I've been loving my RX1...the image quality and low light capability is nothing short of astounding...with that said, I've always lusted after a Leica...that's just the way it is.
Well..I've recently been getting serious about that goal, the financial timeline etc. To that end I've been seriously investigating user reports and tests and checking out real world shots taken with the M240 (and the M9 also)
Hmm...I was underwhelmed to say the least. I realize that shooting with a rangefinder it's difficult to get tack sharp focus where it needs to be but the amount of shots on the web that are just plain soft is amazing. Even shots that are examples of being "tack sharp" are not in the same league as the RX1, not even close.
Well, finding that out was disappointing but I was determined...
So, I started checking out the high ISO capabilities....3200 max? Really? Oh no. And pushing the files shadows up even 1.5-2.0 stops resulted in banding and ugliness from what I saw.
Then if that wasn't bad enough, there is no close focusing capability on the M240...darn!
When any of these things are brought up in forums, (and I say this with love) rabid defense of the L camera's come out; it's obvious. All kinds of excuses are given as a reason to overlook whatever foible is brought up but basically it comes down to "the experience" aka "how you feel when using the camera."
So that led me to a flickr group where a former M9 and M240 user laid it all out. He described all the issues and short comings of an $8000.00 camera that shouldn't be there and I agreed with them all...which led me to Lloyd Chamber's blog and his assessment of the M240, which echoed the flickr user's.
So I guess what I'm saying is that I love my RX1 more than ever seeing the poor design choices in an 8000.00 camera that the RX1 actually got right! (EVF quality, quick menu, ISO, exposure in 1/3 stops, battery accessibility, image quality, dynamic range, lack of focus shift and front/back focusing...etc.)
Now...if SOMEONE comes up with a hybrid-OVF with floating AF box and framelines for the RX1...yikes! I'd be in heaven...the Leica-killer would be complete.
Well..I've recently been getting serious about that goal, the financial timeline etc. To that end I've been seriously investigating user reports and tests and checking out real world shots taken with the M240 (and the M9 also)
Hmm...I was underwhelmed to say the least. I realize that shooting with a rangefinder it's difficult to get tack sharp focus where it needs to be but the amount of shots on the web that are just plain soft is amazing. Even shots that are examples of being "tack sharp" are not in the same league as the RX1, not even close.
Well, finding that out was disappointing but I was determined...
So, I started checking out the high ISO capabilities....3200 max? Really? Oh no. And pushing the files shadows up even 1.5-2.0 stops resulted in banding and ugliness from what I saw.
Then if that wasn't bad enough, there is no close focusing capability on the M240...darn!
When any of these things are brought up in forums, (and I say this with love) rabid defense of the L camera's come out; it's obvious. All kinds of excuses are given as a reason to overlook whatever foible is brought up but basically it comes down to "the experience" aka "how you feel when using the camera."
So that led me to a flickr group where a former M9 and M240 user laid it all out. He described all the issues and short comings of an $8000.00 camera that shouldn't be there and I agreed with them all...which led me to Lloyd Chamber's blog and his assessment of the M240, which echoed the flickr user's.
So I guess what I'm saying is that I love my RX1 more than ever seeing the poor design choices in an 8000.00 camera that the RX1 actually got right! (EVF quality, quick menu, ISO, exposure in 1/3 stops, battery accessibility, image quality, dynamic range, lack of focus shift and front/back focusing...etc.)
Now...if SOMEONE comes up with a hybrid-OVF with floating AF box and framelines for the RX1...yikes! I'd be in heaven...the Leica-killer would be complete.