Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/11/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]When Leica offers a EVF M camera I would really think about spending the obscene money to get one. ( I do not care that the M stands for MESSSUCHER, if it fits M lenses, it is a M camera. My definition, and I am sticking to it.) The M is out of date; technologically inferior; and generally a pain to keep in working condition, especially if you own a Noctilux, 90 AA, or 75 LUX..), But until they do offer a EVF M ( and mind you, they will), my M9 is my basic everyday camera, especially for longer lenses like 50mm +. The M9 is hard to focus, ( older eyes are indeed part of the problem), needs periodic really expensive trips to the Motherland to be tweaked and banged into functional accuracy, and the ISO performance is at par with my D1 of 1999. I don't really like it that much. But to use Leica glass, there was little to no other choice. The Sony is on long term trial. It has less than a perfect score with WA non-retrofocus lenses. But it does a lot I want it to do with a cost that I CAN afford. The M240 is just too expensive. The add on EVF has not gotten sterling reviews. To me, M240 is a non-starter. Remember, I am retired, never was a Professional photographer, and have a Wife to answer to. I have a limit on what I am willing to spend on cameras that depreciate like a rock in a few years and cost a small fortune to keep working while I do use them. I love the Leica glass. I never blinked about my M6ttl when I shot film. But the M8, M9 and, as far as I have seen, the rest of the digi-Leicas, are just not cutting it competitively nor for useful features. Your mileage will vary. Frank Filippone Red735i at verizon.net A7 is not optimal with wide M-mount wide angle lenses, is it? Your M9 will still give much better results shorter than 50 or 35mm, no?