ianman Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2341 Posted January 19, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Good to see you back. I bought one of your books. It brings a smile to my face thinking of it. +1 I bought my 75Lux from yanidel and it also brings a smile to my face Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 19, 2017 Posted January 19, 2017 Hi ianman, Take a look here Leica M 10. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
keithlaban.co.uk Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2342 Posted January 19, 2017 Initial thoughts from an M9-P and M240 owner. I'll take the 100 ISO (if that's true base), I'll take the higher ISOs and higher ISO performance, I'll take the scrolling focus and I'll take the higher DR. I'm indifferent about the smaller size and the re-use of the Visoflex 020. I'll leave the shutter lag and I'll leave the smaller battery. On balance I believe the M10 to be the best digital rangefinder out there. What this new release has made me realise is that I have two rangefinder cameras that I love using (one of which I will eventually sell). It's also made me realise that what I'm really in the market for is an EVF based M (QL or whatever) to compliment my rangefinders rather than another rangefinder with an accessory EVF. That's where I am, but hey, never say never. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2343 Posted January 19, 2017 A night to sleep on it....... The feature I am most surprised at is the apparent poor performance of the EVF/LV. Jono Slack's review suggests a blackout of just under a second, and Sean Reid's says just over. The SL's is not perceptible. When this issue was raised at speculation stage a month or so ago, some here suggested that the 020 EVF was not the bottleneck, but the M240's Maestro I processor. That seems to be not the full story, and Jono implies that it is the mechanical shutter that now slows responsiveness. Given that Leica's approach with the M10 is that "if we can't do it the best way we won't do it at all" (no video, USB), my surprise is that this has slipped through. Yes, EVF/LV is secondary to "normal" manual operation, but then so were video and tethering. Perhaps Leica has an electronic first curtain (or fully electronic) shutter up its sleeve as a firmware update (the SL implemented a fully electronic shutter by firmware, but only at shutter speeds too high for common use). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geetee1972 Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2344 Posted January 19, 2017 Bloated, heavy, pig ugly... well say what you think! I think the problem is that the moment you make a camera like the Q have interchangable lenses, that's what happens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Almulla Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2345 Posted January 19, 2017 With less banding, higher ISO and better DR I'm interested. Only problem is me jumping back to film and noticing how sexy B/W film is again even after being scanned into a digital format. Got to decide if my next purchase will be an M10 or 6x17 panorama film camera. Anyway, either choice is far down the road unfortunately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oronet commander Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2346 Posted January 19, 2017 True, but this is a Leica forum. So I assume people here use Leicas for reasons other than pure practicality. I mean, you could go even further: the A7II, with adapter, can be used exactly the same way one would use an M and with the same lenses. Indeed, and I get your point, but the original comparison was of images not cameras. That's why I said it wasn't encouraging :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2347 Posted January 19, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) well say what you think! I think the problem is that the moment you make a camera like the Q have interchangable lenses, that's what happens. Tell that to Sony and Hasselblad. If Hasselblad can create a medium format camera that's only a little larger than an M then I'm sure Leica given their expertise at producing compact quality camera solutions can do something similar with a full frame, interchangeable lens, EVF based camera. Actually, given the amount of folk here calling for such a camera I'd be amazed if they weren't already doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2348 Posted January 19, 2017 Indeed, and I get your point, but the original comparison was of images not cameras. That's why I said it wasn't encouraging :-) It IS about the image. The performance (lack of) of M lenses on Sony A7 bodies is well documented and discussed. Specially WA lenses. There is also a difference (huge) in haptics. Many who opt for A7 bodies use it with 1) native lenses, 2) normal to longer M lenses and in some cases 3) do sensor mods. For M lenses, M bodies are the best as far as image is concerned. There is no alternative to the M+28 elmarit ASPH (one example) for the same image performance in the similar compact package. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted W Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2349 Posted January 19, 2017 Indeed, and I get your point, but the original comparison was of images not cameras. That's why I said it wasn't encouraging :-) I meant it as a compliment (and it was a camera I know with a comparably-sized sensor) -- you don't think files from the A7II are excellent? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
matlep Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2350 Posted January 19, 2017 I meant it as a compliment (and it was a camera I know with a comparably-sized sensor) -- you don't think files from the A7II are excellent? The files might be great. But the handling of the camera is a disaster. (Compared to a Leica) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oronet commander Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2351 Posted January 19, 2017 I meant it as a compliment (and it was a camera I know with a comparably-sized sensor) -- you don't think files from the A7II are excellent? Yes, they are, of course. But we pay four times more to get there in a different way. That's the price of our passion for the M Never mind, my comment wasn't intended as critique or complain. I was just sayin' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CYBORA Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2352 Posted January 19, 2017 The sensor is definitely not the SL one as Huff initially reported, as it can also be easily understood by the sample images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2353 Posted January 19, 2017 But we pay four times more to get there in a different way. Outlay yes. Depreciation no. Its not as simple as cash up front. Its more about the long term. M8s are still going for good money (UK dealers are asking £800ish). Contrast this with the more expensive contemporary dSLRs and you will find that the M8 has depreciated £2600 to £800 whilst similar dSLRs are worth considerably less. dSLRs and EVF cameras are cheaper today but will I suspect depreciate far faster. So as long term cameras, Leica Ms are not necessarily substantially more expensive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2354 Posted January 19, 2017 The sensor is definitely not the SL one as Huff initially reported, as it can also be easily understood by the sample images. I am not so sure, because it is mainly the software - the fine tuning - that produces the colors. And there is only a limited choice of suppliers. And for Leica (usually using rather small quantities) it would be preferable to have larger numbers by combining several lines. So I assume that the sensor is from TowerJazz (like the Q and SL sensor) and the Maestro II processor is from Fujitsu (at least this processor is common and is used in almost all high-end cameras). Who knows ? Probably not the most important detail, anyway. (for a user) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CYBORA Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2355 Posted January 19, 2017 The sensor is definitely not the SL one as Huff initially reported, as it can also be easily understood by the sample images. I am not so sure, because it is mainly the software - the fine tuning - that produces the colors. And there is only a limited choice of suppliers. And for Leica (usually using rather small quantities) it would be preferable to have larger numbers by combining several lines. So I assume that the sensor is from TowerJazz (like the Q and SL sensor) and the Maestro II processor is from Fujitsu (at least this processor is common and is used in almost all high-end cameras). Who knows ? Probably not the most important detail, anyway. (for a user) That is better that they didn't make it same with SL. The performance would be inferior compared to the current one and we would see disappointed users. Now we hear positive feedbacks from an M sensor, which is not heard very often. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted January 19, 2017 Share #2356 Posted January 19, 2017 I dropped by the Leica Store-SoHo (NYC) as they already have a demo to check. It indeed reminds me of the M6 in both size and 'density'. The VF is again improved in clarity over the M240; nice contrast even in lower lighting. The rear screen is very pleasingly sharp and great color; a bit bigger again than the 240. The black chrome had a slightly different look than that of the MM v.1 that I'm used to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdwardM Posted January 20, 2017 Share #2357 Posted January 20, 2017 I dropped by the Leica Store-SoHo (NYC) as they already have a demo to check. It indeed reminds me of the M6 in both size and 'density'. The VF is again improved in clarity over the M240; nice contrast even in lower lighting. The rear screen is very pleasingly sharp and great color; a bit bigger again than the 240. The black chrome had a slightly different look than that of the MM v.1 that I'm used to. the rear screen size is exactly the same - 3" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted January 20, 2017 Share #2358 Posted January 20, 2017 the rear screen size is exactly the same - 3" Hmmm. Perhaps it appears larger because the camera seems smaller in hand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardster Posted January 20, 2017 Share #2359 Posted January 20, 2017 Do we know if the M10 files are 14bit or 16bit? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted January 20, 2017 Share #2360 Posted January 20, 2017 the rear screen size is exactly the same - 3" it is not exactly the same. Higher resolution and slightly larger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.