M10 or M-D the hard choice!

[Ashkanani1985]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I ve been using DSLR and mirorless for 8 years and last 6 month I get bored from photography and find that I am so much into technical aspect than the real photography so I bought used M240 and the experience was really amazing and now I think I am attached to RF and decided to upgrade...

The hard choice is between M10 and M-D

First I do know that M-D is basically M240 without screen but the idea of going pure photography is the thing that keep me thinking about this camera.

My brain is telling me M10 is much better with new processor and sensor performance and all the technology of 2017 in a RF body, but my hart is saying M-D because I left DSLR and ILC to go back to root of photography so what I am doing differently if I buy M10?

I am attracted to the idea of going shooting for the sake of photography and only photography, without worrying about focus and settings..... etc

 

I am wondering if anyone faced the same choice that i am facing now and any comments will help my decision will apperciated

[a.noctilux]

Not really simple to choose .

 

Each one IS different in "photographic approch", if that matter to you.

 

...

My short story (that may not help you, I fear) :

 

In the beginning of this year, when I wanted to order M-D from my local shop, after hesitating for a quite long time, the announcement of M10 changed the thing.

 

So I ordered M10 and had it delivered some weeks after that.

I was happy with the M10.

 

Later on, I had opportunity to buy an M-D.

Since then, this M-D is my favorite M, but I can't decide to sell M10.

 

I'm luckily enough not having to choose the one or the other as most of my gear  .

 

They are not of same user's approch.

 

M-D experience is something special to live to believe.

 

M10 can be "replaced" by another digital M, but M-D only by M Edition 60.

I can say (for myself) that even M-D is more user friendly (lighter with strap eyelets, and more...) than the first M60 which was some kind of it's "de Luxe Prototype".

 

...

Ideas, here, in this topic :

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/262069-i-love-my-m-d-262/

Edited November 12, 2017 by a.noctilux

[Ashkanani1985]

Not really simple to choose .

 

Each one IS different in "photographic approch", if that matter to you.

 

...

My short story (that may not help you, I fear) :

 

In the beginning of this year, when I wanted to order M-D from my local shop, after hesitating for a quite long time, the announcement of M10 changed the thing.

 

So I ordered M10 and had it delivered some weeks after that.

I was happy with the M10.

 

Later on, I had opportunity to buy an M-D.

Since then, this M-D is my favorite M, but I can't decide to sell M10.

 

I'm luckily enough not having to choose the one or the other as most of my gear  .

 

They are not of same user's approch.

 

M-D experience is something special to live to believe.

 

M10 can be "replaced" by another digital M, but M-D only by M Edition 60.

I can say (for myself) that even M-D is more user friendly (lighter with strap eyelets, and more...) than the first M60 which was some kind of it's "de Luxe Prototype".

 

...

Ideas, here, in this topic :

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/262069-i-love-my-m-d-262/

 

 

thanx for your replay and i want to ask since you own both, what is the difference between them in term of image quality  and color rendering, I've seen some pictures for M10 and the color is just magical, I would like to hear your opinion in that matter 

[michaelwj]

Wait until hopefully they introduce an M10-D? And in the meantime get a used M240 (you won't lose too much on resale in a year or two). That would be perfect!

 

Unless they never release another M-D... I suppose they'll release an M-10 Monochrom next, then maybe an M10-D, so it's got to be close to two years off at minimum.

[Ashkanani1985]

Wait until hopefully they introduce an M10-D? And in the meantime get a used M240 (you won't lose too much on resale in a year or two). That would be perfect!

 

Unless they never release another M-D... I suppose they'll release an M-10 Monochrom next, then maybe an M10-D, so it's got to be close to two years off at minimum.

 

 

I really doubt that we will see M10-D, as M-D is a camera never been made for the mass and only for people who really wants the experience of something special, and the if you think about it there will be no different between M10-D and M-D both 24mp and nothing else to add or remove, maybe starting ISO 100 and the new sensor performance which is not enough for any company to start production of a completely new camera.

[michaelwj]

I really doubt that we will see M10-D, as M-D is a camera never been made for the mass and only for people who really wants the experience of something special, and the if you think about it there will be no different between M10-D and M-D both 24mp and nothing else to add or remove, maybe starting ISO 100 and the new sensor performance which is not enough for any company to start production of a completely new camera.

If that's the case then I can't help you, I would be in the same indecisive boat.

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I really doubt that we will see M10-D, as M-D is a camera never been made for the mass and only for people who really wants the experience of something special, and the if you think about it there will be no different between M10-D and M-D both 24mp and nothing else to add or remove, maybe starting ISO 100 and the new sensor performance which is not enough for any company to start production of a completely new camera.

... and the slimmer body and - most importantly for some here - the improved range finder. Otherwise, you're right, it's all the same.

[jaapv]

I ve been using DSLR and mirorless for 8 years and last 6 month I get bored from photography and find that I am so much into technical aspect than the real photography so I bought used M240 and the experience was really amazing and now I think I am attached to RF and decided to upgrade...

The hard choice is between M10 and M-D

First I do know that M-D is basically M240 without screen but the idea of going pure photography is the thing that keep me thinking about this camera.

My brain is telling me M10 is much better with new processor and sensor performance and all the technology of 2017 in a RF body, but my hart is saying M-D because I left DSLR and ILC to go back to root of photography so what I am doing differently if I buy M10?

I am attracted to the idea of going shooting for the sake of photography and only photography, without worrying about focus and settings..... etc

 

I am wondering if anyone faced the same choice that i am facing now and any comments will help my decision will apperciated

The point is that the M10 is not much better, it is just more refined in some aspects, mainly the thickness and the viewfinder (both the optical and accessory electronic one). Which makes it a favourite for users who wanted those refinements - fortunately, as Leica needs to sell cameras.

 

For others it is a step backwards, by removal of some features, and, perversely, by being made thinner.

 

The photographic results from both cameras are close, with the main photographic improvement being a 1-stop extended exposure latitude with the attendant increase in ISO capability, which can be useful in extreme lighting conditions, but mostly does not show.

 

This makes it a camera which, in daily use, is very similar to the M240 and a personal preference of the user.

 

The M-D, however, is a completely different experience in photography, as it forces you away from the instant result of digital. 

 

So, given your post, my advice would be to get the M-D. There will be very few advantages from a hypothetical M10-D, no use waiting to see if it might materialize in the future, as it would add little to your experience. But wait for November 21st, on the minimal off-chance, Leica has been known to pull weird surprises out of their collective hats on occasions like this.

[Ashkanani1985]

The point is that the M10 is not much better, it is just more refined in some aspects, mainly the thickness and the viewfinder (both the optical and accessory electronic one). Which makes it a favourite for users who wanted those refinements - fortunately, as Leica needs to sell cameras.

 

For others it is a step backwards, by removal of some features, and, perversely, by being made thinner.

 

The photographic results from both cameras are close, with the main photographic improvement being a 1-stop extended exposure latitude with the attendant increase in ISO capability, which can be useful in extreme lighting conditions, but mostly does not show.

 

This makes it a camera which, in daily use, is very similar to the M240 and a personal preference of the user.

 

The M-D, however, is a completely different experience in photography, as it forces you away from the instant result of digital. 

 

So, given your post, my advice would be to get the M-D. There will be very few advantages from a hypothetical M10-D, no use waiting to see if it might materialize in the future, as it would add little to your experience. But wait for November 21st, on the minimal off-chance, Leica has been known to pull weird surprises out of their collective hats on occasions like this.

 

 

thats really helpful 

 

I keep asking myself why did I chose RF? and the answer is always to enjoy photography so the enjoyment I see in M-D 

if technology is my concern I would buy SL without thinking it has all M10 features plus more but the way I see it M is all about basic and pure photography 

[almoore]

The M10 is the first digital M that feels as refined as a film M. It's a great camera, something that can't be said about its digital predecessors. But, if you're really hankering after 'basic and pure photography', why not get an M2, 4 or 6 and spend the money you save on a mountain of film?

[Ashkanani1985]

The M10 is the first digital M that feels as refined as a film M. It's a great camera, something that can't be said about its digital predecessors. But, if you're really hankering after 'basic and pure photography', why not get an M2, 4 or 6 and spend the money you save on a mountain of film?

 

 

M6 is always in my interest but today film camera cost you some much on the long run and not to mention the hassle of developing... etc 

otherwise I would really love a film M 

[a.noctilux]

thanx for your replay and i want to ask since you own both, what is the difference between them in term of image quality  and color rendering, I've seen some pictures for M10 and the color is just magical, I would like to hear your opinion in that matter 

 

May I suggest that the "color rendering" is mainly from "subject and PP plus photographer's eye and skill".

 

As I have no skill to render "color magic", I can say that in my Ms "color rendering" is good enough for me.

No I can't post the differences (for web size/screen calibration, it's ridiculous anyway).

 

I can suggest more in their differences in using:

- M10 is thinner but handling is NOT better than M-D with no LCD at back

- coarse covering at M-D's back is something that I really appreciate (feeling the same as film M), very comfortable to hold

- M-D seems lighter (I don't know why)

- batterie in M-D is nothing to worry about (last one week for me)

- M10, better to have batterie(s) in advance to have peace of mind, even when not chimping/using LV or Visoflex 020

...

 

- files from the M10/M-D are excellent as other Leica's 24M sensor, for my need this is plenty enough

[wattsy]

M6 is always in my interest but today film camera cost you some much on the long run and not to mention the hassle of developing... etc 

otherwise I would really love a film M 

 

 

In the long run we are all dead (if I may quote the famous Bloomsbury economist) so if you "would really love a film M" you might as well have one. Besides, unless you are the kind of person who has to shoot hundreds of frames per day, the costs associated with a film Leica compare favourably with the £6,000 upfront cost of an M10. Yes, developing...etc can be a hassle but most things in life that are good aren't necessarily easy.

[Peter H]

The point is that the M10 is not much better, it is just more refined in some aspects, mainly the thickness and the viewfinder (both the optical and accessory electronic one). Which makes it a favourite for users who wanted those refinements - fortunately, as Leica needs to sell cameras.

 

For others it is a step backwards, by removal of some features, and, perversely, by being made thinner.

 

The photographic results from both cameras are close, with the main photographic improvement being a 1-stop extended exposure latitude with the attendant increase in ISO capability, which can be useful in extreme lighting conditions, but mostly does not show.

 

This makes it a camera which, in daily use, is very similar to the M240 and a personal preference of the user.

 

The M-D, however, is a completely different experience in photography, as it forces you away from the instant result of digital. 

 

So, given your post, my advice would be to get the M-D. There will be very few advantages from a hypothetical M10-D, no use waiting to see if it might materialize in the future, as it would add little to your experience. But wait for November 21st, on the minimal off-chance, Leica has been known to pull weird surprises out of their collective hats on occasions like this.

 

 

 

Jaap, given that so much of this is personal opinion, I'll add mine: the M10 is much better than the M240.

 

The images excite me in ways that the M240 couldn't. The colours and the noise are so superior that when I had to use my M240 while my dropped M10 went back to Leica, I felt a sense of real disappointment most of the time when opening files. The M10 is just a more rewarding camera.

 

All the other differences, particularly the even-easier and therefore quicker and more accurate focussing, are very nice too. I do get fewer out-of-focus shots now in tricky situations. The thinness is probably the least important of all the changes to me.

 

I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the M10 over the M240, whichever version we're talking about.

 

But if you prefer to use film, there's no point trying to replicate it with a digital camera. They are different things and since both are available, the choice of appropriate camera is straightforward.

Edited November 13, 2017 by Peter H

[a.noctilux]

I agree with Ian .

 

Film experience will never be replaced by other means (really not with M-D or M10 ).

 

I bet that if you choose M-D, you would want film experience later.

[a.noctilux]

In the long run we are all dead (if I may quote the famous Bloomsbury economist) so if you "would really love a film M" you might as well have one. Besides, unless you are the kind of person who has to shoot hundreds of frames per day, the costs associated with a film Leica compare favourably with the £6,000 upfront cost of an M10. Yes, developing...etc can be a hassle but most things in life that are good aren't necessarily easy.

 

For me photography is for pleasure, so film or digital is two pleasures to choose from.

I use film and digital with pleasure .

[papimuzo]

As you mentionned: ".. going to pure photography.." the solution is to get a M-D (type 262). You 'll go back to the time of the real line of M cameras and film era... without the pain to work into the "humid" lab...your own or the professionnal one.

Good pictures. I have to say that I sold my M-P 240 to get the M-D.

[Ashkanani1985]

Really helpful comments

 

I think I am 90% M-D and the 10% will keep it in the shop when I hold both in my hand M-D and M10 than I will follow my heart which ever he chose 

Edited November 13, 2017 by Ashkanani1985

[hilm3]

Tough decision! But not for me. I have always shot film with my Leicas. I have a few, but M7 is my favorite. The one thing I did not like about film is that I could not change ISO without changing the roll. I have been wanting an M-D since it was announced. A year and some months later, I bought a (barely) used one for a little less than $4k. Very happy with the decision.

 

Already had a digital system with a Fuji X-E1 and a collection of lenses. I use it only when I want jpegs. I can focus faster with the M-D than with autofocus on Fuji and there is no shutter lag.

The M-D gave me exactly what I wanted - the feel of a film rangefinder with instant choice of ISO from 200 to 6400. I am happy with the purchase. Never considered M10.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ko.Fe.]

M-D is the statement. And dare I say, not so practical one. Turn autoreview off, get half case with screen cover on M10 and it is going to be same in size and same way to operate as M-D.

But if I would be in same situation, most likely ... I'll get M-D. Because I'm meterless film M shooter. So, if M-D is taken, it has to be taken as meterless M. You meter, not the camera. And surprisingly, it works better in terms of exposure to me Main reason for the screen on M-E to me is to check if it did screw the exposure if I let M-E doing it. Well, not just M-E. This is the reason why exposure meters are still made and sold these days...