Jump to content

Leica M 10


rijve044

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As far as I know , the high ISO capability is sacrificed in the SL for more DR compared to Q.

 

I wonder which way Leica will choose for the sensor of the next M.

 

From the ISO indicator , I understand that the native base ISO is not 50 like SL and we don't know yet if the maximum ISO goes to 50K, the ISO wheel only has 100-6400 range and maybe the letter other than ' A ' tells us something about this which I cannot read properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

x
  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It is possibly an M to switch to the menu choice of higher ISO.

It does not look like a feature to be happy with.Given the type of  wheel and the location (next to the strap) it seems to be one of those wheels that always changes position unwanted, like the X1 and X2. And (YMMV) how often does one need to change ISO anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going by how hot shoe looks like (very similar to T).

 

Sorry, I still don't get it. You're saying that because the hotshoe cover looks like that of the TL then there is no hydrid VF !? I'm not saying you're wrong but the reason does seem a little far-fetched.

I find the seemingly absence of an eye sensor on the camera a far more convincing reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is possibly an M to switch to the menu choice of higher ISO.

It does not look like a feature to be happy with.Given the type of  wheel and the location (next to the strap) it seems to be one of those wheels that always changes position unwanted, like the X1 and X2. And (YMMV) how often does one need to change ISO anyway?

 

Couldn't agree more. Although I hope the menu switching of the ISO has reverted to the very fast M9 method for those cases when it is interesting to have faster ISO switching.

Link to post
Share on other sites

       For hybrid viewfinder , all I can say is that Leica is a company to make profit, so why include a hybrid viewfinder in one body rather than introducing another model for the built-in EVF solution. Leica knows that there are hundreds of Leica customers that will buy the both models  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

       For hybrid viewfinder , all I can say is that Leica is a company to make profit, so why include a hybrid viewfinder in one body rather than introducing another model for the built-in EVF solution. 

I tend to agree.  The M remains an M for the very large (in Leica terms!) user base which is wedded to rangefinder photography.  Whatever others may opine, we know that it's the quickest, most reliable way of composing and framing images with manual lenses between 28 and 50.  We also know that we're able to use this RF for 21 (estimating the framing) and with reasonable reliability for 75 through to 135.  Given the increased demands of perfectly flat digital sensors, we recognise that some assistance comes in handy for longer focal lengths and we'll be delighted if we get this with an add-on EVF.  We'll also be really pleased if this same EVF gives acceptable performance with wide lenses (minimum blackout / enough resolution to focus without magnification or highlighting).

For those who are wedded to the experience of looking at the world through a TV camera, let there be a QL.  I might even be interested in one if it's really compact - but for the moment, I'll be spending my hard earned cash on a camera which improves on the M240.  If I didn't have / never needed M lenses wider than 28 or longer than 75 I wouldn't bother.  The 240 is a great RF camera.  As I do have these lenses and these needs, the M10 could well be what I want and need (... and yes, I recognise the powers of self persuasion that are involved in my highly rational decision making.  If I can afford to take the hit of changing to the new body, hey - why not  :p )

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is possibly an M to switch to the menu choice of higher ISO.

It does not look like a feature to be happy with.Given the type of  wheel and the location (next to the strap) it seems to be one of those wheels that always changes position unwanted, like the X1 and X2. And (YMMV) how often does one need to change ISO anyway?

I take quite a lot of indoors shots with variable ISO. I would also be worried about how easy it would be to change it by accident. An extra button/pin on the dial as a locking device, as (I think) on my old Pentax MX, would be useful. But it could also be a lift-and-turn mechanism, or just stiff. We will have to wait and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is a good indication that picture was real. I guess that Leica Rumors has signed some kind of NDA and were forces to remove it. A bit strange with a rumor site who is under sensorship though.....

 

Strangely Leica Rumors still doesn't have this photograph, they still have the M240 shot at the top of heir site.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking again at the hotshoe, I don't think you can deduce anything from it about an add-on EVF. The T, M9 and M8 hotshoes all look very similar, with the same short black central strip for the contact plate. At least we know it can't take the M240's EVF :o.

 

Compared to the M240, there's no group of small holes on the left of the top plate, which I think are for the microphone. They could be elsewhere, or it could be another sign of no video.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you hold the fact, that the photo is still on the Rumor site - it's there since yesterday - for an indication that it's a fake?

It's still there... Probably not a fake IMHO

Nobody so far has offered any evidence or speculation about the most important feature of the M10: has it got a baseplate?

Most important?  I trust you're being ironic... :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more. Although I hope the menu switching of the ISO has reverted to the very fast M9 method for those cases when it is interesting to have faster ISO switching.

I'm still a bit puzzled why ISO setting should have the same prominence as aperture and shutter speed, as it is not -as mistakenly assumed since the advent of digital- an exposure parameter. The former two determine the amount of light entering the camera <exposure>, an ISO setting is just the way the camera handles the sensor output.

It would have been more logical, if a third control were needed, to add an EV compensation dial. At least that is an exposure setting..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take quite a lot of indoors shots with variable ISO. I would also be worried about how easy it would be to change it by accident. An extra button/pin on the dial as a locking device, as (I think) on my old Pentax MX, would be useful. But it could also be a lift-and-turn mechanism, or just stiff. We will have to wait and see.

I quite get that, but is it really necessary to change ISO manually in that case? I should think that a set-and-forget Auto-ISO setting is more practical in that situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite get that, but is it really necessary to change ISO manually in that case? I should think that a set-and-forget Auto-ISO setting is more practical in that situation.

Few things in photography are absolutely necessary. Isn't it enough just to say I prefer to do it my way?

Though your suggestion is just another variety of autoexposure - which is fine unless you want to use manual exposure.

 

Edit: a practical reason for shooting fully manually indoors is that the highlights in the frame can be extremely variable (lamps at night, windows in the daytime). This can cause wild swings in autoexposure; setting a manual exposure helps control this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That iso dial makes little sense indeed. And why having removed the video button? It could have been made programmable for other purposes especially image magnification when we don't need (or like) auto magnification. 

 

 

There we have it: It is the first video only M camera!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Few things in photography are absolutely necessary. Isn't it enough just to say I prefer to do it my way?

Though your suggestion is just another variety of autoexposure - which is fine unless you want to use manual exposure.

 

Edit: a practical reason for shooting fully manually indoors is that the highlights in the frame can be extremely variable (lamps at night, windows in the daytime). This can cause wild swings in autoexposure; setting a manual exposure helps control this.

But in that case having the option to assign ISO change to the thumbwheel (with a readout in the viewfinder) would have been even better. I fear that this wheel is more of a marketing gimmick than a useful addition for many users - although I do not doubt -or grudge- that many will love it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...