Film Leica vs M10-P

[raj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone,

I currently own a Leica MP. It’s my favorite camera. Some of my favorite photos were made with it and I want it to be something I pass down to one of my kids (as long as they keep making film). So I don’t want to get rid of that camera. 
 

However, I have been bitten by GAS lately and have been thinking of getting a digital Leica. So I recently purchased a pristine M9-P with a new sensor and only 4000 activations total. It hasn’t even arrived yet but my coworker is wanting to sell his pristine LNIB M10-P and is offering me a good deal on it. 
 

The biggest advantages I see to the M10-P are the immediacy of digital (but I like the waiting of the film professing) but more importantly the high ISO capabilities that I can tap into at an instant. 
 

But I worry that if I get an M10-P, the MP might just sit around which seems a waste. 
 

Any thoughts on what I should do? I mostly use the Leica to photograph personal work, most often my family. Some of my personal work can be seen here: instagram.com/raj.filmdiary
 

My options are:

1. Just keep the MP and get nothing else

2. Keep the MP and M9-P

3. Keep the MP and get an M10-P

Any thoughts would be appreciated 🙏🏽

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Keep the MP - worst-case scenario, you will pass it on to your grandchildren.  And get the M10, enjoy using it. In practice you'll probably be using both.

[DickieT]

+1. The M10 is a big jump forward compared to the M9. I would not worry at all about having a MP and M10 - I have very different use for my MP and M10D and over time my preference to shoot film or digital goes back and forth. You will have a perfect setup!

[raj]

18 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Keep the MP - worst-case scenario, you will pass it on to your grandchildren.  And get the M10, enjoy using it. In practice you'll probably be using both.

Thank you! Do you have a digital and film Leica? If so, when do you use one or the other?

[raj]

7 minutes ago, DickieT said:

+1. The M10 is a big jump forward compared to the M9. I would not worry at all about having a MP and M10 - I have very different use for my MP and M10D and over time my preference to shoot film or digital goes back and forth. You will have a perfect setup!

Definitely is a big jump! But the M9 (from all I’ve read) seemed to have something special in the images. Not necessarily accurate but it had an opinion. The M10 by the virtue of being more accurate seems to be missing an opinion. It just records reality really well which means I have to do extra work to give it a look. In contrast, my MP already gives me a look since I’m shooting on film. 
 

I guess I just wonder when I’d use one over the other. 

[DickieT]

The look will come from your glass more than the sensor...

[Ko.Fe.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Future of film Leica is not only within availability of film. Some are using micro plates in Leica. Will be MP still serviceable in twenty years from now is another question.

M9 and M10 are two very different cameras. M10 is high ISO capable, but not something very special CMOS sensor camera. M9 has CCD sensor which is very limited in low light, but at low ISO it might give very interesting and very clean (comparing to CMOS low ISO noise) result.

It is not very uncommon to read how people go from M10 back to M9 or at least regretting of  letting M9 go.

If you have money to spend you have no issues to try whatever you want. I'm not in this category.

I'm thinking of selling all I have within RF including film M and switch from M-E 220 to M10. The reason is simple, I'm not into static objects, photos with RF. Something like f8 1/250 @12800 or higher will give me more opportunities. Film M and M9 aren't capable of this. But if your objects are still I suggest to learn more about M9 CCD sensor.

 

 

[Stealth3kpl]

I am using my MPs. I love them. I keep trying to justify buying an M-A or a black paint M4 even though I have 2 MPs and an M2. I keep catching myself and tell me off. My M240 has been in a cupboard for 2 years along with my Q (just occasionally shooting a couple of frames and checking the batteries). I ought to sell them but think to myself I won't be able to justify buying another Leica digital by the time I've used up my film. I find myself thinking "where's the fun" and "what's the point" with digital. I  find film magical and exciting. I'm not so interested in taking photos in low light though.

Only buy the M10 if you don't think you're going through a fad.

Pete

[plasticman]

It’s about 8 years now since I got into film, and during that time I’ve also owned an M8, a loaner M9, an X100, and now a Leica T. But the digital cameras always end up sitting neglected on the shelf. Film is just so much more compelling, and if you know what you’re doing the results are so much nicer than digital

Funny that Ko Fe thinks a film Leica won’t be serviceable in twenty years - I have an M2 that’s older than I am. The M10 will be landfill long before the MP needs fixing. But it’s always nice with new toys - for a while.

Edited December 12, 2019 by plasticman

[Keith (M)]

My MP and M7 lately have been seeing more use than my M240.  To a large extent that is down to the intended subject matter. Last week I needed to go into to town and knowing I would have a little time for some 'street' photography and given the afternoon light at this time of year, it was the M240 that went with me.  An urge or need for some close-up or macro work? M240, 60mm Macro Elmarit-R + R to M adaptor.  Landscapes, country walks, general no particular aim type of outing - then it is film.  After all, pulling the wet negs off the reel and seeing the images there is much more satisfying than importing .dng's into LR!

[ktmrider2]

I am traveling for the next four months.  I threw an M2 in the bag and left the digital Leica at home.  It certainly does not hurt to own both.  I love classic film cameras of all types (Leica, Nikon, Hasselblad, Contax etc) but the convience of traveling with digital cannot be beat, unless I am in the mood to shoot film.  The digital side of my travel kit has a FujiX100F (much smaller and lighter then any M) and a GoPro7 for underwater and action photographs.  I REFUSE to video myself for some blog.

[erniethemilk]

I have an M6 & an M10-P. Both have their place and both are blooming awesome! 

[Ouroboros]

I you have already created your favourite images with your MP,  keep it  as a camera for life.  Digital cameras, even Leica digital cameras, are throw-away consumer goods so why not try something like a Fujifilm X100F alongside your MP to see where you really want to go.

 

Selling one to fund another without being certain could be an expensive mistake, as would letting GAS make the decision for you.  There is a difference between being a photographer and a camera owner.

 

Edited December 13, 2019 by Ouroboros

[Ouroboros]

.

Edited December 13, 2019 by Ouroboros

[shirubadanieru]

I had an M10 and M10-D and for some reason never really loved them as much as the M9 iterations (my favorite digital of all time is the M9M), and given that I try to shoot more film than digital, it makes little sense to pay so much for an M10 if you use it as your secondary body. with that in mind, my kit is a Leica M-A and an M9-p (which I got for half the price of a new M10). M10 is the better camera of course, but M9 has something special and unique about it that the M10/240 don't. 

[earleygallery]

You've already bought the M9 (?) so buy the M10 as well and try them out, then sell the one you like least once you've worked that out.

[Topsy]

I've both M9 (x3) and MP (plus M6 and M2. I would say if you want to keep your shooting similar across both mediums go with M9 but if you want all the "benefits" of modern digital go with M10. I would typically use my film Leicas for times when I am out to shoot specifically but if I'm just out and opportunity might present I would use my M9s. When I can only take 1 camera and the weather is OK it'll be one of my M9s with 35mm Summicron but TBH if the weather or light is poor I'll take my Fujifilm X-T2 with 16-55 for it's all weather/higher ISO capability.

[A miller]

Raj - The choice is clear - #1.  You don't need a digital camera.  You will only make bad photos faster.  Stick with film and savor that film aesthetic that put the art in photography and was what drew people to the craft long before the creature comforts of digital were conceived.   Digital Leicas are all about continuing the gravy train.  They won't produce satisfying photos for you and anyone who tells you differently has sold his or her soul.  Don't listen to them  Instead, listen to your inner self.  Listen to me.  Remember, it's #1 all day long.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest Nowhereman]

raj - As you haven't stated what you want to do in photographic terms, I doubt anyone's advice, including my own, will be helpful. Ultimately, I feel it doesn't matter since the photographer is more important than the type of camera he or she uses. As for me, I love photography, film of digital. While I like film, my attempts at going back to film have run into snags because I can't do my own film development: I move annually between the Washington, DC area and Paris and Bangkok and Chiangmai. I'm too much on the move to develop film in various places. Back in 2012, I bought a pristine Hasselblad SWC 903 in Paris with the intention of having film developed and darkroom enlargements made by the then best darkroom printer in Bangkok. But when I got back, he had died in a freak car accident. I tried several other Bangkok labs, but the results in just film development weren't good; so I sold the SWC and got my money back.

I've had an M6 since 1988, but two years ago bought an M3, the camera I like to shoot with the most — and had film developed in both Bangkok and Chiang Mai. I "camera scanned" with the Leitz BEOON stand and a Focotar II lens, and liked the results. Then, last year, the guy who owned the tiny Bangkok lab, where he used a Kodak film processing machine that he kept scrupulously clean, died at the age of 50 from sleep apnea. And this year, the young woman who ran the small Chiang Mai hand processing and printing lab closed up shop because of strong advice from her doctor, after results from two sets of blood tests over the past year. Now, I could probably find a good small lab in Bangkok, but it would involve some searching and some trials — instead, when I left Washington for Thailand in September, I just brought my M10.

So you know where I'm coming from, below are two film shots followed by two M10 shots. Often, one of the charms of film is the contingent nature of the experience. For example, the first image below is the result of a processing error: the lab developed two rolls in the same tank and did not put in enough Rodinal to reach the required minimum amount of developer needed. 

M3 | DR Summicron 50 | Tri-X | ISO 400 | Stand development with Rodinal

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!

Wiang Pa Pao

M3 | DR Summicron 50 |  | Tri-X | ISO 400 | Stand development | Yellow filter
Chiang Mai 

But chance and contingency can also strike with digital. Everything I like about the first image below was caused by chance. I was trying out the Nikon Z7 at a camera store in Chiang Mai. While I was looking at the Nikon, the two salesmen asked to try out my Leica M10. When I got it back, this little Valentine's Day procession was walking by — never mind that there's a sign for Christmas in the background. I didn't know that they had changed the settings on my camera, so that, when I used the meter to set the shutter speed, I didn't realize that I was setting it as slow as 1/45 sec. It was lucky that the aperture was at f/11, or nothing would have been in focus.

M10 | Summicron 35v4 | ISO3200 | f/11 | 1/45 sec
Chiang Mai 

M10 | DR Summicron 50 | ISO 200 | f/5.6 | 1/350sec
Wiang Pa Pao 

Incidentally, all four pictures are in my book project: Frog Leaping.

Edited December 26, 2019 by Nowhereman

[Nitnaros]

It was said on this thread before, that there is no single answer to your question, Raj

it all depends on what works for you and what you want to photograph and accomplish.

My comments are these:

- I shoot both an M10-P and an M7
- I came to the M10-P unvoluntarily via an upgrade from my M9 (sensor corrosion...); no looking back the M9, but that is a different story
- I disagree with the statement that digital photos generally look "dead"; I think the difference and that perception comes more from how we use a camera, and not whether the capture medium is digital or film
- and I love using my M7 and trying out different film stock.

Here are 2 examples from 2 days ago with my M10-P;  whether one likes these pics or not, I don't think they look "digitally dead".
The photo from the table cloth at ISO 12,500 , it would be quite difficult to shoot that with color film.

The third pic of the inside of the Met Opera is from my M7, Ilford Delta 3200; classic film look. 
Works great, but you have a few more technical limitations, no doubt imho with film.