Jump to content

Is M-10 significantly better than Fuji mirrorless?


Tragg

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own a Leica M-3 and a Fuji XE-2, both of which I enjoy using but I have never owned a Leica digital camera. I'm tempted by the M-10 and like its stripped down aesthetics and functional similarity to a film camera but obtaining one would entail a significant investment. What would I gain over the Fuji (which I intend to keep regardless) in terms of image quality? I have watched several reviews of both cameras including comparison between the two brands but most come across as falling into one camp or another. Perhaps the Leica forum is the wrong place to ask this question but I'm sure there a plenty of folks here who have owned both brands.

Edited by Tragg
Link to post
Share on other sites

I venture that, in many "normal" circumstances, most people would be unable to differentiate between a picture taken with your Fuji and one taken with an M10.

 

Far more important is composition, subject matter, etc etc.

 

The delight of the Leica is how you use it and how involving the picture taking process is. Plus obviously the lenses are rather excellent (though the Fujis are no slouch).

 

So, just like a Ferrari will get you down the shops in a similar way to a Ford, the Leica is a nice thing to own and play with and it can also take good pictures.

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Simplicity :) .

 

Maybe not "better" than another Digital Camera, but M10 is the shortest route to photographing what one has in mind.

No digging Menu to change (or simply check ) parameters like ISO, shutter speed, aperture, that's all.

 

When one hits the shutter button it just take the shoot with no (minimum) delay.

The thing is beautiful and solid (not many plastic parts) and it's made for normal human hands with just the right weight and dimensions.

Leica has done good job in simplicity with this M10 ;) .

Maybe simpler with no LCD screen, but for that we must wait a bit longer.

 

Tragg, what is your feeling when you use your Fuji for a while then switch to your M3 ?

Edited by a.noctilux
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The benefits of Leica for me boil down to three points: the image quality when using Leica glass, the shooting experience - direct and causal, and the materials and craftsmanship, feels the best and lasts the longest.

 

I own the M10 and X100F, and currently own or have owned every X100-series model and every major M sans the M60 and vintage MP.  The X100-type cameras are decent walk-arounds, but you will lose some shots to the AF and to the Auto exposure.  Not many, but a few, think 2-3%.  Every shot lost on the M, also 2-3%, are my fault, and somehow that's more acceptable to me.

 

Might I make a couple of suggestions to help you decide?  

 

1)  Consider starting with a clean M8+UVIR filters.  See if a modern digital rangefinder is for you.  You will find the viewfinder and rangefinder likely brighter than your M3, and you'll see the convenience of having a meter built in.  Try to find a clean one around $1500 and you won't suffer much depreciation if you trade or sell it later.  Be sure to check the back screen is working, as that is the only non-replaceable item on the camera.

2)  Rent or borrow a digital M for even less monies.  The M10 is great, but you can rent the earlier models even cheaper.

 

Enjoy.

 

Eric

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

For image quality probably very little. I had an X-Pro1 many years ago and whilst post on the raw files was a little challenging the output was great and I would struggle to tell the difference.

 

For me it is the indefinable feeling that a Leica gives me that makes me want to take the camera out and use it, I don't get the same feeling with any of my other cameras. When I look at my LR catalogue over that last 10 years it is clear that the bulk of my shooting has been with Leica, no great coincidence.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Simplicity :) .

 

Maybe not "better" than another Digital Camera, but M10 is the shortest route to photographing what one has in mind.

No digging Menu to change (or simply check ) parameters like ISO, shutter speed, aperture, that's all.

 

When one hits the shutter button it just take the shoot with no (minimum) delay.

The thing is beautiful and solid (not many plastic parts) and it's made for normal human hands with just the right weight and dimensions.

Leica has done good job in simplicity with this M10 ;) .

Maybe simpler with no LCD screen, but for that we must wait a bit longer.

 

Tragg, what is your feeling when you use your Fuji for a while then switch to your M3 ?

 

 

Well, having never used a digital Leica, the Fuji is the closest to my M-3 that I have found. It's approximately the same size and most of the settings can be achieved without recourse to the menus. I do use the autofocus on occasion but do everything else manually. So it's fairly easy to move from one camera to the other - the rangefinder - or absence thereof -being the main difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Consider yourself as very lucky person! Personally, I and as some others can't stand EVF only cameras.

 

At the honest end it is what is your dominant way of shooting.  If you need AF, want to see digital picture without chimping Fuji is keeper. If you are using M3 not just because it is prestige film camera, but because you know why you prefer to shoot it, then M10 or else in digi M.

Heck, to me 9$ half frame 28 2.8 pancake lens on 1K$ M8 2008 made in 2017 was way more pleasing and operative than any Fuji X I have hold in my hands.

But it is not about me here.... Just ask your self this question : "Do I want to get digital picture exactly same way as I'm getting picture with my M3 on film?". The answer you'll get will be most close to you comparing to any other answer from some one else here, including mine  :)

Edited by Ko.Fe.
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider yourself as very lucky person! Personally, I and as some others can't stand EVF only cameras.

 

At the honest end it is what is your dominant way of shooting.  If you need AF, want to see digital picture without chimping Fuji is keeper. If you are using M3 not just because it is prestige film camera, but because you know why you prefer to shoot it, then M10 or else in digi M.

Heck, to me 9$ half frame 28 2.8 pancake lens on 1K$ M8 2008 made in 2017 was way more pleasing and operative than any Fuji X I have hold in my hands.

But it is not about me here.... Just ask your self this question : "Do I want to get digital picture exactly same way as I'm getting picture with my M3 on film?". The answer you'll get will be most close to you comparing to any other answer from some one else here, including mine  :)

 

Some good points here and something to think about. I cut my teeth on film cameras and dislike scrolling through menus and DSLRs in general. The evf on the Fuji doesn't particulary bother me but I'm quite comfortable using a rangefinder and regularly shoot film using the M-3.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had an Xpro2 for a year, and recently got an M10. Personally its a bit too early to tell how much of a difference in image quality there is. I'm sure for low light shooting, the M10 will have a bit of an edge over Fuji, but otherwise I don't think there will a huge difference.

 

I did have to change the way I edited the photos from my Xpro2 compared to the photos of my M9 and M10, because of the different sensors. However, in the end, its hard to see much of a difference in the final photos between any of those cameras.

 

At this point I'm selling the Xpro2, because I know I won't use it very much now that I have the M10, and I'm just much happier shooting that over the Fuji. I'm considering using part of the money from that to buy a X100F, just to have a powerful, relatively compact point and shoot.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point I'm selling the Xpro2, because I know I won't use it very much now that I have the M10, and I'm just much happier shooting that over the Fuji. I'm considering using part of the money from that to buy a X100F, just to have a powerful, relatively compact point and shoot.

Agree - Xpro2 v M10 is a bit like Boxster v 911 if you see what I mean. You'll always want a 911 and the Boxster is merely a stop gap (though we all know the new Boxster is actually rather fantastic and could run rings around a 911 if they maxed it out)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the real world differences will depend on what lenses you have for your current cameras and what output you normally use. I no longer have an XE2 but I still have my XPro1 and a bunch of lenses. If we ignore the rather obvious improvements that the M10 sensor will give you (more resolution, more dynamic range, less noise) then the significant differences come down to....

 

Advantages for Fuji:

 

- Autofocus.

- Zoom lenses (with IS as well)

- lenses longer than 135mm (to 600mm)

- availability of macro and fisheye lenses.

- focus anywhere in the frame.

- live histogram, exposure preview, peaking (available on the M10 with the optional EVF)

- lighter.

- cheaper.

 

Advantages to the M10.

 

- battery life.

- build quality.

- menu system.

- rangefinder.

 

I suppose the deciding factor will be. If you prefer using your film M but don't because film is a hassle sometimes then you're a prime candidate for the M10. If you wish your M had AF or a zoom lens, or you like the Fuji but wish it was a bit more *analogue* then you need to be looking at an XPro 2. If you like the Leica optics but you want the modern conveniences of AF, EVF etc. then consider the TL2.

 

Gordon

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at AF, no.  If you insist on a grip, as I do with my Ms, then you can carry two Fujis with a 10-24 and the 18-60, in about the same space as an M with say a 28mm, 50mm and  90mm. And for far, far, far less money.  The best of my Fuji photographs are miles better than the worst of my M ones.  So whats to think about?  Fuji all the way, right? 

 

Well, a few things depending on whats important to you. Folks can argue about the shooting experience. Certainly the M interface is simpler and more direct, but not by a wide margin. Fuji provides manual controls, most lenses have, gasp, an aperture ring, my now vintage XT has had a physical ISO dial for years now. Once the camera is set up the way you like, the interface is rather vintage and relatively minimalist. From a simplicity standpoint, it's certainly in the same complexity ballpark as the SL, which is a more apt comparison given the AF capabilities.  Likely fewer bugs and more frequent updates as well. So Fuji all the way......wait a minute. In the past two years since buying my first digital M, I've shot under 1000 frames with Fuji gear. I've shot well over twenty-five times that with my Ms.  

 

Why? Simple. The results meet your criteria. They are significantly better. A portion of that is down to the technical superiority of the glass/sensor combination, some to the increased flexibility of FF over APS-C, but neither are the key reason. In my case, it's more down to how the dance is done.  The need for more careful consideration of exposure, composition, DoF, lens character etc.  results in a more involving, more rewarding process which, surprise, magically yields more interesting images. I have a far greater sense of partnership, rather than merely having a tool in hand.  But I suspect, having spent time with the M3 and X system, you already know this. And possibly its why you're asking the question about whether owning a digital Leica is worth the rather considerable expense over an X.  

 

Better, significant... quite subjective. It has been for me and I haven't looked back. I retain my X gear for those rare occasions where AF is required. But for you, the only way to truly answer the question is to try living with a digital M for a while. And if you don't opt for one, regardless of how compelling any of the opinions expressed here or elsewhere might be,  I'd wager given your experience with film Ms, it will gnaw at you until eventually you do.  I speak from experience in that regard and deeply regret not biting the bullet sooner. Given the bottom has dropped out of the M240 market, perhaps the best course of action is finding a nice low mileage M240 variant and take a year to decide for yourself.   If it truly doesn't suit you, the cost of ownership after reselling would be marginal.  So why not empower the only person actually qualified to answer the question, you.

 

All the best, which ever way you go. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I spent many years with M's before I abandoned Leica (digital Leica anyway) due to an unfortunate experience with customer service and my M240 a couple of years ago, and so I "downgraded" to an X-E2 then moved to my current camera the X Pro2. So, I suppose that puts me in a good position to offer up my thoughts having lived with both systems, but I actually don't know how much I could add to Taliwagger's post which comes very close to echoing my own feelings. 

 

I find the X-pro fiddly but functional with an excellent sensor and a magnificent choice of well priced lenses. I won't deny that I miss the aesthetics and the stripped back methodology of an M immensely, however. I still get to enjoy those traits with my old M2, but I continue to uhm and ah over going back to a digital M with the M10. I teased on the forum that I might demo one months ago, but have still resisted doing so.  

 

I don't find myself reaching for the Fujis as much as I did my Ms and I often wonder why. It has nothing to do with the prestige of carrying a Leica around by any means. Quite frankly I would often find myself embarrassed by the exclusive (and occasionally pompous) attitude Leica flaunts, but of course I completely accept and understand that they couldn't exist this day in age if they weren't marketing themselves as a boutique brand. I'm very grateful the company still exists, but will always lament how out of reach the cameras and lenses are to the majority of photographers, particularly the younger ones (and this only gets worse with each passing year). I do think there is a lot to be said for how rewarding and comfortable a camera feels to use though, and no other company has really invested as much time and effort as Leica in recognising this and seeking to perfect it. From a technological standpoint it's practically impossible to buy a "bad" camera today, and once you hit a certain price level there are diminishing returns in pushing the boundaries of image quality, so putting that factor aside it really does become a question of what feels good. 

 

The M experience either clicks for the user or it doesn't, and if it doesn't that's perfectly ok. I suspect you and I may be in something of a similar bind as with me and my past Ms, and you and your M3, we can say we know that experience, and we can probably both attest to even loving that experience, but are currently unsure what kind of price we might place on returning to it. The lure of a £5800 M10 vs a cheaper M262 for me, as a glasses wearer, is my curiosity about the improvements to the viewfinder and rf, but the digital M's may now have exceeded a price point I can justify (I was left very hurt by my past customer service experience, however, so I don't know how much my subconscious is getting in the way). The best thing you can do is really find an opportunity to spend some time with an M10 or 240/262. 

Edited by db24fps
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both the M10 and a Fuji X-Pro2.  I've had most of the Fuji X mirrorless cameras at one time or another.  For the most part they are apples and oranges.  The M10 being a slower classic rangefinder and the X-Pro2 a modern faster shooting contemporary digital camera.. Lots of bells and whistles, most of which are actually useful.  Quick AF, great affordable glass including some excellent zooms, etc, etc.

 

However, since acquiring the M10, I rarely use the Fuji.  If I know I'll have to be shooting fast and want autofocus, etc, then I will pick up the X-Pro2.  But the rest of the time, for more thoughtful and slower paced shooting, whether in the streets of Arles, or here at home in Santa Fe, I really enjoy the M10 and it is my first choice.  Obviously, you have to be comfortable with using a classic rangefinder focusing system, etc.  I started with Leica in the 1960's and I find using the M10 enjoyable for my personal work and travel.

 

The BIGGEST difference between the Fuji X and the M10 in terms of image quality is the M10's sensor.  The M10's full frame sensor is amazing in it's ability to pull detail out of high ISO files.  I've shot at ISO 10,000 on many occasions with very good results.  NO WAY are you going to do that with the Fuji X cameras.  I shoot RAW and convert everything to B&W.  The M10 is really terrific.  The Fuji X is very good, but no match for the M10's sensor.

Edited by tbonanno
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I own a Leica M-3 and a Fuji XE-2, both of which I enjoy using but I have never owned a Leica digital camera. I'm tempted by the M-10 and like its stripped down aesthetics and functional similarity to a film camera but obtaining one would entail a significant investment. What would I gain over the Fuji (which I intend to keep regardless) in terms of image quality? I have watched several reviews of both cameras including comparison between the two brands but most come across as falling into one camp or another. Perhaps the Leica forum is the wrong place to ask this question but I'm sure there a plenty of folks here who have owned both brands.

 

After using My Fuji X-Pro2 for the past 6 month I am so impress with the image quality that I might dump M10 that is still on order and go for Fuji GFX 50. Bigger sensor better image quality then M10 can muster. One more option to consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at some test data of both Leica and Fuji sensor (even though you find not too much for the M10 yet). you come to the conclusion that Fuji (despite being APS-C) produces absolutely excellent test data (even though it is built to produce photos). Based on this one might conclude that you will not see any difference in the results produced by the sensor of either camera. Further we know that the Fuji glas is considered excellent.

 

Fuji (X-Pro) follows the retro design and it is a completely new product whereas the Leica is authentic with a great history. I owned so many cameras over the past 50 years but I always wanted to own a Leica (and a Canon). Now I have both :-) And I am so happy with the Leica: Nowadays 90% of my projects I do with Leica and 10% with Canon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is M-10 significantly better than Fuji mirrorless? 

 

The M10 is a significantly better rangefinder camera.

Indeed. There are no bad sensors any more. Most differences are significant for pixel-peeping, but not for photographs*.

One has to choose the camera, not the sensor.

Does that sound familiar?  The Leica film cameras were significantly more expensive than for instance a Revue 1000 (to name the nastiest cheap camera I ever owned), but the film one put in was the same.

 

*The only real difference nowadays is dynamic range, and the way it is implemented. The DxO figures are of no help. They measure the dynamic range, but not the exposure latitude - and that is what matters photographically.

 

Dynamic Range is the number EV values between noise floor and clipped highlights.

Exposure Latitude is the number of usable EV stops between acceptable shadow detail and acceptable highlight detail.

That means that the shouders of the exposure curve (they are not linear!) matter. If a curve rises rapidly from the noise floor into usable shadow detail that is good. If it runs flat just above the noise floor after dropping into it, it reduces the usable  "Dynamic Range" despite a theoretical better value. The same at the highlight end.

The M10 seems to be particularly good in this respect.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...