Your opinion about the Leica M10 Monochrom

[sebben]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would rather Leica make an program to build custom cameras. 
 

step 1 - pick body style 

m10 

m10-D 

m10-P

 

step 2 - pick sensor

24mp Color 

40mp monochrom 

47mp Color 

step 3 - pick a body finish

black chrome

black paint

chrome 
 

step 4 - pick extras

wifi and all the dials

the bar minimum 

 

-

I would take one M10-D in monochrom in black paint without wiFi and minimal control dials. As a boutique manufacturer I’m sure it’s not outside leica’s niche to offer this since their pricing is already outrageous 

Edited January 22, 2020 by sebben

[shirubadanieru]

13 minutes ago, sebben said:

I would rather Leica make an program to build custom cameras. 
 

step 1 - pick body style 

m10 

m10-D 

m10-P

 

step 2 - pick sensor

24mp Color 

40mp monochrom 

47mp Color 

step 3 - pick a body finish

black chrome

black paint

chrome 
 

step 4 - pick extras

wifi and all the dials

the bar minimum 

 

-

I would take one M10-D in monochrom in black paint without wiFi and minimal control dials. As a boutique manufacturer I’m sure it’s not outside there niche to offer this since the pricing is already outrageous 

That would be amazing, but given Leica ceased the a la carte program I doubt that will ever happen (unless the reason they ceased it is to do something like this hehe)...which is unfortunate because I think that cameras like the Monochrom, which is already a very niche product, raise interested from people who used to shoot B&W on film cameras (that's my case btw, and I assume other MM users may be so too, can't say for sure though)...so having the chance to pick a Monochrom with the M10-D body, and definitely black paint or silver, as I hate the black chrome finish (looks ugly with all lenses, the black lenses are a different shade of black, and silver lenses match even worse), plus without all the unnecessary things like the extras you mentioned would be a perfect digital Leica! I'd buy that for sure  

Edited January 22, 2020 by shirubadanieru

[adan]

On 1/20/2020 at 4:46 PM, Likaleica said:

It's hard to judge any image online after it has been reduced in size and compressed, which is why I wonder how people are deciding for or against the camera based on 2MB 72dpi images on (probably) a laptop screen.

I would note that dpreview has "official sample photos" at full resolution, available for download. (As jpegs, however). Enlarge to maximum - and then "save page" out of your browser.

I presume "official" means "from Leica." It is not, however, clear if they are converted from .DNG originals - or in-camera jpegs.

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1589983597/leica-m10-monochrom-official-samples/6825955593

Some interesting things I can gather from those (beyond the fact that someone occasionally went bananas with the sharpening filter ). Some of which may come as a shock to those hoping this is the Holy Grail.

- This sensor will resolve down to single-pixel details. Although I only saw one picture where the lens actually achieved that (35 Summilux at f/4, ISO 800 - image 9 of 13 on that link, center of the image). I had some doubts about that from previous comparisons between the M9M (which could resolve that well) and the M246 CMOS (which did not). But I now think that was an issue with the lens chosen for the comparison.

- About the only other Leica lenses that even begin to make use of all those Mpixels are the 75 Nocti and 50 APO-Summicron - stopped down quite a bit. The 35 lux was about a 5 Mpixel lens in the corners, even at f/4. And even at f/6.8, the vaunted 28 Summilux....well, I've had 1980 28 Elmarits that did better in the picture edges at that aperture....

The M10M is going to reveal some nasty little facts about some vaunted $$$ Leica-M glass....

- Even with the "best" lenses, those who think 41 Mpixels gets them to 40" x 60" prints - LOL. The M10M files at 40 x 60 will be printing at 127 ppi. **giggle** That's lower than our newspaper would dare use on newsprint. **double-giggle**

- The noise (or lack thereof) is generally pretty good - ISO 64000 is smooth and unbanded. But picture 13/13 was god-awful sharpened - turns a beautiful model into so much sandpaper.

- Most of those shots don't test DR or highlights much.

My opinion (for which there is no voting option) is "would have preferred 24 larger megapixels, but still waiting for more tests." If/when I run across a used M246, I will certainly try to test that myself - with a better lens. And I do look forward to Leica posting some serious M10M .DNG-original "proofs of performance" to try out.

[onasj]

5 hours ago, adan said:

- This sensor will resolve down to single-pixel details. Although I only saw one picture where the lens actually achieved that (35 Summilux at f/4, ISO 800 - image 9 of 13 on that link, center of the image). I had some doubts about that from previous comparisons between the M9M (which could resolve that well) and the M246 CMOS (which did not). But I now think that was an issue with the lens chosen for the comparison.

- About the only other Leica lenses that even begin to make use of all those Mpixels are the 75 Nocti and 50 APO-Summicron - stopped down quite a bit. The 35 lux was about a 5 Mpixel lens in the corners, even at f/4. And even at f/6.8, the vaunted 28 Summilux....well, I've had 1980 28 Elmarits that did better in the picture edges at that aperture....

The M10M is going to reveal some nasty little facts about some vaunted $$$ Leica-M glass....

- Even with the "best" lenses, those who think 41 Mpixels gets them to 40" x 60" prints - LOL. The M10M files at 40 x 60 will be printing at 127 ppi. **giggle** That's lower than our newspaper would dare use on newsprint. **double-giggle**

- The noise (or lack thereof) is generally pretty good - ISO 64000 is smooth and unbanded. But picture 13/13 was god-awful sharpened - turns a beautiful model into so much sandpaper.

As usual, Adan offers a thoughtful, lucid, and technically astute analysis.  Of course, I don't think its necessary for lenses to resolve the 41 MP M10M sensor at single-pixel levels of detail in order to offer a benefit over their use on a 24 MP Bayer CFA-covered sensor.  Time will tell—I should receive my M10M later this week, and hope to do tests comparing the M10M vs M10P vs Sony a7riv (61 MP) vs Phase One IQ4 (151 MP) this weekend on a variety of lenses including those Adan identified as capable of fully resolving the M10M sensor... when I'm not walking around shooting the M10M!

[Jeff S]

Some printed monster size prints even using the M8 (various threads).  Only requirement is to stand far enough away to view to find acceptable.  Pixel peepers will never be happy.  I evaluate gear using my own pics, using my own workflow and make prints at sizes and viewing distances I like. For me, it’s not about specs or technical information or screen peeping; it’s about practical print results. The rest is interesting and sometimes entertaining... but doesn’t influence my purchase decisions.  Helps avoid GAS.

Jeff

[SrMi]

8 hours ago, adan said:

I would note that dpreview has "official sample photos" at full resolution, available for download. (As jpegs, however). Enlarge to maximum - and then "save page" out of your browser.

I presume "official" means "from Leica." It is not, however, clear if they are converted from .DNG originals - or in-camera jpegs.

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1589983597/leica-m10-monochrom-official-samples/6825955593

Some interesting things I can gather from those (beyond the fact that someone occasionally went bananas with the sharpening filter ). Some of which may come as a shock to those hoping this is the Holy Grail.

- This sensor will resolve down to single-pixel details. Although I only saw one picture where the lens actually achieved that (35 Summilux at f/4, ISO 800 - image 9 of 13 on that link, center of the image). I had some doubts about that from previous comparisons between the M9M (which could resolve that well) and the M246 CMOS (which did not). But I now think that was an issue with the lens chosen for the comparison.

- About the only other Leica lenses that even begin to make use of all those Mpixels are the 75 Nocti and 50 APO-Summicron - stopped down quite a bit. The 35 lux was about a 5 Mpixel lens in the corners, even at f/4. And even at f/6.8, the vaunted 28 Summilux....well, I've had 1980 28 Elmarits that did better in the picture edges at that aperture....

The M10M is going to reveal some nasty little facts about some vaunted $$$ Leica-M glass....

- Even with the "best" lenses, those who think 41 Mpixels gets them to 40" x 60" prints - LOL. The M10M files at 40 x 60 will be printing at 127 ppi. **giggle** That's lower than our newspaper would dare use on newsprint. **double-giggle**

- The noise (or lack thereof) is generally pretty good - ISO 64000 is smooth and unbanded. But picture 13/13 was god-awful sharpened - turns a beautiful model into so much sandpaper.

- Most of those shots don't test DR or highlights much.

My opinion (for which there is no voting option) is "would have preferred 24 larger megapixels, but still waiting for more tests." If/when I run across a used M246, I will certainly try to test that myself - with a better lens. And I do look forward to Leica posting some serious M10M .DNG-original "proofs of performance" to try out.

Leica M lenses have been used on high megapixels cameras for a while (mostly on non-Leica cameras, and since recently on SL2 as well). No resolution issues were reported by people who used them. Sean Reid wrote in his  M10 Monochrom: Studio Lens Test that concerns about resolution limitation through M-lenses are not warranted (opinion based on tests and usage of M10M).

The billboards are typically printed at 20dpi; it is not the resolution that people complain about them. The viewing distance matters, you would not look at a 40x60 print from the same distance as a newspaper. A 120dpi print looks good if viewed from 5 ft. distance.

High resolution is not only about the ability to print larger. I understand that there are also advantages of using lower resolution cameras.

You can download sample raw files here (scroll to Sample RAW Images chapter): https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/leica_m10_monochrom_review/preview_images

 

[Guest Nowhereman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, adan said:

My opinion (for which there is no voting option) is "would have preferred 24 larger megapixels...

That is also my preference, and I would want IBIS as well. Gregory Simpson ("Egor") writes in his M10M review:

Quote

I was also somewhat concerned all this extra resolution would mean blurrier photos. Granted, since I rarely bother to stop walking when I shoot, all my photos tend to be a bit blurry already — so my trepidation was admittedly rather benign. But what if I did want a sharply focussed photo? Would I be able to handhold the camera and still extract all that extra edge sharpness afforded by the new sensor? Basically, as we know, the higher the resolution, the more susceptible an image is to slight amounts of motion blur. The old “set the shutter speed to 1/f” rule was long obliterated. With the previous generation, I was more inclined to an absolute lower limit of 1/2f. With the M10 Monochrom, 1/4f is the more practical choice for handheld shots with maximum sharpness. Fortunately, this new sensor actually exhibits much better shadow detail, lower noise, and improved high ISO performance, so the cautiously faster shutter speeds are easily compensated.

That is essentially the the view of M10M David Farkas. In his second video — the one in which he shows his shots — he states that he shot the M10M with Auto-ISO and set the minimum shutter speed to 1/250, which he says is fine because the high-ISO image quality of the M10M is so good. However, I prefer knowing the ISO I'm shooting at, and therefore I would prefer to have IBIS. Am I too finicky about this?

The IBIS on my Ricoh GR III is excellent, often down to ⅛ second. However, with my M10, I've been caught out a few times shooting at 1/60 sec with a 50 mm lens. So, the Egor rule of 1/2f — 1/100 sec for a 50 mm lens — makes sense for 24 MP cameras.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[sebben]

will be interesting to see if the mono sensor has more dynamic range than the other sensors 

Edited January 22, 2020 by sebben

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[SrMi]

13 minutes ago, sebben said:

will be interesting to see if the mono sensor has more dynamic range than the other sensors 

How should we compare? The monochrome sensor is more light sensitive. At high ISO-s (ISO300 - ISO12800) the old Monochrome (Typ 246) has equal or better PDR than Sony a7rIV, but the max PDR is lower:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M MONOCHROM (Typ 246),Sony ILCE-7RM4

Hope someone with an M10M will contact Bill Claff and provide him with necessary data files.

[adan]

IBIS requires that the sensor (or sometimes, the CB the sensor is mounted on) moves around. And thus requires space to move around in. And has a drive system (some kind of motors to do the moving). And possibly a dedicated control chip (depends on what extra chores the main CPU can handle).

The image below shows the IBIS "package" from an Olympus EM Micro-4/3rds, scaled to the sensor size of an M10.

Now, that is a bit of an exaggeration. The Olympus has a titchy little sensor in a body nearly as big as an M10, which leaves a lot of room to work with. And the SL2 includes IBIS. But the SL2 also has 50% more volume than the M10.

Anyone who wants IBIS in a M should explain exactly what Leica is supposed to throw overboard to make room for it. Especially in the already-packed M10.

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!

Additionally, from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization :

In-body image stabilization requires the lens to have a larger output image circle because the sensor is moved during exposure and thus uses a larger part of the image. Compared to lens movements in optical image stabilization systems the sensor movements are quite large....

The SL and Olympus lenses are designed with that in mind from the beginning - but do you really want Leica doing surgery on your 2003 35mm Summicron ASPH to increase its image circle (assuming it's even possible, and for how much)? Hmmm?

[snooper]

3 minutes ago, adan said:

Anyone who wants IBIS in a M should explain exactly what Leica is supposed to throw overboard to make room for it. Especially in the already-packed M10.

LCD screen. No doubt.

[mmradman]

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

Leica M lenses have been used on high megapixels cameras for a while (mostly on non-Leica cameras, and since recently on SL2 as well). No resolution issues were reported by people who used them. Sean Reid wrote in his  M10 Monochrom: Studio Lens Test that concerns about resolution limitation through M-lenses are not warranted (opinion based on tests and usage of M10M).

The billboards are typically printed at 20dpi; it is not the resolution that people complain about them. The viewing distance matters, you would not look at a 40x60 print from the same distance as a newspaper. A 120dpi print looks good if viewed from 5 ft. distance.

High resolution is not only about the ability to print larger. I understand that there are also advantages of using lower resolution cameras.

You can download sample raw files here (scroll to Sample RAW Images chapter): https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/leica_m10_monochrom_review/preview_images

 

Thanks for the link.  Well, i have downloaded several RAW and JPGs and stopped there. 

Opening in PS/ACR my first impression, who ever took those pictures didn't mange to produce a single focused/sharp image.  The light is typical dull UK winter daytime so no real challenge to any camera.

Dear Leica, if you are going to promote £7K+ camera at least give it to somebody knows how to use it.

[mmradman]

11 minutes ago, adan said:

IBIS requires that the sensor (or sometimes, the CB the sensor is mounted on) moves around. And thus requires space to move around in. And has a drive system (some kind of motors to do the moving). And possibly a dedicated control chip (depends on what extra chores the main CPU can handle).

The image below shows the IBIS "package" from an Olympus EM Micro-4/3rds, scaled to the sensor size of an M10.

Now, that is a bit of an exaggeration. The Olympus has a titchy little sensor in a body nearly as big as an M10, which leaves a lot of room to work with. And the SL2 includes IBIS. But the SL2 also has 50% more volume than the M10.

Anyone who wants IBIS in a M should explain exactly what Leica is supposed to throw overboard to make room for it. Especially in the already-packed M10.

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!

Additionally, from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization :

In-body image stabilization requires the lens to have a larger output image circle because the sensor is moved during exposure and thus uses a larger part of the image. Compared to lens movements in optical image stabilization systems the sensor movements are quite large....

The SL and Olympus lenses are designed with that in mind from the beginning - but do you really want Leica doing surgery on your 2003 35mm Summicron ASPH to increase its image circle (assuming it's even possible, and for how much)? Hmmm?

Hmm, let's compare Z7 with M246.  The Z7 is fitted with IBIS and full frame sensor.  

The volume of the two cameras, give or take for battery grip (Z7) and add on EVF (M246), is not much different between two cameras. Z7 looks even thinner than M246.

 

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!

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!

[adan]

7 minutes ago, mmradman said:

Dear Leica, if you are going to promote £7K+ camera at least give it to somebody knows how to use it.

Leica is in the business of selling (being generous) 80% of their cameras to people who don't know how to use them. I think you can poke around on these forums and find many pictures even worse than those samples.

It would be "triggering" and degrading to those "users" to see samples significantly better than anything they will ever achieve.

(BTW, not something new - brochures from Leica over the past 50 years have often included poor-quality examples.)

 

[adan]

14 minutes ago, mmradman said:

Hmm, let's compare Z7 with M246.  The Z7 is fitted with IBIS and full frame sensor.  

The volume of the two cameras, give or take for battery grip (Z7) and add on EVF (M246), is not much different between two cameras. Z7 looks even thinner than M246

Of course - what Nikon threw overboard is that useless little part called the rangefinder. 

Is it your plan that Leica should do likewise?

Plus, the tubby M246 is not an M10, now is it?

You usually do better than that - Please tell me you aren't becoming one of those photographers who are proud to demonstrate they have the engineering perception of, say, the average barn-rat.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

26 minutes ago, mmradman said:

Hmm, let's compare Z7 with M246.  The Z7 is fitted with IBIS and full frame sensor.  

The volume of the two cameras, give or take for battery grip (Z7) and add on EVF (M246), is not much different between two cameras. Z7 looks even thinner than M246.

 

 

 

If I squeeze you in the middle you will bulge in other places as well

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mujk]

The M flange distance (17,8mm) is also more than 10mm longer than that of the Z mount and more than 7mm longer than the L mount flange distance. This means that there is a considerable amount of empty space between the mount and the shutter in any M body. The mount already protrudes a bit on all digital Ms when compared to a film body, in order to compensate for the space needed for sensor board and display, The mount could of course be made to protrude much more, e.g. 10mm, and then it might be possible to fit also an IBIS mechanism into the body. But I don't think I would like a Leica M that looked like that.

[mmradman]

Do I hear usual Leica user response, can’t be done 😂. By the time every digital camera in the market is fitted with IBIS Leica may decide to deliver on IBIS challenge.  

There was a time when digital sensor was considered unfeasible in M body, we all know how that one ended.  More recent example, 24Mp was considered by many as maximum resolution one may wish for and adequate as such (I agree), but the world moved forward and competitive pressure is never far.  The response came first with the SL mk2 and few weeks later the M10M, we are rapidly moving away from 24Mp ideal.

[mmradman]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

If I squeeze you in the middle you will bulge in other places as well

Providing you have long arms.

[mmradman]

2 hours ago, adan said:

Of course - what Nikon threw overboard is that useless little part called the rangefinder. 

Is it your plan that Leica should do likewise?

Plus, the tubby M246 is not an M10, now is it?

You usually do better than that - Please tell me you aren't becoming one of those photographers who are proud to demonstrate they have the engineering perception of, say, the average barn-rat.

I am no internet influencer, just entertaining myself like most of us here. It’s up to Leica to follow industry trends and pursue R&D in areas where they are likely to generate future sales and stay in business.

M246 is “tubby” but M10 is no Twiggy in comparison.

As for my engineering perception goes it may well be average barn-rat somedays but probably not today.