D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins
Thought some buyers considering both cameras would welcome this. If you really objectively analyze both camera systems, you'll see that the one argument Leica users have - size and weight - is in fact false.
A Nikon D800 + lens kit can actually weigh LESS than a M240 + lens kit!
I'm getting tired of "professional" reviewers whining and complaining about the "huge & heavy" D800 system. It's actually less heavy if you consider a typical all round walking setup: body + 28mm + 85mm.
See the link below to read more:
I love Leica and used to own an M6. I'd love a reason to buy a 240... but the reasons just aren't there anymore; other than having something to show off as I walk around with my $15K camera system. Not interested!
#1. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 0briantilley Nikonian since 26th Jan 2003Wed 10-Jul-13 05:50 PM
>A Nikon D800 + lens kit can actually weigh LESS than a M240 +
How about some specifics?
Leica M typ 240 680g; Nikon D800 1000g
Leica 28mm f/2 Summicron-M 270g; Nikkor 28mm f/1.8g 330g
Leica 90mm f/2 APO-Summicron-M 500g; Nikkor 85mm f/1.8g 350g
Leica kit total 1450g; Nikon kit total 1680g
As in your other thread, I'm not trying to belittle the D800, but it helps to back up arguments with facts
#2. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 1Wed 10-Jul-13 06:29 PM
Yes, I posted all the facts in the posts on Steve Huff (see link provided). Scroll to the bottom of the posts, my name there is Sergio.
D800 + 28mm + 85mm = 1675g
M240 + 28mm f/2 + 90mm f/2 = 1457g
BUT, I think a handgrip is essential with the M, so that puts it over the weight of the D800 kit.
Even without, you're talking about a half-pound difference... hardly cause of stating that the D800 is 'massively' heavy and a 'pain in the butt' to carry, as many reviewers claim, when it's compared to the Leica M.
#4. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 3Wed 10-Jul-13 07:20 PM | edited Wed 10-Jul-13 07:21 PM by Surge75
Would be interested to know why you thought so.
First of, he was wrong is his weight data, saying that the battery weight wasn't included.
Secondly, he is one of the biggest culprits of grossly exaggerating the weight savings of the M. I find it shocking that if you actually do the math and look at what everything weights, the difference is minor, or actually heavier for the M, depending on how you equip.
Certainly, saying that the M is "much" lighter is just poor penmanship.
#5. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 4lukaswerth Registered since 24th May 2012Thu 11-Jul-13 10:24 AM | edited Thu 11-Jul-13 10:25 AM by lukaswerth
I don't think I have ever had a digital Leica in my hand, so my capacity of judgement is limited. Just a few points:
1) The Leica M is, as far as I can see, a compact viewfinder camera, therefore not quite the same beast as the d800 which compares more to the Leica S, also regarding the pixel count.
2) What is the dynamic range of the Leica? Is it anywhere near that of the d800?
3) As stated, I lack the first-hand comparison, but I never felt the d800 to be a heavy camera, and 230g does really not seem much to talk about. I do not doubt that the Leica is very handy and probably somewhat more compact, though - after all it doesn't have a mirror.
4) The Leica prices are so high that the camera has to be of first-rate quality - you can fool people only so much. On the other hand, there are lots of people who buy Gucci suitcases and I-don't-know-what shirts just because they want to buy the name.
Trying to be a keeper of the light
also see my Nikonians gallery:
#6. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 0
There is little point in talking about exact weights of different kits or dynamic range comparisons. An M camera and lens are smaller than a D800 and an equivalent lens, no way around it. With a smaller lens, and a smaller body, it feels pretty different carrying it on your shoulder compared with a D800 and a comparable lens, even if the weight doesn't seem dramatically different on paper. On the other hand, with the 35mm 1.4 comparison he mentions, that's something you're going to feel in your hand. Ignoring that would be like saying a D4 is essentially the same as a D800.
I'm not a big Leica fan because it doesn't suit my shooting style, but for some people, they work well. There's really nothing else out there quite like them (not an X-Pro1, not an X-100s, etc.), and it doesn't have to do with resolution or dynamic range measurements. It's more analogous to why some people on this forum like photographing with F3's or F2's - it's a different shooting experience and a feel and way of working that appeals to them. That Leicas don't really appeal to me much doesn't matter; what matters is what appeals to those who enjoy using them. If you see the Leica solely as a prestige item, you're not one of the people who should buy one. Admittedly, there are a set of people out there like that, but there also some very fine photographers who use them for valid reasons.
As for on-line bloggers you don't like, my advice would be to move on and read the ones you enjoy.
#7. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 6Leonard62 Nikonian since 15th Mar 2009Thu 11-Jul-13 11:56 AM
>There is little point in talking about exact weights of
>different kits or dynamic range comparisons. An M camera and
>lens are smaller than a D800 and an equivalent lens, no way
I agree with you 100% Rick. I have been a Leica user for a long time but a Nikon user longer. I never gave the weight of the systems a second thought. To me it was picture quality. I went through phases where I mostly used my Leica's and other times I mostly used my Nikon's. I loved my first Leica digital camera, the M8, but it exposed problems with the rangefinder system and focus shift problems with the very fast f1.0 and f1.4 lenses. When I got my Nikon D3X I stopped using my Leica's. Even with Leica's best lenses the photos from the D3X were just better. The D800 is just another step upward.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#8. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 7Photogcam Nikonian since 12th Jul 2010Thu 11-Jul-13 05:56 PM
I, like Len, have and use both Nikons and Leicas. They are very different beasts and both have their place. To me it is never about weight, it is about how I choose to photograph.
I have used both my Leicas and my D800 (as well as my D3) for street photography. I have used both for nature images. I find the images equally wonderful because they suit my mood and method of expression at the time. That is also why I sometimes use my old Polaroids from the 60s to make an image or two.
Too often folks get caught up in debating about equipment. The majority of equipment today is superb and because we are different, we choose different camera systems. If we all chose the same thing life would be too predictable and boring.
Maybe we should just grab a camera and go photograph something.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#9. "RE: D800 vs. Leica M 240 - why the D800 wins" | In response to Reply # 8Thu 11-Jul-13 06:08 PM
I just wanted to call out that many reviewers erroneously state that the M system is much lighter than a DSLR. That in fact, is not the case (see my examples with the D800 and M240, above).