Leica M10 Worth the Extra $2,000 from M262?

[danieldouloslee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the opportunity to purchase a used Leica M10 while trading in my M262 and an additional $2,000 (USD). Is the camera worth the $2,000 additional investment or am I better off investing the money elsewhere, say a secondhand copy of 35 'cron ASPH or a 50 lux? I am just an avid hobbyist, shooting mostly street and my 2 year old daughter. I also shoot with a .85x M6 TTL and a Sony A7 III, so the digital M is certainly not my daily driver (though I must admit, I have not held my Sony A7III for some time as I find myself enjoying the rangefinder experience as time goes on). Current M-mount lenses are the 50/2 Zeiss Planar and 90 Hexanon (just sold my Elmarit-M as the focus throw was a bit too long for me). The new 35mm/f2 Voigtlander Ultron has my eye right now, but I am waiting to see if I should invest my money on the M10 instead.

Edited February 5, 2019 by Danieldouloslee

[evikne]

When I upgraded to M10, the slimmer body was one of the most tempting improvements and something I couldn't get from any other digital Leica model. If you simply want "better image quality", a new lens will probably make a more noticeable difference.

[Advertisement]

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

[danieldouloslee]

Thanks for your input. The smaller design is something I really do like. In addition, how punchy the RAW files originally come out (Less lifting on my end). 

 

Would you happen to know if the M10 shutter is quieter or the same as the M262?

[IamTheDistance]

Something you will notice that is an improvement is the viewfinder. Before I bought the M10 I was trying at a Leica store the M10, M240 and M262. I wanted to buy the M262 because I found the image quality was good enough, but the slimmer body and better viewfinder of the M10 were important to me. 

I prefer the M262 shutter sound. I don't know why but I think the M10 sounds like a machine and the M262 like a camera, but that's just me. It's something subjective and I didn't care.

[Peter Zapp]

I went directly from M6 to M10. Lets ignore the interregnum with Sony NEX. The body proportions were the deal breaker. M8, 9, 240, 262 did not feel right.

If you were never spoiled by a film M, or if 2k, 3k, 4k of cash matter, decide for yourself.

P.S.: M10's live view is better than M240's, and much better than M8, 9, 262's. I neven though I would use it and even considered the M10-D.

 

Edited February 5, 2019 by Peter Zapp

[microview]

Having gone in the reverse direction, M10 to M262, I think the thickness saving is overhyped. In terms of comfort the old fatter design(s) is/are just as comfortable and the 262 had a weight saving over 240 (far more significant). I am more comfortable too with the menu system and back buttons, but have to concede M10's performance at higher ISOs, if night photography is your thing.

[Mark II]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I switched from the M 262 to M10. Ergonomically the M10 is a bit better, but you also pay a penalty with the shorter batter life. Image quality is virtually identical - maybe half a stop better with equivalent exposures at higher ISOs. Although the VF is allegedly better, I am not sure that I can see a significant difference (glasses wearer).

For me the upgrade was worthwhile because I specifically wanted a camera with an option for live-view. This makes it a much more versatile platform, particularly for occasional use with ultrawide-angles, polarisers or adapted lenses. That said, for the same cost I could simply have bought pretty much any of current crop of 24MP mirrorless FF cameras and still kept the M 262...

[John Miranda]

I only know the M10, but I would imagine the higher ISO performance - to be able to set a high auto ISO value and 'forget about it' is compelling, especially if you photograph your daughter moving about in lower light conditions.  

[Mark II]

3 minutes ago, John Miranda said:

I only know the M10, but I would imagine the higher ISO performance - to be able to set a high auto ISO value and 'forget about it' is compelling, especially if you photograph your daughter moving about in lower light conditions.  

Having shot both, the high ISO improvement of the M10 is pretty much negligible over the M 262, possibly because the 262 was itself improved slightly over the 240, at least in terms of banding. Leica played fast and loose with the M10’s definition of ISO, so the real world improvement is not as big as you might expect - and the M10 lags behind older and cheaper cameras from Sony/Nikon.

 

[Rupert Greenwell]

I currently have both M10 and M262. I don't see much difference in the results that they give, the slightly thinner body of the M10 is a non issue for me, I don't notice anything different with the viewfinder. The 262 is a bit lighter, has a better battery life, the on/off switch also incorporates the single/continuous shot ,which is so easy to check and switch, it is a bit simpler and more basic in a pleasing way. I have now got used to the Iso knob on the M10 but could easily live without it, the M10 has a larger buffer, live view, facility for a Evf , there is a slight improvement in the higher iso .

My main camera is the M 246 Monochrom, if the next M10 based Monochrom is not a big step up I will not change and so to keep things simple regarding batteries I will. sell the M10 as for colour the M262 is all that I really need.

I would ask to see if you can have the M10 on loan for a day or two so that you can compare results.

[Chaemono]

vor 13 Stunden schrieb Mark II:

..., the high ISO improvement of the M10 is pretty much negligible over the M 262,...Leica played fast and loose with the M10’s definition of ISO... - and the M10 lags behind older and cheaper cameras from Sony/Nikon.

That’s just terrible. I feel betrayed. 

[Mark II]

Why? I am very happy with the upgrade to the M10, probably because I knew these things beforehand and knew why I wanted to change.

Both the M10 and M 262 are great cameras if you need or want a rangefinder. There are compelling reasons to chose the 262 over the M10 (weight, battery life and cost) just as their are compelling reasons to choose the M10 (ergonomics, live-view).

[scott kirkpatrick]

// Sarcasm alert above.

[Chaemono]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb Mark II:

...just as their are compelling reasons to choose the M10 (ergonomics, live-view),

better sensor. 

[Mark II]

I strongly suspect that it is exactly the same sensor, just with some tweaked readout electronics and a different mask (possibly to give more masked pixels for calibration).

In real world shooting the difference is nowhere near enough to be a decisive factor in an upgrade.

[Chaemono]

vor 40 Minuten schrieb Mark II:

I strongly suspect that it is exactly the same sensor, just with some tweaked readout electronics and a different mask (possibly to give more masked pixels for calibration).

You sound like you know what you’re talking about. 

[Photon42]

On 2/5/2019 at 3:59 PM, Danieldouloslee said:

Thanks for your input. The smaller design is something I really do like. In addition, how punchy the RAW files originally come out (Less lifting on my end). 

 

Would you happen to know if the M10 shutter is quieter or the same as the M262?

You are the only one who can relate what he likes to what he is willing to spend. If you want to hear the M10 shutter, I would think you have enough opportunities in NY to compare your 262 to an M10.