Why so much love for M10?

[Casey Jefferson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, steve 1959 said:

But i much prefer RF focus to electronic focus peaking thingy,,,so its subjective yes?

One thing that focus peaking does better than RF is that you don't need to focus your subject at the center, just compose and pull focus until you see the subject light up with peaking. This work pretty well with mid apertures.

But still, lenses like noctilux probably won't work with the above method when shooting wide open.

[Advertisement]

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

[Ray Vonn]

1 hour ago, budjames said:

Ray, you are correct, however the excellent focus peaking in the SL2 makes it so much easier.

Regards,

Bud James

 

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto.

👍

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, Casey Jefferson said:

One thing that focus peaking does better than RF is that you don't need to focus your subject at the center, just compose and pull focus until you see the subject light up with peaking. This work pretty well with mid apertures.

But still, lenses like noctilux probably won't work with the above method when shooting wide open.

Thanks,i had the olympus system but hated focus peaking  on manual focus although the auto-focus was good,its just that it was olympus doing it not me.

Love the rangefinder though.

[Jeff S]

I use RF only on my M cameras.  But the SL2 is a different tool offering a variety of focus options.  I use native SL lenses with back button autofocus, decoupling focus from the shutter button, and then fine tune if needed by turning the focus ring slightly to automatically engage magnification.  No reason to use focus peaking, which I find distracting and not as reliable. Off-center subject focusing is simple using the same back button.  Different strokes...

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I use RF only on my M cameras.  But the SL2 is a different tool offering a variety of focus options.  I use native SL lenses with back button autofocus, decoupling focus from the shutter button, and then fine tune if needed by turning the focus ring slightly to automatically engage magnification.  No reason to use focus peaking, which I find distracting and not as reliable. Off-center subject focusing is simple using the same back button.  Different strokes...

Jeff

What he said

[strohscw]

I would like to add a point why I love my M10 Monochrom:

Because this camera has such a high dynamic range and useable ISO-range up to 25.000 which gives me possibilities I never had with film cameras in the past. Taking landscape pictures without need for graduated grey filters and taking handhold pictures almost in the dark without the need and the limitations of a tripod and/or very expensive Noctilux lenses. This camera gives me completely new possibilities. And I haven´t even started to talk of the lenses, size, weight, ...

But to say something negative: I would like to get batteries with higher capacity and some more weathersealing would be perfect. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

19 hours ago, Erato said:

Mastering photography is one thing, making an eye-catching or capture a stunning picture in the name of $FAME is another thing.

Some learn to be a cash printer while others embrace and enjoying the outstanding design and fabulous artworks because they're not eager to make $ under the name of art.

This is probably a side tangent for another thread. As a working photographer for 30 years or more I can say I don't totally agree with you. My partner is also a full time fine art painter. We've paid our way with our images and paintings. My clients paid me to make bold and striking images that would be hung as an art piece. And as always. It's only their eyes that can say if it's art or not.

i think the idea that art and profit are or need to be separate are falsehoods. I have images, taken for clients that have ended up as wall art in foyers of corporate headquarters. Some of these I am genuinely proud of and I think they'd hang in a gallery exhibition just as well. I don't call myself an artist but I think I have produced some in my pursuit of making my clients happy. Artists need to eat. To do that they need to market and sell. Just because they sell well doesn't necessarily diminish the work.

While some do as you say, I think it would be unfair to lump all commercially sucessful art photographer into one pile.

Gordon

[Erato]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

This is probably a side tangent for another thread. As a working photographer for 30 years or more I can say I don't totally agree with you. My partner is also a full time fine art painter. We've paid our way with our images and paintings. My clients paid me to make bold and striking images that would be hung as an art piece. And as always. It's only their eyes that can say if it's art or not.

i think the idea that art and profit are or need to be separate are falsehoods. I have images, taken for clients that have ended up as wall art in foyers of corporate headquarters. Some of these I am genuinely proud of and I think they'd hang in a gallery exhibition just as well. I don't call myself an artist but I think I have produced some in my pursuit of making my clients happy. Artists need to eat. To do that they need to market and sell. Just because they sell well doesn't necessarily diminish the work.

While some do as you say, I think it would be unfair to lump all commercially sucessful art photographer into one pile.

Gordon

"Some" learn to be a cash printer. English is a very precise language, isn't it?

[rramesh]

Any camera these days can take great pictures (smart phones, DSLRs/mirrorless etc.). Most have useful aids like zoom, autofocus, focus assist etc.

A rangefinder is a completely different beast from anything else out there . It's completely manual and learning the process is akin to learning to cycle for the first time (back to basics). It takes time to master and you have to enjoy the experience. If you can't it's not for you. There would be better options.

Also in the days of film, people were not so picky about pixel peeping etc. It was always about the overall composition and look. Patience and foot work was needed to capture the right moment and in the right frame.

 

[Mr.Q]

With a rangefinder, I don't concern myself with perfecting focus, composition or exposure. 

I rather enjoy the shortcomings, and that's one of reasons why I sold my M10-P to go back to an even less capable M9-P 😆

[WvE]

3 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

With a rangefinder, I don't concern myself with perfecting focus, composition or exposure. 

I rather enjoy the shortcomings, and that's one of reasons why I sold my M10-P to go back to an even less capable M9-P 😆

That sounds pretty interesting to me, going from the M10-P to the M9-P. I just went opposite and don't regret it (apart from the ever present frame lines with the M9).  

[Mr.Q]

14 hours ago, WvE said:

That sounds pretty interesting to me, going from the M10-P to the M9-P. I just went opposite and don't regret it (apart from the ever present frame lines with the M9).  

I shot with the M10 + M10-P for over 3 years and earlier this month I compared the images to my M9 catalog.  I prefer CCD.

[adan]

1 hour ago, Mr.Q said:

I shot with the M10 + M10-P for over 3 years and earlier this month I compared the images to my M9 catalog.  I prefer CCD.

I liked the M9 - but it just wouldn't work in the new, adventurous world the M10 has opened up for me.

M10, ISO 10000, 135 f/4.0 at f/4.0, 180th sec.

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!

[Mr.Q]

19 minutes ago, adan said:

I liked the M9 - but it just wouldn't work in the new, adventurous world the M10 has opened up for me.

M10, ISO 10000, 135 f/4.0 at f/4.0, 180th sec.

Agreed, the M10 is the more capable camera in challenging situations. But I have even more capable cameras (X1D II, Q2, A9) for those sort of outings.

Like I mentioned a few posts above, I don't concern myself with what I can accomplish with a rangefinder.  For what I shoot, I prefer the M9.

When I sold my M10-P I also decided to sell all my M lenses as well, leaving only the 50 lux asph.  It's back to square one with the M9-P and 50 lux, and I feel liberated.

Nice picture, by the way.

Edited July 31, 2020 by Mr.Q

[Ko.Fe.]

Much love indeed, but it seems to be withing LUF and RFF. Which is very few of us... I like every digital M Leica has made so far. But I was born as photographer with rangefinder camera as only good camera in my possession. If OP knows nothing, but DSLR and Mirror_Less, here is nothing we could do to make OP to dare try and understand something different.

Time slot and willingness...

 

[stray cat]

1 hour ago, adan said:

I liked the M9 - but it just wouldn't work in the new, adventurous world the M10 has opened up for me.

M10, ISO 10000, 135 f/4.0 at f/4.0, 180th sec.

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!

Andy - not wishing to sound like I'm criticizing, but isn't there too much magenta in this picture?

[IkarusJohn]

I assumed it was the stage lighting

[Mr.Q]

I did too.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[adan]

Like John said....

[rivi1969]

On 7/27/2020 at 5:14 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

At some point recently sensors must have become good enough. Because all the review sites switched from talking about sensors to talking about tracking focus. It seems a modern amateur needs nothing less than the focus system in a Nikon D6 and anything less than a hit rate of 99% is unacceptable. Really? How many pin sharp but poorly composed shots do you need on your hard drive of that fluffy white barking rat some think is a species of dog? If you read the reviews unless it does 8K raw video internally and has pro level sports focus it's a failure. And all the reviewers are mostly into video and companies loan gear to the same tiny group that have no flexibility in camera usage types so we end up with the same criticisms over and over and over because they can't or won't think outside the box.

Don't get me wrong. These impressive pieces of tech have their place and I use them when I need them. I'll buy a camera just to see how cool the new technology is. If you're shooting for a client the the end result is all that counts. But when you point a Sony A9 at someone and the eye focus tracks them like a rabid wolf and the exposure does more calculations per second than a lunar lander you realise that there's not much skill involved in capturing those images. You stand in the right spot, choose an aperture and hold the button down. The real skill is remembering where each function is in the encyclopedic menus.

I spent 30 years building up a skill set that most modern cameras are determined not to let me use. That's why I like the M10 so much. I would rather be a more capable photographer with a less capable camera than the other way around.

Non M people like to moan about the lack of features and the incredible cost as if less stuff should cost less. That you miss shots? That you can't rely on the camera to get things right. Which, to me, is kind of the whole point. The most important tool in the M system is the one holding the camera. Skill matters. The more you practice focusing the better you get. If you stop your skill level drops a bit. Hands up if you're a regular M user and you find yourself sitting on the sofa just twiddling the dials or practicing focus like a really expensive fidget spinner? The M is tactile. Dials that click and aperture rings on the lenses you can set while the camera is turned off (I'm looking at you SL. What were you thinking?). A viewfinder that shows the world as you see it, not through a wide open lens. There's a rewarding feeling to getting a shot right on the M. It's you that made the decisions that resulted in a good image. When you learn to focus quickly and when you set the aperture by counting clicks rather than looking the M is an incredibly satisfying camera to use. It's fun.

Not to mention it takes thought and concentration to use an M. You're in the moment. In years like 2020, which basically suck, a distraction is important.

Gordon

After 25 years of working in advertising I am used to work with Arri, Red (and a few times when lucky) Panavision cameras. 1080p was more than enough, 4k IS more than enough, so I I find hilarious that people in certain forums are cutting their veins because the new Canon R5 overheats after shooting 15 minutes at 8K resolution, all flamed by a bunch of YouTube sensations that are the new experts, even though they might have never being involved in real productions other than their own YouTube channel.

Technology as you said is at our service I am welcome it. If am taking a portrait of a Governor candidate of course I welcome blazing fast eye-focusing and a shutter able to take 20 frames per second. The same when I want to take pictures of my dogs in action. If I travel with my wife, I take the Leica M8 or M9P,  no rush, I take my time. 

The point is to enjoy the craft with whatever gear we have, any modern camera is able to great results anyway, is all up to us the final result.

 

Edited August 3, 2020 by rivi1969