web image. Some magazines have lost 70% of their ad pages. When they fold they'll never be back. We might fantasize (while in front of the camera case) that we'll be shooting double trucks again before long but it might be a couple of years and by then the $8,000 wondertool that we crave today will be old news and ready for the scrapheap. Do you have more downtime than you really want? If so, do you want to spend it with an extra $8000 to $12000 worth of camera inventory?

I took a hard look at the kind of work we're doing lately. The one thing that seems to not go out of style is the need to light things well. If we light them well then we don't need peerless high ISO performance. Oh I'm sure someone will chime in and say that we do but I notice an interesting phenomenon: The ultra pro shooters who demanded super high ISO performance in their 35mm based DLSLR's moved into medium format DSLR's for a spell and never whispered a peep about the high ISO output of those $30,000 cameras. Which are not anywhere near as good as a $1,000 Canon or Nikon....

If you shoot weddings or sports I don't begrudge you the best high ISO tool you can find but if you are shooting advertising, corporate work or studio portraits you don't need (or probably use) anything over ISO 400, maybe 800 in a pinch.

So why go crazy on the bodies. It's the lenses that retain their value.

With that in mind, here's my new buying strategy: I'm buying up the pro level Olympus glass for the E system but I'm swearing to only buy camera bodies that are less than $800. I'll keep em for a year and then trade em for whatever comes out next. That way I'll always have the current sensor technology without the investment in the "talisman of power" that the high end cameras represent.

Don't believe me? That's okay because I'm not always right. But I ran into John Isaac the other day (big time Olympus shooter) and he was sporting the e620. Swore it's his favorite camera. Cost? $599. His take? Superb.

Just a thought. Lenses for the long haul, bodies year by year. No matter which system you favor. Because even when the megapixel hysterics wear out we'll still have dynamic range to drive the market.

I've sent off most of the Nikon and Kodak inventory. For jobs that require (and pay for) the high end gear I'll gladly rent. For all the rest I'll be happy with the 12 megapixel bodies that are now $599 and blow away anything that was available for less than $5,000 just five years ago.

Works for me. Might not work for you.

Hope everyone is staying cool.