Why the big soft spot for Leica's M240? Isn't that camera just obsolete? Depends....

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. 

Back to work. Turns out my former neighbor is the CEO of an Austin based tech company. He'd like me to make some portraits of his senior staff.

Shot with a Leica SL in two steps. Step one was to photograph Chelsea

against a green screen at a theater location. The second was to photograph

a slice of Third St. separately. And slightly out of focus.

Then it was a simple task to composite them together in post.

This semi-retirement or progressive retirement concept can be tricky. I've gotten in six swim practices in a row and been to the gym twice this week and done a number of long walks but I have to admit I was getting a bit...bored. I was missing the early in the year photographic activities that usually arrived, like cedar fever, in the early part of January, in years past. 

I was just cracking open a new book to read. One about Josef Koudelka, when I got an email from the former neighbor who recently relocated from the house next door. He asked if I could make myself available for a photo session. His company needs five people photographed for website use and general P.R. He asked  for an estimate and I went online to see what new Carl Zeiss ZM 21mm f2.8 lenses were selling for. I added about 30% to that and sent over the proposal. The bid was accepted and now I'm booked for Monday morning. But at the civilized start time of 9:30. 

We'll use a similar technique to the one I used in the image above. I'll photograph each of the subjects against a white background, or a green screen, here in the studio and then I'll work with the new company's art director/marketing director to choose urban background photographs with which to composite their chosen people poses. It's a great way to work as opposed to attempting to go out to five different locations and shoot. Especially since the weather forecasts are getting dicier and dicier for the next couple of weeks. Including a 50% chance of rain on Monday. We already have a catalog of 1100+ urban images from which to choose so...no glitches in the schedule.

This will be the second commercial shoot I've done here in the studio since it was recently painted and upgraded. I'll be lighting with a handful of Nanlite LED fixtures because I like the continuous light and I've used them enough to be quite comfortable with their color. No surprises.  It's also a chance to work more with the Fuji GFX MF camera and a few of the lenses I've acquired. 

Diving back into the Josef Koudelka biography, "Next" can wait until Tuesday. After swim practice. 

I'll admit that I've been choosey with work over the last six months; turning down more and more projects. But my former neighbor is a fun guy with a sweet family and he's the kind of client you always wanted to work with. 

Bonus: the masters pool is closed on Monday so no loss of swim opportunity is entailed. And I can always go for a nice, chilly solo swim at Deep Eddy Pool in the afternoon. Now....when am I going to work that nap into the schedule?

My favorite scan of a black and white negative to date. B. at Sweetish Hill Bakery about 23 years ago. Sunday breakfast.

 

B. Photographed with a Pentax 645n camera and the omnipresent 75mm Pentax lens.

Damn. I used to take that camera everywhere. Including to our weekly Sunday breakfast and coffee klatch with friends. In this instance the camera of the day was the Pentax 645N. Almost certainly equipped with a 75mm Pentax lens. And the film, of course, was Kodak's amazing Tri-X 400. Fun to have a camera casually sitting on the table, out on the bakery's patio, just waiting to be picked up and used.

Just digging through my visual past and having fun in the New Year. Hope you are having a blast as well.

Getting comfortable with 28mm lenses. Two in particular....

I bought two Carl Zeiss ZM lenses in 2023. One is a 35mm and other other is the 28mm Biogon f2.8 shown just above. Both of the lenses were put onto the market to support Zeiss's short "experiment" with an M mount, rangefinder, film camera. I'm sure the camera was very good but it was launched into a roiling market at the same time digital cameras, and news about digital cameras, was just flat out frothy. I presume that the few cameras Zeiss actually made and sold are now "collector's items" but the nice thing for the lenses accompanying the camera is that they are fully compatible with all the current Leica M camera products. From M6 film camera, the new M11 to the M240 cameras I like to tote around and make odd, urban snapshots with. 

I bought these two lenses together, in a slightly used condition, and was able to get a discounted price for "buying in quantity." Compared to the same focal lengths in the Leica family the ZM lenses were absolutely dirt cheap. About on par with current good lenses from the big three mirrorless camera makers.

I use the 35mm lens a lot. It's small and light and it's an f2.0 max aperture. The image in the optical viewfinder is right at the edge of what I can comfortably see when I look through the finder. I can see the edge frame lines without too much moving my eye around while wearing eyeglasses. I've resisted using the 28mm as much because, with my glasses on, I can't see the left and right frame edge lines without moving my head around a bit to get the angles right. The finder on the M240 is not what I would call a "high eye point viewfinder." Usually, when I'm in the mood for something wide, I pick up the Leica Q2 and use that. The lens on the Q2 camera is fantastic and the EVF is easy as pie to compose in, and to manually focus with when I want to. But I sometimes like to do things the hard way and so .... I keep the 28mm ZM around. 

I thought about buying a Leica bright line finder to put in the hotshoe which might make using the ZM 28 easier. But two problems bubble up. First, putting a finder in the hot shoe would mean going without the thumb grip that currently resides in the hot shoe and I've grown used to that very convenient attachment. It makes handling the camera so much better. I'd miss its presence too much. But the biggest downside is the sheer cost of getting a really excellent 28mm finder. They are pricy. And having one would be one more thing to carry around in a camera bag. One more thing to remember and one more thing to deal with when changing lenses. 

Instead I thought I'd try a few different approaches. When I am being very capricious and illogical I just guess about the focusing distant and then set the hyperfocal distance on the lens's focusing ring. There's a nifty scale right there on the lens for depth of field when using various f-stops. I see stuff that needs photographing, point the camera in the general direction and snap away. Sometimes I glance through the finder and sometimes not. 

In bright light I have a different approach. In strong daylight the pupils in my eyes stop down a bit and this increases my visual acuity to the point where focusing with the 28mm, even without my eyeglasses, is quite easy and so much more accurate. And, if I glance through the finder and shift my eye from side to side I can also compose with a modicum of accuracy. Most of the images I'm showing below were done that way. Worked fine yesterday. In low light? Might be a bit of a crap shoot...

If I'm hell bent on using the 28 ZM on a Leica M240 and I need to get perfect focus and accurate composition I use a two step approach. With my glasses firmly on my face I use the rangefinder to achieve correct and persnickety good focus. Then I hit the live view button on the back of the camera and compose using the rear LCD panel. It's slower going --- but the dog and pony show described here works well --- mostly for subjects that aren't moving too fast. If they are moving I default to option one, described above. 

Why go to all this trouble when I can just buy a nice autofocus lens for one of my conventional mirrorless cameras? Hmm. I like the friction of the process but mostly I like that the images look different to me when they come from the combination of the older M camera and the ZM lenses. Not profoundly different but different enough to make me notice. Also, the M camera, using a 28mm profile for a similar Leica M lens of the same focal length and speed, allows for a file with no color shifting or nonlinear shading across the frame which is something I saw often when using the same lens on a Leica SL camera. Something about the filter stack on the M sensor is optimized for lenses designed for M series rangefinder cameras. 

It's so interesting to note that different styles of cameras render the colors and the consistency of images from the 28mm rangefinder lens so differently. On the Sigma fp camera, even after using the in-camera programming/profiling feature to adjust for this lens, I see a different color palette than I do with other cameras. And, like most humans, I seem to prefer consistency. 

The thing I love about the Carl Zeiss 28mm f2.8 Biogon is the jewel-like construction of the lens, the aperture ring, and the small, tactile focusing ring. The lens is absolutely tiny compared to modern AF lenses made for full frame AF cameras. So much junk has to be crammed into the bigger lenses....

Sometimes, especially when the urge strikes me to go out and photograph in black and white, I like to put this tiny lens on the front of a smaller mirrorless camera --- like the Panasonic S5, with an adapter. What I get is a very small overall package with a very lovely wide angle image rendering. The total dimensions are so compact that I can fit the system into a coat pocket. ( I never do that. I am a camera strap user...).

I like using the ZM lens on the Leica SL2 camera as well. Not as small a package but on that camera I can use the Leica M lens profiles provided to compensate for some of the optical quirks of the lens. The camera's profiles for the pre-ASPH M 28mm lenses do a good job of eliminating the color shading that sometimes haunts wider M lenses on most other cameras. 

The other 28mm lens I referenced is the one on my Leica Q2. It's a gem and the EVF makes using it easy as pie. It's equipped with the same focal length that I've always had trouble wrapping my head around but I think I'm finally getting there. The safety net for me with both cameras is that they are high enough in resolution and sharpness to allow for judicious cropping should I get skittish about using "too wide" a focal length.

Since I've been practicing I've started to use this angle of view more than I thought I would. The methodologies for use that I've described above become more or less second nature when practiced often, and for hours at a time. In an age when people have gotten use to letting their cameras take over the function of focusing and setting exposures it's actually a different process when one takes back complete control. And it's a feeling long time photographers (especially those who worked in the film era) seem to enjoy. Maybe we just like getting our hands "dirty." 

But when keeping one's hands clean takes precedent the Q2 is right there ready to go...

JC, Does this one work better for you?

 

A few more images to round out and illustrate my feelings about the Leica SL camera. Here mostly used with the Voigtlander 58mm f1.4.

How does the Leica SL handle low light/high ISOs? Hmmm. This image was photographed at ISO 6400. Looks pretty good to me. I still use the cup but it's been ages since I had a coffee at SBs. They lost 

me with the ever present and ever boring "Pike Place" as their medium roast drip coffee.

It sucks. And it's their "go to." 

Can the SL make pretty "monochrome" files? Yes. Even just when you are looking for Jpegs straight out of your camera. Maybe select "medium high contrast" in the Jpeg parameters menu. 

just a consumer advantage message. See above. Sara will do free mullets on Mondays 

at Wet Salon on S. Congress Ave. Not sure if that's worth flying in for.... but?

I magnified the image of the weird monkey up to 100% and contrary to popular belief the 

Voigtlander 58mm lens really does deliver a greater sense of three dimensional depth than 

many other lenses. Maybe it's a feature of the combination of lens and camera body.

Same thought but here referencing the "..IG TOP" signage and the elephant. 

Can I say that the lens is sharp when used at f2.0? yes, I can.

I did a campaign for a dermatology practice many, many years ago.

I didn't get called back. I can only conjecture that the models the agency and 

I selected lacked...."stature" and were also "not blonde enough." 

But these medical professionals always make a nice soft core porn billboard...

I find the auto white balance of the SL to be pretty darn good under most lighting situations. 

Sometimes I cheat and just set the camera to "daylight" and try not to torment myself about 

the details.

Post on the right. Another New Years Eve party I won't be attending. Or didn't attend (depending on the you read this...). 

I shopped at the Hermés shop on S. Congress Ave. Everything in the store was pricey. Made Leicas look cheap. The only thing of real value I saw was this coffee shop across the street. I waited patiently at the cross walk, holding on tight to my credit cards, and breathed a sigh of utter relief at being able to still buy something I wanted (coffee-- specifically a latté) for less than five bucks. Bargains abound. But NOT at the Hermés shop.

Jo's coffee shop has two restrooms for, well, anybody. They are freestanding from the coffee stand and instead of electrical lighting they have ceilings of red Plexiglas which casts a red filter effect over everything inside. I've never felt so red before. But I thank them for their egalitarian approach to providing the public with much needed facilities. And clean ones at that.

I'm not as punctilious as some Northeastern U.S. bloggers but I still think a sign like this is odd.

It states at the top that they have a "Happy Hour" (singular) but then show a time which is two hours in duration. Almost like they can't make up their mind. Will it be one hour? Oh heck, let's make it two hours.

So when you multiply the Happy Hours by the days of the week you actually wind up with 14 potential happy hours. Math is so weird but then I guess the writing is as well. 

My one resolution for 2024 and beyond. And yes, I know that to some readers the sign resembles a phallus. Try to stay out of the mental gutter if you can.... It's a really nice hotel now, they've chased off all the congressmen who always wanted to rent rooms by the hour. Now they just cater to hip tourists... a much better crowd. Promixity to the Capitol Building can be fraught with peril.

TS:CR (too short, couldn't read): 

The Leica SL is the best camera I have ever used for focusing and photographing with fully manual lenses. The camera accommodates them well with accurate aperture priority exposure control, a high res finder, with focus peaking and quick image preview magnification. Also, the color, even with Jpegs, is exactly what I'm looking for. Clean, used Leica SLs are almost all gone from the market now. I should have bought one more but I got side-tracked by the M cameras. Ah well, two SLs will have to do.

 

There are two cameras I've bought in the past three years that seem more...fun...competent.... than all the others. I wonder why that is...

Leica SL + 24-90.

I've owned and used a fair number of digital cameras since I first started dabbling with digital photography back in the late 1990s. There were a number that were very good in their day. There were a  number of very forgettable ones as well. Talking about digital cameras is like trying to hit an erratic moving target. Tastes change, styles change and things that the general public like to see in cameras change. There are a number of features that hobbyists love which don't move the needle at all for me and there as some aspects of a handful of cameras that I just love. It's hard to put it all into a tidy package of parameters but over time one finds that they have developed an appreciation for certain camera models that is both illogical and strong. The winners are usually not the "spreadsheet" friendly models that tick all the boxes but the outliers that are just capable of making, consistently, very good images. But are also equipped with personality.

Everyone seems to have different uses for cameras and that certainly drives adaptation of some models for specific use cases. One man videography businesses seem overwhelmingly to favor Sony cameras because they have very fast and sticky continuous AF. Some sports dads and sports pro photographers swear by either Canon or Nikon because one or the other of the cameras delivers color they way people like it while also providing above average continuous AF and fast frame rates. Me? I've never used C-AF, don't need it and really don't understand why it is such a popular focus setting. When it comes to video production I am so old school I think we should be using manual focus lenses and focus follow gears to deal with moving subjects. And when it comes to color science well....I think Leica, Fuji and Nikon are the front-runners. It's so subjective though. My choice for not just color but also color discrimination, contrast, micro-contrast, etc. is Leica all the way. But, truth be told, I could use any one of the mentioned brands to make nice photographs for clients --- and I have. 

But what is it that makes two particular cameras quite special to me? 

I should start out by stating that the two cameras I am most fond of are both from the same camera maker but one is a rangefinder and the other is a big, pro mirrorless. Two completely different ways of making photographs; or at least composing and "seeing" photographs. The cameras are the Leica M 240 rangefinder and the Leica SL. Both have been superseded by newer models but there is something about the hard core industrial design layered into both of these cameras that makes them amazing. At least to me.

I was deep into Leicas, both rangefinder and SLR back in the film days. Loved shooting with both but for different reasons. It's the same now. The M240 is very much a haul it everywhere and use it all the time/street shooting/decisive moment camera while the SL is at home on a tripod, coupled with lights, used on a copy stand and pressed into service for just about anything commercial. Neither one is a low light champ but then neither of them give up anything in terms of brilliant color and great imaging science at "normal" ISOs. (And by that I mean a mixture of color discrimination, perfect contrast and very complex tonality). 

While I can use third party lenses on the M camera I only use lenses that are already set up for M series cameras. The reason is that the way to focus these lenses is with the cams built into each lens which match up with an arm in the camera body which moves the rangefinder mechanism to focus. Adapt a non-M lens to the camera and you have the ultimate dumb lens. No cams means no rangefinder focusing. This limits the different lenses you can successfully use with the camera. The three main players at the higher end of the M market are: Leica (of course), Carl Zeiss ZM lenses, and Voigtlander VM lenses. And all three makers do a very good job making a small selection of focal length lenses for these kinds of cameras. 

If I had all the money in the world I'd happily cherry pick through the most high performance Leica lenses in the catalog. As it is, given that I don't use the M cameras on a tripod or with flash, I find that the Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses already give me great images without putting a tremendous bite on my net worth. I've limited my selection of M type lenses just to focal lengths that I know will work well within the constraints of the angle of view of the viewfinder window. And the ones that work best within the frame lines supplied by the cameras. For me these are the 28mm, the 35mm, the 50mm and the 75mm options. Going longer means a smaller rectangle in the finder with which to focus and compose. Going wider means having to buy auxiliary finders that sit in the hot shoe and show you, roughly, where the edges of the frame will end up. It's a pain in the butt I'm not interested in entertaining. 

When I head out the door to experience the raw pleasures of photography it's generally with one M body and one or two lenses.  My favorite combos are the 28 + 50 and the 35 + 75. When I travel I take all four lenses but usually leave two in the hotel and only take along two for the day. 

The M camera I've chosen is an old one. It's the M240. It has a fairly modern and very capable 24 megapixel, full frame sensor, a super-rugged and weather resistant body and it's the first M camera I've ever owned that has the ability to delivery live view --- and, by extension, video (which I have yet to try out). The camera is beautifully designed and built, has all the charm of my old film M Leicas and has a battery that last for a long, long time. Usually for at least a full day of shooting for me, which is something like 1200-1500 frames. 

The M240 was announced in 2012, became available in the every day marketplace in 2013 and stayed on the market until around 2017. It was a very popular model and it's still possible to buy very good condition samples on the used market. I've now bought two of them. Both from Leica store Miami and both of them had recently been sent back to Leica for complete CLAs and were supplied with warranties from Leica. Both are black paint models. That's important to me because it means they both have brass top and bottom plates which are heavier and feel nicer than the aluminum alloy top plates used on most subsequent models. 

On an aesthetic note, when the photographer uses his cameras with real working intention, over time the edges of the camera can wear, the black paint can eventually succumb to the friction of use exposing a beautiful, warm brassing underneath. This brassing is the mark of a well used Leica. Something to aspire to for some. And it's much different, aesthetically, from the black anodized finish over aluminum alloy of most current Leica M cameras. When the newer black cameras wear they show what looks like dull, gray metal. The M240 camera is beautifully designed and, with the addition of a thumb grip, feels natural in one's hands. But it's not a camera "for all seasons." There are no zoom lenses, no auto focus, and no image stabilization (not in the lenses nor in the camera). 

For scenarios where lots of useful features and an "all terrain" capability are needed I turn to the Leica SL. I own a newer SL2 which features a nearly 50 megapixel sensor and IBIS but I much prefer to shoot with the SL at it's about as barebones as one could hope for. While incorporating the features I need in order to get just about any job(s) done. 

From what I can tell the SL is pretty much indestructible. The body is carved out of all metal allow and features an IP rating of 52 for water and dust intrusion resistance. Takes balls to list an IP rating instead of just chickening out and saying, "splash resistant." The camera does good 4K video, has a high shutter speed of 1/16,000th, a flash sync of 1/250th and, importantly, a sensor stack that's optimized for best results with both Leica M and SL lenses as well as previous generations of R lenses. You really see the results on the edges when you compare M lenses used on an SL with M lenses used on a competing brand. The viewfinder is big and was the first to crest the 4 million dot range. The finder optics are multi-coated optical glass instead of high grade plastic and the camera feels incredibly capable when you pick it up. Couple all of this with a short and straightforward menu and a minimum of buttons and external controls and you have a camera that every minimalist should love. 

When I use the Leica SL I feel as though there was a single designer behind the exterior design of the camera who spent time really carrying around and using a camera. Prototypes, works in progress. And by carrying them and using them as a photographer  would he or she became better and better at distilling down what the essentials are for a great working tool in hand. 

I prefer this camera for most of my work because it feels just right in my hands. In the old days the rationale for owning a Leica had a lot to do with the quality of the lenses. It's not that Leica lens designers were so much more gifted than their competitors at pure optical design as much as it was the much tighter mechanical tolerances used when making and assembling the lenses that seems to have been responsible for much of the perceived quality differences. 

Now, while Leica lenses still have marvelous reputations for high quality they are not so far ahead of everyone else because of the widespread adoption of computer control machining and advances in manufacturing across the board. While companies can use these "tools" to make remarkably good lenses they can also use the same tools to make incredibly cheap but tolerably good lenses as well. Compromise is everywhere. 

It seems obvious to most observers that Leica often dips into partner and third party companies to fill out their catalog of lenses. The recent 35 and 50mm Summicron Asphericals for the Leica system seem to be almost exact optical copies of Panasonic L mount lenses but have a nicer finish on the bodies of the lenses. Same with the Leica/Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 lenses. If lenses from all the top makers keep getting better and better then there has to be some other reason or reasons to keep embracing Leica mirrorless cameras. There is.

Probably the biggest reason for getting an SL body is that the sensor stack in the camera is optimized to deliver better corner and edge results (and results over the entire frame) when using M mount lenses on the mirrorless body (with lens adapters). This means that committed users of expensive and really excellent (and small) Leica M cameras and lenses can also leverage their lens investment across two different imaging platforms; the M and the L mount. If you really love M lenses but you feel the need for image stabilization you can pair those lenses with either of the two newer mirrorless camera bodies; the SL2 and the SL2-S. But for most uses in good light the SL does a fine job on its own. 

In addition to designing the sensors for optimum performance with rangefinder lenses Leica also provides very well crafted profiles in the camera menu for most of the rangefinder lenses across time. Shooting with an older 50mm M Summicron? There's an in-camera profile for that. Same with profiles for many of the excellent R mount lenses that were supplied for Leica's range of film, SLR cameras. While many of these lenses work fine with mirrorless cameras from other makers they work better when used with the customized profiles provided by SL and SL2 bodies. 

While hardcore Leica SL and SL2 users may turn up their noses at putting anything non-Leica on the fronts of their cameras I don't have the same brand fixation. Or compulsivity. I'm happy with any lens that can prove its own worth in actual practice. For me these include specialty lenses like the Sigma 70mm Macro Art lens, everyday user lenses like the Sigma iSeries of Contemporary lenses and a small collection of M mount lenses. I do have the Leica 24-90mm zoom lens but it's a hulking beast and I only press it into service if people are paying me to show up and make great content. 

As far as primes go, in addition to the ZM, VM and Leica M lenses I use several of the Sigmas all the time. These include the 24mm f3.5 (small, light and sharp!), the 35mm f2.0 (same...well not so small), the wild and weird and small 45mm f2.8 and the 90mm f2.8 lens, which is incredibly nice to shoot with. All of them work seamlessly with the SL bodies and provide great images. Combine these with the really nice color science of the camera files and you can see a difference in rendering with or without actual Leica branded lenses attached. 

I had the opportunity this past fall to use the Leica SL and SL2 cameras interchangeably on a two day shooting assignment. If one discounts the file size it's hard to tell the difference between the SL camera launched in 2015 and the SL2 camera launched in 2019. Both are exemplary imaging machines. 

Again, when it comes to economics, you could splash out $7,000 for the SL2 or....you could, in 2022 and 2023 invest about $2200 apiece in used SL bodies. Combine an SL with a less expensive zoom like the Panasonic 24-105mm lens and you have the color science I like along with optical performance that is 95 to 98 % of what you might gain by spending $5600 on the big Leica zoom and pairing it with an SL2 body. By way of actual example, I bought a nicely maintained SL body with some warranty left over from a recent CLA service for $2200. I bought the Panasonic zoom as part of a used camera and lens kit which made the brand new cost of the lens = about $600. For less than $3K I got a camera, the operation of which I love, the color and file quality I wanted and need, and a lens that stands up well for most of the projects I've thrown at it.

Finally, and I think this is important to me, there is the concept of a "beater" camera. A camera that's in the same system as your new, top of the line camera, uses the same accessories and lenses but is cheap enough to use in the rain, in the snow, banging around in the desert or bouncing around on the floor board of a four wheel drive vehicle on an off road experience. Even better is the use of a beater system if you have a fear of urban crime. While losing an M11 and a 50mm APO (maybe $15,000 worth of gear - retail) to criminal activity would be really painful losing $2800 worth of used gear is many levels less painful. 

I have reasons for owning both cameras. I used one mostly for professional work and the other one almost all the time for personal work. But my situation is a bit different in that I've depended on cameras and lenses for the last 40 years or so in order to earn a living. I can justify two different systems, especially when there can be some crossover between them. I don't expect others who do this as strictly a passion or hobby to have a split need in the same way. But it's good to come to grips with why we do what we do when we do it. 

I have been lucky to have spent much of my time working with well funded clients who rarely feared spending money to get what they wanted. I've been able to buy gear with less concern about budgeting than many. But it's still good to know why you prefer one tool over the other for different kinds of applications. I've been doing this for quite a while and, from my point of view today these two cameras are the best I've used in this digital era. We can't compare the apples and Brussel sprouts of film versus digital cameras. They are such different animals. But when it comes to digital I haven't come across anything else that is as much fun to shoot. Or which helps me feel connected with photography in quite the same way. 

there is a ton of lenses you can adapt to an SL body. Some of the older Canon FD 

lenses have a lot of character. Stop em down to f5.6 or f8.0 and the "character"

converts into convincing competence. 

SL combined with the Leica 24-90mm Vario Elmarit. For work. 

Example of an SL body and an M series 75mm. Nice.

I added a second M240 to my kit in part to make the kit self sufficient.

By that I mean I have a shooting camera and a backup camera which 

are identical. Now that I have camera body redundancy I can travel with that small

system and not worry about the gear. It's a held over habit from

the film days when most cameras did fail from time to time.

We're back.