Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Any digital RF you could afford is good value for its current market price.
As long as you actually need rangefinder and digital. Crop, ISO doesn't matter, the rangefinder is.
But I see people buying M10 without even knowing what RF is or people using SLR lenses on M240 and still happy.
As long as you actually need rangefinder and digital. Crop, ISO doesn't matter, the rangefinder is.
But I see people buying M10 without even knowing what RF is or people using SLR lenses on M240 and still happy.
trix4ever
Well-known
Well I recently bought a used M240 for under US$3000, use it alongside my M6 and M4-P which I use for black and white only.
I thought I would only use the M240 for mono, with the option of colour, but fell in love with its colour output (raw only, hate the jpegs), at 59 I'm thinking of doing a serious colour project, the first in my life, totally inspired by the M240. Now I'll have to start a digital colour website! (always used digi Nikons for commercial work until I semi-retired, but they bored me to death).
So for me it was terrific value and the first digital Leica that seemed grown up and I wouldn't need to make excuses for it. In particular I love the shutter sound which I loathed in the M8/9's that I tried.
http://filmisadelight.com
I thought I would only use the M240 for mono, with the option of colour, but fell in love with its colour output (raw only, hate the jpegs), at 59 I'm thinking of doing a serious colour project, the first in my life, totally inspired by the M240. Now I'll have to start a digital colour website! (always used digi Nikons for commercial work until I semi-retired, but they bored me to death).
So for me it was terrific value and the first digital Leica that seemed grown up and I wouldn't need to make excuses for it. In particular I love the shutter sound which I loathed in the M8/9's that I tried.
http://filmisadelight.com
Huss
Mentor
Yeah, I hated the shutter feel and sound on the M9. There was no crispness to the action, and the sound was weird/'cheap'. The LCD screen on the back was also almost useless.
The M240, used, really is the best deal out there.
ktmrider
Well-known
Agree. I owned an M9 but never really bonded. I bought a used MP240 in January and it is worth the money even if it has features I seldom use.
narsuitus
Well-known
Update:
I had given up on hoping to find a digital Leica rangefinder that I liked for reasonable price.
However, with the introduction of the M10D, M10R, M10P, and M10monochrome. the M10 prices have dropped to such a low price that I decided to buy a used chrome Leica M10.
Thus far, I have been very pleased with my purchase.
Deardorff38
Mentor
It's ironic that the M8 ($5500/ 2006 ) & M9 ($7000+/ 2009) should get the highest percentage of votes, given their limitations or sensor corrosion problems. "Come home Leica....all is forgiven."
Tom R
Established
I own and use an M8-2, and have come to terms with its limitations. (I am grateful that I never purchased any other Leica digital camera body; I consider the somewhat hefty outlay of cash (about $2,300.00 (US) five or so years ago, an acceptable loss when the shutter or some other component craps out.)
Opinion alert: The less money spent on ANY digital camera body, the less likely that the purchaser will experience buyer's remorse as some "new" variation with yet another (questionable) feature will roll-out with a substantial jump in base price a few months later ... only to then experience some unforeseen technical failure or limitation that will, naturally, give rise to another crop of camera models.
I don't blame Leica for this, however. I think it's in the nature of a technology-driven marketplace where too often feature-creep replaces meaningful innovation in the interest of keeping the shareholders happy.
Opinion alert: The less money spent on ANY digital camera body, the less likely that the purchaser will experience buyer's remorse as some "new" variation with yet another (questionable) feature will roll-out with a substantial jump in base price a few months later ... only to then experience some unforeseen technical failure or limitation that will, naturally, give rise to another crop of camera models.
I don't blame Leica for this, however. I think it's in the nature of a technology-driven marketplace where too often feature-creep replaces meaningful innovation in the interest of keeping the shareholders happy.
It's ironic that the M8 ($5500/ 2006 ) & M9 ($7000+/ 2009) should get the highest percentage of votes, given their limitations or sensor corrosion problems. "Come home Leica....all is forgiven."
Probably because the thread is 6 year old.