Leica M10 Ordered; What is about a lens

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A digital correction of a lens only makes sense for things like vignetting and distortion, possibly CA. Only if a lens  exhibits such obvious faults, or is designed with such corrections in mind (i.e. the aberrations have been shifted to distortion, enabling a higher state of optical correction (read: Q) ) does it make any sense to apply a profile. On Leica M lenses the only things a profile will do is correct the vignetting and colour shifts produced by the sensor, a part of the optical vignetting of the lens (as this is influenced by aperture, it cannot be a precise correction) and distortion on some wideangle lenses. Everything that we define as lens rendering remains an unique property of the lens itself, and is not subject to digital manipulation by the camera.

 

Obviously one can change the rendering of a lens dramatically in post-processing, like for instance DOF manipulation by focus stacking,  but that will never be done in-camera as a profile.

 

 

See again: all you want to do is play language games, contradicting yourself even within this single post. Let it rest.

[jaapv]

i do not think you read, or understood,  my post... I'm out of this discussion.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

 

 

“You said you didn't want manual focus. You spent 7k on a manual focus camera?”

I prefer driving manual Ferrari over automatic Japanese car. Fast acceleration and fast stops, therefore reaching destination earlier than the Japanese car with enjoyments. The cores are high capacity engine, and advanced gearbox.

The same theory applies to Leica, from the internet I see M10 images sample much better than Sony A9. The cameras’ core “Sensor” of M10 is better than Sony A9. But M10 is manual. I don’t know will it be easy for me like driving a manual Ferrari car or I will be like the disabled guy who loves to drive Ferrari but has to drive Automatic Lexus![/size]

“If you have Parkinson's or something similar[/size]” Do not worry I will use a monopod or high shutter speed or both.

“And when it comes to image quality, you have it backwards” Well the sample images says M10 is better. Sharpness is better on Leica lenses. You are right about Lightroom. But I do not want to spend long time on Lightroom. Family and work balance is required.

I will see Sony RX1RII and hopefully it is better than M10 

I truly appreciate your advice. If you are in Qatar I will invite you for a big sheep dinner 

 

Dear all, Please find the attachment which describes what is happening now

Dear Wosamko, I think your questions have been answered from the beginning of the thread. If you are not specifically motivated to buy an M camera for what the camera is, the chances of a disappointment are high and you should look elsewhere.

It is correct that any modern high-end system nowadays will give you more than the quality that you desire. But Leica will always bring something special, albeit intangible, to the table.

 

I met Leica people from the Emirates at Leica functions and I can only say that they were extremely nice and knowledgeable. I am sure that if you approach them they will be happy to let you try before you buy. 

 

And do put the Netherlands on your travel schedule. I'm sure you will feel comfortable and accepted there, even if  we have a few idiots over here as well, but they can be ignored. 

[ramarren]

+1

Leica has never been excellent in bodies, Contax and Nikon were better IMO.

 

Maybe I’d sooner buy a Leica lens on a Sony A7something than reverse

 

But coming to the OP’s question, I’d go for a 35mm: Summicron 35 pre-asph, or Summarit 35/2.4

 

I've never found Leica bodies to be "poor" or "worse" than Nikon or Contax. All of them have made their mistakes over time. I owned and used Nikons from 1969 to 2002, had another spate of use with them in 2013-2015. Good lenses, good bodies (although I was never fond of anything much past the FM/FE/F3 generation). Had a Contax and two Zeiss lenses for a while in the late '80s. Nice, solid, but I preferred the Nikons. 

 

I had Leica RFs alongside the Nikons for most of those years. Never had any problems with them, although the II/III series bodies had miserable to use viewfinders. Great lenses all the way through. I bought into the Leica R stuff when it was discontinued (because that's when I could afford it). And the Leica R lenses have worked brilliantly on the SL, and are now working brilliantly on the CL too. The Leicaflex SL which I kept is my all time favorite film SLR body, the Nikon F plain prism I have next to it on the shelf is my nostalgic keepsake and also a superb body. Neither get used much anymore, but they do still see the occasional roll of film. My M4-2 sees film a little more often. 

 

I tried to use the R lenses on a Sony A7 body, also my M lenses. Crappy body, mediocre sensor, fragile raw files; I sold it. 

 

I have zero complaints about my Leica equipment. It's not perfect, but nothing is.

 

Regards a one line response to the OP:

• My choice as the "first, single, general purpose lens for any Leica M" is a Summicron 50mm f/2 lens.

... Not necessarily new, because they're so freekin' expensive new. If I couldn't afford a Summicron 50 at all, I'd hunt up a good condition Voigtländer Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5 (usually findable for $275 to $450) and use that until I could afford the Summicron 50. (Still have one, still makes excellent photographs.)

• My second lens would be a Summilux 35mm f/1.4 lens, again not necessarily new (mine is 1972 vintage, and I like it more than the new ones).

Everything else comes after those two.. And if they're enough for your photography, you're done.

[hteasley]

Leica has never been excellent in bodies [...]

 

Bizarro-world laughable.

 

M cameras have defined "superior construction" for their entire existence. I (currently) have a 1962 and 2 2017 Leicas and they'll compare amazingly to any camera you can name for any construction feature you care to identify, pace weather sealing. Further, having owned a few different Ms of varying ages, the viewfinders are incredible compared to the viewfinders of Canon or Nikon rangefinders. Size, clarity, light transmission, focus patch, Leica has always been obviously the best. Recent vintage Zeiss Ikons are the only comparable viewfinders, but their body construction was, on the whole, far less robust than an M.

Edited July 24, 2018 by hteasley

[Jeff S]

Well, Human unlike animals. Animals their thoughts are fixed.

You do a disservice to many types of animals. And give far too much credit to many humans.

 

Jeff

Edited July 24, 2018 by Jeff S

[microview]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For the OP and others that may be interested in the Zeiss Distagon T* 35mm 1.4 ZM for your M10

 

I think he likes it – not least perhaps for its 7cm [sic] close focus ability      (at around 9m 08s into the film).

[earleygallery]

"Wosamko, if your questions here are genuine"

Well, Human unlike animals. Animals their thoughts are fixed.

 

How wrong you are. What do you base your statement on I wonder?

 

Without any scientific research I can relate the story of the dog I used to have which hated cats. It went crazy when it saw them. Then one day my sister brought home a stray kitten and said we had to keep it. I immediately thought how the dog would eat it alive. Long story short they ended up living happily together, protecting each other even.

 

Anyway, enjoy the M10, I really hope you like it. If it turns out to be the wrong camera for you please don't lecture us on how deficient Leica rangefinders are.

[jaapv]

How right you are, James. Dogs and some other animals like Dolphins and Elephants certainly rate higher than humans in social intelligence, and quite a few dogs are smarter than most humans anyway.

[otto.f]

Did you still use the Voigtlander Ultron 1./35?

Regarding sharpnes an Bokeh it blows awy every Leica Summicron, incl. the apsh. and ist still faster at a much lower price.

So why to buy a Leica Summicron?

Because I’m a bit older and can tell from experience that in the end I want a Leica lens anyway. This does not count for the VC 15mm and sometimes I miss my VC 75/2.4 Color Heliar

[otto.f]

@ hteasley and ramarren: ok ok, sorry, I’ll specify: Leica has always been excellent in rangefinders. In SLR’s they were not excellent and if so, often too late. But that is beside OP’s question. To be short: I prefer an M9 over an M10

Edited July 25, 2018 by otto.f

[M11 for me]

@ hteasley and ramarren: ok ok, sorry, I’ll specify: Leica has always been excellent in rangefinders. In SLR’s they were not excellent and if so, often too late. . . . .

 

. . . . and with rangefinder they are so terribly late that there is no one left all around.

 

And I still love it. Would never buy anything else. Except for parties where I want have kids nailed sharp on the sensor (and some other situations that get rarer and rarer). 

Edited July 25, 2018 by Alex U.

[wosamko]

Dear Wosamko, I think your questions have been answered from the beginning of the thread. If you are not specifically motivated to buy an M camera for what the camera is, the chances of a disappointment are high and you should look elsewhere.

It is correct that any modern high-end system nowadays will give you more than the quality that you desire. But Leica will always bring something special, albeit intangible, to the table.

 

I met Leica people from the Emirates at Leica functions and I can only say that they were extremely nice and knowledgeable. I am sure that if you approach them they will be happy to let you try before you buy. 

 

And do put the Netherlands on your travel schedule. I'm sure you will feel comfortable and accepted there, even if  we have a few idiots over here as well, but they can be ignored. 

 

Thank you for your advice. As someone said : Too many chiefs will spoil the soup! I hear from many positives and negatives. I will ask the dealer if the workshop has a faulty camera so I go there and try it after they fix it before the customer collect it.

Netherland is awesome and I hear friendly people. We had a Dutch supervisor who can handle difficult staff and has a great memory while he drinks lots of Alcohol !

[wosamko]

How wrong you are. What do you base your statement on I wonder?

 

Without any scientific research I can relate the story of the dog I used to have which hated cats. It went crazy when it saw them. Then one day my sister brought home a stray kitten and said we had to keep it. I immediately thought how the dog would eat it alive. Long story short they ended up living happily together, protecting each other even.

 

Anyway, enjoy the M10, I really hope you like it. If it turns out to be the wrong camera for you please don't lecture us on how deficient Leica rangefinders are.

 

 

How right you are, James. Dogs and some other animals like Dolphins and Elephants certainly rate higher than humans in social intelligence, and quite a few dogs are smarter than most humans anyway.

 

I know animals are faster the human like a horse. Ability to smell 1000 times more than human like a dog. Can hear far away like bats/owls. Can fly. Have mouths that break tables easily and stomach to melt the iron like crocodile. So, human is weaker than animal BUT we have brains unlike animals. Animals can think but unlike human.

 

I said in general we keep our thoughts changed to describe my self why I am changing the questions and answer without humiliating animals at all. Now days, sometimes I get a feeling of prefering animals more than humans

[wosamko]

How wrong you are. What do you base your statement on I wonder?

 

Without any scientific research I can relate the story of the dog I used to have which hated cats. It went crazy when it saw them. Then one day my sister brought home a stray kitten and said we had to keep it. I immediately thought how the dog would eat it alive. Long story short they ended up living happily together, protecting each other even.

 

Anyway, enjoy the M10, I really hope you like it. If it turns out to be the wrong camera for you please don't lecture us on how deficient Leica rangefinders are.

 

If there is any deficient then I will post it to get away to fix the issue or to learn for myself as well as letting know others what a customer thoughts before and after buying M10. What the customer heard from others and what he saw. We have to take point of views and experiments from others in considerations. As someone said: Even if you EAT 2000 lb of wine you will not get drunk UNTIL you DRINK it. It is better do experiments rather than only we hear. I know I am going to pay lots of money But I can sell it later with some loss. I can see on ebay prices of used are fine for me. If I post I will mentioned that I used it for few days so people will see it as a new item

[wosamko]

Question regarding the shutter speed. Since M10 shutter speed is 1/4000, will ND filter will act as 1/16000?! I mean If I shoot with f2 and speed 1/4000 and the result is white image or extremely bright: What ND filter rating should I choose? For the lens Leica 50mm f2

[jaapv]

What do you want an ND filter for? The density is related to the purpose. There are variable density ones as well.

[wosamko]

What do you want an ND filter for? The density is related to the purpose. There are variable density ones as well.

 

I do not know the density exactly and that is what I am asking. I would like to shoot with M10 as its shutter speed 1/8000. What ND density should I use? Under very sunny day and shooting f/2.8 for example to get blurry background

[wosamko]

What do you want an ND filter for? The density is related to the purpose. There are variable density ones as well.

 

Or, shall I use circular polarizer?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[a.noctilux]

Circular polarizer would alter the contrast/color as it removes reflection in one plane.

When used for portrait, for example, the skin "color" may be affected.

For urban photos, this may be good idea.

 

For only one EV, I'd use the "pull ISO" of 100 instead of neutral filter or polarizer.

 

Side note:

I'm pol' user since decades on slides to enhance " natural color", but sometimes it's "too much" not natural at all.