M10-P or M10R

[rsoby]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello and thanks for having me in this forum!!

I was planning to get my first Leica ever (Sony so far) by buying an M just when the new M10-R was presented. At this point I hesitate between the 10-P and the 10-R since the price difference is "only" 700€. 24MP is enough for what I shoot but can you please help me decide which one I should buy?

Has the R any disadvantages except the bigger raw files? What are the pros and cons for or against the 2 models?

What would you do if it'd be your first M?

Thank you!

Roby

[onasj]

The M10-R has higher resolution, better highlight recovery (overexposed regions are recoverable using the raw DNG files), and better high-ISO performance.  In my opinion for 700 euros of difference, less than 10% of the price, it's a no-brainer if you are considering buying the P or the R new.

If you search my recent posts you'll find links to three side-by-side comparisons of the M10-R vs. the M10-P and the M10-M for various image quality parameters on a test scene.

Welcome to the world of Leica, and to this forum!

Edited August 13, 2020 by onasj

[Advertisement]

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

[Mikep996]

I am not currently interested in an "R" and I have never purchased a new Leica M camera, including back in the film days with my M2, M6, and M7.  BUT if I was buying a NEW Leica digital, I'd buy the R (which, IMO,  should be called the M11)!   As suggested, if you are buying a new M camera, it makes no sense to me to purchase anything else.  If a 24MP M10 cost 1/2 the price, I could see it buying the 24MP model because for most of us, 24MP is plenty.  But for the current price difference, there's no way I'd buy a 24MP M10 rather than the R.  It's like a car with more HP - I might not NEED 400 HP as opposed to 300 HP but if it comes at a minimal upcharge, why the heck not?  

[Hanno]

I would believe than the 2nd-hand value of the M10-R will be significantly higher in a few years than the M10-P. It may be worth factoring that in.

[IkarusJohn]

Sean Reid is doing a thorough review of the M10-R (and his vegetables, I assume).  You might find some useful information there - https://www.reidreviews.com You do have to subscribe, and I do find much of his conclusions only vaguely useful; but worth a look for your question.

Were it me, I’d buy the M10-R.  I don’t need or even want more MP, but I think you’ll find that more MP just goes hand in hand with sensor development.  Actually, I’d buy an M10-M, as for me photography is about presenting a different perception of reality, rather than a faithful reproduction of what you see; and I find black & white more interesting and easier to control than colour.

We await your next question about lenses with interest 😀

Edited August 13, 2020 by IkarusJohn

[jonoslack]

Hi There

The disadvantage of the M10-R is longer shot to shot times and an effectively smaller buffer (it’s the same size but the files are bigger).

The advantage of the M10-R is a better sensor with much better holding of highlight detail in over-exposed shots.

I think that the sensor in the M10-R is altogether better and easily worth the extra few hundred euro (and will hold it’s value better).

I’ve spent a year with various different test cameras, and I’ve just bought one (even though I already have the M10). 

You can read my thoughts at https://www.slack.co.uk

All the best

[WvE]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would simply buy a used M10 (or P), it's fit for its purpose.    

[rramesh]

You need to buy a M10-R new but you can easily snag a second hand M10-P in very good condition for 30% less. 

[rsoby]

Thank you very much for all your input here!! I now actually lean towards the R!

I'll give me a few days and also check second hand P's and by the end of next week I'll hopefully know!! 🐵

[scott kirkpatrick]

I've got an R now and am very impressed with it, so I may be biased.  To me the negatives that Jono Slack cites are very minor (I think he is trying to be even-handed), and the positives -- higher resolution, some amount of magic in better highlight coverage, resistance to Moire, new sensor cover layer that suppresses UV as well as IR contamination for cleaner colors are all important to me.  These will mean that an R will hold value pretty well for the next few years.  It takes about a year for any discounts on a new Leica model to appear, so if you buy one now, you get the advantage of that year's use.

There may be some magic going on in the highlight behavior.  The basic operation of a digital sensor is that each photon that is captured creates the same number of electrons and the electrons accumulate up to a maximum, with a hard stop.  My feeling is that Leica has softened that hard stop a bit, but I don't  know yet at which step in the processing chain it happens. 

[WvE]

1 hour ago, rsoby said:

Thank you very much for all your input here!! I now actually lean towards the R!

I'll give me a few days and also check second hand P's and by the end of next week I'll hopefully know!! 🐵

Good luck with your decision. If you have the money just go for the R, otherwise the 10 will do nicely (especially if you don't do large prints). 

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

There may be some magic going on in the highlight behavior.  The basic operation of a digital sensor is that each photon that is captured creates the same number of electrons and the electrons accumulate up to a maximum, with a hard stop.  My feeling is that Leica has softened that hard stop a bit, but I don't  know yet at which step in the processing chain it happens. 

I couldn’t begin to explain, but we do know that Stefan Daniel has described four specific sensor enhancements besides increased MP or cover glass improvements: (1) greater active vs inactive (supporting electronics) area; (2) 10% more photons; (3) dual gain architecture; and (4)  refined pixel shape to eliminate some imperfection.

Jeff

 

[Good To Be Retired]

Were I purchasing NEW, I would gravitate strongly towards the R.  Personally, I like resolution, although the new sensor appears to have significant other benefits.

But let me see if I can complicate matters for you 

I don't generally purchase new.  And I don't need to do so.  

There appear to be significant numbers of folks who enjoy owning the latest and greatest sufficiently (and why not if you can work out) that there are generally excellent bargains to be found on VERY lightly used equipment.  I would suggest you consider identifying reputable used camera sellers ( B & H, Adorama, PopFlash, KEH, Roberts come to mind, but there are many others) and looking into pricing.

You are going to want Leica lenses, and they ain't cheap.  It's entirely possible to go used and get an excellent lightly used body and lightly used lens for the cost of a new body alone.

For that matter, and to make things even more complicated, you might at least investigate the M240 and it's variants for an even cheaper entry into the Leica system.

Edited August 14, 2020 by Good To Be Retired

[Erato]

Draft version -- mind map, FYR.

 

 

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!

[jonoslack]

Very nice Erato - but the only benefit you are giving the M10-R is added resolution for printing - you are quite missing out the advantages with respect to the sensor generally (see Scott's post above). 

[jonoslack]

21 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

I've got an R now and am very impressed with it, so I may be biased.  To me the negatives that Jono Slack cites are very minor (I think he is trying to be even-handed), and the positives -- higher resolution, some amount of magic in better highlight coverage, resistance to Moire, new sensor cover layer that suppresses UV as well as IR contamination for cleaner colors are all important to me. 

Thank you Scott - I was trying to be even handed, and I quite agree, the benefits in terms of image quality are the most important thing (not so much the 41mp - 24 was fine for me [I thought])

Generally speaking I get the first iteration of each Leica M upgrade (M9, M240, M10) and I just drool over the other variants, I was really intending to do the same with the M10, but the M10-R is enough of an upgrade to have shelled out again, and this is not any kind of whim - I've been running an M10-R test camera alongside my basic M10 for more than a year now, and I still wanted the M10-R!

If you're going to buy secondhand - of course it's worth looking at a basic M10 or an M10-P, but if you're going to buy new, get an M10-R, it will hold it's value for longer, and you'll know you made the right decision!

Good Luck!

[Erato]

59 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

Very nice Erato - but the only benefit you are giving the M10-R is added resolution for printing - you are quite missing out the advantages with respect to the sensor generally (see Scott's post above). 

Thanks for your comments. I'm not trying to make a well-completed chart indeed. It was just trying to gather some thoughts logically.
You'd find some advantages/benefits or so-called differentiation on the decision tree if you look into the flowchart.

[astrostl]

I have an M10, and I don't feel very compelled to upgrade.

If I were buying new today, though, I would definitely buy an M10-R.

[Tailwagger]

As has been mentioned by a few of us who've owned both, there's more to the output quality of the M10 than mere megapixels. I think Jono's analysis is spot on. I'd add that personally, I see the R as somewhat of a leap. The 10-P is the culmination of the previous generation, 10-R the dawn of the next.  The R is a camera one could live with for a very long time. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IkarusJohn]

Monochrom (v1) ... M10-D ... cold dead hands ...😷