Leica M 10

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

  

So why would Leica present a non-top-of-the-line camera in the M line? Something less than an M-E is hard to imagine.

And what is the expected life span of the M-E production?

[otto.f]

The best evidence that this is for real is the fact that Mr Slack and Mr Husmann are completely silent

LOL

[Advertisement]

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

[otto.f]

And what is the expected life span of the M-E production?

I think Leica is working on diversification; like Porsche, do you know how many Porsche's 911 there are? They are all top of the line

Edited November 14, 2016 by otto.f

[Peter H]

I think Leica is working on diversification; like Porsche, do you know how many Porsche's 911 there are? They are all top of the line

 

 

I agree. We should probably stop thinking about top-of-the-line, and just about what best suits each of us.

[Tailwagger]

Leica - was well aware that these images would go viral. Do you really think that this was accidental?

Ahh... but we all know that in this cat and mouse game of facts and rumor that they are far, far, far more cunning and devious than that. They clearly utilized the 'lowly' Summarit in a clever attempt to throw us off the scent. They cant trick us so easily though, eh?

[jaapv]

But they still went for a weird-perspective top/and/front image. I'm sure they are hiding something on the back

One thing is or sure - they are not introducing a T-S lens

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, they're keeping us talking.

 

Mission accomplished, I'd say.

[luigi bertolotti]

But they still went for a weird-perspective top/and/front image. I'm sure they are hiding something on the back

One thing is or sure - they are not introducing a T-S lens

They aren't anymore SO needed, today...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[IkarusJohn]

M10's flange (top) looks slightly thicker than M240's here.

 

LeicaM10_M240_comp_flange.jpg

 

 And here's the M Edition 60 (an M(240) in reality) flange.

 

While MJH has suggested that there is a size reduction of less than 3.8mm, or something like that - his post was intentionally obtuse - I think this photo is largely useless for anything but the interesting fact that it is  Typ3565 or whatever, and it has a radio frequency registration.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[uhoh7]

I would bet the M10 will have the same sensor as the SL, which is fantastic, possibly with modified lens profiles for M lenses. I will be making a decision between an M10 and an SL when the time comes to add to my M cameras.

 

 

Hmm....I do hear crying from shooters who have 240 and 262 also, about SL color in comparison. While I can't say I noticed it in looking at samples, these guys have shot it alot. I never saw an SL image stand out compared to M9 or 240, or MM for that matter. Unedited RAWs from SL are pretty bland to my eye, but seem to respond very well to attention. I see nothing to write home about

 

24 Mp is fine, but a 42 MP option and a low light 12 MP option (like A7Sii) might be a bit more up to date, the latter would sell a bunch of bodies, as there is no great low light Leica. The A7s is better at 12,500 than the M9 at 800 LOL

 

Really nice when you shoot in the dim: DOF is actually an option. And if you are trying to hold that 135 APO steady, you can use very high shutters anytime 

 

I love the classic bodies, but with such a lens set, let's also have a smaller lighter EVF version (interchangeable Q) with a ergonomic design. I hate EVFs too, but for a really small back I'll put up with it. That could be the new Barnack

Edited November 14, 2016 by uhoh7

[derleicaman]

Otto, you are on to something here. I was told some time ago by my sources at Leica that the Typ numbering system for the M came about as the then CEO was a Porsche fan and wanted to emulate the 911 TypXXX nomenclature that Porsche used. True or not, it does make some sense as an explanation for the Typ numbering system Leica has been using.

 

I think Leica is working on diversification; like Porsche, do you know how many Porsche's 911 there are? They are all top of the line

[Peter H]

Otto, you are on to something here. I was told some time ago by my sources at Leica that the Typ numbering system for the M came about as the then CEO was a Porsche fan and wanted to emulate the 911 TypXXX nomenclature that Porsche used. True or not, it does make some sense as an explanation for the Typ numbering system Leica has been using.

No one should be surprised about this since it is exactly what Leica explained when the M (which too many people insist on calling the 240) was launched.

 

I think people ignored their explanation because they were too wedded to the traditional numeric progression and couldn't accept that Leica were actually thinking ahead.

[steamboat]

>>>as there is no great low light Leica. The A7s is better at 12,500 than the M9 at 800 LOL<<<

 

The reason for the high ASA's is the glut of zooms and other lenses that go as high as f5.6 as a maximum opening. EVERY Leica is a great low light camera when it has a F1.4 Summilux on it. You -- Kodachrome shooters -- remember when the ASA 200 Kodachrome came out. Wow. :-)

[zlatkob]

>>>as there is no great low light Leica. The A7s is better at 12,500 than the M9 at 800 LOL<<<

 

The reason for the high ASA's is the glut of zooms and other lenses that go as high as f5.6 as a maximum opening. EVERY Leica is a great low light camera when it has a F1.4 Summilux on it. You -- Kodachrome shooters -- remember when the ASA 200 Kodachrome came out. Wow. :-)

 

That's not the only reason for high ISO's.  Photographers are finding ways to use ISO 6,400, 12,800 and above with f1.4 lenses at f1.4.  Indoor events can have very low light and it's nice to be able to shoot them without flash or with much less flash.

[Morry]

If I were Leica management I would split the line-up into M10 (classic, optical RF, stay at 24M megapixels, no image stabilizer) and M lens optimized Q (Modern, Mirrorless, more than 36M megapixels, image stabilizer).

 

While M10 attracts many of the current Leica users including film models, M mount optimized Q must be very competitive against Sony Alfa.

 

Possibly I will want both

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[IkarusJohn]

If I were Leica management I would split the line-up into M10 (classic, optical RF, stay at 24M megapixels, no image stabilizer) and M lens optimized Q (Modern, Mirrorless, more than 36M megapixels, image stabilizer).

 

While M10 attracts many of the current Leica users including film models, M mount optimized Q must be very competitive against Sony Alfa.

 

Possibly I will want both

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yep, some of us have been saying this for some years.

 

The M Mount Q, or whatever it might be, did rather morph into the SL; but the idea of addressing some of the technological shortcomings that go hand in hand with the optical RF, but retains access to the M lenses has huge appeal.  A built in EVF of at least the quality of the SL, allowing movable focal point, proper live view and video etc etc.

 

But then, we have the SL and TL; everyone's concern is that it will screw up the M camera.  For me (pop in Jeff S), the M(240) already did that, and not so well.  I believe that is why we have so much disparity in the current M line up - Types 240, 246, 262 & M-D.  Now, if the M10 is a traditionalist replacement to the M(262), what would the others look like?  Monochrom?  probably.  LCD-less?  probably not, but that will depend on how successful the M-D has been, and the BIG one - the M(240) flagship replacement ...

 

What I do hope is that Leica actually releases the range at the start, so people know what is coming (I know this runs against the grain for them):

• M-P, which is the top of the line, best sensor, best electronics, best finish.  Will it have the optical viewfinder ...
• Monochrom version of the M-P
• M-EVF, or whatever, the high tech, carbon bodied, light small, taking all M lenses etc
• M10/M-E/M(262) traditional version, without all that gee-whizz modern gubbins stuff and nonsense

They'll get there anyway, as clearly they intend to diversify.  I do hope they ditch the baseplate - it should have gone with film.

Edited November 15, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[Exodies]

I don't have an SL or a Q so maybe the answer is obvious - why isn't the SL considered to be the M mount Q?

[zlatkob]

I don't have an SL or a Q so maybe the answer is obvious - why isn't the SL considered to be the M mount Q?

 

My guesses -

1. It doesn't have an M mount, but rather can accept M lenses with an adapter;

2. It is autofocus;

3. It is styled like an SLR with a centered viewfinder, not like an M (or Q).

Edited November 15, 2016 by zlatkob

[Exodies]

So if I had said "SL with M adapter" instead of "SL" you would be left with point 3 - the position of the viewfinder.

 

I get it now.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[LocalHero1953]

Hmm....I do hear crying from shooters who have 240 and 262 also, about SL color in comparison. While I can't say I noticed it in looking at samples, these guys have shot it alot. I never saw an SL image stand out compared to M9 or 240, or MM for that matter. Unedited RAWs from SL are pretty bland to my eye, but seem to respond very well to attention. I see nothing to write home about

 

I notice that from M9 through M240 to SL, colours SOOC have got "blander" as you call it, but actually are more like real world colours, are capable of showing more subtle tonal transitions, and are better in highlight and shadow areas: perhaps just the consequences of wider DR. Certainly I find it easier to get a more pleasing and delicately coloured image from my SL raws than I do from my M240 raws.

 

Looking back at my M9  images, and those of people promoting the qualities of the CCD M9 sensor, I am struck by the strong bright colours: pleasing to some, but I find them unrealistic and unsubtle. I occasionally jump into a film image thread where I find this lack of realism and in-your-face colouring even more noticeable. 

 

These are personal preferences, and I'm just giving my opinion, not trying to convince CCD and film lovers that I am right and they are wrong. But I think it is a mistake to draw conclusions about a sensor from a SOOC image. I for one am looking forward to the next M's sensor, which I fully expect to look "blander" than the current one.

Edited November 15, 2016 by LocalHero1953