Anyone else have trouble moving from Q to M?

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

M10-P Reporter + 50 Summicron f2

I'm ok with the manual focusing, learning to use the rangefinder (wow, it helps the contrast of the patch to move your eye back just slightly from the eye-hole), etc. Everything mechanical and design-wise about the M10-P is wonderful. But the sensor of the M10-P is very different from the original Q. It's brutal (I almost want to say "devastating") on highlights even when the histogram and live view look ok. I'm going to have to learn to never push the histogram much further than about 3/4 of the way to the right and possibly set me exposure comp permanently to -1 stop. Doing ETTR with this sensor is a death sentence to the highlights. Possibly the lack of an RBG histogram is the problem, and I need to adjust accordingly, but the Q never gave me this much guff. I was about 50/50 on the M for not-blowing/blowing the highlights on my first test shots at sunset this evening.

Would it make sense to take the 15% restocking fee and move to the M10-R, which is supposed to be better with highlights? Would it help for my situation to exchange the 50 Summicron for the 50 Summilux? I'm not super enthused about the SOOC color signature of the Summicron – it takes some serious pushing in post compared to the Q-P Summilux, which is just brilliant SOOC. Sharpness, however, is insane on the Summicron – almost hard to believe even on the 24mp sensor. 

Any advice that might help would be welcome. My first step will just be to shoot the crap out of the camera to see how/if I adjust.

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!

[dkmoore]

it’s just a different way of shooting. The Q is a wonderful Beautiful image producing point and shoot while the M is a wonderful beautiful image producing manual camera. I think your issue is more about the differences in metering. Center weighted versus more dynamic metering options. The M10P is still in the top echelon of sensor and image performance. 

[hdmesa]

Just now, dkmoore said:

it’s just a different way of shooting. The Q is a wonderful Beautiful image producing point and shoot while the M is a wonderful beautiful image producing manual camera. I think your issue is more about the differences in metering. Center weighted versus more dynamic metering options. The M10P is still in the top echelon of sensor and image performance. 

Thanks. I was just about to post back about metering. With my other digital cameras, I've been used to using center-weighted metering so that when I move the focus point, the exposure doesn't change. Seems like the M10 is much happier with the default Multi-field metering. I took a few test shots in a dark room with a dramatic light source in only part of the frame, and now it's not overexposing.

[mujk]

3 hours ago, hdmesa said:

Thanks. I was just about to post back about metering. With my other digital cameras, I've been used to using center-weighted metering so that when I move the focus point, the exposure doesn't change. Seems like the M10 is much happier with the default Multi-field metering. I took a few test shots in a dark room with a dramatic light source in only part of the frame, and now it's not overexposing.

It's good to remember that the M10 has two separate metering systems. The one in use when only the OVF is in use (shutter closed during metering) has exactly one mode, more or less equal to center-weighted metering. When liveview/Viso is in use (shutter open), there are three different modes to choose from. This may be a bit confusing in the beginning.

[jaapv]

Exposure is not a fixed value to be left to the (rather limited) brain of your camera's automation, and the M has a rather low IQ compared to the sophisticated systems of more modern EVF cameras. No matter, it passes more of the responsibility to the photographer. Remember that there is no correct exposure, it depends on the photographer to determine the final result. Don't expect the camera to do the thinking for you.
Using the OVF you can use the histogram by chimping a test shot, using the EVF you can do so in real time (obviously).

If you use the histogram to refine your metering,  just keeping it at 3/4 from the right edge is the wrong way to go about it; you are throwing away your dynamic range on many shots. The same goes for dialing in a permanent negative exposure compensation, BTW.
There are two things to look for:
1. the "mountain(s)" in the middle should be as high as possible.
2. if there is a spike at the right up against the edge, you need to interpret it:
     a. if there are blown specular highlights in your image that should be present, e.g. the sun, or strong reflections on  water, disregard the spike.
     b. if you want detail in all highlights, back off the exposure to the left until the spike shrinks away.

With the spot meter of the EVF/Live View  you can pinpoint the exact exposure of all parts of a scene by moving the camera around.
Even with the center-weighed metering of the M  OVF it is worth "scanning"  to determine the exposure value  of different parts, to decide which exposure comes closest to your intention.

Example: When photographing a sunset, never take your exposure off the sun or off the foreground: always expose for an area of sky next to the sun and then compose your image.

[Max EPR]

I'm going thru a similar process with my newly acquired M10. I have both the Q2 and SL2 and wanted the M experience.  The Q2 and SL2 make taking sharp and beautiful photos fairly easy. The M10 makes you work much harder and that is part of my attraction to the M. I know the fundamentals well, but the M makes me put that knowledge to practice. It's like taking a plane off autopilot and hand flying it. In flying it's important to be a good "stick and rudder pilot". The M is the "stick and rudder" and the Q2 and SL2 are more like being on auto pilot. That's my thought.

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

Exposure is not a fixed value to be left to the (rather limited) brain of your camera's automation, and the M has a rather low IQ compared to the sophisticated systems of more modern EVF cameras. No matter, it passes more of the responsibility to the photographer. Remember that there is no correct exposure, it depends on the photographer to determine the final result. Don't expect the camera to do the thinking for you.
Using the OVF you can use the histogram by chimping a test shot, using the EVF you can do so in real time (obviously).

If you use the histogram to refine your metering,  just keeping it at 3/4 from the right edge is the wrong way to go about it; you are throwing away your dynamic range on many shots. The same goes for dialing in a permanent negative exposure compensation, BTW.
There are two things to look for:
1. the "mountain(s)" in the middle should be as high as possible.
2. if there is a spike at the right up against the edge, you need to interpret it:
     a. if there are blown specular highlights in your image that should be present, e.g. the sun, or strong reflections on  water, disregard the spike.
     b. if you want detail in all highlights, back off the exposure to the left until the spike shrinks away.

With the spot meter of the EVF/Live View  you can pinpoint the exact exposure of all parts of a scene by moving the camera around.
Even with the center-weighed metering of the M  OVF it is worth "scanning"  to determine the exposure value  of different parts, to decide which exposure comes closest to your intention.

Example: When photographing a sunset, never take your exposure off the sun or off the foreground: always expose for an area of sky next to the sun and then compose your image.

Thank you, this is very helpful info. Where I was having trouble at sunset yesterday was in the near-specular highlights, such as the sun-facing side of a light-colored blade of grass. The grass in the photo I posted was exposed correctly, but I had quite a few that looked ok in live view but were just a bit too hot. I will try out your suggestions and practice!

 

6 hours ago, mujk said:

It's good to remember that the M10 has two separate metering systems. The one in use when only the OVF is in use (shutter closed during metering) has exactly one mode, more or less equal to center-weighted metering. When liveview/Viso is in use (shutter open), there are three different modes to choose from. This may be a bit confusing in the beginning.

Wow, thank you. I totally missed that in my pre-M research and my skimming of the FAQ questions here, but that makes perfect sense. Sounds like it’s time for me to go completely through the manual in fine detail.

[hdmesa]

10 hours ago, mujk said:

It's good to remember that the M10 has two separate metering systems. The one in use when only the OVF is in use (shutter closed during metering) has exactly one mode, more or less equal to center-weighted metering. When liveview/Viso is in use (shutter open), there are three different modes to choose from. This may be a bit confusing in the beginning.

Just did a casual test of the metering system on a difficult subject (looking out a bank of windows on a bright morning from a room with a dark interior). Looks like:

OVF vs LV Multifield @ f/2, ISO 200 = OVF was 1/4000 sec., LV was 1/2000 sec.
OVF vs LV Center weighted @ f2, ISO 200 = OVF was 1/4000 sec., LV was 1/3000 sec.

Looks like a more conservative metering bias with the OVF Center weighted versus LV Center weighted.

This may explain why I was blowing highlights less frequently when trusting the OVF exposure recommendation. It also shows why leaving exposure comp in any state but 0.0 would be unwise if you flip back and forth between OVF and LV a lot.

Edited March 6, 2021 by hdmesa

[P1505]

I experienced the M10 for the first time in bright light today. I now understand what people say about the highlights. No worries though, just adapt and shoot at higher speeds by a couple of stops.

I can see what people who are used to matrix metering struggle with though.