Leica M10 vs Leica M240

[@BrunoChalifour]

Excellent in-depth review, very practical for the new comer. Notes: -Contrary to what is being said ion the video, NO anti alias / low-pass filter on the M240 (as on the M10) -Leica's car reference, being German, was Porsche (911). So they went from (since the 1970s with film cameras) M4, M5, M6, M7, [digital] M8, M9, M (240), M10, M11. [although M10 and 11 in fact should be M11 and 12vif it were not for the M (Type 240). -with the M (240) more than the shooting rate the problem, especially shooting RAW (DNG) files, was the buffer: after 4 or 5 images in a row, the camera would stall to save the files. The M10 has a more efficient buffer and the M10-P even a better one (twice > to M10). -THREE BIG differences between M (240) and M10 1-as Tim mentioned: the size. With the M10, Leica went back to the size (especially thickness) of the film M cameras, and film M users deplored the extra thickness of the M240 that made it feel like a brick (same reproach was made to the M5 that became a commercial flop). The M10 feels more nifty, more an extension of one's hand ;o) [in reference here to Henri Cartier-Bresson that called the Leica an extension of his eye]. 2-two completely different sensors. a- After the bad experiences with Kodak CCDs [ ;o) some M8 and M9 aficionados will cringe reading this] Leica went to a Belgian company for sensor design and a French company based in Grenoble for production. The M (240) is, as a consequence, somewhat unique. No anti-alias filter as the M10 (contrary to what is said in the video) and a more "Leica" appearance in colour and tone from JPGs straight out of the camera. With the M10 and Q, and following models, Leica is using Japanese custom-made sensors [by a big sensor manufacturer [wink]] and their Japanese look (more saturated colors). [Some describe the "Japanese" look (noticed in lenses before the digital era, Japanese on one side [snappier] / Leitz and Zeiss on the other [smoother]) as more "clinical" which does not mean much anymore with the possibility to create presets on import modifying the look of DNG and JPG files and even make a CMOS file look like a CCD file [re-wink to current M8 and M9 die-hards ;o0] b-far better behaviour in high ISO. With the M (240) you had to stop at 800 ISO, beyond that noise started to show and soon became highly problematic. With the M10 the 800 limit becomes 3200 which covers most usages. All this to confirm Tim's point of view which is that the M240 is a good introduction to the Leica digital M system because it is the most affordable (M8 and M9 are now impossible to repair, M240 is next because of its specific sensor) one. All the reasons mentioned above are why I moved from the M (240) to the M10 [size and sensor capacities]. Now in terms of technology and usability if one can make a financial effort (a lot of M10s and M10-Ps are on the used market now), the M10 or M10-P is worth it on many levels and will stay with the photographer longer.

[@goorackerelite]

I loved my M240 way more than the M10. Strange I know, but the M240 had more luminous colors and looked more filmic for my liking. The ISO was limiting though on the M240 , I was only comfortable shooting at 3200 max

[@mwales2112]

I made the jump from Fujifilm last year to an M240 and the price point was a huge reason for this choice and very happy with everything about it in day to day shooting. Since I have never held or even seen any other Leica M camera while out and about which may be a good thing. If I were to try out an M10 or M11 I would want one and then that crazy price comes into play. Thanks for the video Tim...

[@paulsehstedt6275]

The M240 and M-P240 are faster to handle than the M10. That was essential to me, when I had to decide to buy a new M10 or a demo M-P240. I opt for the M-P240. Keep on rolling.

[@thomassarver7638]

I got the m246 and a year later got the m10. Best of both worlds.

[@zairrewright4131]

Great idea

[@rexgigout1472]

I bought an M10, in early 2018. After a mishap, I bought a pristine, pre-owned M Type 246, in order to keep shooting, while waiting for my M10 to be repaired. Yes, an M Type 246, and an M10, are a wonderful team. Life is good.

[@k3nnyngoo]

Hi Tim, I've been enjoying your content a lot as I recently got my M10-p. It's a wonder to me how you do not have more subscribers, but I daresay keep up the good work and less than a year down the line I hope you'll revisit this comment and remind you how far you've come!

[@timriddick2]

Oh, wow. This literally made my day. I hope to revisit this comment in a year and I hope your prediction is right! Thank you so much for the words of affirmation.

[@danieljohnburke]

The 240 doesn't have an AA filter, so image quality is as good as the m10. The m10 has better iso performance and is slightly smaller and lighter with better LCD. The M240 is great value and has a much better battery.

[@MB-or8js]

I like my M-E 240, but I found its menu a bit hard to get used to. I still have no idea why some menus can only be found when pressing the Info button and are omitted in the main menu. Not the most convenient but easier to get used to is the need to keep the ISO button pressed to change the ISO number. I consider these the little quirks of the M 240. Main con of the M 240 display is not so much the lower resolution but its too contrasty JPG view - too dark images on the screen might actually be good when downloaded from the card. One often overlooked aspect is that two M 240 models - the M-P and the M-E - both have upgraded 2 GB camera buffer which is the same as in the M 10 (the original M 240 only has 1 GB). It makes them faster and more convenient to use.

[@andyjones5192]

If you‘re on a budget consider the M240…other than that it’s always the M10 that will come out on top. Big downside of the M240 is the mediocre ISO performance at higher ISO and the lack of any kind of connectivity. As you said…compared to the new M11 the M10 is a steal.

[@timriddick2]

Can’t help but agree with the ISO performance. Dang it. I should have covered that!.

[@zguy95135]

I like the M10 more but then again that’s the one I have currently. Usable ISO 12,500 is the biggest differentiator between the two IMO. Also man the M240 must be chonky because the M10 is feels considerably heavier than my M2.

[@timriddick2]

Hahaha it’s thicc but again, I think the weight of the m240 makes it feel more substantial than the m10

[@petemcknight803]

“Thicker than a bowl full of oatmeal”--LOL

[@IDaumI]

The M240 has a warmer tone to it's file compared to the M10/P. Also prefer the ISO+dial to change the ISO on the M240 over the stupid knob. I wish Leica would update the M10 firmware to allow custom buttons. And yes the M240 battery is crazy good, you definitely need 2 batteries for the M10. Another good thing about the M240 is the brassing, you can't get that with the M10 unless it's the M10R black paint. One knock on the M240 is the shooting mode is tied to the power switch. I never want to use continuous or timer. Other than that, I love thr M240 and will keep it along side my M10-P.

[@lensman5762]

The M10 viewfinder is an improvement for sure, but I am not quite sure how much of an improvement the rest of the stuff are. Also the M10 is chrome plated so it doesn't show that beautiful M240 brassing effect, unless you have the rare black paint version.

[@jesusalvarado6074]

Thank you for this awesome reviews!

[@UnconventionalReasoning]

Yes, this is an overly specific use... The Leica M Monochrom Typ 246 over the Leica M10 Monochrom to create available light, 'high' ISO vintage-style black and white 'films'.

[@paprhat]

This may sound absolutely dumb because I’ve literally never shot a Leica, but do shoot Fujifilm with mostly manual glass. Does the M240 have peaking even using the display? Just curious since I’m going out on a limb and assuming focusing via the OVF is true to rangefinders. -potential Leica buyer/future Leica addict haha P.S. also a dad photographer!

[@UnconventionalReasoning]

Have you gotten any Leica M lenses to use on your Fujifilm camera? I like the Novoflex adapters [MFR #FUX/LEM], because they seem to be machined at the same quality level as the Leica lenses. Many also like the FotodioX adapters which are much less expensive.

[@poorpolarbear]

every body say "it holds their value" but then the problem it is to sell it, leica niche it is to small.

[@Deetroiter]

This is the truth! Holds its value but you need to find another person who actually wants to buy a Leica. And then you need to find the person who wants to buy the model of Leica you have…even smaller group within a small group. Took me forever to sell my Leica x2

[@Macca-95]

@@DeetroiterThere are hundreds of times more people out there that are looking for any m leica than for an x2 though. Leica m240s and m10s move pretty quickly while the x2 has a much smaller fanbase.

[@ThePhotographersStone]

​​@@Macca-95This is correct because of the price. When someone is ready to move to Leica they are committing to atleast $2k so that puts you close up M and Q. The X2 is priced sub $1k and has too many other great cameras in that price range.

[@alexc8512]

If you live in LA the market is pretty decent. I notice when I search for leicas in other US cities not as much..

[@s.j.249]

Yeah, but what about that sweet brassing on the 240?! 😂 love my 240

[@klarkolofsson]

Very important!

[@zairrewright4131]

M240 !!1

[@JJ-gm4ck]

neither; leica peaked with the M8 with digital cameras.

[@arturodeguzman]

Background music distracting.

[@ruhnet]

Everyone keeps saying how Leica cameras hold their value and then they talk about how much cheaper the M[x] is than when it came out lol. So with Leica digital cameras, it’s pretty much a myth about holding value. The M240 is a very expensive camera for an old digital model, but compared to the new price it has not held its value very well. The M10 although still steep is already dropping in price as well. Leica lenses do hold value very well, but cameras? No.

[@oetproductions8101]

At least 2500€ for a camera from 2012. Kinda held it’s value pretty good imo

[@ruhnet]

@@oetproductions8101 Not really when you consider the original price though.

[@UnconventionalReasoning]

@@ruhnet Three cameras from 2012: * Canon 5DIII, $3500. Now about $500-700, 15-20% of the original price. * Nikon D800, $3000. Now about $400-500, about 15% of the original price. * Leica M240, $7000. Now about $2500-3000, about 40% of the original price.

[@wtorresify]

Just buy fullframe from canon sony nikon and 16-35 24-70 that will do

[@SourPlanet]

DERP