DXO Mark Leica M10 Score

[Reciprocity]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don’t think Leica enthousiasts buy their gear because if the DxO score. Nikon and Canon buyers do.

You sure appear to assume a lot.

 

I never buy equipment based on a DXO score, in fact no pros I work among do either. Don’t know many enthusiasts so I can’t really comment there.

 

I bought the M10 because I felt it was a worthy upgrade for my documentary and other low key, low light work.

 

And I bought my D850, Hasselblad digital back, etc because of image quality coupled with stellar lenses like tilt-shifts and ones with VR that make commercial shoots and landscapes a sure bet, an area I feel the Leica M system is too “fidgety” and limited to be really productive with in these genres. I also appreciate the robust system approach that these brands afford me as well.

 

I have a ton of equipment for my work, Leica plays a small but important role in that scope and is hardly king of the hill.

King of the hill is choosing the right king for that particular hill in that particular moment.

 

I could care less about what DXO says although I do like their Optics Pro software.

Edited December 16, 2017 by Reciprocity

[Mark II]

FWIW, I care about the DXO scores.

 

I have been considering upgrading my M 262 to an M10, and one of the reasons is for the potentially improved sensor. DXO's measurements are objective, and I can make a straight comparison between the two Leica cameras to quantify whether or not the improvement will make a meaningful difference in what I shoot.

[Advertisement]

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

[pgh]

I don’t think Leica enthousiasts buy their gear because if the DxO score. Nikon and Canon buyers do.

I doubt this. Most buy Canon and Nikon because they are the easiest, most versatile, and most reliable solutions. I sold my Nikons, so I have nothing invested in this statement, but I still think that holds true. If I were still doing more generalized work I absolutely would have kept my Nikons. Not because of the sensor, but because they can shoot anything at the drop of the hat with the least hassle, aside from their bulk. 

[M11 for me]

The testscore is not very interesting, but the comments on this article from DPReview are as always entertaining when then they talk about Leica: https://www.dpreview.com/news/7982593338/dxomark-the-full-frame-leica-m10-is-on-par-with-the-best-aps-c-sensors

Of course the testscore is very interesting. You are right with that: The overall score is definitely not of great value and the „Portrait“ is not either. All the more are the „landscape“ and „sport“ scores. The first one is the test result for dynamic range and the second one is the result for low ISO capability. And the M10 sensor, at least on paper, fails in both. Or if you want the new sensor is just in the middle field and this is certainly quite disappointing. And from an image point of view it is disappointing to learn, that APS-C sensors are on par except for high ISO capabilities which is just a physical fact and to be expected.

 

I am very happy that by today I could shot already over ½ year with the M10 and I am really very satisfied. This shows once again that most test results are not very relevant in practice. Still this result will harm Leica. They can not compensate the sensor deficit with pink or green à la carte bodies.

[adan]

How the heck did they test it without any lens? I click Lenses tested and it says that no lens has been mounted on the camera?!

 

Read it carefully - they have not tested lenses (measuring specific lens qualities) on the M10. I.E. testing a lens for MTF, resolution in lppm, contrast, etc. DxO can't, for example, tell us how a 50 Summicron APO performs on the M10, or any other camera.

 

That is not the same as testing the M10 (measuring specific camera/sensor quality) without a lens. I.E. testing a sensor for s/n ratio, accuracy of ISO settings, DR, etc. DxO can and has told us how the M10's sensor performs.

 

Although it is perfectly easy to test a sensor's properties without a lens. Film companies do a lot of film testing in the chemistry lab, without lenses. And then practical tests WITH a lens, as well.

_____________________

 

Interesting to see DxO's results (or comments) for several things discussed at length on our forum already.

 

Base ISO - there is a small real difference between ISO 100 and 200 on the M10, whereas the M240 is the same true ISO at either setting (flat-lined - ISO 100 is just a full-stop "pull").

 

DR - the M10 does have slightly better DR at 100 than at 200. Just a question of which one prefers in recovery to get best DR - blown highlights (100) or noisy shadows (200).

 

A bit disappointing to see Leica labels the M10's ISOs a full stop below (or above, depending on how you think about it) nominal except at 100 - explains why I need ISO 10000/12500 in light where I'd expect to rate Tri-X at 5000/6400-ish. Nevertheless, a real 1.5-stop gain over my M9 in available-light - with less noise.

 

Several sources have remarked that the M10 firmware seems a bit "rushed" (including someone at Leica - Herr Daniel?). Which DxO also seems to have noticed in some specific comments.

 

Nevertheless, there is no existing camera that I would rather use than the M10.

Edited December 16, 2017 by adan

[M11 for me]

Interesting. . . . They also put it up against a set of 40MP+ sensors. Comparisons to other 24MP sensors show a somewhat different comparison.

I like a great sensor as much as the next guy, but that’s hardly the point of an M10.

Gordon

This is not correct. You can compare the M10 results with any other camera. It depend on your selection. You are free to compare towards whatever you like. And the results are not depending on the number of pixels anyway.

[M11 for me]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don’t think Leica enthousiasts buy their gear because if the DxO score. Nikon and Canon buyers do.

Do you mean that Leica ehthusiasts buy their camera because of the red doc that they then xan change to black? Lecia shooters expect the best.

[Gobert]

I mean that Leica enthousiast appreciate their gear, whether from the latest generation or not.

Nikon/Canon people tend to think they can only make nice pics with the latest stuff.

[M11 for me]

I'm not at all sure that this is correct.

 

I suspect that a lot of the people who buy Nikon and Canon, do so because they can afford them, because they want autofocus, because they wanted DLSR, because they want optical stabilisation – but maybe mostly because they can afford them.

 

I doubt whether many camera purchases are really bothered by DxO scores – even if they know about them.

 

I think that by and large DxO scores are important to professionals and to geeks.

I hope you are not saying that Leica shooters shoot Leica because the can afford it. And the others shoot . . . .

[tonyniev]

I mean that Leica enthousiast appreciate their gear, whether from the latest generation or not.

Nikon/Canon people tend to think they can only make nice pics with the latest stuff.

Not true, I bought Canon in the early 2000 and used it because it offered better digital, cmos, images, in the early 2000 Canon was the best in town...by mid 2009 the Canon 5D2 was light and full frame with plenty of functions except for slow burst shooting that was for the 7D...then Sony 7R came out mirrorless, with a few good zeiss coated lenses high 37 megapixel and very llight, so I got the A7R upon release, by this time Sony offered the best if not one of the best sensors, then the smal cheap A6000 as mirroless backup ....I bought the M10 this year because it has better sensor and higher iso capability. Since the M8, I have been looking at the Leica, I used to shoot films with Leica and only this year did Leica on the M came up with good enought gizmos. Today my main Camera is the M10 travel backup is the Spny A7R with autofocus lenses. 

Edited December 16, 2017 by tonyniev

[M11 for me]

I mean that Leica enthousiast appreciate their gear, whether from the latest generation or not.

Nikon/Canon people tend to think they can only make nice pics with the latest stuff.

I am not sure about your argumentation. Many photographers that I know understand their Nikon or Canon gear absolutely well. And I think that I do as well. The same anyway as professionals with Leica equipment.

 

Just to tell you: I knew very well why I changed from the 5D Mk III to the Mk IV. And when I bought my first Leica (the M10) I knew well what I did, too. And I still regret nothing. I am just disappointed about the DxO results. And note that DxO is the largest free data base available. This a very important data base available to everyone. And it shows you clearly the technical progress over the years. Lucky enough that progress is not as fast as some might believe. Because of that the M10 sensor is still a good sensor compared to the ones available over the last 3 years and it is much better than a sensor 10 years ago. And it might now be more difficult to see differences in practice between sensors of the last 3 years whereas it is easy to see differences between the best sensors of today and the best ones 10 years ago. We all appreciate that progress. But we see that Leica is far from the top of the range (in terms of M10 sensor) and they have to make big efforts not to fall further back.

Edited December 16, 2017 by Alex U.

[M11 for me]

Nonetheless I want to make clear how happy I am with my M10. I do probably 90% of my photography with this tool. It feels perfect in my hands and I love working with my 3 prime lenses.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I actually think that most people who look at DXO scores already bought their camera and now feel the need to back up that purchase decision. I also think most people rarely push a camera to the point where any differences on these scores matter. Just like most people who shoot D850s don't print and most people an interchangeable lens camera only pwn a single zoom.

 

Me. I only look when I read something on the web. Couldn't care less. But that's easy because I own no 1 and 2 on their list.

 

Gordon

[marcg]

I hope you are not saying that Leica shooters shoot Leica because the can afford it. And the others shoot . . . .

 

No I wasn't at all saying that. But now you mention it….

[Lucena]

The perfect gear does not exist. There will always be someone to put a defect on it and see better elsewhere.

The perfect gear for me is what I can get along with.

 

I have a D800 since...? a few years, perfect for birdwatch with a dedicated prime and for macros.

A Leica Q for everyday, always with me.

A M10 with a 50lux for composed pics

 

I am very happy with the 3 of them, they fit my purposes. Maybe there is better, but why bother if I feel fulfilled with what I have?

Always wanting to compare can be seen as a need to comfort/reassure oneself or a way to feed a perpetual insatisfaction or justify a GAS...

[zlatkob]

I don’t think Leica enthousiasts buy their gear because if the DxO score. Nikon and Canon buyers do.

 

Canon buyers?  Not for cameras, I can assure you.  Canon cameras have been getting modest DxO scores for years.  DxO favors the Sony sensors that are used in Sony & Nikon cameras.  Canon gets no love from DxO.  The highest rated Canon only gets a 91 score, behind about twenty cameras from other brands.  Of course, that doesn't stop Canon users from making great photos in all sorts of situations.  The Canons that I personally use only get DxO scores of 82 or worse, and they are excellent cameras.

[Arai]

Everything you say is entirely reasonable. Heck, my A7R2 sits in a closet alongside all of my Leicas when I want big prints or shoot landscapes. 35mm format seems to me to be a jack of all trades and master of none, except maybe the thin DOF wars. However, there's no denying that the files are great.

 

However, as a counter I would argue that if you can't get a decent shot from the M10, it isn't the camera. Most people (including me 90% of the time) don't need more resolution and don't take advantage of any perceived DR increases. The M's excel as cameras that *want* to be used. I have too many cameras. And although the Sony's produce very close to the top IQ in their class I almost never use them. My A7R2 is a backup to my SL. I like the Sony files but use the camera because I have to, not because I want to. people bang on about how the SL is too big, too expensive and has an average sensor but I get what I need from it, or an M10, every time. If I need more I skip the incremental increase to a Sony and go straight to miniMF.

 

I think the trick is to stop worrying about what camera *X* might do better in a lab than the camera I have in my hand and worry about how to exploit the most out of what I have with me by learning how to get the best from it. The prints on my walls are a mix. I have X1D shots next to shots from my phone, next to M10 and S007 images. My favourite landscape shot I've taken was from a M9 and  cheap as chips CV lens. People who come to my home stop and look at that print more than any other.

 

All cameras have limitations. At some point the D850 will run out of DR and we'll need to make a decision what to clip. That decision happens in a different place with an M10 but it still happens. To me it's like worrying about a lens you left at home. You don't have it so stop worrying about it and shoot the infinite number of things that are available to what you have with you.

 

Scores are interesting but only a small part of what makes a camera great. The M10 and SL have much bigger limitations than their sensors. Long exposure noise reduction, short exposure times (for the M, M10, S, CL and TL), average flash support and some bizarre firmware choices. But mostly leica still make the most usable cameras available today. I'd rather have that than a D850 any day.

 

Gordon

I might want to stop by your house sometimes

 

The DXO got me fooled once before I came to Leica, regret it and sold all my Sony gear and got my first Leica MP240.

I laughing all the comments they made on dpreview page on FB..best part is they seem to know Leica while they don’t even hold or try ones..

[Reciprocity]

I mean that Leica enthousiast appreciate their gear, whether from the latest generation or not.

Nikon/Canon people tend to think they can only make nice pics with the latest stuff.

I apologize ahead of time for being blunt, but it is this kind of statement and mindset that gives way to a snobby reputation around the Leica brand. This is twice now you have made blanket derogatory statements around gear that is not Leica.

 

I get why people are passionate about Leica M but what you don’t get is that people are also passionate about the Canon and Nikon gear they buy too.

 

I am passionate about the work I create with all of my gear which are just tools to better facilitate my vision for a final result.

 

If I were ever in the unfortunate position of having to make a choice between what gear I could keep, my Leica M gear would not be at the top of my list, the Nikon gear would.

 

I also don’t buy this whole argument for Leica being simple and a good DSLR like the D850 not being simple. Any piece of equipment can be as simple and subconscious an act of using as the next if you take the time to master it.

[pgk]

I also don’t buy this whole argument for Leica being simple and a good DSLR like the D850 not being simple. Any piece of equipment can be as simple and subconscious an act of using as the next if you take the time to master it.

 

Hmmmm. I'm not so sure. I've owned various manufacturer's cameras. There is nothing more frustrating than having to reset a number of parameters on a camera in order to use it - hardly subconscious even if you are familiar with the menu system - I've had to do so in a hurry and its infuriating. There is a lot less to set and reset on the Leica which does/can make it simpler to pick up and use. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[FlashGordonPhotography]

This is not correct. You can compare the M10 results with any other camera. It depend on your selection. You are free to compare towards whatever you like. And the results are not depending on the number of pixels anyway.

 

It is correct. Of course you can compare any camera to any camera but when you open the page you are presented with a comparison to two high megapixel cameras. Why not two current 20-28MP cameras. Would we be saying the sensor is poor if the cameras DXO chose when you open the page were the Nikon D5 or Canon 1DX2? Probably not because those sensors are actually close to the M10. Yet somehow the M10 sensor is shit and they are just fine? I don't think so. "Ah, but those cameras aren't designed to perform like an A7R3", you say. Well neither is the M10. It's a specialist tool for M lenses. Not just the newest ones but also the last 50 years of M glass. It isn't designed to operate like the A7R3 either.

 

It's simple marketing to choose the A7R3 as a direct competitor to the M10 on that web page. Same as when DPR put an SL body in the hands of a young woman to make the body look bigger than it actually is. Putting the Sony's score up creates a perception about the Leica. Put the Nikon's D5 score next to the M10 and the perception is entirely different. Now we see a sensor that's competitive with Nikon's flagship. As does just testing the sensor. They say that the Sony sensor is better. Not with a 50mm Summilux on the front of it, it isn't. No mention of the specialist microlenses or that unlike most Canikons it has no AA filter, etc.

 

DXO needs people on their website so they can sell their software. The cameras they chose to headline against the M10 were for dramatic effect and all of the major camera websites just blindly used exactly the same comparison cameras. Sure you can change that. But no one did. The truth but not the whole truth, as usual.

 

Gordon

Edited December 17, 2017 by FlashGordonPhotography