Thinking of switching to M10

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all,

 

Have had an SL and the 24-90 for 18 months, great camera and wonderful IQ but the size/weight means I am not using it as much as I could. I am thinking of moving to the M but have a couple of considerations on which I would appreciate some advice from owners.

 

Rangefinder robustness - I have read too many threads where people have had to get their RF adjusted or sent back to Leica to get adjusted, is the M10 any more robust? Is RF calibration really an issue?

 

As I have been shooting mirrorless for some years now (range of Fujis before this, my first Leica), I would need the comfort blanket of the EVF on the M10. I cant find much information on the Visoflex (Type 020), can anyone compare it to the SL EVF?

 

Thanks.

[jaapv]

The rangefinder is the most robust they ever built. And they were pretty good to begin with. You really need to bash the camera hard to knock it out. Which means that it would have to go in for service anyway.Reading threads, take it from me: most M cameras have never needed RF adjustment. Thus is the Internet.

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest]

If you haven't seen it already maybe you can get some constructive ideas / opinions from this thread…..

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/277542-go-back-to-the-m-or-stay-with-the-sl/

[}{B]

The rangefinder of my M10 was slightly misaligned from new. I put up with it for a few weeks then it had to go back to Leica.  Just unlucky I guess but it did have a signed inspection card to say it had been checked before leaving the factory.

[LocalHero1953]

The EVF (which I use on the TL2 - I don't have the M10 - the EVF is identical and I've tried it on the M10) is not as good (as large, as high resolution, as responsive) as on the SL. You can say the same about every other EVF on the planet. But I find it acceptable enough for me to forget about the difference. It doesn't distract me from taking the photos I want, which is my primary test.

Edited October 22, 2017 by LocalHero1953

[Big John]

The rangefinder is the most robust they ever built. And they were pretty good to begin with. You really need to bash the camera hard to knock it out. Which means that it would have to go in for service anyway.Reading threads, take it from me: most M cameras have never needed RF adjustment. Thus is the Internet.

Thanks, I don’t abuse my cameras so should be ok.

 

  

The rangefinder of my M10 was slightly misaligned from new. I put up with it for a few weeks then it had to go back to Leica.  Just unlucky I guess but it did have a signed inspection card to say it had been checked before leaving the factory.

I am always amazed to read reports like this, makes me questions Leica’s quality control when they despatch new cameras. I guess if I bought from a dealer in person then I should test the camera on the spot?

 

Also re calibration, is it still necessary to calibrate your camera body to lenses?

 

Thanks all.

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The EVF (which I use on the TL2 - I don't have the M10 - the EVF is identical and I've tried it on the M10) is not as good (as large, as high resolution, as responsive) as on the SL. You can say the same about every other EVF on the planet. But I find it acceptable enough for me to forget about the difference. It doesn't distract me from taking the photos I want, which is my primary test.

Thanks, the SL EVF is amazing so not expecting anything to equal it - hence mor interested in whether it is decent enough for use. My Fuji XPro1 EVF wasn’t brilliant (pixly and laggy).

[LocalHero1953]

Thanks, the SL EVF is amazing so not expecting anything to equal it - hence mor interested in whether it is decent enough for use. My Fuji XPro1 EVF wasn’t brilliant (pixly and laggy).

I'd say the EVF is not obviously pixely, and only noticeably laggy when panning. If trying to catch absolutely the decisive moment, then I would use the OVF (this is a limitation of the TL2, which has no alternative VF), but >95% of the time I don't notice lag. This is a personal thing and depends on your style of shooting.

[jaapv]

Thanks, I don’t abuse my cameras so should be ok.

  

 

I am always amazed to read reports like this, makes me questions Leica’s quality control when they despatch new cameras. I guess if I bought from a dealer in person then I should test the camera on the spot?

Also re calibration, is it still necessary to calibrate your camera body to lenses?

Thanks all.

Virtually impossible to test on the spot; you need a proper setup. As for adjusting the body to the lenses or the other way around, an emphatic no, this is an erroneous myth. Lenses and bodies are adjusted to a common standard.

[CJJon]

You really shouldn't blame Leica QC for rangefinder adjustment issues, rather you should praise Leica engineers for making rangefinder adjustment possible. It is quite simple to adjust on your own. The hardest part is removing the Leica logo to get to the adjustment screw (it just takes a warm finger and a bit of patience). 

 

The Visoflex 020 works well for me. I often use non Leica glass and it is great for that. I would not want to use it all the time though as I prefer the OVF. One big reason I would not want to use it all the time is that it covers the shutter speed dial. Which can be very frustrating. Perhaps if I used it more I would get used to it...

 

If you don't get along with the M10, the used market is pretty hot right now. 

[Jeff S]

But the good news is that, with a stable setup, the EVF and LV will provide a standard from which the RF / lens focus can be assessed.

 

Jeff

Edited October 22, 2017 by Jeff S

[Big John]

Virtually impossible to test on the spot; you need a proper setup. As for adjusting the body to the lenses or the other way around, an emphatic no, this is an erroneous myth. Lenses and bodies are adjusted to a common standard.

 

 

Great to hear thanks!

[Reciprocity]

The rangefinder of my M10 was slightly misaligned from new. I put up with it for a few weeks then it had to go back to Leica. Just unlucky I guess but it did have a signed inspection card to say it had been checked before leaving the factory.

I had the same issue, but I removed the red dot and made the adjustment my self and replaced the red dot with a black one. The RF is perfect now, only problem currently is that there is now some dust specs on the inside of my VF's eyepiece.

 

QC does seem to be a fairly consistent weak area of Leica's production outcomes.

 

To the OP, the M10 is a great canera, the best digital M they have made to date for sure.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Reciprocity

[CJJon]

 

QC does seem to be a fairly consistent weak area of Leica's production outcomes.

 

 

 

Why? Because your RF needed adjustment? Did you pick up your camera at the factory? If it needs adjustment in the future will you also blame Leica QC?

[marcg]

Why? Because your RF needed adjustment? Did you pick up your camera at the factory? If it needs adjustment in the future will you also blame Leica QC?

 

I really do think that this is an unhelpful comment.

 

I think that any purchaser of a new camera is entitled to expect that that camera is in perfect condition – especially something as critical as the rangefinder adjustment.

 

If you wanted to apply a test that I think you would have to ask whether Leica would be pleased to know that they are supplying brand-new cameras whose rangefinders are out of adjustment.

 

This doesn't quite fit with the reputation for quality which Leica prefers to have.

Edited October 22, 2017 by marcg

[Reciprocity]

 

I really do think that this is an unhelpful comment.

 

 

I think that any purchaser of a new camera is entitled to expect that that camera is in perfect condition – especially something as critical as the rangefinder adjustment.

 

If you wanted to apply a test that I think you would have to ask whether Leica would be pleased to know that they are supplying brand-new cameras whose rangefinders are out of adjustment.

 

This doesn't quite fit with the reputation for quality which Leica prefers to have.

Thanks for this, I appreciate it.

[CJJon]

 

I really do think that this is an unhelpful comment.

 

I think that any purchaser of a new camera is entitled to expect that that camera is in perfect condition – especially something as critical as the rangefinder adjustment.

 

If you wanted to apply a test that I think you would have to ask whether Leica would be pleased to know that they are supplying brand-new cameras whose rangefinders are out of adjustment.

 

This doesn't quite fit with the reputation for quality which Leica prefers to have.

 

 

Again, it is unreasonable to blame Leica QC. You assume that the camera left the factory needing adjustment. It is unreasonable to expect that every camera maintain factory adjustment. To me it isn't a problem. In fact, Leica made an easy way to adjust rangefinder alignment. It's the nature of the system. If you want something that never needs any maintenance/adjustment then a Leica rangefinder isn't the best choice. 

 

Unhelpful, indeed...

[Tailwagger]

I managed to knock my M240 out of alignment a while back and being a bit of a wimp about such things I took it to Mr. Yi to be adjusted as he's just only a couple of dozen miles from where I live. His comment after completing the work was that typically he wont do RF adjustments as far too often, by the time the camera reaches the customer its back out of alignment again.  I can imagine factory new Leicas can suffer the same fate, particularly those purchased over the internet rather than bought form a local dealer. 

[arno_nyhm]

there is absolutely no reason to be afraid os misaligned rangefinders or rangefinder robustness. the M10 just is the best rangefinder they ever made. everything you read about problems comes from people that obviously have more time for writing about their problems than for just having them fixed by Leicas customer care service.

 

i'd rather wonder, if a rangefinder is the right thing for you, when you are normally using an SL and your only issue is the weight of that thing. instead of ordering and waiting for an M10 you might be way better off with either starting off with one M-Lens and adapting it to your SL to give manual focus a try (you'd have to buy one anyway, if you switch to M10) or trying out X2 or D-Lux(109) .

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[onasj]

I’ve used two M10s extensively (more than 1000 frames on each). Both have had essentially perfect RF calibration with respect to my lenses, as measured by a commercial focus calibration device. Of course focusing error is hard to notice on the ultrawides, but my 28 lux, 35 lux, 50 APO, 90 APO, and 135 APO are all spot on, with even focus zone depth in front of and behind the focus point, when the lens is wide open and distance is minimum, 1 m, and 2 m.

 

I came from a Nikon DSLR background (D80, D200, D700, D800E, D810) and if you are considering the M10 to lose the weight while improving the experience and probably improving the quality of your glass, you won’t be disappointed. Also, I’ll point out that while Leica isn’t perfect in terms of their QC, neither was Nikon or Zeiss or Sigma and the return/exchange policy of Leica stores is absurdly generous. I’ve returned 15K in new Leica lenses simply because I didn’t prefer them after shooting with the for a month or longer. No problem, no questions asked.