Leica M 10

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well I hope this to be true. ISO 6400 sounds off to me given the Q and SL are, what, 50 000? Could it really be a CCD?

 

No.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Paul J]

No.

 

Well I wouldn't think so either, but...

Edited December 16, 2016 by Paul J

[Mike Rawcs]

 

Some additional information on the Leica M10 camera:

 

• The camera looks very much like the film Leica MP. It appears to be made of black chrome and it is very slim compared to previous digital M models.
• There are no openings for a microphone or a speaker.
• The dial for the ISO on the top plate has the settings A - M and then goes from 100 to 6,400.
• The camera on switch has only one setting and it’s marked with a dot. No S - C options (for single/continuous shooting).
• Next to the display on the left are only 3 buttons: LV, Play and Menu as well as 2 LEDs (this is probably done to fit the larger LCD screen).
• The M10 does not have video recording, but it does have Live View.
• The flash shoe has the same EVF connector as the TL - previous rumors indicated that the M10 will use the same EVF from the TL:

 

Wow.  Out of date sensor.  Out of date EVF.  Disabled video. Retro film rewind button for ISO?

 

Where is the film advance lever?  That could be repurposed for some stupid idea too.   

 

Rick

 

 

Let's wait and see what actually materialises but, from what I read so far, I'm going to buy one. I don't need Live View or EVF but, a digital M the the same size as a film MP, I'm happy. I'd love to see a view of the camera back (wouldn't we all).

[IkarusJohn]

Well I hope this to be true. ISO 6400 sounds off to me given the Q and SL are, what, 50 000? Could it really be a CCD?

Live view would suggest not.

 

The EVF and sensor being "out of date" is probably the point - like the M-E and M(262) this could be Leica's idea of all you need for a traditional optical rangefinder based M camera. M(262) sales might suggest they are right on that score. More critically, an M mount camera without the constraints of a baseplate might be able to offer more that is "state of the art".

 

I'm sure many here recall the discussions of a few years ago about what could be done with M lenses and the CMOS sensors that were appearing. Many of us tried the new A7 cameras with great hopes, only to be disappointed. A Leica A7 style maybe a step too far, but are we looking at a more imaginative M?

 

I sorely doubt this M10 is the last world on the M system.

[Rick]

Let's wait and see what actually materialises but, from what I read so far, I'm going to buy one. I don't need Live View or EVF but, a digital M the the same size as a film MP, I'm happy. I'd love to see a view of the camera back (wouldn't we all).

 

 

I agree.  I'd like a smaller M, too.  

 

I have to assume the specs are off.  4 years of development just to put outdated parts from the T and SL in their best selling camera?  Oh, and the parts were outdated when they put them in the T and SL.  

 

I can't imagine these rumors are right.  I know someone who handled the camera at the first of this year who stated that we will all want one      - not a rumor.

 

I have to pin my hope on that, 

 

Rick

Edited December 16, 2016 by Rick

[Rick]

I read it is going to be Black Chrome.  I love this on my M4!  This finish wears really well and is just beautiful.

 

Rick

[keithlaban.co.uk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not really. I have no affinity to the SL. Too big, not my taste on looks, no rangefinder. Still, I like the options that the M240 offers. And I will not spend the money to buy both.

 

Agreed. I wish I did have affinity with the SL. I'd love that EVF but the lenses are just too big, as is the body in combination with M lenses. The camera could work as a tripod based solution but for that I'd want more MP.

 

My M9-P serves me well when I want the pure rangefinder experience but the truth is it has become all but a backup to my M240. The M240 has also served me well but I'm sick of the toy grade EVF and limitations of the processor.

 

Really, I simply don't know where I'm headed here. I imagined I'd be shooting Leica for many years to come but can't for the moment see any way forward.

[Jeff S]

Let's wait and see what act. I'd love to see a view of the camera back (wouldn't we all).

 

Rumors edited their post with this statement....  

 

"Update: there is also a setting dial as well as direction pad on the back.

 

Jeff

[Rus]

Dimension-wise, it really isn't enough to say, as per the current rumours, that the M10 will be of a similar size as a film M body, as the film M's have different dimensions. If the new M10 is going to be similar to the M7 in terms of dimension, then isn't it just "thinner" than the m240 but in fact is about the same as the M9/M-E ? In terms of thickness, the M9 is 37mm, the M240 I believe is 42mm. 

 

Thing is: the M7, according to Leica's own spec sheet, has a depth of 38mm. 

 

It'd be more exciting if the new M10 could be as thin as the M3, M2, or M4, rather than the film bodies that came later. But then again, as much as I like how the M9 feels, I'm never bothered by the depth of the M240. 

Edited December 16, 2016 by Rus

[Peter H]

The QR plates I bought that were made to fit the width of the base of the M9 (and did so) also fit the base of my M240 perfectly.

And while I had both cameras I used the plates interchangeably without noticing any difference in fit.

 

I haven't followed all the posts on this subject and I no longer have my M9, but this confirms my suspicion that it's just the little thumb-wheel protrusion that creates the extra depth of the M 240, meaning that if the M10 is similar to the M9 in depth, there's no meaningful reduction compared with the M240.

Edited December 16, 2016 by Peter H

[Jeff S]

 In terms of thickness, the M9 is 37mm, the M240 I believe is 42mm. 

 

 

 

Discussed ad nauseam....only about 1mm difference, the rest is the thumb rest protrusion.

 

Different weight, and grip, perhaps change perceptions.

 

In any case, I think most folks adjust to whatever they have after extensive use.  At least that's my experience.... I now find film Ms too skinny, although that's because I haven't owned them for a while.

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

The QR plates I bought that were made to fit the width of the base of the M9 (and did so) also fit the base of my M240 perfectly.

And while I had both cameras I used the plates interchangeably without noticing any difference in fit.

I haven't followed all the posts on this subject and I no longer have my M9, but this confirms my suspicion that it's just the little thumb-wheel protrusion that creates the extra depth of the M 240, meaning that if the M10 is similar to the M9 in depth, there's no mainingful reduction compared with the M240.

I can't fit the baseplate of my M60 onto my Monochrom. The difference is not just the protruding tumb wheel.

 

If the new camera is the same size as a film M, the pictures look more like an M5 than anything ... ooer

[Rus]

Discussed ad nauseam....only about 1mm difference, the rest is the thumb rest protrusion.

 

Different weight, and grip, perhaps change perceptions.

 

In any case, I think most folks adjust to whatever they have after extensive use.  At least that's my experience.... I now find film Ms too skinny, although that's because I haven't owned them for a while.

 

Jeff

Oh yes, the thumb rest... I stand corrected. 

I do agree that one just quickly adapts. And many also use the half cases anyway. 

[pico]

What, exactly, is our aggressive constituency trying to assert seeking great resolution or LPI?

 

Certainly the goal is not for presetting greater screen resolution, which is clearly  limited.

 

The question is only a beginning. Next is whether the mavens will print, and how they might.

[Peter H]

I can't fit the baseplate of my M60 onto my Monochrom. The difference is not just the protruding tumb wheel.

 

If the new camera is the same size as a film M, the pictures look more like an M5 than anything ... ooer

I was referring to QR plates John, not base plates, because the fittings are different on the M9 and M 240. I don't know about the variants you have. Anyway, the differences n depth of the bodies of the M9 and M240 families is negligible.

 

If the body depth of the M10 is going to be regarded as one of its significant features I think it further confirms my suspicions about the directionLeica are taking us in, at least with this model.

Edited December 16, 2016 by Peter H

[microview]

 

Some additional information on the Leica M10 camera:

 

•  
• The camera on switch has only one setting and it’s marked with a dot. No S - C options (for single/continuous shooting).
•  

 

 

does this suggest no timer facility for tripod usage?

[tom0511]

 

Some additional information on the Leica M10 camera:

 

• The camera looks very much like the film Leica MP. It appears to be made of black chrome and it is very slim compared to previous digital M models.
• There are no openings for a microphone or a speaker.
• The dial for the ISO on the top plate has the settings A - M and then goes from 100 to 6,400.
• The camera on switch has only one setting and it’s marked with a dot. No S - C options (for single/continuous shooting).
• Next to the display on the left are only 3 buttons: LV, Play and Menu as well as 2 LEDs (this is probably done to fit the larger LCD screen).
• The M10 does not have video recording, but it does have Live View.
• The flash shoe has the same EVF connector as the TL - previous rumors indicated that the M10 will use the same EVF from the TL:

 

Wow.  Out of date sensor.  Out of date EVF.  Disabled video. Retro film rewind button for ISO?

 

Where is the film advance lever?  That could be repurposed for some stupid idea too.   

 

Rick

 

 

WHy outdated viewfinder. have you ever used the Visoflex?

[jmahto]

 

Some additional information on the Leica M10 camera:

 

• The camera looks very much like the film Leica MP. It appears to be made of black chrome and it is very slim compared to previous digital M models.
• There are no openings for a microphone or a speaker.
• The dial for the ISO on the top plate has the settings A - M and then goes from 100 to 6,400.
• The camera on switch has only one setting and it’s marked with a dot. No S - C options (for single/continuous shooting).
• Next to the display on the left are only 3 buttons: LV, Play and Menu as well as 2 LEDs (this is probably done to fit the larger LCD screen).
• The M10 does not have video recording, but it does have Live View.
• The flash shoe has the same EVF connector as the TL - previous rumors indicated that the M10 will use the same EVF from the TL:

 

Wow.  Out of date sensor.  Out of date EVF.  Disabled video. Retro film rewind button for ISO?

 

Where is the film advance lever?  That could be repurposed for some stupid idea too.   

 

Rick

 

It is not out of date.... it is just late to the market.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IkarusJohn]

I was referring to QR plates John, not base plates, because the fittings are different on the M9 and M 240. I don't know about the variants you have. Anyway, the differences n depth of the bodies of the M9 and M240 families is negligible.

 

If the body depth of the M10 is going to be regarded as one of its significant features I think it further confirms my suspicions about the directionLeica are taking us in, at least with this model.

 

 

Hi Peter, I realised that after I posted.  But there is a continuing suggestion that the M(240) body "is no thicker" than the M9.  It's not huge, but it is there.

 

Purely in the name of accuracy (I actually don't give a toss about the size or thickness), here's a picture of the M9 baseplate (Monochrom) and the M Edition 60 baseplate.  Doesn't tell much, as the materials are different (I suspect the stainless makes the M60 a bit thicker; not sure).  More critically, leaving aside the different fittings and attachments, there's just no way either fits on the other camera.  Maybe negligible, but not the thumb wheel ..

Edited December 16, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[Peter H]

I can't see a picture John.

 

There must be someone around with a standard M and M9 and a pair of callipers though.

 

But like you, it doesn't worry me at all, but it does seem to concern some people who I believe mistakenly take the M 240 to be appreciably thicker than its predecessor. Some even avoided buying it for that reason, or so they said.