M10-P or M10-R for my first digital Leica?

[gettons]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello there,

 

I am a Fuji (X-Pro3)/Ricoh (GR III) user which shoots (not professionally) street for 90% of the times (10% being some long exposures and landscape photography). I have an M6 which I love and I am now thinking about getting a NEW digital Leica M so that I can use the same M-mount lenses and consolidate a little. Currently I have a Voigtlander 35 mm/1:1,4 Nokton VM II but I will look at other lenses in the future (28/50 Leica or not this is still to be confirmed). But the idea of having just one film camera and one digital camera with the same mount, the same ergonomics and the same characteristics (if you will), is very very attractive.

Potentially I could keep the GR3 for everyday kind of snapping tool, and have the two Leicas for a more sort of introspective and slowed down photography.

Now, besides the technicalities, I am wondering why should I go for the M10-P or the M10-R, considering the small price difference.

A few things I have been pondering on:

- I do not need a 40MB sensor.

- I may need long exsposures capabilities of the M10-R (by looking at my pictures' exif I see only in one occasion I had to use iso 1000 at 240 seconds, one at iso 100 at 240 seconds, and one 1600 iso at 30 seconds. last one being astro which is a completely different beast and I would not even try to accomplish good results with a tool like the M series. Having said that, if the camera has decent capabilities, why not?)

- I am wondering how much the M10-R battery life is impacted (for a street shooting in particular), compared to the M10-P.

- I like the discreet touch of not having the Leica red button (I can probably just hide it somehow, but I do not want to risk damaging it in case I need to sell the camera at some point).

- Would compatible lenses such as Voigtlander and Zeiss perform ok with such a big sensor the M10-R sports?

 

Thoughts?

 

Thanks in advance

 

 

[jaapv]

If you don't need a 40MP sensor, why get one? There are downsides too. It demands a more  precise photographic technique and the larger data stream slows down transferring files and processing them.
The lens performance non-issue has been done to  death in this forum. Summary: it is no weakest link situation. Both lens and sensor contribute to the image.

[gettons]

19 minutes ago, jaapv said:

If you don't need a 40MP sensor, why get one? There are downsides too. It demands a more  precise photographic technique and the larger data stream slows down transferring files and processing them.
The lens performance non-issue has been done to  death in this forum. Summary: it is no weakest link situation. Both lens and sensor contribute to the image.

The lens thing is definitely reassuring. With regards of the reason why one should go for the 40MP although not strictly needed is, as I mentioned, the fact that if I find myself to sell the camera, it will probably be much easier to do and at higher price. Last but not least, I was hoping someone who does shoot landscape from time to time could comment on the long time exposure limitations of the M10-P compared to M10-M (fundamentally whether or not, apart from astrophotography, regardless of an in-build evf, the M10-P proves to be usable enough for landscape)

[Tailwagger]

While I am a huge advocate for the R, if this is your first Leica, I'd strongly suggest you go with a used M10 from a reputable Leica dealer.  The M is a substantially different experience from an XPro/totally different world from a GR. You may find you love shooting with an M or discover that you cant possibly live with one. Take the money you just saved and assuming you do love the experience, spend it on glass instead. Variation in lens rendering will have a far greater impact your image than any changes to the body. Live with the other limitations, none of them are crippling in any way. If it turns out you do love the M experience, no worries, you'll be able to trade up over time and your used M after a year or so wont have depreciated all that much. 

 

[M11 for me]

Its not your first M. You like already your M6 and evaluate a digital M. The argumentation that you do not need 40MP is maybe not accurate. If you had 40MP you could mount a 28mm and still crop to 35 or 40 or even 50mm. You never had that before. Many in this forum claimed that they would not need 40 or more. But there is an incredible advantage. I work with M10 (24MP) and the Q2. I see no difference in my Lightroom workflow. Think of cropping!

[TomB_tx]

I have an M10, and have no plans to change to the M10-R, as 40MP has no appeal to me.

However, in Sean Reid's comparison of these models using the Voightlander 21mm f4 lens, he found the sensor on the M10-R showed no coloration at the edges and corners, even with in-camera lens corrections turned off. That's the only sensor he has ever seen that wasn't affected by the shallow incident angles of that lens at the edges. So the M10-R sensor is about the least sensitive to challenging RF lenses.

I use that Voigtlander as my 21, and the M10 handles it quite well when the lens is coded as a Leica 21, with just a hint of false color on the edges in most shots (best at low ISO settings). But Sean's findings got my attention. Now if Leica would make a 24MP version...

[Tailwagger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

While I am a huge advocate for the R, if this is your first Leica, I'd strongly suggest you go with a used M10 from a reputable Leica dealer...

Apologies... somehow missed the statement about M6 ownership... So I'll amend my comments to say that were I you, I'd either buy a used M10 or a new 10-R unless the10-P drops to a more reasonable price differential.  Battery life reduction, if any, has not been noticeable with the R. File handling has not been an issue either, but then I've been running 64GB since last year.  I see no appreciable difference in using the M10 vs 10-R for longer exposure from an IQ standpoint, but take that with a grain of salt as I neither do a lot of such work  nor have I done any serious comparisons.  What I can say is I've own both, the 10-R, in my view produces noticeably better files than the 10, but either camera is capable, the R, just more so. 

[gettons]

Thanks a lot for your input everyone! One of the main benefit of 40MB is definitely being able to shoot wide and then crop the hell out of it, but it is something I am not interested doing. To some extent the 24MB sensor would somehow force me, if you will, not to crop too much. And as a photographer I think it' s a good thing. Unfortunately the price of M10-P has not dropped and in the UK it' s basically just 600£ less than the M10-R. But I will take a look at second hand as well at this point! Thanks a lot.

 

P.S. Anyone feel like I should instead take a look at the M10-D? I know this camera is even more special than the others, but to some extent is attractive.

[Jeff S]

The M10 is still an excellent camera, and there are mint copies, with one year warranty and recent Leica CLA, available (in US) for roughly $5k.  Why pay more?  Still plenty quiet and easy enough to replace or cover the logo if that’s a big deal.  

Jeff

[scott kirkpatrick]

I've used an M10-D since 2018.  It minimizes your impact on the people around you, since it looks a lot like an M6 or 7.  Of course that factor depends even more on you, but I live in a country where some people object to being captured in a photo, and not being able to stop for inspection comes in handy.  Purchased new from existing unsold stock won't save any money, but they may be available used from time to time.  Inside the camera, it's an M10-P with the quiet shutter.

[gettons]

1 hour ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

I've used an M10-D since 2018.  It minimizes your impact on the people around you, since it looks a lot like an M6 or 7.  Of course that factor depends even more on you, but I live in a country where some people object to being captured in a photo, and not being able to stop for inspection comes in handy.  Purchased new from existing unsold stock won't save any money, but they may be available used from time to time.  Inside the camera, it's an M10-P with the quiet shutter.

Thank you Scott! 
The workflow with an m10-D appears very similar to analog to some extent. And because I have an m6 and develop at home, that specific side things are not super attractive to me (because essentially I can do with the film camera). However the discreetness and the lack of lcd display it’s something I like. At the end of the day I have a film camera, and the idea of having a modern one with lcd also does not seem like a bad idea in case I need to frame at very weird angles. And this is where the m10-p comes into play. I am only wondering if I go for the m10-p, is it going to be easy to resell one day if I need to (provided the m10-r is almost the same price)? Who should go for a new m10-p as opposed to a new m10-r these days? Cause I am sure there is people who prefers a brand new m10-p even at the same price tag (which is not exactly the same here in the UK though, there is a £600 difference).

[250swb]

51 minutes ago, gettons said:

Thank you Scott! 
The workflow with an m10-D appears very similar to analog to some extent. And because I have an m6 and develop at home, that specific side things are not super attractive to me (because essentially I can do with the film camera). However the discreetness and the lack of lcd display it’s something I like. At the end of the day I have a film camera, and the idea of having a modern one with lcd also does not seem like a bad idea in case I need to frame at very weird angles. And this is where the m10-p comes into play. I am only wondering if I go for the m10-p, is it going to be easy to resell one day if I need to (provided the m10-r is almost the same price)? Who should go for a new m10-p as opposed to a new m10-r these days? Cause I am sure there is people who prefers a brand new m10-p even at the same price tag (which is not exactly the same here in the UK though, there is a £600 difference).

If you are doing landscape and want to get the best out of any camera you'll sometimes use a tripod and an LCD is invaluable if you are stood waiting for the light to change. It will also allow you to compose the picture accurately. But are you sure you can't still get an M10 and forget the 'P', after all a roll of black tape is much cheaper than paying so much more for cosmetic differences?

[gettons]

39 minutes ago, 250swb said:

If you are doing landscape and want to get the best out of any camera you'll sometimes use a tripod and an LCD is invaluable if you are stood waiting for the light to change. It will also allow you to compose the picture accurately. But are you sure you can't still get an M10 and forget the 'P', after all a roll of black tape is much cheaper than paying so much more for cosmetic differences?

Thing is, the vast majority of my shooting happens within the streets, which is why I am leaning towards the P as it is much quiter at close distance. And yes, I do agree a screen is a nice to have when composing landscapes, and this is why I was looking at a model with a screen. So, it's a matter of M10, M10-P, M10-R. It would be good to have a feedback from those who also shoot some landscape with their M10's, to better understand if the 4 min time limit at 100/200 iso (of the M10 and M10-P) is a block stopper when it comes to their workflow.

[Jeff S]

5 minutes ago, gettons said:

Thing is, the vast majority of my shooting happens within the streets, which is why I am leaning towards the P as it is much quiter at close distance. 

You think the minor difference in sound, above the street noise and commotion, is what’s going to defeat your shooting discreetly when you’re already standing close to your subject? I barely hear anything myself with an M10.  If you can, I think you should demo or rent these options to determine what’s real and what’s imagined.  I’ve shot film M’s since the 80’s, and digital M’s (M8.2, M Monochrom, M 240 and M10) since ‘09, and none have presented problems on the street.  And the M10 is the quietest of the digital bunch.  
 

Jeff

[shirubadanieru]

I’ve tried all M10 variants minus the R (but did try the Monochrom with 40mp sensor), and I would say my favorite is the M10-D although it’s a bit too niche for a first camera. I would def. recommend the M10-P instead of the M10-R for a few reasons:

- 24MP allows to shoot slower shutter speeds (ie 1/60 with a 50mm or 1/30 with a 35mm), whereas with 40MP I felt I had to keep the shutter speed at 1/250 to get sharp pictures. That’s fine if it’s the Monochrom, given it has an insane ISO performance, but with the M10R you don’t get the same kind of ISO performance and are losing 2/3 stops of light due to this factor.

- 40MP gives you huge files, which are great if you want to print or crop a lot, but there are also cons such as slower transferring times to the laptop, larger files to save on your limited storage, and more power required to edit them

- M10P design is cleaner too without the Leica red dot in the middle, and you can get it in silver or black. On top of that, M10P is cheaper.

- 40MP and 24MP should both be future proof, even the M9 with 18MP is fine today 11 years later. And for those who shoot film, anything above 10MP is already more than enough eheh

Hope this helps with your decision. Whichever you get in the end, I’m sure you’ll love it and never go back : ) 

[Kwesi]

Based purely on specs, the Xpro 3 is light years ahead of the M10-R in terms of exposure control for landscape photography.

My suggestion would be to buy a used M10-P with warranty solely for the street photography and use your Xpro-3 when you feel like shooting landscapes.

If you prefer a new camera then go for the M10-R the small difference in price makes it the obvious choice. and no one will notice the red dot while you are out shooting  onto street.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Kwesi
added options for "new" camera

[Mikep996]

Personally, if buying new, there is no way I would spend $7795 to buy an M10P with the R at $8295 (B&H).  If the M10P was $4795, I could see considering it, especially if I was sure I didn't need the 40 MP.  But at 7795 vs 8295?  Frankly, I can't figure out why anybody would buy a new M10P from BH (or anyone else) with the price structure as it is.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Mikep996

[250swb]

Or just wait and see, I think Leica probably have time for an M10R-P and an M10R-D just in case you are still feeling anxious, it will have one or two cosmetic improvements sure to make you feel better. So wait for the 'best camera ever' review that's sure to come on this forum and open your wallet, again.

[Mikep996]

LOL...yep, the "best" camera will never occur.  I'm sure Leica, like everyone else, could have more in the latest version of the M10 than they do but that makes no sense if you want to continue selling new products.

But I just don't understand the pricing scheme.  The 24 MP "three year old" camera is selling for only around 6% less than the current 40MP camera.  You can get that much of a discount on most new items from a dealer - though probably not an M10R at the moment.  But still, to me it would be like going to a car dealer tomorrow and having him say he'd sell you a 'new' 2017 car that he happened to have in stock for 6% less than a 2020 car.  Would anybody take that deal?  It makes no financial sense to me.  

OTOH, since Leica are not dramatically reducing the price of the 24MP M10's, they must be confident they will sell which indicates they know more about marketing than I do!  

Edited September 6, 2020 by Mikep996

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Maybe, or they  know their customer base - the high MP count is of little interest to the average Leica M photographer, and may force him into upgrading his post-processing chain. So why not take a reasonable price advantage?