Just based on image quality- M8 vs. M9 vs M240 vs M10 vs M10R vs M11

Never expected that sending my M8.2 to Solms and having to choose between a ME or M240 would be that tough a decision for me. I like the M8.2 but 'common sense' leads me towards getting the newer camera's with warranty for the coming years.

I have the black M8'2 which looks great and I have to get used to the ME grey color. That alone would steer me towards a more expensive black M240. But than the discussion about the M9 vs M240 (Leica CCD look vs more universal look) confuses me. So I go back and forth between the 'familiar M9' and the latest tech m240. :bang:
 
LCT said:
I don't use printers nor scanners to compare cameras but developping files from M8 & M9 with the same raw converters gave me the feeling that the M9 files need more sharpening than their M8 counterparts. Not a big deal to be honest but the M9 files need also more IR correction which is hardly satisfactory for a $7K or 8K camera IMHO. I would still use my IR-cut filters on the M9 if i had one i guess but the M10 will do better on this issue hopefully.
Click to expand...

I just leave mine on the lens all the time, either camera. The 240 will benefit also so I have read. I bought some metal screw on shades from B&H as the filter tends to catch stray light with the currently short shades on the M lenses.
 
shaper softer all depends on the glass you put in front your camera a 35mm lens on a m8 is completely different m9 because of the crop on m8, dof at wide open f2 changes to approx 2.8 when put in front of m9, so will defiantly be sharper, so comparison is for the user not the print. but keep disagreeing I'm enjoying the thread and I'd love to own a digital M.
 
One advantage to keeping an M8 is that if one were ever to get the urge to do IR the M8 is one great IR camera, both b&w and false colour.
 
I took advantage of the Solms discount to part exchange my M8.2 for the M. I had the choice of either accepting the coffee stain (which could be an issue if I wanted to sell at a later date), a used M9-P, a new M-E or an M. The M-E would have been the cheapest option but there was little difference in the used M9-P versus the M.

I absolutely love the M. Compared to the M8.2 (I have never used an M9) the high iso capabilities are not just simply better but massively improved. 3200 files are relatively noise free and very acceptable. The EVF allows excellent framing with wide angle lenses. The rangefinder mechanism (despite no comment from Solms) is an improvement on the M8.2.

I am perfectly happy with both the colour and b/w output (I always shoot RAW). In fact I would judge that the colour is better (I find I use it more) and b/w just as satisfying as the M8.2 (my biggest worry!).

The M8.2 is a fine camera - and remains so. In my (humble) opinion the M is better. Your views may vary!

James
 
wpm said:
I'm not here to fan the flames between which has better IQ, the M8 or 9.
Two weeks ago I bought an M8.2 in good shape with just a little brassing for character. I held my breath with all the known issues with Leica no longer supporting that model. I decided it would quench my GAS for a digital M for awhile.
Anyway, as to image quality, I've noticed that with certain grays, notably my Mazda MX5, the image comes out blue. I've used coded and non-coded lens, with and without ir cut filters, auto white balance and wb taken with an expo disk. Still comes out blue. Am I missing something or am I destined to deal with this in pp?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Click to expand...

The best advise is to use the IR filter or you will not benefit from this great camera. That is my experience of using the camera with out filters and I started filters and seen the different. Better colours I have seen from M and better than M9 i am sure.:D
 
I had an M8, M9-P and now M240.

I found that in nice light, I enjoy the look of the M9 photos most. Although they aren't actually better from a technical standpoint I preferred the way it rendered the scene with the highlights and shadows. It seemed crisper and i preferred the skin tones. In any other light or lack of, I prefer the M240.

Whichever choice, no doubt you will enjoy it!
 
Roel said:
I have the black M8'2 which looks great and I have to get used to the ME grey color. That alone would steer me towards a more expensive black M240. :bang:
Click to expand...

The M8's are finished in black chrome, and the M240's use black paint. I'm in the minority that prefer the black chrome finish over the painted versions. The matte finish just looks nicer than the paint finish to me. It also feels a little cooler in the hand, versus the softer feel of paint.

I also prefer the grey ME over the steel grey M9. :)
 
Johann Espiritu said:
The M8's are finished in black chrome, and the M240's use black paint. I'm in the minority that prefer the black chrome finish over the painted versions. The matte finish just looks nicer than the paint finish to me. It also feels a little cooler in the hand, versus the softer feel of paint.

I also prefer the grey ME over the steel grey M9. :)
Click to expand...
While I find myself thinking that I shouldn't care about the aesthetics of the camera, only the photos I take with it, I'll have to confess that I actually do care, and perhaps more than I'd like to admit. On the other hand, I do rather like the black paint on my M240, so I guess I'm OK. I'll be even more OK, I'm guessing (again), once I've used it enough for a bit of tasteful brassing ('till now only on the Thumbs Up device I have permanently attached). But it's early weeks yet...

...Mike

(P.S. - for that g*damn much money, I think I'm allowed to care how the d*mned thing looks!)
 
Last edited:
mfunnell said:
While I find myself thinking that I shouldn't care about the aesthetics of the camera, only the photos I take with it, I'll have to confess that I actually do care, and perhaps more than I'd like to admit. On the other hand, I do rather like the black paint on my M240, so I guess I'm OK. I'll be even more OK, I'm guessing (again), once I've used it enough for a bit of tasteful brassing ('till now only on the Thumbs Up device I have permanently attached). But it's early weeks yet...
Click to expand...

It took me about six months of (almost) daily use for brassing to start on my black paint M240. It did start to look much better then! :)

On the original topic (image quality), and having owned an M8, M9 and now an M240, I have to agree with a lot of the posts that the M9 had the best output in good light. There is indeed a nice film-y look to the DNG's. It took me a while to learn how to process the M240 DNG's to look more like the M9's (TIP: use the Clarity slider), and now I'm starting to bring them closer to each other in look. Alien Skin Exposure helps a lot too.

In low light, high ISO situations, though, the M240 does shine!
 
Johann Espiritu said:
(TIP: use the Clarity slider)
Click to expand...
I'm not quite sure about this. I never owned an M8 or M9, so I'm not trying to emulate anything, but I've found (YMMV, and your taste might vary too) that M240 RAW (ie. DNG) files, in many circumstances, can fall apart rather quickly (again to my taste) with over-use of the Clarity slider (at least in comparison to, say, my original Canon 5D RAW files). To my taste, you may be right in some circumstances but I'd also caution "be very careful with this one".

Johann Espiritu said:
In low light, high ISO situations, though, the M240 does shine!
Click to expand...
I have certainly found it so. In my experiments so far I've found photos up to ISO 3200 to be easily handled, rather better than I'd expected:

This has had (by my previous expectations) rather little in the way of post-processing (simply taking the standard PS CS6 / ACR default noise reduction; which at lower ISO values I simply reduce to zero) yet is completely useable without further work. I've found this an added bonus, given that I'd been led to believe that the M240 was horridly noisy at high ISO compared to cameras which I'm more familiar with yet find, in fact, worse. Perhaps, again, that's a matter of tastes varying.

...Mike
 
I really understand why someone would keep his M8 instead of going into an m9 or m240...the m8 is that good.

Perhaps the only thing is keeping me from getting an m8 again is the fact I really use the full frame sensor and can´t live without my redscale elmar.
My lens choice, 50mm and 28mm. Both for depth of filed and angle.
 
I am using my M8-up dated after shutter broken, as my Digital and all I know is lot of people are arguing to own the latest Leica that come to the market is the best and even whiteout knowing the full potential of a camera they used as previous they defend what they have in their hand. Briefly M8 make best colour photos and best B&w than the M9 or MM series .

You can see the Photos around you see in the internet and compare them and consider the talks of people who are talking . Compare your own pictures. I am comparing Mine always to the pictures I see of others. That is how i justify. M8 Is a good camera. I never change it But Planing to go for for a M Monochrome as it a different camera. :)
 
M8 is no doubt a good camera. I know lot of folks are defending their cameras they have in their hand like as I do.. Ha Ha :D . But the truth is according to my experience as a sole Digital camera owner M8 Leica, I learned M8 camera is unique and has a special colour and B&W rendering and it is more pronounce and different than M9 and MM cameras. It non arguable what ever thinks others says my photography in colour and B&W Looks better than the Colour that I see from others who uses M9 or MM . I never want to change my camera to update as what some keep changing to the latest camera to improve the photography. I did it 16years ago buying my M6 after going for all cameras since 1985 and it is still my best camera.

All of you know M6 ....it is still more competent and efficient as the New M monochrome.
And the next change I did was bought my Hasselblad after my Bronica Sq - SQ-A .. So I bought my M8 4years ago still I love this camera,:rolleyes:
 
jaapv said:
The framelines on the M8 and M8.2 are not essentially different. RF framelines can only be 100% accurate at one given distance. As the lens is focussed to infinity, they will get too narrow. Experienced users compensate for this. Normally one would expect framelines to be accurate at the shortest focussing distance, to avoid accidentally cut off edges. And that was the way it was on the M8. As the M8 attracted quite a few new users that were not familiar with the phenomena and protested, Leica decided to take a chance and shift the optimum accuracy from 1 m. to 2 m. As this is closer to the usual shooting distance of 3 m. and less pronounced at infinity, the gamble paid off in far less complaints. But the "zoom" effect of the field of view in relationship to the framelines is unaltered. And now the framelines are too wide at closest focussing distance on the M8.2. So on the M9 they reverted to 1 m. And you know what? Nobody even noticed...
Click to expand...

When I got my m8 upgraded in to M8.2 they have( Leica Slomes ) adjusted my frame lines and It was mentioned in the details of service . I have immediately noticed form my photos the difference and Of course better than than the M8 I had before . It is not funny :D and they are much better. I read lot of people who are Leica photographers ... are mentioning about M.8 frame lines are better and far more better than M9 .

Am I missing some thing here . it is really funny..:rolleyes:
 
M240 hands down. The others wont even come close at high ISO. They don't even offer ISO 6400 and certainly wont give even marginal results at much lower ISO numbers.
I shoot dancers in dimly lit clubs at 1/90 f1.4 ISO 6400 and get very usable images (granted, B&W), but that is just out of the question with the other cameras. Maybe a carefully constructed test at native ISO with equivalent lenses might allow for an argument, in real life there is no contest IMHO.

This is a JPG right out of the camera.

drLvHu4.jpg
 
Roger Hicks said:
As soon as I tried the M9, I thought the image quality had gone from 'almost 35mm' to 'for all practical purposes, 35mm'. I didn't WANT to think that. I didn't WANT to buy an M9. But between the image quality, and getting all my old focal lengths back, buying the M9 was something I felt I had to do. Bear in mind, of course, that I can put it through the business, so it's not just a toy. But I found the difference impressive http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/m9 review.html

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Thank you for providing the link, Roger. I enjoyed going over the write-up and the posted images. I agree 100% with your final conclusions. I have an M8.2 and an M9, and they make a wonderful combo. I do not need shutter speed to be 1/8000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top