Focusing speed and ease: M9 vs. M10

[Deliberate1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For those of you who have lived with both the M9 and M10, could you kindly share your thoughts on the focus enhancements of the newer model. I used an M9 extensively until I got my S 006 two years ago. The M9 also had sensor problems that kept it on the shelf as well. That problem has been resolved. But not, I suspect, my challenges with focus accuracy. I did quite well in easy situations - brightly lit scenes or those with significant contrast that made viewfinder alignment easy. But in dim light, or with low contrast, success was less sure. And I wear glasses.

When I got the camera back recently following the sensor repair, I put a 50mm on and was surprised to find how much my eye and brain had become accustomed to the amazing OVF of the S. It is like staring up at a movie screen. Both with auto focus and manual, my success rate with the S is so much greater.

But with CCD sensors, I hesitate to use either camera over 400 ASA, unless converting  to black and white. I tend to print larger - up to 24" on one edge, so any focus error is magnified. 

Last month, I spent some quality time with my son's Q. It is a lovely device. And to the point at hand, the auto focus is blisteringly fast, as is the manual focus  with the peak magnification function employed. I was quite smitten by the remarkable quality of low light images up to ASA 6400, a range that would extend my street shooting opportunities exponentially. But it has a fixed 28mm lens. And while I shoot with its equivalent on the S, I do wonder if I would ultimately find  it too limiting. And beyond that, to see my M glass sitting on a shelf waiting to be pressed into service would be disappointing.

Which brings me to my question. And that is whether those of you who have experienced the enhanced focus capabilities and larger OVF in the M10 find that it is a significantly faster and more accurate camera to use vs. the M9. And particularly for those of you with "mature" eyes, which  struggled as I  have with the M9 finder. And while I  am familiar with and use zone/hyperfocal focusing, that is not the thrust of my question.

Obliged in advance for the help.

David

Edited January 1, 2018 by Deliberate1

[Advertisement]

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

[Rand]

I am 70 so I have tired eyes too.

 

My M10 viewfinder is head and shoulders above my previous M240, I get LOTS more shots in focus with the M10 finder. Never had the M9 but I bet you will like the M10. YMMV.

 

Rand

[Maarten]

I solved viewfinder issues in low light situations by using a +0.5 diopter.

I wear multifocal spectacles. With spectacles my eyesight is excellent, but I realised to see the viewfinder patch well I need a little plus correction. My optometrist helped me to find the right strength by letting me try out his correction lenses.

I would guess that for many readers of this forum a correction lens could be the solution of their focussing issues.

[lucerne]

I solved viewfinder issues in low light situations by using a +0.5 diopter.

I wear multifocal spectacles. With spectacles my eyesight is excellent, but I realised to see the viewfinder patch well I need a little plus correction. My optometrist helped me to find the right strength by letting me try out his correction lenses.

I would guess that for many readers of this forum a correction lens could be the solution of their focussing issues.

I agree. I've transferred my diopter from my M9. An M9 to M10 adaptor (less than half the cost of a new diopter) is available and if doesn't increase the viewfinder by more than 1mm.

 

I suspect that many users avoid this simple addition and never get a relaxed focusing action.

Edited January 1, 2018 by lucerne

[microview]

Yes, easier to focus with M10 although I did spend more for the larger diopter rather than adapt.

[Deliberate1]

Op her. Appreciate the replies. I, too, have an diopter on my M9. And it did help. 

David

[dkmoore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do not notice "that big" of a difference between the M9, M240, and M10 finders, other than the fact that the M240 and M10 finders are more robust and less likely to lose adjustment.  I currently own the M10 and M240. While the improvement is noticeable, I do not know that it is a game changer if you have vision difficulty. 

 

Everyone is going to have a different opinion on this topic so your better off renting an M10 to explore for yourself.

 

I love both cameras but objectively I am not sure that you wouldn't struggle with both. Maybe the SL is the better option to keep your M lenses entertained?

[adan]

The key to using any rangefinder (or even the old split-image screens in SLRs) "quickly and easily" is to simply snap the two images together. Avoid trying to saw the lens back and forth looking for "best alignment" - that is flat-screen "in-and-out-of-focus" technique. (that is per David Alan Harvey of Magnum and National Geographic).

 

Now - that may put an upper limit on which focal lengths and apertures any particular photographer can use. Which is just the way the universe works - there is a reason a lot of photographers only use their Leicas with lenses 50mm f/2 (maybe f/1.4 or f/1-ish) and wider. My own personal limits are 75 @ f/2.4, 90 @ f/2.8 and 135 @ f/5.6 to comfortably be fast and easy - and accurate.

 

That being said, the M10 has a higher hit-rate than my M9, esp. with the 135. Of course, the M10 is 7¹/₂ years younger and fresher from the factory. But the extra magnification does help. As does an appropriate diopter if needed (although that helped with the M9 also, obviously).

[mdemeyer]

+1 for getting the diopter nailed. Made all the difference for me even though the adjustment was only +0.5. Also an older wearer of progressive lenses. I tested and selected at the SF Leica store - fortunate to have one nearby.

[albertknappmd]

I had the M9 and now use the M10.

More importantly, I also use the S 007..

The M10 is a significant improvement viz the Viewfinder and I have no issue with it when compared to the 007.

They are different tools but the M10 acquits itself very well in regards to focusing..

 

Albert     

[bocaburger]

I do not notice "that big" of a difference between the M9, M240, and M10 finders, other than the fact that the M240 and M10 finders are more robust and less likely to lose adjustment.  I currently own the M10 and M240. While the improvement is noticeable, I do not know that it is a game changer if you have vision difficulty.

Agreed.  People said the M240 was a "big improvement" over the M9 but I used them side by side and couldn't see any appreciable difference.  Ditto between M240 and M10. 

[bocaburger]

I solved viewfinder issues in low light situations by using a +0.5 diopter.

I wear multifocal spectacles. With spectacles my eyesight is excellent, but I realised to see the viewfinder patch well I need a little plus correction.

Ditto, except for me it's a +1 needed.  I could fiddle with finding the right spot on my progressive eyeglasses, but it's just easier to use the +1 and view through the distance (upper) part of my glasses. 

[bocaburger]

The key to using any rangefinder (or even the old split-image screens in SLRs) "quickly and easily" is to simply snap the two images together.

Easier and faster than trying to discern the exact coincidence optically, is to focus by contrast.  When the images are coincident, the image appears at maximum contrast.

[Jeff S]

+1 for getting the diopter nailed. Made all the difference for me even though the adjustment was only +0.5. Also an older wearer of progressive lenses. I tested and selected at the SF Leica store - fortunate to have one nearby.

+. 5 helps my aging eyes, too.

 

But one needn't be close to a Leica store. Many local opticians stock trial diopters that can be tried for free. That's what I did, using my glasses and camera, to determine strength before ordering online.

 

Jeff

[Photon42]

Easier and faster than trying to discern the exact coincidence optically, is to focus by contrast.  When the images are coincident, the image appears at maximum contrast.

 

 

Also my experience, most of the time. The M10 finder actually is an improvement over the M9, at least for my eyes. But I did not find the M9 finder unusable at all.

@David: maybe you want to check the CL with the 11-23 and an M adapter ...