I continue to be underwhelmed with M(240) images.
[See: M240: Final Verdict.]
I know, I know, the shutter is quieter, and the buffer is larger, and the LCD is better than what we had with the M8/M9/Monochrom.
But… who cares, if the images all look like Canikon… sorry, like Canikoleica?
Oh yes, I forget, we have to wait for updated firmware, for the correct raw converter “profiles”, for people to get used to working with the new files, etc. The problem I have with these sorts of statements, and other statements from many M owners, is that it all sounds like mass rationalization.
Yes, the new “box” is shinier, the new box is newer.
But… I prefer to let the images do the talking. So far, they are inferior to anything I’ve seen out of the M9 or M8 (not to mention the Monochrom).
Sorry, but I’m calling it as I’m seeing it.
Perhaps my long-held view that CCD has something that CMOS lacks is simplistic.
But it appears to summarize things nicely.
If you haven’t already done so, please consider signing my open letter to Leica.
- About the M240… the image quality is a step down.
- The M9 and CCD sensor.
- Leica M9 vs. M240
- Leica M240: Final Verdict
- Leica M9 sharpness vs. Sony RX1R, Nikon D800E, Fuji X100s
- My camera of the year for 2013