Talk me out of selling my M10...

[6bit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Let me elaborate a little on my post above. When the X1D was announced, the only Leica I owned was an M6. I sat through the Fuji GFX and Leica M10 announcements thinking the entire time I was going to get the X1D. It's a straight up beautiful camera. I waited and waited for the ship dates. They would come and go and nothing. The Get DPI forum is a good forum for medium format users btw. Eventually, the GFX and X1D shipped. I went with the M10 after much soul searching, angst, AND help from this forum locating one in Germany. I am glad I did! The M10 has been a workhorse for me and I love it. Is it perfect? No. It is a rangefinder and that is what I truly love (thought I would purchase a M10EVF if they dropped one on us ). The X1D has a lot of baggage that comes with it and I won't get into it other than to say the X2D should take care of most if not all the negatives (including how the physical camera holds up after 12 months).

 

I don't know what you will be happy with but there is no way I would purchase an X1D. I don't know how big a print you need to print, but I have done 24"x36" prints without issue. Enjoy the M10 and let Fuji and Hasselblad (DJI) sort out the next version with the awesome Sony sensor. Buying an X1D now would feel great but I wouldn't feel that way for long. My point is the X1D is a first generation camera (Sony a7R ish). The distance between first and second generation cameras is generally very large. Does that make the X1D a worse camera when the X2D comes out? No. It does make it less appealing and doesn't fix all the issues the camera has.

[pgh]

Wait and see, the new Nikon mirrorless camera ( 50 to 100 megapixels) with new Z mount lenses, it could be a possible candidate.

Rumours are it may be offered in medium and full frame(FX) format with compatibility with current FX lenses with adaptor.

No sense rushing until photokina when manufactures release the newest technology

There have been rumors about Nikon entering medium format for a decade now. I just really don't see that happening. It would be cool if I were wrong, but the sensor in the D850 is so good they'll probably be putting that in their new camera and call it a day, come in at a lower cost and like 90% the image quality of the less reliable Hassy. 

[Deliberate1]

Consider the S. Three years ago, when I wrapped my hands around an S 006, I put the M9 on the shelf. The only time it has left was to return to der mother ship for a sensor replacement. My MF Rollei 6008 (6x6) and 4x5 rig, Toyo 45A, are similarly collecting dust. The S 006 is brilliant in every respect. It feels better in the hand  than any other camera I have ever handled. Beautifully balanced and sophisticated enough to be simple.I far prefer an optical view finder than an electronic one. Looking through the S is like looking up at a movie screen. The files, when properly captured, are extraordinary. Just today I was working with some 6x6 chromes that I scanned with with a Nikon 9000 or my Scitex Eversmart Pro II. The S files are so much cleaner, equally detailed and much easier to work with. They may not quite reach the quality of a 4x5 sheet, but close enough for real world applications. I have brought back virtually black images adding 4 stops of exposure, to make very credible monochrome images. Printed on my venerable Epson 7800, the S 006 files are wonderful. I show at a local gallery. People are inevitable drawn to the images I make with the S, both color and monochrome, because they just look different from images made by other artists - rich, dense with detail, special. True, the camera is big, though in a perfectly balanced way. True, it suffers the same low light limitations characteristic of all CCD sensors. If that is an issue consider the 007. On the used market, it is stunning to think that you can get a very clean 006 and 70mm Summarit for about $1000-1500 less than the X1D body. On a recent trip to Thailand, I shot the S during the day, and the Q at night, Perfect combination. Also, the C adapter opens up the world of excellent Contax/Zeiss lenses, which go for a fraction of the Leica equivalents. Finally, the S just feels old school. Not quite like my IIIg, but still like a robust 35mm rig. I feel that with the S and the Q, I have all the bases covered. Put plainly, no one will ever have to talk me out of selling the S.

Good luck. It is all an embarrassment of riches.

David

Edited July 28, 2018 by Deliberate1

[Herr Barnack]

Based on past self-inflicted sorrow and misery, I have come up with a rule that I live by regarding M cameras and lenses:  Think twice, buy once.

 

It beats the hell out of my previous method, which was think once, buy twice, cuss three times.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Herr Barnack

[low325]

I only read your post so I think that’s what counts. And from that post I would support you actually selling and obtaining the X1D or whatever tool you require. Per your comments, The X1D or something to that equivalent is the tool/system you need for what your clients PAY for.

 

And in fact I agree with you, the Q is THaT good. I have to say my Q is the at center of my photography hobby. And my other cameras including my Digital M are the satellites.

 

Good luck sorting it out.

[adan]

Why I wouldn't make that swap (but it is just me).

 

- Lens range - I use 21-135 on the M10. Hassy isn't there yet.

- Format - I find "ideal formats" (6x7, 645, 44x33) boring. I prefer the dynamism of 3:2 - OR - the zen balance of 6x6. I don't crop - pixels are precious.

- Electronic viewing - I still consider any kind of EVF "watching the boob tube" - old slang for "TV set."

 

Coincidentally, I just went the other direction - swapped a film Hassy (SWC) for a second M10. Format was fine, but a tad heavy, and my brain just can't juggle hand-held metering and "guesstimate focus" at the same time anymore, at least not in fast-moving documentary situations. Rethinking things - (and I still have a 6x6 film rangefinder (as light as my M10s) when needed).

 

That being said, I am an interested observer of the X1-D approach and wish it well. The minimalist form factor is intriguing (yeah, I know, the form depends on EVF viewing - I'll figure out that contradiction if/when I have to ). Maybe given: AF, AE, the 1:1 crop option, more pixels in a -2 version, and the 22mm lens, I can just stick an old SWC finder on it and ignore the EVF.

 

In addition to (not in place of) the M10s.

[cp995]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

He was referring to the rumored Fuji medium format RF camera. Of course the GFX is not.

 

Jeff

 

The rumored one won't be "real" RF camera.

Maybe the bodystyle, and this pseudo RF like the X-Pro, but for sure not with a true rangefinder like our M.

[250swb]

 

I have seen large prints from the M10 that look beautiful - it's just that it's less forgiving in situations with very large dynamic range (and sometimes I am not perfect with metering....)

 

 

Perhaps taking the time out of your day to read a Photoshop tutorial is the real answer? There's buying yourself out of a problem or not allowing it to be a problem in the first place.

[dantemi]

I don’t know if it may be of some help, but I had an X1D for 1 year and last may I ended trading it for the M10 and I cannot be happier!

Reasons for my choice:

- X1D reminds me a lot the Leica simplicity but the EVF is very far from the clarity of the Leica rangefinder;

- X1D dinamic range is awesome and its files out of the camera need no (or minimal) adjustments, however the M10 files make me happy as well and limit to no extent my photography;

- X1D system does lose its value very quickly (in addition, the imminent announcement of the X2D contributes to such depreciation) while Leica usually maintains its value;

- X1D isn’t suitable for catching the decisive moment (at least for me), it requires (likes Leica) deliberate shooting but, at the same time, feels sluggish and complex (though its interface is one of the best in terms of simplicity);

- can’t explain but Leica M10 (I had a M7 and M240 before) makes things simple (i.e. essential) and myself a better photographer.

After 3 months of M10, I couldn’t go back to X1D

.Hope it helps

[brill64]

..it's going to be a long wait & besides, if you're still not sure it probably means you don't want it

[pgh]

Perhaps taking the time out of your day to read a Photoshop tutorial is the real answer? There's buying yourself out of a problem or not allowing it to be a problem in the first place.

Lol. There are hard limits to the M10 sensor that no reasonable amount of photoshop knowledge will solve, however a more capable sensor would. Sometimes "buying yourself out of a problem" is actually just getting more suitable tool for the work you're trying to do. 

[Jeff S]

Maybe given: AF, AE, the 1:1 crop option, more pixels in a -2 version, and the 22mm lens, I can just stick an old SWC finder on it and ignore the EVF.

 

Might not matter to you, but the 22mm lens was changed to the XCD 21, so about 17mm FOV.

 

Jeff

Edited July 29, 2018 by Jeff S

[M11 for me]

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D850-versus-Hasselblad-X1D-50c___1177_1114

 

Look at that: I do not think, that you are better off with the Hasselblad than any normal FF camera.

 

And then I looked at this "test" from Tony Norhtrup:

 

 

I believe there is much more out there. But its probably not such a good idea of giving up the M10. And if you still want to do that I'd go for an D850

 

I hope that its within the rules of the LUF to post those links.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Alex U.

[adan]

Hi Jeff. Actually, if cropping any rectangular sensor to square, lens equivalence is directly proportional to "short side length" of the sensor or film. Most lens "equivalences" are based on the relative diagonals of the total image area, which is variable with rectangles of different aspect ratio, but a fixed value (1.14156 - root 2) in the unique case of a square. Makes the math a bit different - Pythagoras can be left out.

 

Hassy film "6x6" neg has a 56.4mm edge length. Barnack format sensor edge length 24mm. H1D edge length 33mm

 

So 56.4/33mm gives a "focal length ratio" of 1.71 for X1-D lenses, and 56.4/24mm gives ratio of 2.35 for lenses on the digital Barnack format - relative to Hassy film and assuming a square crop.

 

"38mm on 6x6 equivalent" for the X1-D = 22.2222mm, or conversely, a 22mm lens on the X1-D is equivalent to a "37.6mm" on a film Hassy, and 21mm on the X1-D is equivalent to a "35.9mm." Either is "close enough for government work."

 

"38mm on 6x6 equivalent" for an M = 16.2 mm. I used a C/V 15mm on the M9, cropped square, and again, it was "close enough" - and cropped off the purple corners as well.

 

And for this specific purpose, 21 on the XD-1 = "15.7272...mm" on the M. Because we can ignore the difference between the native 4:3 and 3:2 ratios and their diagonals.

Edited July 29, 2018 by adan

[Jeff S]

Andy, recognizing many of those factors (Godfrey has written at length here regarding similar issues), I noted the focal length change more because of the SWC finder and its coverage, for which I have no familiarity, than because of the lens or because of the sensor format.

 

Jeff

Edited July 29, 2018 by Jeff S

[Narsuitus]

(I sell fine art prints and many clients ask for very large prints).

 

I owned a Leica M10. I have tested the Nikon D850. I have never used the X1d, the GFX, or the A7RIII.

 

If I had to choose between a Leica M10, Nikon D850, Hasselblad X1d, Fuji GFX , and the Sony A7RIII to meet the demands of fine art print clientele, I would select the Nikon D850 primarily because I already own Nikon lenses or the Leica M10 because I already own Leica lenses. However, I think any of these cameras would meet my need to make high-quality large prints.

[jay968]

I did the opposite. Sold an X1D to fund an M10. While the X1D has some really nice things about it (small, very well balanced, ergonomic camera that produced absolutely stunning images) it was probably the most buggy camera that I have ever owned. Not sure if it's been improved since I owned mine ( last summer) but the thing was honestly  like a beta product maybe a year or two away from being polished. Dials wouldn't always work as intended, AF would keep trying to focus at times even after I lifted my finger off the shutter button, Battery compartment would heat up to the point of being uncomfortable to hold the camera, flash white balance was just an estimate, no electronic or otherwise release, noisy lens focusing....get the picture? I ended up selling it and going with a Fuji GFX and an M10 (Fuji lenses are huge in comparison) and haven't looked back.

Perhaps one day when the X1D (or X2D, whatever) matures, I will revisit. But for now, no thanks.

Edited July 29, 2018 by jay968

[pmendelson]

Thanks everyone for the interesting and helpful replies.  I have decided to stick with the M10 for now and enjoy the hell out of it. 

 

I just got back from shooting a friend's warehouse that he has renovated, and the M10 with the Voigtlander 21mm f/1.8 performed beautifully (would have been tough shooting the slower X1D lenses without a tripod, and I couldn't use a tripod where I was).  I will wait to see what's announced this fall, but right now I am going to pass on the X1D...

 

Best,

 

Peter

[otto.f]

Wise decision

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pico]

Andy, recognizing many of those factors (Godfrey has written at length here regarding similar issues), I noted the focal length change more because of the SWC finder and its coverage, for which I have no familiarity, than because of the lens or because of the sensor format.

 

Jeff

 

I do not understand what you mean, Jeff. Ma faute. Sometimes I use an SWC with a ground-glass back and 90º finder and certainly the optical finder does not correspond for near-to-far scenes. How could it?

 

Here is one SWC image that was impossible to frame with the optical finder. It was a difficult assignment I do not wish to explain. It enlarged to 40x40" rather nicely.

 

I hope I have not hijacked the topic.

Edited July 29, 2018 by pico