Paulus Posted January 27, 2019 Share #1 Posted January 27, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) Is anyone noticing the difference in hit-rate with the Summicron 2.0/90mm Asph and Apo-Telyt -M 3.4/135mm or Tele Elmar 4.0/135mm using the M 10. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 27, 2019 Posted January 27, 2019 Hi Paulus, Take a look here M 10 and improvement of your 90/135mm behavior. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
FMB Posted January 31, 2019 Share #2 Posted January 31, 2019 Yes, better viewfinder, better rangefinder and much less noise. Francisco Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 1, 2019 Share #3 Posted February 1, 2019 Difference compared to what? Compared to M9, definitely. My 135 TE f/4 can now go places at ISO 12500 that would have been just fantasy dreams with the M9, and with smooth "filmic" noise comparable to the M9 at ~1000. (I don't go above 12500 with the M10, because some banding starts there.) Generally speaking, the focus is more consistent. But not "magically" better - a 75 f/1.4 at f/1.4 and 1 m is still tricky in moving situations. If possible, in daylight I still prefer to stop down my 135 to f/5.6, both for a slight overall IQ improvement, and for the extra DoF "just in case". 135 TE at f/4 and 1/125th sec., M10, ISO 12500, very dark "pop-up" concert venue. "Reach out and touch someone" Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293714-m-10-and-improvement-of-your-90135mm-behavior/?do=findComment&comment=3675767'>More sharing options...
Paulus Posted February 1, 2019 Author Share #4 Posted February 1, 2019 Thank you Adan : " Difference compared to what? Compared to M9, definitely." I meant in comparison with the M 240, because the 2.0/90 is just on it's limit with the 0.68 viewfinder and I was curious if one could see any progress. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted February 6, 2019 Share #5 Posted February 6, 2019 (edited) When I took an M10 out on trial in consideration of upgrading from my M240s, one of the things I paid most attention to was the rangefinder especially with longer lenses. I used 90/2 and 135/4. I shot the two cameras side by side, I even mounted them on a tripod with a QR plate so I could quickly switch between them from the same composition. I can't speak for anyone else but I did not find any difference in clarity or ease of achieving focus. I also found the increase in frame size negligible despite the increase in magnification. And because of the increase in frame size, the greater eye relief merely renders the M10 on par with the M240 in terms of visibility of the 35 and 28mm frames. Had they increased the eye relief without increasing the magnification, THEN those frames would be easier to see with glasses on. There may be other factors making the upgrade attractive (though none to myself) but the viewfinder definitely wasn't one of them for me. Edited February 6, 2019 by bocaburger Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted February 6, 2019 Share #6 Posted February 6, 2019 I never used the 240, but as a full-time glasses wearer I sure appreciate the improvements over the M9. I've checked the RF focusing of my 135 TE and find a much better hit rate. Also, comparing results (on the 135 at f4) using the M10 RF to using the 020 EVF I find little improvement from the EVF, and of course faster work with the RF. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.