Opinions on a Leica M262'

[Nikon 2]

Shooting lots of film lately and it costs me $50 a roll, $30 processing, $15 for each roll, $5 shipping.
Like to go digital and save on the costs that film brings.
What about the Leica M262…?

 

[radialMelt]

$50 a roll, $30 processing, $15 for each roll, $5 shipping

Wow that is really expensive processing, no? Labs here dev+scan for $12 CAD. Have you investigated alternate processing options?

As for digital, I had the M10 for a little while. It sure is nice to not worry about overhead, so you make a fair point there. I eventually sold it and went exclusively film however. While the files looked great, I felt that I really had to spend a lot of time tweaking the colors and overall look; there's almost too much flexibility. For me, I preferred the fact that film has the looked baked in, for better or worse. It saved me a lot of time making decisions in terms of the direction I wanted to take my photos. Additionally, the fact that film makes you think twice about pressing the shutter (due to the very costs you mention) made the job of culling photos at the end of a project/day/vacation much easier, on account of simply having less choice.

Food for thought!

 

[bjorke]

Shooting lots of film lately and it costs me $50 a roll, $30 processing, $15 for each roll, $5 shipping.
Like to go digital and save on the costs that film brings.
What about the Leica M262…?

Are you already invested in M lenses, and the rangefinder process of shooting?

If not, a mirrorless that accepts the glass you have might be a good alternative.

The digital M's of that era are a bit slow & heavy imo, but compared to an F2, not bad.

 

[Paul Howell]

Unless you have a brace of Leica lens and you are a Nikon user why not full frame Nikon, DF?

 

[Nikon 2]

Are you already invested in M lenses, and the rangefinder process of shooting?

If not, a mirrorless that accepts the glass you have might be a good alternative.

The digital M's of that era are a bit slow & heavy imo, but compared to an F2, not bad.

My first camera was a Leica M3 that I traded for a Nikon 35Ti back in the early 90’s. A big mistake since the 35 Ti died a few years ago...!

 

[Nikon 2]

Unless you have a brace of Leica lens and you are a Nikon user why not full frame Nikon, DF?

Good advice...!

 

[Nikon 2]

The Nikon DF is 16MP.
What’s the resolution of 35mm film anyway...?

 

[Nikon 2]

The Nikon DF is 16MP.
What’s the resolution of 35mm film anyway...?

 

[darkosaric]

Do you shoot color only? B&W is really simple to do at home. If I don't develop myself - I would also not be able to cover the costs.
About digital camera: I searched which camera will give you most "film" like look out of the box (without too much post processing): I got Nikon D700 for me - it has a character that is not sterile digital, and people also swear on M9 colors.

 

[Nikon 2]

Do you shoot color only? B&W is really simple to do at home. If I don't develop myself - I would also not be able to cover the costs.
About digital camera: I searched which camera will give you most "film" like look out of the box (without too much post processing): I got Nikon D700 for me - it has a character that is not sterile digital, and people also swear on M9 colors.

Yes, color only...!

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

I have no experience with Leicas but for goodness sake if you like shooting film find somewhere that will develop and scan for you at a reasonable price. You are getting ripped off on your processing. I use Fulltone Photo (https://fulltonephoto.com/). They will develop and scan 35mm C41 for $12 a roll (that's with "enhanced scans" which IIRC are about 17MP) and they pay return shipping on orders over $15.00.

 

[Paul Howell]

In terms of resolution, depends on which film you are shooting, ISO 100 or 200, slide vs negative film. I have prints made from ISO 100, Kodak gold 100, Ektar 100, and Fuji Color 400 next to prints from my Sony A900 and Sigma SD9, printed by a very good Canon inkjet printer, at viewing distance, these are 11X14, I cannot see any difference in detail. Maybe up very close there is more detail in the Ektar, but I would need to know where to look. Now if I were to print 16X20, I think the Ektar 100 might show noticeably more fine detail. The Sony A900 is 24MP, the Sigma is around a true 12MP, but I have 8X10 and 11X14 taken with my A700 and bottom feeder Pentax K2000, which are just fine. Like you I have stopped shooting color film, cost of film, processing, and printing, and I do have a darkroom, is just too high. Maybe buy a DF from KEH, shoot a few images then have them printed at a Office Max or Walgreens, 8X10, 11X14 and One 16X20 then compare to prints you have made from a slide or negative. If you don't like it send it back. Other thought, if you are willing pay $3000 for a Leica why not go big, a Pentax MF DSLR?

 

[MattKing]

Just so you know, digital vs. film discussions are at the very least frowned upon here on Photrio. They have been done a million times, and they only result in disruption.
Speaking more generally, and without moderator duties in mind, I can get extremely satisfying 12"x16" prints from jpegs straight out of my wife's M4/3 Olympus OMD DSLR and the kit zoom lens. That is a "16 MP" camera, used to help create machine prints done on RA4 paper at 300 dpi.

 

[albada]

I have no experience with Leicas but for goodness sake if you like shooting film find somewhere that will develop and scan for you at a reasonable price. You are getting ripped of on your processing. I use Fulltone Photo (https://fulltonephoto.com/). They will develop and scan 35mm C41 for $12 a roll (that's with "enhanced scans" which IIRC are about 17MP) and they pay return shipping on orders over $15.00.

+1
You are being cheated. $50 a roll? Who charges that for one roll?! $30 processing?
You should pay about $15 a roll and $15 for processing with scanning.

And you might try developing black and white yourself. Then the per-roll cost becomes almost insignificant.

Mark

 

[Paul Howell]

Food for thought, I read an interview with now retired Nat Geo photographer Steve McCurry who took the famous shot of the Afghan Girl with Green Eyes. He switch to a Nikon D90 with 12 or so MP, if 12MP is good enough for Nat Geo it is good enough for me.

 

[Nikon 2]

+1
You are being cheated. $50 a roll? Who charges that for one roll?! $30 processing?
You should pay about $15 a roll and $15 for processing with scanning.

And you might try developing black and white yourself. Then the per-roll cost becomes almost insignificant.

Mark

It’s $50 a roll total.
$30 processing fee that includes 36 prints, CD, shipping and taxes plus $5 mailing fee to the lab and $15 for the Kodak Ektar 100…!

 

[Nikon 2]

Food for thought, I read an interview with now retired Nat Geo photographer Steve McCurry who took the famous shot of the Afghan Girl with Green Eyes. He switch to a Nikon D90 with 12 or so MP, if 12MP is good enough for Nat Geo it is good enough for me.

I’ll stick to my iPhone 13 Pro Max. While the iPhone 11 with a camera better than a Leica Q2 according to Ken Rockwell and others. It seems the iPhone computer has a lot to do with the image ...!

 

[Paul Howell]

If you want a high MP at a reasonable cost, used Sony A99II. The A mount has been discontinued and prices are falling. Many very good lens, including Zeiss, Minolta/Sony G, Sigma A, are available 42MP sensor 12FPS.

 

[Lee Rust]

I have an M262 and it's a fine, no frills camera that's undervalued compared to other digital Leicas. If you're OK with rangefinder focus and already have at least one Leica lens, you might give it a try. However, there are plenty of other digitals that do a good imaging job and cost much, much less. I also have a micro 4/3 camera... a Lumix GX8... that tends to get used way more than the Leica because it's very light and much more versatile. Image quality is excellent, even though it's only 20Mp with a smaller sensor.

 

[bjorke]

IIRC the D1X that Salgado used for Amazonia was the original 18.1MP edition (link).

 

[darkosaric]

If you cannot get cheap developing - and you pay 50$ --> then consider to get a developing system and chemicals, and do it yourself. Developing color films is easy - once when you get temperature where it should be.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Over time the cost of the camera and lenses are amortized to almost nothing, but the cost of film and processing starts to dominate. The difference with digital is that the camera, software and powerful computer to do the job start high, but the storage of all the files start to dominate. Since I do not do digital photography I can use a less capable computer for the rest of my needs and replace it much less often.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I don't think any of the old Leica digital cameras are worth it at this point. The only Leica that interests me is the last one, but that thing costs a fortune. If you've got the scratch then it is a pretty sweet camera. The older ones had some issues.

If you are thinking of replacing color film with digital I can't blame you, but you might as well step up at the same time. Get something with over 40mp. If you have lots of lenses already then get whatever they will fit on. Mirrorless cameras can take just about anything. I even have an adapter for my Canon AF lenses to fit on my Sony that is made by Sigma that translates everything. It is amazing what is available these days. The latest Sony mirrorless is probably about the same price as the Leica 262 and it will blow the pants off of it. I'd assume Nikon and Canon have similar cameras too. I don't bother to keep track these days.

 

[Nikon 2]

I don't think any of the old Leica digital cameras are worth it at this point. The only Leica that interests me is the last one, but that thing costs a fortune. If you've got the scratch then it is a pretty sweet camera. The older ones had some issues.

If you are thinking of replacing color film with digital I can't blame you, but you might as well step up at the same time. Get something with over 40mp. If you have lots of lenses already then get whatever they will fit on. Mirrorless cameras can take just about anything. I even have an adapter for my Canon AF lenses to fit on my Sony that is made by Sigma that translates everything. It is amazing what is available these days. The latest Sony mirrorless is probably about the same price as the Leica 262 and it will blow the pants off of it. I'd assume Nikon and Canon have similar cameras too. I don't bother to keep track these days.

So far I’m sticking with film and found an optical printer void of using any digital equipment for the 4x6 prints...!

 

[Nikon 2]

I have no experience with Leicas but for goodness sake if you like shooting film find somewhere that will develop and scan for you at a reasonable price. You are getting ripped off on your processing. I use Fulltone Photo (https://fulltonephoto.com/). They will develop and scan 35mm C41 for $12 a roll (that's with "enhanced scans" which IIRC are about 17MP) and they pay return shipping on orders over $15.00.

I now use Blue Moon labs which print optically...!