Jump to content
rsoby

M10-P or M10R

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

58 minutes ago, dkmoore said:

Even if I zoom in on an image to 200% with M10P at 1/60 the image is sharper than M10R magnified to 100% at 1/250. Maybe there is something else at play with the M10R?

I am not a flash user but 98% of my photos are during times of day that I am at least at 1/500 so it hasn’t affected me with the M10M. 

I can 100% confirm this testimony. EXACT same experience here. Trust. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Steven said:

The only explantation to me was Lens/RF calibration. Then I had them calibrated, nothing changed. The M10R needs IBIS or better low light. 

My question wasn't about M10R per se (others have noted shutter speed concerns), but why the difference between M10R and M10M in this regard, as they are essentially the same except for bayer array.  Seems likely either final output magnification and/or subject matter/shooting style differences.

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

My question wasn't about M10R per se (others have noted shutter speed concerns), but why the difference between M10R and M10M in this regard, as they are essentially the same except for bayer array.  Seems likely either final output magnification and/or subject matter/shooting style differences.

Jeff

I have the beginning of an explanation, but when I try to go to the end of my reasoning, it doesn't make sense. 

BW is more forgiving than colour. Take the example of low light. Colour noise is much more bothering than BW noise. A lot of people claim the M10M is much better in low light, and to some extent, I'm sure it's true. But I can tell you one thing: when the light gets too dark and the images on my M10P becomes unbearable to watch, I switch to BW and all of a sudden of my images look great ! Another example: the other day I wanted a photo but it was too bright outside and  didn't have an ND filter (stupid 41mm thread of my steel rim), so I took a shot at 4000 (it was blinking in my OVF) and the shot was at least 3-4 stops overexposed. In LR, I brought down the exposure to the required level, and all of a sudden the clouds became glowy and the blue sky turned almost yellow. Totally blown out. Converted to BW and boom, my photo was amazing, or at least amazingly usable, if we want to look at it objectively. 

Now, how is BW more forgiving with motion blur/handshake ? Dont ask me, no idea. Doesnt make sense. 

Edited by Steven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jeff S said:

Well, I offered two possibilities, but both relate to user process, not the camera.

Jeff

There's one way to investigate further. Those having issues with the M10R should try the M10M to see the difference. Anyone in Paris wants to lend me an M10M? 

I personally believe its not user related, but camera/sensor/colour channel related. Bold claim, I know. J'assume...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Steven said:

There's one way to investigate further. Those having issues with the M10R should try the M10M to see the difference. Anyone in Paris wants to lend me an M10M? 

I personally believe its not user related, but camera/sensor/colour channel related. Bold claim, I know. J'assume...

My question came about because two people here DID use both and found a difference.  One explained that he used them differently.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

25 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

My question came about because two people here DID use both and found a difference.  One explained that he used them differently.

Jeff

I experimented further tonight because I was very curious. I used the M10M w/ 50 APO and M10R with 50 Lux ASPH, both at f2. I shot photos in my laundry room so same bright light and same distance to camera.

With my wife posing still, I could shoot at 1/60 with the M10M and get perfectly sharp image focused on the eye ball every time.

With my wife posing still, I could shoot at 1/60 with the M10R and I was seeing slight motion blur. Not horrible, but it is there. (not calibration) I know it isn't calibration because I simply moved to 250 and it was prefect at same aperture (skipped 1/125, etc just to be sure).

I was able to replicate this over and over again as I tried this a bunch to make sure I wasn't creating something from nothing. That said, with a still object (mostly still) you can get down to relatively slow speeds. It wasn't quite as bad as I made it seem earlier. 

My experiences that I discussed earlier were with my kids posing. But, my kids (like most) are never fully still so that likely accounts for some of the motion blur that I was experiencing.

I guess the outcome is that I am unsure of the results. I know from a ton of use with the M10R that I definitely need faster shutter speeds than I was used to with the P. And, it does seem to be sightly different with the Monochrom. = inconclusive. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jeff S said:

Thanks for the follow-up.  Can you repeat with some rental gear to rule out sample variation? 😂

Jeff

Ha, sure. Visit lens rentals and have it shipped to my address...  :  )

Just as an example at 1/60 with M10M. I cropped out probably 75% of the frame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, dkmoore said:

I experimented further tonight because I was very curious. I used the M10M w/ 50 APO and M10R with 50 Lux ASPH, both at f2. I shot photos in my laundry room so same bright light and same distance to camera.

With my wife posing still, I could shoot at 1/60 with the M10M and get perfectly sharp image focused on the eye ball every time.

With my wife posing still, I could shoot at 1/60 with the M10R and I was seeing slight motion blur. Not horrible, but it is there. (not calibration) I know it isn't calibration because I simply moved to 250 and it was prefect at same aperture (skipped 1/125, etc just to be sure).

I was able to replicate this over and over again as I tried this a bunch to make sure I wasn't creating something from nothing. That said, with a still object (mostly still) you can get down to relatively slow speeds. It wasn't quite as bad as I made it seem earlier. 

My experiences that I discussed earlier were with my kids posing. But, my kids (like most) are never fully still so that likely accounts for some of the motion blur that I was experiencing.

I guess the outcome is that I am unsure of the results. I know from a ton of use with the M10R that I definitely need faster shutter speeds than I was used to with the P. And, it does seem to be sightly different with the Monochrom. = inconclusive. 

 

Incredible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you do the maths you can work out how much you need to increase your shutter speed on an M10R vs an M10 to get the same pixel-level blur (or lack thereof). It works out at about 1/2 a stop, 1/60th to 1/90th. The actual linear resolution difference between the cameras is not that big. Of course if you print the two to the same size you will get exactly the same impression of blur.

So why would users think differently? I can think of two reasons. At pixel-level on a 40mp sensor you will be pushing the lens further. So unless you have a top lens you will not see the increase in detail that you might expect. One might see that as blur rather than lack of sharpness and suspect the wrong thing. Secondly, people are people, they hate to be wrong. Once someone thinks they see a phenomenon they will run with it. And once they've proposed it and defended it on a public forum, they will be loath to admit error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, dkmoore said:

Even if I zoom in on an image to 200% with M10P at 1/60 the image is sharper than M10R magnified to 100% at 1/250. Maybe there is something else at play with the M10R?

I am not a flash user but 98% of my photos are during times of day that I am at least at 1/500 so it hasn’t affected me with the M10M. 

That is not so very strange, as you are not taking the influence of noise, diffraction, microlenses, filter stack and crosstalk into consideration. A sensor is more than a collection of sensels. Smaller sensels will have a different S/N ratio than larger ones (see the Clarkvision article), will have more crosstalk depending on the microlenses (see the BarnackBerek article) and both articles will mention the diffraction limit in relationship to MP count.  The Monochrom will have no Bayer filter which will "clean up" the light path before it hits the sensel layer and no interpolation in software which acts like resolution-lowering pixel binning, giving it a superior acuity over a Bayer sensor camera.
I am not even starting to mention the influence of an AA filter (thankfully not on Leica) and thickness of the IR filter.

It is all more convoluted than counting pixels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, convexferret said:

If you do the maths you can work out how much you need to increase your shutter speed on an M10R vs an M10 to get the same pixel-level blur (or lack thereof). It works out at about 1/2 a stop, 1/60th to 1/90th. The actual linear resolution difference between the cameras is not that big. Of course if you print the two to the same size you will get exactly the same impression of blur.

So why would users think differently? I can think of two reasons. At pixel-level on a 40mp sensor you will be pushing the lens further. So unless you have a top lens you will not see the increase in detail that you might expect. One might see that as blur rather than lack of sharpness and suspect the wrong thing. Secondly, people are people, they hate to be wrong. Once someone thinks they see a phenomenon they will run with it. And once they've proposed it and defended it on a public forum, they will be loath to admit error.

While you may be right in general I don’t think your comment fits when you posted it. For one, the lenses tried and tested are two of the best. 
 

Second, I personally admitted that my assessment may be wrong and requires additional testing.  
 

Without further testing I think a 1/2 to full stop is about right for my hands anyway as long as whatever I’m taking a photo of isn’t moving a lot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2021 at 10:51 AM, SoarFM said:

Sigh, well here I am struggling with the same decision. I have a very beautiful M10P sitting here at my table for the last day. I’m either keeping it or returning it along with another wad of money for an M10R.

 My last digital M was an M9 that I sold 6+ years ago, and to be truthful, I never got on very good with it. Terrible high iso performance, the shutter was anything but discreet and lack of live view is what finally made me give it up as mirrorless cameras came of age with CMOS sensors and high resolution EVF’s. I tried to make my M lenses work on that infernal Sony A7r and A7r2, but never to my satisfaction. I just couldn’t accept smearing. So I sold all but my 35 and 50 summicrons and put them aside with my M6 (also 35 years old) that I couldn’t bear to part with for sentimental reasons.

Turns out the Sony’s output is really nice but every time I had to dive into a menu, I wanted to poke my eyes out, searching for some cool feature that was for some reason not working because some other setting change made that unavailable, well I had enough and got rid of it. Then some time with the MF Fujis including the GFX 100, but turns out it was more an exercise in chasing ultimate image quality while ignoring my unwillingness to actually haul that stuff around on a regular basis. Sold it all replacing it with a relatively more diminutive Hasselblad 907x, although still not an everyday driver...In the meantime I put together a Leica CL digital kit for actually carry about and practical family and family vacation photography. I really use the hell out of that kit, pandemic notwithstanding. Bought an M-L adapter for the M lenses on the CL, used it a few times but really just used the very remarkable 18-56 zoom that came with the CL. A Q2 was rationalized and added for low light indoor uses.😀

Then I decided to start scanning my analog archive with a pre-owned Panasonic S1r (for the pixel shift multi shot function) and a Sigma macro. It is light years ahead of flatbed scanning and works so well I started putting film in my film cameras again, including the M6. I can’t emphasize enough how pleased I am to have meaningful access to almost 30 years of negatives and slides to print on modern inkjets.  I decide upon the S1r for scanning because in the back of my mind I was aware that I could put all my CL lenses (L mount) on the S1r and then have IBIS capability and 20 megapixels available—if I wanted.  Then took out the M-L adapter and put my 35 and 50 on the S1r. Wow! 47 megapixel of niceness and none of the edge smearing that I saw on the Sonys (2 paragraphs back), not perfect on the 35 but real darn close. Focus peaking worked great. But it’s still more camera than I will carry around. For a moment I regretted not jumping right to the SL2 which has the clean interface I know from the Q2 and CL, but the S1r pre-owned was about $2k and an SL2 was going to be well over $5k and I wasn’t convinced I would still carry it regular. I just can’t picture myself buying Leica SL lenses, not because of the cost, but because of the size. No how, no way.

But my appetite has been whetted to use my diminutive M lenses on a camera I will carry. And the sour taste of the M9 is gone and while most of my time here on the L-forum has been focused on Q and CL cameras I have been aware that the digital rangefinder has really matured. So I bought an M10-P. It is slim and beautiful, and oh, that shutter, what a change from M9 days! I was a bit concerned about how I would get along with the rangefinder (focus accuracy) since eyeglasses became a part of my wardrobe. I know that digital is more demanding of focus than film. It’s going quite well, performance checking focus accuracy on the live view and picture review is very instructive. The fluid motion of focus and shutter release has returned helped out by setting 1/4f in auto. IBIS or high iso performance seem to serve the same function and now we have high iso performance, it places this camera in a different league of usability over film or the old M9. I’ve also found that I can frame, focus and shoot (at least indoors) using solely the rear screen quite well. That’s mostly how I use my Q2 indoors also. I am going to the Leica store tomorrow to pick up a Visolflex 020. I know some people swear by it, others say it sits in their bag unused. I get the feeling it is what will make the M useable, for me, close focusing (or critical focusing?) outdoors.

The only real decision is do I exchange the M10P for the M10R?  On the one hand, I am totally happy with the 24 megapixels of the CL for family photos and the Q2’s 47mp is nice (especially cropping)but not a must have (for the family photos), on the other hand the M lenses on the S1r really do shine with all those megapixels (except maybe near the edge) and I am quite happy with the 50 mp Hasselblad and starting to think that 40-50 mp might be my sweet spot. I think  I know what I am going to do.  There is a part of me that thinks keeping the M10P might be false economy, or is it keeping a camera that is everything the M10R is, save a few megapixels?

Sigh...

 

Ok, so what did I do...?

I exchanged the M10P (and some cash) for the M10R. I’ve only had the camera for a week now but I don’t seem to have any issues with camera shake vs. the M10P, but to be honest I only had the M10P for a coup;le days and the M10R hasn’t really seen wide usage in real life, just a bunch of test shots. I will accept that even if I didn’t see a night and day difference, I’m sure that there is a difference, that is the nature of working with a higher resolution sensor. So far I’ve been using 1/4f as min shutter speed and I’m OK with that. I put a diopter correction on the rangefinder and have now learned how to slide the eyeglasses up with my hand and I have the crisp clear viewfinder to work the rangefinder and the rangefinder is dead on. I had always struggled with the M9 rangefinder.

I had actually noticed that my 50 Summicron wasn’t dead on with the rangefinder at closer distances and sent that and its 35mm cousin into Leica for a CLA that was 25 years overdue, I asked them to pay special attention to focus calibration. Sadly the problems ran a little deeper, 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....

The 50 summicron and Summilux are the two candidates. Going to Leica DC and put the lens on my camera and test in store and neighborhood near store. Go home. Pixel peep. Make decision.

 

Edited by SoarFM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, I'm new to this forum so apologies if this has already been covered. I'm about to buy my first Leica and I'm torn between picking up an excellent condition used m10p and a new m10r. Ignoring cost, I'm struggling to understand which would make better prints from dng files at ISO 6400 & 12800. I tend to shoot a lot of low light photos so ISO 6400 is fairly important and 12800 is rarely (but sometimes) needed. Which body would you recommend? Also which body would you recommend for the 35 Summilux FLE? It's unclear to me which lenses work best with the P vs the R. I've been struggling to find a good collection of raw files online to compare. Thank you for your advice.

Edited by Crem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Crem said:

Hi everyone, I'm new to this forum so apologies if this has already been covered. I'm about to buy my first Leica and I'm torn between picking up an excellent condition used m10p and a new m10r. Ignoring cost, I'm struggling to understand which would make better prints from dng files at ISO 6400 & 12800. I tend to shoot a lot of low light photos so ISO 6400 is fairly important and 12800 is rarely (but sometimes) needed. Which body would you recommend? Also which body would you recommend for the 35 Summilux FLE? It's unclear to me which lenses work best with the P vs the R. I've been struggling to find a good collection of raw files online to compare. Thank you for your advice.

The 35 FLE will work fine on both bodies. No issues there. 

However, if you're a frequent low light shooter, between the P and the R I would recommend.... none. At least not until you tell us what camera system you are coming from ? Leica long time shooters are amazed by the M10 low light capabilities. But that's because they didn't know better. They were always used to bad low light standards. To me, the M10P is unusable at 6400, even less at 12800, and even less for printing. Unless it's for black and white. 

P.S. In Leica's defence, while it's not the M10P, they do produce what to me is the most incredible low light camera I have every tried, even beating the A7SIII. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Steven said:

To me, the M10P is unusable at 6400, even less at 12800, and even less for printing. Unless it's for black and white. 

Ditto for the m10r. They both work at high ISO, just not that well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, kokoshawnuff said:

Ditto for the m10r. They both work at high ISO, just not that well. 

Tried the M10P recently at 6400 ISO and was disappointed ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...