Jump to content

MD 262 + 50 summilux or an M10-D


Murdog

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

Just a little background first... I am an amateur street photographer and solely shoot street. I currently own a Leica M7, which has been my main camera for 3 years and this will be first move to digital.

I really love how engaged I am in the moment while shooting film, so I wanted to hang onto that experience, which is why I have chosen the screenless option. Although I love the process of shooting film, I mainly shoot at night where I lack high ISO and sometimes I get lazy when it comes to developing. 

My current lenses are  a 28mm Elmarit and a Voigtlander 35 1.4. 28mm being my favourite length. 

I will be buying used and my heart was set on an M10-D but while looking online, for the same money I could buy an MD 262 plus a 50 summilux for the same price. A 50 being a lens I have been hoping to buy in the future as I feel the 35 is too close to the lens I shoot most, the 28.

So just looking for suggestions, or maybe someone who has used both 240/D262 and M10/D. Or even someone coming from film. (I will still keep my M7) 

Any help would be great, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

M-D typ 262 plus Summilux 50 wins hands down !

For some years now that I use M-D 262 , I've never feel upgrading to M10-D (I do have the plain M10 also).

With precaution 3200 ISO is nice with M-D, that's enough for me: even in dim situation which I prefer fast lens anyway (Noctilux/Summilux when I need).

Funny that when I used the 28mm Summaron at f/5.6 inside dim cathedral I have nice results at 3200 ISO, blessing of digital comparing to b&w 3200 film...

Myself...never need using 6400 ISO or more.

...

Look like they are made for each other, very nice handling top/left M 262 (M-D with screen) plus Summilux 50mm

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!

chrome Lux not bad mounted on chome M4, here

 

Edited by a.noctilux
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

M-D typ 262 plus Summilux 50 wins hands down !

For some years now that I use M-D 262 , I've never feel upgrading to M10-D (I do have the plain M10 also).

With precaution 3200 ISO is nice with M-D, that's enough for me: even in dim situation which I prefer fast lens anyway (Noctilux/Summilux when I need).

Funny that when I used the 28mm Summaron at f/5.6 inside dim cathedral I have nice results at 3200 ISO, blessing of digital comparing to b&w 3200 film...

Myself...never need using 6400 ISO or more.

...

Look like they are made for each other, very nice handling top/left M 262 (M-D with screen) plus Summilux 50mm

chrome Lux not bad mounted on chome M4, here

 

Thanks a lot for the reply and your experiences with the MD. That's a very nice collection you have there. 

When using both cameras, do you feel you get the same experience, handling etc.? In terms of the different thickness and layout. Or does it more come down to me being mad to pass on the 50? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in a similar position in that I was considering an M (something) D and, having tried and been much less than "wowed" by the gimmickry (IMO) included in the 10 was extermely fortunate to find an all-but-unused ex-demo M-D 262. Nothing really wrong with the 10 - it's a great, feature-packed camera - but I hated the fact that they had created, in the M-D, what was essentially a film M(*) with a digital sensor but when the 10 came out it had a large number of (for my needs) useless features lumped on to it which went completely against the original M-D ethos of just being able to select ISO / Focus / Aperture / Shutter-speed.

For instance; why buy a camera without a screen if you are then going to use a phone app to download the images to your phone so you can look at them on a screen? If you need to see your images when you are shooting then simply buy a camera with a screen in the first place. Makes much more sense.

As a camera to have and to use I'd always go for the 262 regardless of the situation. If you can throw in a Summilux as well then, for me, it's a no-brainer.

I'm sure the 'D' users in the M10 sub-forum will have a different take on things; but I've made my choice which is why I'm answering this question here and not there...

:)

Incidentally I have had - and still have - various models of Digi-M cameras with screens and have absolutely no argument that screens can be very useful.

Philip.

(*) I've been using an M2 since 1980 so am very much used to the 'film-shooting' way of working.

Edited by pippy
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, pippy said:

I was in a similar position in that I was considering an M (something) D and, having tried and been much less than "wowed" by the gimmickry (IMO) included in the 10 was extermely fortunate to find an all-but-unused ex-demo M-D 262. Nothing really wrong with the 10 - it's a great, feature-packed camera - but I hated the fact that they had created, in the M-D, what was essentially a film M(*) with a digital sensor but when the 10 came out it had a large number of (for my needs) useless features lumped on to it which went completely against the original M-D ethos of just being able to select ISO / Focus / Aperture / Shutter-speed.

For instance; why buy a camera without a screen if you are then going to use a phone app to download the images to your phone so you can look at them on a screen? If you need to see your images when you are shooting then simply buy a camera with a screen in the first place. Makes much more sense.

As a camera to have and to use I'd always go for the 262 regardless of the situation. If you can throw in a Summilux as well then, for me, it's a no-brainer.

I'm sure the 'D' users in the M10 sub-forum will have a different take on things; but I've made my choice which is why I'm answering this question here and not there...

:)

Incidentally I have had - and still have - various models of Digi-M cameras with screens and have absolutely no argument that screens can be very useful.

Philip.

(*) I've been using an M2 since 1980 so am very much used to the 'film-shooting' way of working.

Thank you for your insights. I agree the 262 is more inline with the stripped down camera I was looking for.  My head is playing ping pong with my decision 🤣

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Murdog said:

Thank you for your insights. I agree the 262 is more inline with the stripped down camera I was looking for.  My head is playing ping pong with my decision 🤣

Ping pong is normal, Murdog,

anyway you can't go wrong with each, and if you are not happy with your first choice, you can sell it ( I hope not for huge lost of money, sort of price of experience ).

So buying second hand can limit lost.

As Philip said above, the choise is more or less features (in the end only real experiences can tell).

I like the lesser M-D over M10-D but if you will use those, why not.

 

A word about the "size" or thickness thing,

at first an digital M (before M10) can give the feeling of "thick" but when I used for a while, I even have a feeling of more "grip" (so more comfort) than my thinner film M.

I use add-on grip on film M when I don't use the Motor-M with thicker grip... or Leicavit ...

 

 

 

 

Edited by a.noctilux
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have this combination - M-D 262 paired with a 50 Summilux most of the time. I also use the M7, either with slide film or more often than not TriX and usually also with a 50 Summilux or Summicron. They play together well. I always shoot on Auto exposure and the two cameras feel the same in use. I like that I can shoot at different ISO's with the M-D. I get good results at up to 3200 and usable results at 6400, but I really prefer to shoot at 100-400. Great results there. 800 and 1600 are pretty good, too. I have a few M's and a handful of LTM Leicas, but when I HAVE to get the shot, I use the M-D. Never misses if you know where to meter the scene. I was never tempted with a digital M until the M-D came out. I then waited to get a good one used at a good price. I am pretty sure I can make a decent profit if I were to sell it. That is very unlikely, though. The 50 Summilux is as good as it gets, in my opinion. I have the pre-asph. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Some electrical tape will turn your camera to screen less.  To me one of the best things about digital is knowing you have the pic right away exposure wise at least. Maybe use some cardboard and tape hinge so you can peak if required.

50 1.4 ASPH is by far the best 1.4 Leica ever made.  Never wanted a pre ASPH after I tried them.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, tobey bilek said:

Some electrical tape will turn your camera to screen less.  To me one of the best things about digital is knowing you have the pic right away exposure wise at least. Maybe use some cardboard and tape hinge so you can peak if required...

No, Tobey, using electrical tape does not make your camera screenless and for precisely the reason you mention; because if you want to have a quick peek you can simply peel back the cardboard. This is not the same thing as not having the option at all. How is being able to peel back cardboard to look at a screen the same as not having a screen? It's like saying 'I have the screen switched off apart from those times when I switch the screen on'. It's a meaningless statement.

The whole point of the M-D Typ-262 is that you cannot just have a peek to see if you have the pic right away. This is the absolutely fundamental part of using the M-D 262 which a great many people who have no experience of using it 'in the real world' don't seem to be able to comprehend. It is this completely inability to 'have a quick peek' which makes using the M-D 262 a very different proposition from every other digital camera ever made(*).

Before the M-D I had a succession of digi-M bodies and frequently used them with the screen switched 'off' and can assure you that not having a screen at all is not the same. Not even close. I do still have a M Monochrom and, if I feel the need, I'll have a look at the screen. Why wouldn't I?

You really do need to try it out for yourself - on its own with no backup - and for, say, a fortnight. Then see if you think that having a bit of cardboard covering a screen 'most of the time' and not having a screen at all amount to the same thing.

For obvious reasons the M10-D is not included in this discussion.

Philip.

(*) Not counting the limited release and ancestral 'Edition 60' of course.

Edited by pippy
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, pippy said:

No, Tobey, using electrical tape does not make your camera screenless and for precisely the reason you mention; because if you want to have a quick peek you can simply peel back the cardboard. This is not the same thing as not having the option at all. How is being able to peel back cardboard to look at a screen the same as not having a screen? It's like saying 'I have the screen switched off apart from those times when I switch the screen on'. It's a meaningless statement.

The whole point of the M-D Typ-262 is that you cannot just have a peek to see if you have the pic right away. This is the absolutely fundamental part of using the M-D 262 which a great many people who have no experience of using it 'in the real world' don't seem to be able to comprehend. It is this completely inability to 'have a quick peek' which makes using the M-D 262 a very different proposition from every other digital camera ever made(*).

Before the M-D I had a succession of digi-M bodies and frequently used them with the screen switched 'off' and can assure you that not having a screen at all is not the same. Not even close. I do still have a M Monochrom and, if I feel the need, I'll have a look at the screen. Why wouldn't I?

You really do need to try it out for yourself - own with no backup - and for, say, a fortnight. Then see if you think that having a bit of cardboard covering a screen and not having a screen amount to the same thing.

For obvious reasons the M10-D is not included in this discussion.

Philip.

(*) Not counting the limited release and ancestral 'Edition 60' of course.

I completely agree, I happen to be coming from a film Leica and I love my relationship with it when shooting. Of course I have owned and shot digital cameras in the past but since moving solely to film for a few years, not having a screen has given me a much better shooting experience when doing street photography. A screen is something I don't want to even know is there. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I very much want an M10-D (have an M10 today). The main reason is that I dislike the feeling of the glass screen on the back. I feel in a way it doesn't belong there. Just to feel the leather cover under my thumb would be great! I also love the fold-out thumb rest and the engraving on top.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Murdog said:

I completely agree, I happen to be coming from a film Leica and I love my relationship with it when shooting...

This is it in a nutshell. I grew up shooting an M2 and the M-D 262 is an M2 which shoots DNG as opposed to film. Simple as that but with TTL metering thrown-in for good measure.

Anyone who has learned "135mm" photography using a Leica film camera (especially) will find using the M-D 262 to be second-nature.

The M-D files have to be processed in much the same regard as a roll of film has to be processed. Images have to be readied for final print in much the same fashion as negatives have to be evaluated for final print.

I've seen the M-D Typ-262 described as the '...digital camera for those photographers who wished the digital revolution had never happened...' but this is completely wrong; it is the digital camera for those who are perfectly comfortable with the ways of analogue shooting with the benefits associated with digital imaging and workflow.

Philip.

Edited by pippy
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pippy said:

I've seen the M-D Typ-262 described as the '...digital camera for those photographers who wished the digital revolution had never happened...' but this is completely wrong; it is the digital camera for those who are perfectly comfortable with the ways of analogue shooting with the benefits associated with digital imaging and workflow.

I probably belong to a not so common group: I have grown up in the digital age, and have very little experience with analog photography. But I feel very much attracted to it. I love the look of film photos (and film cameras), and I often use older glass to remove some digital harshness from my own pictures. I prefer to shoot without any modern aids or auto-settings.

But I still appreciate the comfort of a digital workflow. So an M10-D or M-D 262 is truly the closest I get to a digital camera with an "analog soul".

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an M7 that I love shooting more than my M10P. Because you are in the moment. Because there is suspense. Because it feels like tradition. 

The problem with my M7 is that I cannot manage to get good photos. Partly because my film technique is not great, but also because I don't have a good lab. Bad development. Bad Scans. 

So I have had the idea of replacing it with an M10D. I am scared. 

I am scared to hate it, and I am scared to love it. I am also scared that I regret my M7 if I sell it to finance the M10D. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steven,

Two ideas if this can help 😉 :

- keep your M7 and take time to process film yourself, b&w lab is very easy with Rondinax day processing, for example

- or go the easier experiences M-D route ( M10-D is for me not good idea, too many frills comparing to M7 ).

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Steven,

Two ideas if this can help 😉 :

- keep your M7 and take time to process film yourself, b&w lab is very easy with Rondinax day processing, for example

- or go the easier experiences M-D route ( M10-D is for me not good idea, too many frills comparing to M7 ).

I tried the route of processing film myself. Considering that I only like colours, lets say the bathroom got messy and the wife angry. 

Why do you recommend the MD over the M10D? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Steven said:

I tried the route of processing film myself. Considering that I only like colours, lets say the bathroom got messy and the wife angry. 

Why do you recommend the MD over the M10D? 

Colour would be harder, so digital will "save" better.

M-D has less "frills" as I wrote.

M10-D went the wrong route (for me) in less simplicity adding features like using Visoflex 020, Fotos, etc.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so glad to be rid of the burden of film.  I know many who laud film.  But for me having immediate access and being able to have so much power over the image in the software available for that purpose is progress.  I can email images, post them on the internet and share them with others at the press of a key.  And I can do this without a scanner.  I can get a copy of my image in color and B&W at the same time in the camera.

I have been through this analog vs digital exercise in the audio world.  The arguments are often similar.  But at the end-up, for me, the immediacy of results and the ability to manipulate those results far outweighs the tedious hours in the darkroom fiddling with chemicals, tanks, trays and enlargers and print dryers.  No film canisters to take up room wherever they are. I can pretend I have a film camera.  I cannot pretend I have a digital camera.

Edited by boojum
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, evikne said:

...I prefer to shoot without any modern aids or auto-settings...but I still appreciate the comfort of a digital workflow. So an M10-D or M-D 262 is truly the closest I get to a digital camera with an "analog soul".

The main functional difference between the M-D 262 and the M10-D is that the latter allows the photographer to take full advantage of some modern technological advances so you have the convenience of being able to view images just photographed on a mobile phone, use GPS recording data etc.

The main problem with the M-D Typ262, of course, is that you can't see what you have shot until you get home; the tacit understanding being that, similar to shooting with film, you were meant to be in control of that aspect of 'Photography' before you pressed the shutter-button.

Philip.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, pippy said:

The main functional difference between the M-D 262 and the M10-D is that the latter allows the photographer to take full advantage of some modern technological advances so you have the convenience of being able to view images just photographed on a mobile phone, use GPS recording data etc.

The main problem with the M-D Typ262, of course, is that you can't see what you have shot until you get home; the tacit understanding being that, similar to shooting with film, you were meant to be in control of that aspect of 'Photography' before you pressed the shutter-button.

Philip.

Personally, I probably will not buy any of them, but rather wait for a future M11-D or something. I am happy with my M10 and cannot afford a new camera for a long time yet. And by that time I hope Leica has found a faster and better solution to the connection between the camera and mobile phone (Bluetooth instead of WiFi). I think that's the only drawback with M10-D today.

  • Like 1
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.

×
×
  • Create New...