M10-P or M10R

[ELAN]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@Steven - let me make a prediction, you will soon trade your -P for an M10-R.  You (rightfully) like the -R sensor better and you will eventually take the 1-stop hit in favor of the new and improved sensor. You will not be able to resist for long

I generally shoot my M10-P at 1/125 and faster.  Only when my max Auto-ISO of 3200 is reached will I let it drop below 1/125.  At 1/60 many of my shots are blurry... at 1/30 I am lucky to get a sharp image. 

As for an IR filter at night, you are absolutely correct, the filter can play havoc with bright light reflections. I have tried a few filter brands and they are all the same.  On modern Karbe lenses I never put on an IR filter because the front element can be replaced by Leica at a modest cost (for Leica).  But on a lens like the 35 AA the front element cannot be replaced and I dare not walk around without a protective filter on that lens, especially since I don't use a hood. Sometimes at night I may remove the filter to take some shots but then I put the filter right back on.

Edited March 26, 2021 by ELAN

[Advertisement]

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

[Kwesi]

4 hours ago, Al Brown said:

To everyone still debating whether the R causes more blur in the photos: it is a FACT that more megapixels make the camera more susceptible to shake. When Nikon D800 came out with 36 megapixels (a jump from the usual 24 for DSLRs of 2012) the company issued a technical guide and a warning on using faster speeds. To mitigate the problem, there are only two solutions - shooting at higher shutter speeds or improving your holding techniques. No great debate here.

I think what you mean here is that because of the increased sensor resolution any motion blur during capture is more apparent when examined. 

[ELAN]

19 minutes ago, Steven said:

Do you have the M10R, by the way, or just the P ?

I don't have a M10-R yet.  I like the top script and dislike the red dot, so was holding out for the M10-RP, or the M11, or the end of the pandemic, whichever comes first.  But... I appreciate that the -R sensor is better, and not being a great fan of the M10 sensor (I prefer the M240 and M9 sensors), I suspect that I may succumb to Leica's insistence of not giving us a choice of a top plate and order an M10-R with the dot.  I was almost there a few times already but so far have held my ground.

 

19 minutes ago, Steven said:

But how do you explain that I got the reflection dots on the M10P and not on the M10R ?

Reflections don't always happen, on most night shots I don't see them.  But like flare, in certain situations they do appear.

[Kwesi]

4 minutes ago, ELAN said:

I don't have a M10-R yet.  I like the top script and dislike the red dot, so was holding out for the M10-RP, or the M11, or the end of the pandemic, whichever comes first.  But... I appreciate that the -R sensor is better, and not being a great fan of the M10 sensor (I prefer the M240 and M9 sensors), I suspect that I may succumb to Leica's insistence of not giving us a choice of a top plate and order an M10-R with the dot.  I was almost there a few times already but so far have held my ground.

Funny,

I'm holding out for the same reason - except I'm happy with the M10-P sensor color palette

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Steven said:

Mate, don't worry so much about my technique. My technique is excellent. I too can get squirrel shots if I put the efforts in. Maybe even at 1/30th. My photography skills are more than fine. 

All I'm saying is that it requires more effort than on a smaller resolution. Of course, one can take incredible photos in any scenarios with an M10R. The only thing I do not accept is the statement from some that the bump in resolution had no impact on shutter speed. It did. And a lot. Now depending on your photography style, it might impact you more or less. For the tripod shooters, they'll see now difference. For the chilled handheld shooters, it'll make no difference. My style of "candid" photography relies on a more "effortless" style of shooting, so the difference is real. 

Now wether one is willing to put in the extra efforts that you described to make the M10R works, that's up to each and everyone of us to decide. But I am not misleading people when I am warning them the the M10R might require you to adapt your shooting style because of motion blur. That's the only thing I'm saying. 

As a matter of fact, I might make the sacrifice and go for the M10R again. I have been loving the sensor too much since yesterday. It's so good.... 

I've got till Wednesday to decide, before the price increase. I was proposed to upgrade to a brand new R for 3,300 euros + my P. 

I don’t have any concerns regarding anyone’s technique. My underlying issue was presented to me when I stumbled across this thread as I was cross - shopping between the R and P. I was put off slightly from the R after reading your experiences with the camera, and as such I thought there was something potentially wrong with your sample, or something larger with the camera. Thankfully, I decided to go with the R, regardless. 

So, my experiences as I posted here will hopefully serve other people that may very well be in a similar situation to what I was in, and be reassured that there’s nothing aberrant about the camera and how it behaves at low shutter speeds. It’s no different than any other camera in that regard. . 
 

[Kwesi]

6 hours ago, Steven said:

With my M10P, I can easily shoot moving subjects at 1/30th, or night scenes. I am not saying that I freeze water droplets at 1/30th, but I can get clean printable images 100% of the time. With the M10R, it requires much more efforts.. 

Technically, It shouldn't. At the same print size at printer's optimal resolution (that does not exceed the capabilities of the lower resolution sensor)for both files, there should be no discernible difference.

[Crem]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

51 minutes ago, Wallflower said:

I don’t have any concerns regarding anyone’s technique. My underlying issue was presented to me when I stumbled across this thread as I was cross - shopping between the R and P. I was put off slightly from the R after reading your experiences with the camera, and as such I thought there was something potentially wrong with your sample, or something larger with the camera. Thankfully, I decided to go with the R, regardless. 

So, my experiences as I posted here will hopefully serve other people that may very well be in a similar situation to what I was in, and be reassured that there’s nothing aberrant about the camera and how it behaves at low shutter speeds. It’s no different than any other camera in that regard. . 
 

I too was debating the P vs the R. I ended up ordering an R because of the info here and also playing with the free raw files we can download from DP Review. I come from a Fuji and Sony background (both use Sony sensors) so everything I say is relative to that. The summary is that the R sensor improvements for me are way more about iso 100 and the highlight recovery. I photograph lots of people so I’m typically at a min shutter speed of 1/125 or 1/250 with 35 and 50 mm lenses. It’s very clear from this thread (thanks @Steven!) that 1/60 and lower probably won’t get much use for me handheld. I rarely photograph people at 1/30 and 1/60 so I suspect I made the right decision. 

Edited March 26, 2021 by Crem

[RF’sDelight]

If I want more resolution than my M10s or my SL2-S can deliver I use this: https://topazlabs.com/gigapixel-ai/ 😂

[hdmesa]

1 hour ago, Kwesi said:

Technically, It shouldn't. At the same print size at printer's optimal resolution (that does not exceed the capabilities of the lower resolution sensor)for both files, there should be no discernible difference.

It's because he is obviously looking at the files from both cameras at 1:1 or 100% magnification, which is not an equal comparison. The M10-R viewed at 50% would be identical to the M10-P.

One can argue that they will always review their images at 1:1, so moving up to a higher res sensor will reveal the same motion blur that existed at lower resolution but was not noticeable at the lower magnification. We call these people (of which I am one) pixel peepers. It doesn't help that the double-tap on the rear screen default is 1:1 zoom, so if you're chimping while shooting, you think the shot is more blurred with the high res camera, when if fact if you zoomed out to the same size your M10-P shot would have been, it would be the same.

[hdmesa]

8 hours ago, Steven said:

With my M10P, I can easily shoot moving subjects at 1/30th, or night scenes. I am not saying that I freeze water droplets at 1/30th, but I can get clean printable images 100% of the time. With the M10R, it requires much more efforts.. 

It only requires more effort on the M10R if you insist on reviewing photos at 100% or 1:1 magnification on the rear screen or in post. If you view them so that objects are the same size in the frame as they would be with your M10-P files, there will be no extra effort required.

You can come back and say, "But why buy the M10-R and not zoom to the same 1:1 zoom as my M10-P to review them" – I would say maybe because you don't intend on printing anything you'd shoot handheld at 1/30 of a second to 40-60" wide

Edited March 26, 2021 by hdmesa

[Crem]

40 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

The M10-R viewed at 50% would be identical to the M10-P.

I think this may not be completely accurate based on my own experience with Sony cameras. I have a Sony a7rIV (61MP sensor) and at ISO 100, daytime light, and fast shutter speeds, the files are extremely sharp zoomed at 100%. When I export them at smaller sizes (say 24MP dimensions) they really do appear sharper than if I took the original file with a 24MP full frame camera. The best way I can describe it is extra sharpness around the edges of objects (eye lashes, hair, etc) when exporting the 61MP files to 24MP compared to using a 24MP camera. Assuming all this is true it would make sense to me why motion blur would be more noticeable with the R even if exporting to say 50%. It would be great if someone with both cameras could put them both on a tripod, exact same exposure settings at say 1/60, walk across the frame of both cameras, and then export the R to match the P file dimensions. I suspect the R file would look sharper and thus motion blur would be more noticeable. Bonus points if someone prints both files since prints don't always look the same as photos on a screen.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Crem

[Kwesi]

16 hours ago, Crem said:

I think this may not be completely accurate based on my own experience with Sony cameras. I have a Sony a7rIV (61MP sensor) and at ISO 100, daytime light, and fast shutter speeds, the files are extremely sharp zoomed at 100%. When I export them at smaller sizes (say 24MP dimensions) they really do appear sharper than if I took the original file with a 24MP full frame camera. The best way I can describe it is extra sharpness around the edges of objects (eye lashes, hair, etc) when exporting the 61MP files to 24MP compared to using a 24MP camera. Assuming all this is true it would make sense to me why motion blur would be more noticeable with the R even if exporting to say 50%. It would be great if someone with both cameras could put them both on a tripod, exact same exposure settings at say 1/60, walk across the frame of both cameras, and then export the R to match the P file dimensions. I suspect the R file would look sharper and thus motion blur would be more noticeable. Bonus points if someone prints both files since prints don't always look the same as photos on a screen.

I agree. The 61mp sensor records more detail hence the more defined eyelashes. When you reduce the size to 24mp the definition(sharpness) is maintained. In the same way the motion blur on the. 61 mp sensor is captured with more definition and so is more apparent than the same motion blur captured with a 24mp sensor.

What is important to note here and the internet myth that needs to be debunked is that the higher resolution sensor does not cause camera shake or motion blur. humans do that

Edited March 27, 2021 by Kwesi
added "internet"

[tom0511]

Am 26.3.2021 um 16:39 schrieb Crem:

I too was debating the P vs the R. I ended up ordering an R because of the info here and also playing with the free raw files we can download from DP Review. I come from a Fuji and Sony background (both use Sony sensors) so everything I say is relative to that. The summary is that the R sensor improvements for me are way more about iso 100 and the highlight recovery. I photograph lots of people so I’m typically at a min shutter speed of 1/125 or 1/250 with 35 and 50 mm lenses. It’s very clear from this thread (thanks @Steven!) that 1/60 and lower probably won’t get much use for me handheld. I rarely photograph people at 1/30 and 1/60 so I suspect I made the right decision. 

Even if it is more prone to shake and you might see some blur in some images, it is still very well possible to shoot 1/60 and even lower exp times. (just to make clear, my last statement: you can get not burred images at such exp times, but it will not always work, there is a risk you get shake)

Edited March 29, 2021 by tom0511

[enboe]

On 3/4/2021 at 11:56 AM, SoarFM said:

Leica has pronounced the 50 Summicron unrepairable with haze and coating damage between rear elements that are no longer available. 😢. I was never in love with the 50 Summicron and am wondering if perhaps it is due to what amounts to a “bad sample”? Lens arrives back tomorrow and I will examine it closer because I never noticed any obvious defects. Happily, the 35 doesn’t seem to have been afflicted with same problem and is getting overhauled.

Now I have to shop for a 50... Not the news I wanted...

There is a technician in Garden Grove, CA, Cuong, I believe is his name, that routinely re-polishes and re-coats vintage Leica glass.  You may want to track him down.

Eric

[MarkP]

On 3/19/2021 at 3:20 AM, Steven said:

Jeff, I'm sorry to break it to you, but you belong to a rare group in extinction. People don't print anymore. 

Although I don't print many of my photographs, my greatest pleasure in photography is seeing my prints (from negative or digital file) framed and on the wall.

Edited April 28, 2021 by MarkP

[augustwest100]

I have been happily exploring the SL2-S, but cannot get M off my brain since I traded in my M10 (previously owned M240, M9). Also wondering if I should try for a used M10P or an M10R. I have one single M lens now but it's a good one - 35mm Lux FLE.

I almost feel like if I get the M10R, my system would be sort of "backwards" in that I would have the resolution on the camera that I would use mostly for street photography, and the "lower" resolution on the more flexible SL2-S that I currently use. Does this make sense to anyone? Would I have been better off with the SL2 and then an M10P for street photography where I don't necessarily need so many megapixels? I'm not going to switch now, but just wondering.

Even though I love the SL2-S so far, I still miss looking through a glass viewfinder at the actual world. Wondering what would be the best compliment to the SL2-S at this point. Oh, Leica, with you, one thing is never enough! 🙂

 

[SoarFM]

1 minute ago, augustwest100 said:

I have been happily exploring the SL2-S, but cannot get M off my brain since I traded in my M10 (previously owned M240, M9). Also wondering if I should try for a used M10P or an M10R. I have one single M lens now but it's a good one - 35mm Lux FLE.

I almost feel like if I get the M10R, my system would be sort of "backwards" in that I would have the resolution on the camera that I would use mostly for street photography, and the "lower" resolution on the more flexible SL2-S that I currently use. Does this make sense to anyone? Would I have been better off with the SL2 and then an M10P for street photography where I don't necessarily need so many megapixels? I'm not going to switch now, but just wondering.

Even though I love the SL2-S so far, I still miss looking through a glass viewfinder at the actual world. Wondering what would be the best compliment to the SL2-S at this point. Oh, Leica, with you, one thing is never enough! 🙂

 

M10M

[Jeff S]

4 minutes ago, augustwest100 said:

I have been happily exploring the SL2-S, but cannot get M off my brain since I traded in my M10 (previously owned M240, M9). Also wondering if I should try for a used M10P or an M10R. I have one single M lens now but it's a good one - 35mm Lux FLE.

I almost feel like if I get the M10R, my system would be sort of "backwards" in that I would have the resolution on the camera that I would use mostly for street photography, and the "lower" resolution on the more flexible SL2-S that I currently use. Does this make sense to anyone? Would I have been better off with the SL2 and then an M10P for street photography where I don't necessarily need so many megapixels? I'm not going to switch now, but just wondering.

Even though I love the SL2-S so far, I still miss looking through a glass viewfinder at the actual world. Wondering what would be the best compliment to the SL2-S at this point. Oh, Leica, with you, one thing is never enough! 🙂

 

Strictly personal.  Why did you replace M10 with SL2-S?  What was missing then?  What’s missing now?  Or just GAS?

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[augustwest100]

4 minutes ago, SoarFM said:

M10M

Nooooooooo! Temptation!  😆

 

[augustwest100]

1 minute ago, Jeff S said:

Strictly personal.  Why did you replace M10 with SL2-S?  What was missing then?  What’s missing now?  Or just GAS?

Jeff

I replaced the M10 because I was then using Sony A9 almost exclusively, and thought I didn't want to watch both cameras depreciate while not using one of them. I always intended to get back an M body, but hoped that after a little time passed, I would either get a better deal on an M10P or the "next" body. I still could continue to wait for the M, but I really miss the viewfinder experience, the simplicity, and the native use of my 35mm Lux. Oh, but GAS is always in the rear view mirror too.