Jump to content

M10? - Sorry, no!


Olsen

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The whole point to me is that the emphasis on das Wesentliche is impacting the usefulness of the camera as a tool. Nostalgia -even superbly implemented- may be good for sales within its niche, but ohne mich, I fear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is news to me and also not what Leica have said themselves. ie. there will be no tether and people have to buy the M240 if they want that.

 

Are you saying there is a connector underneath this SD engraving/panel? Does the panel come off to reveal a connector?

Yes, precisely. For comparison, here's the bottom of my M-D; there's a connector under there too.

 

590ce390633be397b9a6c34ec940c0ed.jpg

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point to me is that the emphasis on das Wesentliche is turning the M is impacting the usefulness of the camera as a tool. Nostalgia -even superbly implemented- may be good for sales within its niche, but oh be much, I fear.

I get what you are saying, and agree that it's a valid point to consider. Each potential buyer will have to come to their own conclusions. For me personally . . . I was unhappy with several aspects of my M9, particularly considering the cost. I wanted to upgrade it at the earliest possible time. But I didn't upgrade to the M240, primarily because I was uncomfortable with the direction Leica seemed to be taking the platform and also because it just didn't seem a sufficient enough upgrade for the money.

 

Fast forward to today, and I can't wait to upgrade to the M10. Because I am now very comfortable with the direction Leica is taking the platform, and because from all the user reports and photos I have seen thus far it appears to be a fantastic upgrade from the M9. So I expect Leica will gain some sales and lose some sales from this decision. Judging by the current backlog, it doesn't appear that it's going to hurt them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Leica... for saving me so much money lately.  The Q camera does not have interchangeable lenses, so, I didn't have to buy it....Saved $4250.   (I'm worried about the auto-focus TL Summicrons....That could easily lead to a TL mount Q camera or really nice lenses to use on my SL or T).

 

The M10 does not do video, so, I didn't have to buy it...Saved $6595.  (Future M240 upgrade could be dangerous).

 

And since now I only shoot in monochrome mode with my M240, I don't have to buy a MM 246 ...Saved $7450.. (Yes, I know conversion is inferior, but I have lowered my standards since becoming a pensioner.  I also couldn't see a huge difference on test prints from each camera...Mono was better, but not $7450 better).

 

TOTAL SAVED:.......... $18, 295

 

Sully's pensioner wife is very happy.  Happy wife, happy life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, I am very impressed by the full frame sensor and ability to use Summiluxes on my iPhone too ....

 

The M in my view is not really a better tool for video than the iPhone. Yes, it has a full frame sensor. Is that an advantage for video? No if you have to use line skipping and other tricks to condense the video. Sure if it was 12MP and was read at full resolution as 4K video like the Sony A7s, then full frame would be an advantage. As it was used in the M not so much. Cameras like the Panasonic GM5 are excellent video cameras with sensor much smaller than full frame 35mm. You have to have a lot of things built into the camera for full frame to be utilized well on a camera. The best hope would be to use the Super 35 sized part of the sensor for video (like the SL does), but then you aren't talking about a full frame sensor. How about the M Summilux lenses? Surely they are great for video. Actually not so much. The fast aperture is nice, but there are two pretty huge problems with any M lenses for video. First, the aperture ring has detents and it can't be declicked. This means that you can't shoot video in changing light without affecting the quality of the video. Only being able to shoot in constant light is a huge limitation. Second, M lenses designed for a rangefinder have relatively short focus throws. This makes using them for focussing in video fiddly and imprecise. Another huge limitation. So, in a number of ways, an M camera is just not set up to do video well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But I do sympathise with those who feel disappointed with the M10. Having been an M user for so many years and followed its development with enthusiasm, I wouldn't want to be in a position of finding the newest model disappointing. And I still have some reservations about Leica's future intentions regarding keeping the M line as up to date a camera as they are capable of, within the parameters of being a manual focus rangefinder, but that's another story.

 

For now, the M10 suits me fine. But some of the concerns others have seem perfectly reasonable to me.

 

Peter, are you (and others) under the mistaken impression that the M10 is the direct and sole replacement for the M240?

 

Going forward, there will be the M "typ xxx" cameras (M240 and its descendents), with video, tethering capability etc. etc. All the bells and whistles. And the currently most-up-to-date sensor. Six months or a year from now, as the M247, or whatever "typ" is next in line. And maybe, eventually, a smaller form-factor, ISO dial, revised RF/VF, and other innovations (if that sector of the M market want them, and Leica decides they are feasable).

 

And there will be the M (roman numeral) cameras (M10 and its descendents), with minimal functionality outside of still photography.

 

If the M10 replaces any existing M camera, it is the M262, which already had the video capability deleted (to a resounding lack of complaints). I'd expect the 262 and the 262 MD to now disappear, and an M10D to show up eventually, along with perhaps an M10M, M10P, etc.)

 

The M262 was "the missing link" as the M line split into two subspecies.

 

When the M240 was introduced, I was discussing some of my doubts about it with my Leica rep, and she said "Oh, don't worry. THIS is the M for the people who want video and a studio camera. There will be another M soon, for those who just want the basics." "Soon" turned out to be 4 years - but that's just "Leica time." ;)

_______

 

BTW, when the M240 was introduced and I decided to give it a miss, I bought a D-Lux 6, exclusively for video. 299 grams, image-stabilized, no "jello-shutter" effects, great color, B&W, f/1.4 lens, pretty good audio for a built-in mic, 4x slow-motion.

 

Far better than anything Leica would cram into an M body. Panasonic knows their video. Smaller and lighter than many M lenses - I just pop it in my M camera bag (or my pocket). Plus, I don't have video files cluttering up my picture collection, or vice-versa.

 

A couple of short event videos made with the D-Lux 6 (with some M9 stills - umm, yes, it is trivially easy to carry both):

 

http://www.coloradoseen.com/king-day-marade/

 

http://www.coloradoseen.com/gun-rights-protest-2013/

 

Someone explain to me - again - why third-rate video in the M10 is the better option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it does there will be no argument from me. I would actually prefer wireless transfer but we are long way off that to the point it replaces the stability and speed of a reliable hardware tether. So why on earth kill this functionality in the meantime?

 

Why not tether via Bluetooth? It's instantaneous.

 

My fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M in my view is not really a better tool for video than the iPhone. Yes, it has a full frame sensor. Is that an advantage for video? No if you have to use line skipping and other tricks to condense the video. Sure if it was 12MP and was read at full resolution as 4K video like the Sony A7s, then full frame would be an advantage. As it was used in the M not so much. Cameras like the Panasonic GM5 are excellent video cameras with sensor much smaller than full frame 35mm. You have to have a lot of things built into the camera for full frame to be utilized well on a camera. The best hope would be to use the Super 35 sized part of the sensor for video (like the SL does), but then you aren't talking about a full frame sensor. How about the M Summilux lenses? Surely they are great for video. Actually not so much. The fast aperture is nice, but there are two pretty huge problems with any M lenses for video. First, the aperture ring has detents and it can't be declicked. This means that you can't shoot video in changing light without affecting the quality of the video. Only being able to shoot in constant light is a huge limitation. Second, M lenses designed for a rangefinder have relatively short focus throws. This makes using them for focussing in video fiddly and imprecise. Another huge limitation. So, in a number of ways, an M camera is just not set up to do video well.

FF is FF. The "look" depends on it. You can never get that from iPhone sensor. See Jaap's comment about summiluxes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, are you (and others) under the mistaken impression that the M10 is the direct and sole replacement for the M240?

.............

 

 

Andy, you've probably missed the umpteen posts I've made over the last 18 months in which i've been consistently speculating and suggesting that there will be two M lines such as theIhe M10 and the Mxxx.

 

I became so fed up saying the same thing that I stopped, so please forgive me for find this amusing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Someone explain to me - again - why third-rate video in the M10 is the better option.

I'll try. Next week, I will be traveling to Ireland to film a piece for television. I will be traveling with about ten cases full of professional video equipment. I will probably bring an M camera for stills during my limited free time. As part of my assignment, I always have to shoot some b-roll shots of the location to add some local flavor to the piece. How nice would it be if I could do that while sightseeing instead of dragging my 35 pound professional cinema camera in and out of the van. I am not bringing another still camera. So limited video in my next M would be a nice bonus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Peter H: I guess I did.

 

Two Ms, one with a full feature set, the other without. Eventually the underlying technology (sensor, processor, buffer) will be the same in both, so you just pays your money and takes your choice.

 

@ Bernd - I guess what I hear you saying is "I can't be bothered to carry another 300 g in my pocket; so every other Leica buyer has to put up with video in the M10."

 

Trust me, if the D-Lux 6 or similar (which to me is not a stills camera - I have not shot one single still picture with it) isn't good enough for your b-rolls, any video from the M10 will be even more dismal.

 

I've considered getting another D-Lux 6 for my own b-rolls (interview cutaways, etc.) - but video is on the back burner for the time being.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Adan, but yes, when I am on my break from carrying 35 pounds on my shoulder, I can't be bothered carrying another 300g (?, I think an additional camera system that shoots video and takes M lenses would weigh considerably more). And yes, in my world you would have to put up with a video function somewhere buried deep in the menu system of your M camera that doesn't add any extra weight or bulk to it. That is what I'm saying. I do not want to buy or carry another camera. The video function included in the M240 without the rolling shutter would be good enough for my purposes, the SL video quality is great. Now the next person will answer: why don't you buy an M240, an SL, or even a Sony? I get it.

 

I just firmly believe that video could have been included without being a burden for anyone, without any extra buttons etc. But nevermind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A couple of short event videos made with the D-Lux 6 (with some M9 stills - umm, yes, it is trivially easy to carry both):

 

http://www.coloradoseen.com/king-day-marade/

 

http://www.coloradoseen.com/gun-rights-protest-2013/

 

Someone explain to me - again - why third-rate video in the M10 is the better option.

 

 

as limited as the M240 video is...its still far better than the video produced by the D-Lux. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

FF is FF. The "look" depends on it. You can never get that from iPhone sensor. See Jaap's comment about summiluxes.

 

Did you read what I wrote. I address why FF is problematic if you use line skipping or other condensing techniques. Simply it makes the video look like crap. The best way to use the sensor on the M10 would be to us a crop to Super 35 format (just a bit bigger than APS-C) as the SL does in 4K mode. If you think FF is automatically better, then you don't understand video. Some for the summilux lenses. if you can't adjust exposure without affecting the video quality this makes the lens a lot less useful (and you can't with M lenses). And if you can't focus the lenses well (and the focus throw is awfully short for video on M lenses) then that makes the lenses a lot less useful too. You don't understand video if you don't understand these issues. The M camera is simply not a good platform for video, not without extensive revision and development of a new set of lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Adan, but yes, when I am on my break from carrying 35 pounds on my shoulder, I can't be bothered carrying another 300g (?, I think an additional camera system that shoots video and takes M lenses would weigh considerably more). And yes, in my world you would have to put up with a video function somewhere buried deep in the menu system of your M camera that doesn't add any extra weight or bulk to it. That is what I'm saying. I do not want to buy or carry another camera. The video function included in the M240 without the rolling shutter would be good enough for my purposes, the SL video quality is great. Now the next person will answer: why don't you buy an M240, an SL, or even a Sony? I get it.

 

I just firmly believe that video could have been included without being a burden for anyone, without any extra buttons etc. But nevermind.

I hope when you are out sight seeing the lighting isn't fluctuating otherwise I am not sure how you would adjust exposure with an M camera.  Without exposure adjustment would it really be all that useful for b-rolls? Do you honestly like the focus throw on M lenses for video? Don't you find it more than a tad bit short to change focus well? For me I just can't see the point even for b-rolls for trying to us the M for videos. If b-rolls were important I would just take another camera. In my case I would take a Sony A7rII and Zeiss Loxia lenses that would let me shoot quality video in which I can adjust exposure and I have a reasonable focus throw, and although I would prefer the M10 for sight seeing I would get by with the Sony at least if getting that video was at all important.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read what I wrote. I address why FF is problematic if you use line skipping or other condensing techniques. Simply it makes the video look like crap. The best way to use the sensor on the M10 would be to us a crop to Super 35 format (just a bit bigger than APS-C) as the SL does in 4K mode. If you think FF is automatically better, then you don't understand video. Some for the summilux lenses. if you can't adjust exposure without affecting the video quality this makes the lens a lot less useful (and you can't with M lenses). And if you can't focus the lenses well (and the focus throw is awfully short for video on M lenses) then that makes the lenses a lot less useful too. You don't understand video if you don't understand these issues. The M camera is simply not a good platform for video, not without extensive revision and development of a new set of lenses.

Yes, I understand that M is not the best platform for video but the comparison was with iPhone. My comment was for the difference in look.
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...