Should I have just ordered the M10?

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Recalling and feeling the struggle in my 50 years of photography I know the major mechanical issue was proper focusing due to my unfortunate eyesight. Regardless, I made a living largely in daily newspaper work. (Most of my personal work is not 'out there'.)

 

Over the years technology has risen to accommodate my physiological shortcomings. It is as if invention was chasing our coat-tails to make it better, and it is better. Younger people today assimilate today's picture machines quite naturally just as they should. Oldsters have gone though grief the younger might never appreciate. It is natural. Suck it up!

 

Speaking across all photographers' ages, I believe discussions regarding "Should I have (purchased, stolen, borrowed, leased) a Leica M* are exercises in which people look for supportive cohorts - a club mentality.

 

No opinions here will make you a better photographer, but they might make you a happier consumer. Make your choice, photographer or consumer, and be happy - or not.

Edited November 11, 2017 by pico

[Dr. G]

Maybe it's an analog mentality with a digital means. FWIW, I still like my audio with tubes.

 

I think, for me, I like the idea of being in control of the whole system. I'm not knocking the RX1R ii - I got some stunning images with it. I didn't love the manual focusing experience of the camera. The Q felt much more like an extension of myself when I was using it. Even in full manual mode, I never felt the Sony was reacting 1:1 with my input. Mind you, I also have the RX10 IV that I use for more casual shooting and long range shots. I'm not bashing Sony. In fact I think the RX10 IV is an incredible piece of kit.

 

As I've said before, the images I'll produce with the M will come down to my eye, my handling of the camera and the inevitable growing understanding of the relationship between all the adjustments needed to have the camera capture what I envision in my mind. I am looking forward to the journey.

 

The M10 arrived yesterday. Right now it's still sitting in its unopened box, as is the 50mm. I have my screen protector coming tomorrow and, as with all my cameras, that's the first thing I install immediately after opening. My case arrives Monday. I'm already anticipating having to go to the Leica store in Manhattan on Sunday to purchase the correct diopter, since I always end up adjusting them on the cameras I have.

 

Damn, though, those boxes are calling my name.

Edited November 11, 2017 by Dr. G

[Advertisement]

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

[mdemeyer]

I, too, use both M10 and Sony. For me the biggest frustration with the EVF of any of them is shooting outdoors in bright light. Even the brightest EVF doesn’t keep up, for me, in a situation where I have to wear sunglasses (or my adaptive lenses have darkened substantially).

 

Looking through the the OVF on the M10 my eyes are seeing an image at essentially the same brightness as they are adapted to, and this makes it very easy to work.

[jaapv]

Maybe it's an analog mentality with a digital means. FWIW, I still like my audio with tubes.

 

I think, for me, I like the idea of being in control of the whole system. I'm not knocking the RX1R ii - I got some stunning images with it. I didn't love the manual focusing experience of the camera. The Q felt much more like an extension of myself when I was using it. Even in full manual mode, I never felt the Sony was reacting 1:1 with my input. Mind you, I also have the RX10 IV that I use for more casual shooting and long range shots. I'm not bashing Sony. In fact I think the RX10 IV is an incredible piece of kit.

 

As I've said before, the images I'll produce with the M will come down to my eye, my handling of the camera and the inevitable growing understanding of the relationship between all the adjustments needed to have the camera capture what I envision in my mind. I am looking forward to the journey.

 

The M10 arrived yesterday. Right now it's still sitting in its unopened box, as is the 50mm. I have my screen protector coming tomorrow and, as with all my cameras, that's the first thing I install immediately after opening. My case arrives Monday. I'm already anticipating having to go to the Leica store in Manhattan on Sunday to purchase the correct diopter, since I always end up adjusting them on the cameras I have.

 

Damn, though, those boxes are calling my name.

That sounds like perfect Leica fodder to me...

[M11 for me]

Maybe it's an analog mentality with a digital means. FWIW, I still like my audio with tubes.

I think, for me, I like the idea of being in control of the whole system. I'm not knocking the RX1R ii - I got some stunning images with it. I didn't love the manual focusing experience of the camera. The Q felt much more like an extension of myself when I was using it. Even in full manual mode, I never felt the Sony was reacting 1:1 with my input. Mind you, I also have the RX10 IV that I use for more casual shooting and long range shots. I'm not bashing Sony. In fact I think the RX10 IV is an incredible piece of kit.

As I've said before, the images I'll produce with the M will come down to my eye, my handling of the camera and the inevitable growing understanding of the relationship between all the adjustments needed to have the camera capture what I envision in my mind. I am looking forward to the journey.

The M10 arrived yesterday. Right now it's still sitting in its unopened box, as is the 50mm. I have my screen protector coming tomorrow and, as with all my cameras, that's the first thing I install immediately after opening. My case arrives Monday. I'm already anticipating having to go to the Leica store in Manhattan on Sunday to purchase the correct diopter, since I always end up adjusting them on the cameras I have.

Damn, though, those boxes are calling my name.

Oh, I wonder if it is a good idea to compare with a Sony RX10 (Crop 2.7!!! It is not very serious from Sony to indicate the focal lengs as full frame equivalents but not the max. aperture as this breakes simply rules of mathematics)! That camera therefore is not a serious competitor considering the hughe focal lengt and the „slow“ lens when considering equivalence. After all we have here a 1 inch sensor. Then we have statements here from professional photograpgers that see a camera as a working tool and definitely not as an interesting nice and fascinating accessory. Even though I love my M10, for me it is not the camera for everything (but for a lot). There are definitely other performers in situations where the photographer has to act fast. I believe that image stabilization is a hughe plus mainly when you have your camera in your hand for a long time and your hand gets a bit tired an might start to tremble a bit. Or think of the AF that ensures that you can act fast when documenting events in lower light situations. Yesterday I was the photographer of a big political event and besides my pro camera (with 50 or 135mm) for the first time I took the M10 (with 28 and 75mm) and I permanently carried both with me. I worked on the pics last night and I clearly see that next Monday I am going to deliver from my 100% images about 70% from Canon and 30% from M10. And its definitely not the missing focal length of the M10 that was the issue (I could go near enough) but the sharpness of the images. And still it was a success having the M10. I will continue like this as it is much lighter weight than carrying 2 full frame bodies (I have the MkIII and the IV bodies). Certainly from a pure technical perspective it would make more sense to have a 2 Sony instead if a Leica and a Canon (assuming the needed focal lengths are available on Sony). But besides the pure technical argumentation there is something with the M10 that no other camera has. And still all disussions about colour rendering of the Leica lenses is often difficult to understand too: Yesterday I got many picture from the M10 that rendered terrible colours in thre artificial light mix of the convention hall. Often the Canon did much better and sometimes the Leica did better. My conclusion is anyway that for professional use and moving targets there are better tools than the M10 if sharp pictures are a goal. For all other situation where I need limited focal length I have an excellent tool with the M10 that has a lot of history attached to it that makes it so valuable. I would not be with my M10 any more.

[StS]

I might have drifted to the wrong topic, so delete if necessary.

 

If the early 35mm Summilux is not worthy at ƒ1.4, but as good as a Summicron at ƒ2, why don't y'all use it at ƒ2?

.

 

As a side note, unless the option for a very shallow depth of field is attractive, I wonder, whether a Summilux is still needed in combination with a modern sensor, which produces impressive results at high ISO, such as the M10's.

 

I'm using the early spherical 35mm Summilux as a "Summicron with Summilux option". I've learned to live with it's peculiarities and like the look it produces. If I want the look to be more crisp, I use the modern aspherical Summicron.

 

Stefan

[Dr. G]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Oh, I wonder if it is a good idea to compare with a Sony RX10 (Crop 2.7!!! It is not very serious from Sony to indicate the focal lengs as full frame equivalents but not the max. aperture as this breakes simply rules of mathematics)! That camera therefore is not a serious competitor considering the hughe focal lengt and the „slow“ lens when considering equivalence. After all we have here a 1 inch sensor. Then we have statements here from professional photograpgers that see a camera as a working tool and definitely not as an interesting nice and fascinating accessory. Even though I love my M10, for me it is not the camera for everything (but for a lot). There are definitely other performers in situations where the photographer has to act fast. I believe that image stabilization is a hughe plus mainly when you have your camera in your hand for a long time and your hand gets a bit tired an might start to tremble a bit. Or think of the AF that ensures that you can act fast when documenting events in lower light situations. Yesterday I was the photographer of a big political event and besides my pro camera (with 50 or 135mm) for the first time I took the M10 (with 28 and 75mm) and I permanently carried both with me. I worked on the pics last night and I clearly see that next Monday I am going to deliver from my 100% images about 70% from Canon and 30% from M10. And its definitely not the missing focal length of the M10 that was the issue (I could go near enough) but the sharpness of the images. And still it was a success having the M10. I will continue like this as it is much lighter weight than carrying 2 full frame bodies (I have the MkIII and the IV bodies). Certainly from a pure technical perspective it would make more sense to have a 2 Sony instead if a Leica and a Canon (assuming the needed focal lengths are available on Sony). But besides the pure technical argumentation there is something with the M10 that no other camera has. And still all disussions about colour rendering of the Leica lenses is often difficult to understand too: Yesterday I got many picture from the M10 that rendered terrible colours in thre artificial light mix of the convention hall. Often the Canon did much better and sometimes the Leica did better. My conclusion is anyway that for professional use and moving targets there are better tools than the M10 if sharp pictures are a goal. For all other situation where I need limited focal length I have an excellent tool with the M10 that has a lot of history attached to it that makes it so valuable. I would not be with my M10 any more.

Alex, I was in no way comparing the M10 to the RX10 IV. I simply meant the RX10 it is a good camera for leisure shooting. The camera the M10 is replacing is the RX1R II, which has many of the attributes you mentioned.

[M11 for me]

Alex, I was in no way comparing the M10 to the RX10 IV. I simply meant the RX10 it is a good camera for leisure shooting. The camera the M10 is replacing is the RX1R II, which has many of the attributes you mentioned.

I am sure that you will love your new M10. I don’t carry anything else with me when I am with my wife (!) or when I am hiking (with my wife) or when I visit a new town (with my wife). That precision and technique of the ragefinder is unique. Sometimes I wonder why 50 years ago I got a Voigtländer Bessamatic. It could have been a Leica as well. Probably my parents thought that I should start with something less costy. And at that time I did not think of documenting an event :-)

 

Just as a matter of interest: Did you get now the 50mm Lux in silver? Just in front of me I have the silver M10 with its silver 50mm Lux.

Edited November 11, 2017 by Alex U.

[Dr. G]

Alex, I have no self control - I got the APO 50mm f/2 Summicron in silver.  

Edited November 11, 2017 by Dr. G

[M11 for me]

Now! Great. Congratulations.

[Jeff S]

Having owned the 50 Summilux ASPH for quite a while, I rented the 50 APO Summicron for a week to compare within my shooting and print workflow. I'm glad I did, as I preferred the Summilux, and eliminated any GAS.

 

Both lenses rendered beautifully for my sized prints, if of course the pic was worthy and I did my job well. But I preferred the ergonomics and handing of the Summilux. The aperture ring on the APO, like various other recent M lenses, was extremely loose, as was another store sample I tried. And because Leica strove to make the lens so compact (one reason for its expense), the focus ring is crowded against the aperture ring and is not fully knurled like the Summilux design, making fine focus adjustments less fluid. Maybe the forthcoming limited edition LHSA 50 APO will solve these issues, but it will sacrifice the nifty built- in hood and will probably cost near $10k.

 

And of course the Summilux has an additional stop, which can provide greater low light and DOF flexibility.

 

Leica doesn't make bad lenses, and all are capable of producing quality work. For me, as is the case with digital cameras these days, a lot comes down to practical details, which can only be assessed by trying.

 

Jeff

[Dr. G]

I should have done my research as I have astigmatism.  Not a huge deal, though.  My neighbor is an ophthalmologist and I'm going to see him on tuesday after work (have to bring my sunglasses for the drive home ).  Once I get my current prescription I'll get the info to Walter to make me a corrective eyepiece so I can start using the M10 properly.

[Jeff S]

I should have done my research as I have astigmatism. Not a huge deal, though. My neighbor is an ophthalmologist and I'm going to see him on tuesday after work (have to bring my sunglasses for the drive home ). Once I get my current prescription I'll get the info to Walter to make me a corrective eyepiece so I can start using the M10 properly.

I prefer wearing glasses for distance and to correct for astigmatism so that I can both focus and see the scene without taking glasses on and off.

 

I still need a +.5 diopter for ideal focus, which is not uncommon for aging eyes and the M. I determined my diopter strength by taking my M10 to a local optician and placing trial diopters over the VF (with my glasses on).

 

BTW, I warned you about astigmatism....and other issues....here.....   https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/278532-what-2-lenses-for-m10-if-i-also-have-the-q/?p=3390585

 

Jeff

Edited November 13, 2017 by Jeff S

[Dr. G]

Yes, Jeff, you did warn me. 

 

No worries, I needed to get it addressed anyway. I'll take the M with me tomorrow and try out a few diopters.  Obviously, without using glasses, the Walter is the only option that allows rotation of the astigmatism correction for taking both landscape and portrait shots. 

[BerndReini]

One of the problems with reading the forums is that it's very easy to convince yourself you "need" something.  I just pulled the trigger on a silver M10 - it should arrive tomorrow.  I haven't picked up any lenses yet, but for now I'll just tuck it away into my bag until I decide what lenses to go with.  Originally I was thinking 35 and 50 summilux.  Being that I'm keeping the Q for my "easy" camera.  Maybe the 50 and 90 would be a better choice for the M. 

 

I'm both excited and nervous to be taking the plunge into rangefinder land.

 

I think you should put some restrictions on yourself. If you are keeping the Q, I would start out with a 50 summicron (old version, not Apo). It won't break the bank, it is different enough from the 28mm on the Q, and it is easier to nail focus at f2 than at f1.4 with a summilux. Use the lens for a whole year exclusively on the M10 to really get to know it and learn the rangefinder with this classic focal length. Then decide what you want next, and keep the cron or trade it in. Too much choice in gear will only hinder you from learning a new tool.

[Jeff S]

Yes, Jeff, you did warn me.

 

No worries, I needed to get it addressed anyway. I'll take the M with me tomorrow and try out a few diopters. Obviously, without using glasses, the Walter is the only option that allows rotation of the astigmatism correction for taking both landscape and portrait shots.

I need prescription sunglasses in daylight, so I'd still need to take them on and off even with a Walter piece. Glasses (especially with flexible frames) work perfectly with the M10 VF, which offers improved eye relief. The 50 and 35 frame lines are no problem.

 

To each his own... eye preference and comfort is quite personal... but essential for enjoyable M shooting.

 

Jeff