Not sure if I want upgrade to M10 anymore.

[ianman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

🙂

Yes, I know.... but that hardly influences the resulting photographs!

[otto.f]

Happiness is a warm gun

[Advertisement]

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

[otto.f]

There is another point, which I have not seen mentioned on the forum thus far (I won’t have read all the posts in the CCD vs. CMOS hubbub I guess). If you use the Clarity button with an M9 file (in C1 it works quite powerfull, more than in LR), you get unnatural sharp prints, sometimes called digitized images. Whereas with M10 files I almost need it to keep some distance from woolliness. The same counts for SL files btw.

[JimmyCheng]

12 hours ago, otto.f said:

It has a grey anthracite paint finish

I could, but I didn't realize that when I had my M-E, not until I've used plenty of leicas did I realize what I truly wanted from them.

[Archiver]

On 3/6/2020 at 12:11 AM, JimmyCheng said:

Well, here’s my story.

I purchased an M 240 back in 2016 as my first digital Leica, I was thrilled by this beauty and the image it was able to produce, until I saw someone posted m9 images and I went deep into this ccd vs cmos debate. There are claims that the difference was not humanly distinguishable and there are evidences. Yet to me, the difference is obvious enough that I swapped my 240 for an m-e, which I used for about half a year. As I was still at a phase where camera speed and iso were important to me and finally I cannot stand the sluggish m-e and its not so charming appearance, and pull the trigger on a black m10p

Are you 'the' Jimmy Cheng, as in Red35 Jimmy Cheng? I so, I love your content, man.

[JimmyCheng]

8 hours ago, Archiver said:

Are you 'the' Jimmy Cheng, as in Red35 Jimmy Cheng? I so, I love your content, man.

Haha Nah I'm not him, but I like his contents too.

[WvE]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Although the M10 is a great camera of course (tried for a week), I will not upgrade to the M10 because (not necessarily in that order):

(i) I can't really justify to spend that kind of money at this moment;

(ii) Not overly impressed by its IQ (at least not better than my M9 files up to say 800 iso); 

(iii) Love the design of my old M9, it's getting cult status 🙂 

(iv) Personally I feel sometimes a bit uncomfortable walking around with an expensive piece of equipment like an M10 (same goes for expensive lenses or a Rolex of course...). 

 

  

[Archiver]

On 3/11/2020 at 7:12 PM, WvE said:

(iv) Personally I feel sometimes a bit uncomfortable walking around with an expensive piece of equipment like an M10 (same goes for expensive lenses or a Rolex of course...).

Like many, I bought my M9 brand new and close to full price, so I've been walking around with an expensive camera since the day it reached my hands. You get used to it. Sure, be careful with it like any other thing, but you don't have to overly baby it.

[WvE]

42 minutes ago, Archiver said:

Like many, I bought my M9 brand new and close to full price, so I've been walking around with an expensive camera since the day it reached my hands. You get used to it. Sure, be careful with it like any other thing, but you don't have to overly baby it.

Agree, over time you get more relaxed about it.

[otto.f]

Yes it’s not an M4 with which you could defend yourself as a war photographer, just in case. Although the SL comes near to that. 

Edited March 12, 2020 by otto.f

[Ko.Fe.]

7 hours ago, WvE said:

Agree, over time you get more relaxed about it.

Overtime it will become much less expensive.  As any digital camera. 

I'm thinking of keeping M-E (purchased it new in 2016, sensor replaced recently for free) and get used Q for low light. 

[otto.f]

21 hours ago, Ko.Fe. said:

and get used Q for low light

I don't think you’ll do that

[Ko.Fe.]

46 minutes ago, otto.f said:

I don't think you’ll do that

 I have to sell unused gear first.

[otto.f]

Don’t think it’s your thing

[Ko.Fe.]

1 hour ago, otto.f said:

Don’t think it’s your thing

Thank you for thinking about it! Could you, please, then you have time, explain it here? I don't want to loose hundreds of dollars on taxes and re-sale of expensive to me used Q.

Here is what I have considered so far:

Incoming Canon R6. All is great, but no good compact, wide native lenses.

Fuji X100V. Too small menus, for my eyes. Not user friendly interface. 

Fuji X-Pro2. Too big for no IBIS cropper.

Leica CL. Out of price range, even used.

Leica M240. I don't need second digital M.

Leica M10. I don't want to sell everything and use very expensive camera as everyday camera.

Olympus Pen F. No direct controls on camera, complicated menus. Still limited IQ.

Ricoh GR III same as Pen F. Not impressed with image quality on higher ISO. And no VF for its relatively high price. 

I have Olympus E-PL1 with 15 f8 pancake and like to use it. Q is just same thing, but with much larger sensor and faster lens, higher ISO. It also has most user oriented GUI I have seen.

I went to the store yesterday and tested Q-P indoors. 

[otto.f]

As far as I remember from your posts I guess that you do not bathe in money, or don’t want to spend to much on photography. But you have quite a taste for image quality. And although sometimes ambivalent or inconsistent you tend to lean towards CCD. You see no problems in manual operating your camera, might even prefer it above auto-anything that disturbs your own thinking. Well, the Q is, used or not, a relatively expensive CMOS camera with not the most bite in its images compared to what you are you are used to with your CCD-M and your Summarit. With the Q you might even loose neutrality of colors as you know it from the M-E. You are more a classic, naturalistic photographer and I doubt whether this fits with a camera that combines three angles on false pretenses, namely crop till you drop. Cropping is a violation of the idea of traditional photography namely: you decide to frame at the moment of shooting, not afterwards. Digital photography has compromised this basic idea to a great extent. The word ‘photoshop’ has even loaded this connotation of cheating and fake news. Nowadays there are a lot of LUF-members interested in SL2 and 40+Mp just because of the greater freedom of cropping without loosing too much resolution. Well, the Q has not enough resolution for that game.
Leica has survived and has been able to maintain the M by bringing out all kinds of more or less commercial products, point and shoots, that had a market growing  on the idea of ‘me too Leica’, starting with C-Lux. The Q is the top camera in that canal. In my view and if my memory is correct, you do not fit in that photographic  lifestyle. 
Compared to lenses, camera bodies are a waste of time and money. Is it true that you have only one lens for your M? In that case you don’t know your M.

Edited March 13, 2020 by otto.f

[Ko.Fe.]

1 hour ago, otto.f said:

As far as I remember from your posts I guess that you do not bathe in money, or don’t want to spend to much on photography. But you have quite a taste for image quality. And although sometimes ambivalent or inconsistent you tend to lean towards CCD. You see no problems in manual operating your camera, might even prefer it above auto-anything that disturbs your own thinking. Well, the Q is, used or not, a relatively expensive CMOS camera with not the most bite in its images compared to what you are you are used to with your CCD-M and your Summarit. With the Q you might even loose neutrality of colors as you know it from the M-E. You are more a classic, naturalistic photographer and I doubt whether this fits with a camera that combines three angles on false pretenses, namely crop till you drop. Cropping is a violation of the idea of traditional photography namely: you decide to frame at the moment of shooting, not afterwards. Digital photography has compromised this basic idea to a great extent. The word ‘photoshop’ has even loaded this connotation of cheating and fake news. Nowadays there are a lot of LUF-members interested in SL2 and 40+Mp just because of the greater freedom of cropping without loosing too much resolution. Well, the Q has not enough resolution for that game.
Leica has survived and has been able to maintain the M by bringing out all kinds of more or less commercial products, point and shoots, that had a market growing  on the idea of ‘me too Leica’, starting with C-Lux. The Q is the top camera in that canal. In my view and if my memory is correct, you do not fit in that photographic  lifestyle. 
Compared to lenses, camera bodies are a waste of time and money. Is it true that you have only one lens for your M? In that case you don’t know your M.

Thank you for your reply and your thoughts. 
I started with Fed-2 and only 50 on it and used it as only camera for years. Then it was film P&S with fixed focus prime and then SLR with normal zoom. 
I never had any thoughts of adding more lenses. Only then DSLR came and I was exploring all ways in photography. But even then I liked Canon 5d with just 50 lens on it. Every time mission was critical I switched to only 50. With my return to film and getting Bessa, then M, I switched from 50 to 35 and it opened street photography for me. I’m not 50 anymore :). 35 is do it all lens for me. Having get used to inhead framing is important for consistency in accurate, no crop framing.

I do plan to keep M-Е,  but for low iso, no rush or street some time. Not because predominantly CCD but because it is my mother present to me, which I got new. Summarit 35 was also new, then I purchased it.

I’m big fan of Winogrand. Seriously and I knew which lenses he used for most. This is why I see Q as new every day camera for me. I have no practice to crop in PP, but I  like Q framelines for 35 and 50. I do frame at the shot, not in PP. Just as Winogrand did.  I like JPEG from camera and keep it small in size.

I’m at new work in  large city, downtown core. Now 35 is narrow. And M-E iso range is too low. I would prefer 3200-6400 and 28. I have 28 for M-E, but it is blocking VF. Smaller will have smaller aperture, which limits use of M-E.

One thing I can’t follow Winogrand is VF on the top and in the middle. Not my thing for daily use.

As for cameras bodies, I still have DSLR and use them randomly. And even old digital P&S works. I have no tendency to sell camera which is working.

Q seems to be still working camera after five years of initial release.

[otto.f]

4 hours ago, Ko.Fe. said:

And M-E iso range is too low

Ok, success with your quest!

[atournas]

On 1/16/2020 at 1:52 AM, Ko.Fe. said:

https://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2019/7/29/the-myth-of-the-leica-m9-ccd-vs-cmos-sensors
 

This link was posted by person who damaged m10 behind repair. He googled m9 vs m10 and google return is above.

After he looked at article images, his conclusion.... m9 wins. I came to same conclusion after looking at the same.

I was thinking of selling my photography gear to get M10 for high iso I want due to street photography, but I’m not ready to sell M-E and have lower IQ camera on base ISO range.

With all due respect, I'm a bit confused. Why would such colour/hue refinements be important in street photography? High iso, on the other hand, IS important.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ko.Fe.]

6 hours ago, atournas said:

With all due respect, I'm a bit confused. Why would such colour/hue refinements be important in street photography? High iso, on the other hand, IS important.

You are right. By mistake I was thinking if I'll sell everything to get M10, I could use it for something else. But been more at home these days, I realized what I still need good and not bulky AF camera for more important than street pictures. So, I'm currently in the progress of figuring this out and for my M-E 220 I purchased 35 1.4 lens. Low ISO problem was solved, at least  :).