M10 the game changer?

[Ozytripper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ve

 

As they were before the M10 arrived - very similar to the M10 in the M240, quite doable with any M camera before that. If you look through the forum you will find a large number of my tele-wildlife images taken with M8, M9, MM1, etc

 

I never had a problem using long lenses on any Leica M camera, the first wildlife Safari I made was in 1988 - using a Telyt-V-400 on the M4. So my game hasn't changed at all.

Well actually, it has, as I find that since the arrival of the new 20 MP MFT sensors and Leica's DG lenses the game has changed dramatically - outside the M system.

 

You might want to have a look at a little article I wrote some time ago on the subject:

 

https://the.me/henri-in-africa-the-leica-monochrom-as-a-travel-camera/

Very impressive photos and abilities. I am obviously not in the same league as you in skill levels and I am sure you are way above the average photographer.

 

I had trouble focusing with the M9 and M240

 

Had a Leica R system from R3mot to R7 than gave up when the huge R8 was launched. Never had any focusing problems with them on any lens. But then I was younger

 

Interesting to read that M users are complaining about existing M lenses blocking their views while others have "memorized" the frame lines and is no bother to them

We buy equipment to suit our needs and the skill set varies. Can't have a system designed for just the experts?? 

[jaapv]

We have - the SL, the S...

But that begs the question - what is an expert whom it should be designed for?

[Advertisement]

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

[willeica]

The discussion here proves that there is no such thing as the best camera for all users. We should be grateful for the variety available to us today. One final point. The 50 DR (mine is from 1957) is absolutely superb on the M10 in both normal and 'close up' ranges. It is a toss up as to whether it is better with the EVF or rangefinder for close up work. Up to this I had been using the 50 DR only on M3s and M2s etc. Now that I can use it on a modern digital camera it really shows itself to be one of Leica's finest ever lenses. It is not often that one can say this about a 60 year old lens.

 

William

[Steve Spencer]

Except that it did not - that was the M (typ 240) with the EVF2.

The only thing that  the M10 adds to this part of the game is an improved EVF.

 

Or for some of us an EVF that is actually useable. I found the EVF2 to be unusable, but YMMV and it seems it does. For those of us who found the EVF2 unusable, however, we are more likely to see the M10 as a game changer.

[adli]

I never stop being surprised by the number of people who buy an M and immediately starts wishing for zooms and long tele lenses....

[jdlaing]

I never stop being surprised by the number of people who buy an M and immediately starts wishing for zooms and long tele lenses....

Exactly.

[Ozytripper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The gamechanger was the M240 series, with its add on viewfinder and liveview. The M10 was refinement, but not a gamechanger.

 

The addon viewfinder allowed other lenses to be used without rangefinder coupling. Especially macro and telephoto.

 

I think you have missed the point Ozy.

 

Cheers...

Hi David,

what point did I miss?

 

The topic started as "the M10 a game changer? " note the QUESTION MARK

 

The whole point of the topic is not really whether the M10 is the game changer but the M10 IN MY OPINION (and may reviewers' opinion) has the first USEABLE albeit add on EVF that allows photographic enthusiasts like myself (and dare i say many many others) to use macro and telephoto lenses on a rangefinder.

 

As the above capability is now available and USEABLE to MOST of us PHOTOGRAPHIC MORTALS why then does Leica not make dedicated M zoom and longer telephoto lenses? Of course there are experts and Photography GODS who could shoot any M Leica blindfolded and still get sharp shots. But most of us enthusiast are not in this Photography God category:) So what is wrong with asking for an additional range of M lenses?

 

Why do we have to depend on R lenses or VINTAGE LEICA M LENSES for macro and telephoto lenses.

Not everyone like the classic Leica look, not everyone is comfortable buying vintage lenses with their potential accompanying faults. 

 

Is it too much to want to use one's Camera for the widest usage it is capable of? To be able to carry one camera and a set of dedicated lenses?

Instead of carrying an M10, an SL, R lenses, SL lenses, M lenses (New & Vintage), multiple franken finders. While we are at it throw in a Leica Q, a Fuji Xt100, Sony A7 and Fuji XPRO2 for backup (hehehe I am getting a bit carried away - but you get my point ?

 

I just would like to carry one M10 and a set of dedicated M lenses from primes to zooms to longer telephotos. ( i know I am repeating myself but my point got lost). Is it Leica blasphemy to ask for lens extensions?

 

The strangest thing is that I gather from this discussion so far is that most participants seems to agree to the point that M bodies since the M240 or M10 (depending on  their personal ability to use either model) can effectively use R or vintage lenses or even 3rd party brands lenses for macro and telephoto work but are resistant to a set of new M lenses dedicated to macro, zoom or longer telephoto.

Weird isn't it?

 

So in Summary:

Use vintage macro lenses

Use R telephotos

Use Olympus or other 3rd party lenses

Use SL (despite all the complains about its weight and size)

BUT don't even go near asking for a set of new M lenses than can replace the vintage Leica lenses, R lenses, SL lenses or 3rd party lenses

 

The above, David is my point and not whether the M10 is a Game Changer. 

[tsleica]

Definitely a game changer...1st M to go backwards instead of forwards...lol..

Well after the MD that is..

[adan]

To get to Ozy's main points:

 

1. Gamechangers? Depends on which game is being changed. For me the M8/9/10 were all gamechangers. First digital M, first digital M that didn't crop my beloved 21 f/2.8, first digital M on which I can use my 135 f/4 in dim light and with reliable focus. For Leitz/Leica (the company) - the M3, and the M4-2 (which resurrected the line after Leitz killed the system in the late 1970s), and the M8 (which put a failing Leica back in the black). For others, it was putting Leitz/Leica lenses onto an SLR system camera (Leicaflex, Leica R3 et seq.).

 

2. TTL viewing? As mentioned, the M240 really was the gamechanger in that specific regard (not counting the original optical Visoflex). The M10 just adopted that from the M240. Not a new game, only a new player (with better colors ).

 

3. New lenses no longer dependent or tied to the optical range/viewfinder and frames? Again, there has been the opto-mechanical Visoflex, and all the superwides that took/take an accesory finder previously (even 28mm at one point), and more recently the 16-18-21 "zoom" from 10 years ago (which does zoom - can be set in between the marked focal lengths). There have been lenses usable on any M, and likely usable on the M240/M10 with less hassle - for decades. From 15mm to 800mm. The M10 just makes using them a bit easier.

 

So I don't really have a problem with that concept. Or the idea of new lenses in M mount that step outside the boundaries of 28-135 primes, by using live-view/EVF.

 

I probably would not be in the market for them, myself. I'm not an EVF guy. I'm not a zoom guy. I LIKE using a 21 accessory finder - a different view of the world. I don't have a "felt need" for anything between my 135 on the M10 and my 400mm on a Canon SLR. And with the 400, I do need autofocus sometimes for sports tracking. I did carry a Leica-R 180 on my Canon for a while, since the 135 on the M9 was - tricky. But not any more, with the M10.

 

But if Leica decides there is value in resurrecting some of the R-lens tele designs in a straight M mount, or getting creative in other ways - more power to them!

Edited June 27, 2017 by adan

[Tailwagger]

It works perfectly for me, accepting its limitations.

 

It did for me as well, until I got the M10. Its the blackout time more than anything else that I now find exceedingly hard to accept. 

[adli]

No blackout time in the rangefinder, that is one of the advantages of a rangefinder camera...

[jaapv]

Hi David,

what point did I miss?

 

The topic started as "the M10 a game changer? " note the QUESTION MARK

 

The whole point of the topic is not really whether the M10 is the game changer but the M10 IN MY OPINION (and may reviewers' opinion) has the first USEABLE albeit add on EVF that allows photographic enthusiasts like myself (and dare i say many many others) to use macro and telephoto lenses on a rangefinder.

 

As the above capability is now available and USEABLE to MOST of us PHOTOGRAPHIC MORTALS why then does Leica not make dedicated M zoom and longer telephoto lenses? Of course there are experts and Photography GODS who could shoot any M Leica blindfolded and still get sharp shots. But most of us enthusiast are not in this Photography God category:) So what is wrong with asking for an additional range of M lenses?

 

Why do we have to depend on R lenses or VINTAGE LEICA M LENSES for macro and telephoto lenses.

Not everyone like the classic Leica look, not everyone is comfortable buying vintage lenses with their potential accompanying faults. 

 

Is it too much to want to use one's Camera for the widest usage it is capable of? To be able to carry one camera and a set of dedicated lenses?

Instead of carrying an M10, an SL, R lenses, SL lenses, M lenses (New & Vintage), multiple franken finders. While we are at it throw in a Leica Q, a Fuji Xt100, Sony A7 and Fuji XPRO2 for backup (hehehe I am getting a bit carried away - but you get my point ?

 

I just would like to carry one M10 and a set of dedicated M lenses from primes to zooms to longer telephotos. ( i know I am repeating myself but my point got lost). Is it Leica blasphemy to ask for lens extensions?

 

The strangest thing is that I gather from this discussion so far is that most participants seems to agree to the point that M bodies since the M240 or M10 (depending on  their personal ability to use either model) can effectively use R or vintage lenses or even 3rd party brands lenses for macro and telephoto work but are resistant to a set of new M lenses dedicated to macro, zoom or longer telephoto.

Weird isn't it?

 

So in Summary:

Use vintage macro lenses

Use R telephotos

Use Olympus or other 3rd party lenses

Use SL (despite all the complains about its weight and size)

BUT don't even go near asking for a set of new M lenses than can replace the vintage Leica lenses, R lenses, SL lenses or 3rd party lenses

 

The above, David is my point and not whether the M10 is a Game Changer. 

You missed one point. Given the plethora of lenses, old and new, that can be used on the M240/M10, how do you think the sales projection of Leica lenses would look? And, given the small number of projected sales, what astronomical price would they be? Making for even fewer sales...

Imagine, for instance, an 80-200 4.0 M. It would have to be a complete redesign, as some of the glass types are no longer available. Price point? Certainly more than 5000 Euro, if not 6000-7000.  How many would they sell? I would guess very few... there are excellent R, Canon, Nikon, Sigma, etc. alternatives at a fraction of the price.

[Tailwagger]

Game changer? I suppose it comes down to what game you're playing.  My guess is there are quite a few.

 

I really hope Leica gets around to stuffing and tweaking the basics guts from the M10 into a 240 follow on to assuage those who I sense feel a more than a little jilted by the loss of video and battery life. That way we can all hold hands again and get back to insulting the M-D crowd and SL owners instead of fighting amongst ourselves. Though I suppose fomenting excessive controversy and infighting might elevate the furor to a high enough pitch that perhaps those waiting for the MP10 will find it arrives wrapped in a 240 sized body with bigger batteries and video. That could be fun.  

 

For me the M10 is just a better M240. It smooths out a lot of things about speed and operation of the 240 that had I not gotten this latest M, I might never have consciously noticed. I certainly prefer its OOC color rendition and the menu layout, the VF and size, pretty much everything except the loss of C and the delete procedure... shocking they could make clearing photographs even more of a finger dance than it was. Regardless, the M10 benefits from the sum of lots of little things, none particularly earth shaking, but on the whole, make it an even more enjoyable camera for photography than the previous version.  But, AFAIC, it's really changed very little other than bar for how good a Leica RF can be. 

[Tailwagger]

No blackout time in the rangefinder, that is one of the advantages of a rangefinder camera...

No seeing the precise composition from a 21mm either.   Thats the advantage of an EVF. 

[lct]

Modern EVFs have no blackout at all. Cannot be a reason to prefer rangefinders anymore. 

[jaapv]

Unfortunately the M10 does not fall in that category...

[Tailwagger]

Modern EVFs have no blackout at all. Cannot be a reason to prefer rangefinders anymore. 

 

While its true that the M implementation does not equal a pure EVF one, none of those cameras provide an OVF, let alone permit seeing outside the frame. In my view, with an EVF/RF camera, neither viewfinder is optimal.  On the OVF side, an SLRs ability to precisely frame, utilize a complete range of focal lengths, larger brighter VFs etc, is arguably a superior to an RF based system.  What the modern M does uniquely, except perhaps for the X-Pro, provide is the ability to utilize the positive aspects of both optical and electronic viewing where appropriate.  Its one of this things that makes it quite special and more versatile than the alternatives. While it would be terrific if it could match all comers in all aspects, the RF compromise, if you will, works well, at least for what I wish to do.  

[lct]

The M240 was versatile with a sluggish EVF in 2012. The M10 is less versatile with EVF blackouts in 2017. The M** will be more versatile with no blackout at all in **** hopefully…

[Jeff S]

But it's the best digital M RF camera to date IMO....as long as 28-90 suffices.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Tailwagger]

 Perhaps. OTOH, if, ala the SL, there ever is an electronic shutter update, perhaps the M****  might actually turn out to be the M10.  Regardless, I find the improvement both noticeable and very welcome.