Jump to content

Comparisons of M11 and M10R


John Smith

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

My point was that it’s more typical that users are unhappy at first (as with the M9), and then begin to love their camera. Not the initial ‘honeymoon’ period you suggest, where users are thrilled from the outset.

To be honest they'll be people sitting in each camp I would imagine... there's been a lot of praise heaped on the M11 IQ (and not unfairly from what I've seen), but already we see in this thread talk of colour casts.

I guess while neither of us owns one, and are both quite happy to profile our cameras it's irrelevant for us today and in the future

Being somewhat budget restricted (or as I quipped to the Leica store manager after playing with an M11 for a bit "not bad at all, see you in 2025 when they're four and a half in your pre-loved section!") I'm actually quite happy to pick up lightly used M bodies that already have the FW tweaks and a ton of info online about getting the best from them

 

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I had the M10 until a couple of months ago, and my prints were totally fine, as they were with my M8.2, M240, and my Monochroms.  I generated profiles for each.  My switching models had less to do with IQ than with other camera features, handling, etc.  There are many factors in the shooting, editing and print workflow, beyond the camera and lens, that influence IQ, most of which depend on my judgment and decision making. Same as in my darkroom print days.  My prints have always been on the smallish side, so I don’t need more resolution for print size; MP is a secondary issue.  The M10-R better matches my M10-Monochrom workflow, and I got a great deal trading little used gear for the BP M10-R, resulting in no cash outlay.

It certainly makes sense to me that having the M10 R and M would make for a cohesive workflow, I debated the M10R, but it was (at the time) quite a lot more coin, I wasn't fussed for the touch screen (OMWV), the quieter shutter was only on the nice to have, not essential list the extra res I was a little ambivalent about (again OMWV), and I couldn't justify the extra cash for just a 'genuine' ISO 100.

But all that's just me, and there's a lot of love on here for the 10R

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

It certainly makes sense to me that having the M10 R and M would make for a cohesive workflow, I debated the M10R, but it was (at the time) quite a lot more coin, I wasn't fussed for the touch screen (OMWV), the quieter shutter was only on the nice to have, not essential list the extra res I was a little ambivalent about (again OMWV), and I couldn't justify the extra cash for just a 'genuine' ISO 100.

But all that's just me, and there's a lot of love on here for the 10R

The features you cite were also not that important for me. The sensor, however, is improved beyond just MP, having derived from the new generation sensor from the S3.  Much of my decision to upgrade, though, was circumstantial. I was in the process of consolidating (selling) underutilized gear to simplify my photography. The dealers I was working with offered much better deals, not unexpectedly, if I traded on new gear rather than selling outright.  And it so happens that one had a single remaining black paint M10-R.  I ended up getting it without cash outlay, effectively at no more cost than the standard M10-R.  I figured that the value down the road, should I again want to trade, would be better than a standard M10-R, and far more than my existing M10 (which I got nice value for).  Plus the black paint finish and discreet appearance (no red logo) appeals and pairs well with the Monochrom.  Sometimes it’s about other stuff, not due to any print magic or compelling need.

Jeff

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Overgaard said:

Jeff, curious to know, where did you see a connection with the S3 sensor on the M11 sensor?

Both chips use a 4.6 micron pixel pitch, so it has been widely assumed that the manufacturer made a deal to supply both sizes of chips to Leica, filling a wafer more effectively.

Edited by scott kirkpatrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Both chips use a 4.6 micron pixel pitch, so it has been widely assumed that the manufacturer made a deal to supply both sizes of chips to Leica, filling a wafer more effectively.

S3 has 4.6 micron pixel pitch, but M11 has 3.8 microns pixel pitch. I do not see a connection between S3 and M11 sensors. AFAIK, S3 and M10-R/M10-M sensors are related.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SrMi said:

S3 has 4.6 micron pixel pitch, but M11 has 3.8 microns pixel pitch. I do not see a connection between S3 and M11 sensors. AFAIK, S3 and M10-R/M10-M sensors are related.

You’re right. There is no connection. Two different engines as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I misread the original question (as did Overgaard), because the connection was between the M10R sensor and the S3 sensor.  Obviously no connection to the BSI, denser sensor in the M11.  I'm surprised that Thorsten didn't catch that, so I thought he was asking about the R-S3 pairing.

Edited by scott kirkpatrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Overgaard said:

Jeff, curious to know, where did you see a connection with the S3 sensor on the M11 sensor?

I was referring to the M10-R, not the M11. I didn’t buy the latter.  If you follow my chat with Adam, you’ll see it’s about my M10-R purchase.  It’s well known that the M10-R and M10 Monochrom share S3 sensor architecture.  Just as the S007 and M240.  Economies of scale for Leica.

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 1/15/2022 at 11:40 AM, Tailwagger said:

50mm 'lux:

M10-R

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!

M11

Sorry to revive an older thread but I was wondering since you have (had?) both - how accurately does the m11 meter auto white balance compared to the m10-r? 
 

There seems to be more magenta in the m11 files - which seems similar to the Sl2-s. 
 

I have a m10-r and would be possibly interested in an m11. But I love the m10-r’s auto white balance and colors and wouldn’t  want to upgrade if it meant losing that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome. I think that that you place far too much importance on auto white balance. In my experience any new camera must be properly profiled to give  decent starting point for postprocessing   Colour is set by the raw conversion. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lifeandmylens said:

I have a m10-r and would be possibly interested in an m11. But I love the m10-r’s auto white balance and colors and wouldn’t  want to upgrade if it meant losing that. 

In which case, I would consider waiting and see what happens with the impending firmware update. The AWB, IMO, does seem to have taken a step backward. That said, I concur with Jaap, it nothing that can't be overcome with a little work. 

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

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

In which case, I would consider waiting and see what happens with the impending firmware update. The AWB, IMO, does seem to have taken a step backward. That said, I concur with Jaap, it nothing that can't be overcome with a little work. 

.. I will use UniWB anyhow (with EVF/display set to black and white) to overcome the unified histogram limitations on the M11 -> no indication when e.g. blowing the red channel by +1.5 when using regular WB ... other cameras show separate histograms per channel to overcome this ... irrespective of "pure range finder/no EVF" usage preference, my hypothesis is that UniWB will also trick the built-in exposure algorithm to behave better in Aperture Priority or Auto ISO mode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 2/16/2022 at 2:43 PM, Adam Bonn said:

FWIW I think uniwb is certainly worth a try… there’s a recommendation in the lumariver manual that “most” cameras exposure is geared around the tone curve of the sooc jpeg (not a crazy idea when you consider that most histograms are the sooc jpeg)

obviously with uniwb one will need to apply wb adjustments to every DNG… not the end of the world… you might wanna make sure there’s something white in the shot under mixed artificial lighting though!

Don’t own an m11… but all this talk of colour casts maybe Leica will release a FW update to resolve it (wouldn’t be the first or even the second time)

LR users… there is a shadow tint slider (and also a split toning tool) 🙂

Interested to know if the cobalt profiles resolve it?

IIRC….. most Leica Ms start life being heralded as the best colour M ever, then the honeymoon wears off and people start talking about the M9 😂 

Now that I have the M11, I took 20 minutes yesterday to set a custom UniWB white balance (using the grey card color choice on the camera). Using these steps: https://blog.kasson.com/using-in-caera-histograms-for-ettr/8-a-one-step-uniwb-procedure/

Almost forgot to set ISO fixed and constant aperture/exposure across all frames during the procedure (kind reminder if you are trying to replicate).

Outcome: UniWB is still effective and relevant on M11. The built-in "blinkies" and histogram are based on a JPG rendition of the current scene, based on current white balance (AWB, daylight, custom, ...). This leads to an exposure that is not optimized to 'expose to the right' (ETTR), which may blow red or blue channels, or lead to a habit of always under-exposing to avoid the issue. UniWB is not perfect but tweaks the channel balance to give red and blue the same weight as green, so that the histogram, blinkies, and auto-exposure algorithm are based on the "peak" channel closest to maximum brightness.

As stated before, since the custom white balance turns the color preview in a greenish tint, UniWB 'ruins" color JPG (I only shoot DNG) and most photographers would set JPG mode to b/w (e.g. I use high-contrast BW) to render the EVF and preview images in black and white (... also helps with red focus peaking outlines).

How much of a benefit UniWB brings is hard to say, as it depends on your regular motives. In my experience on average you would not notice any difference in practice; it's maybe 5% of the time you would notice a visible difference in highlights (less unintentionally blown) or shadows (more details). For me, UniWB is more a feel good measure - I am getting the most out of my camera, and not wasting any of its technical potential regarding exposure settings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, mzbe said:

Now that I have the M11, I took 20 minutes yesterday to set a custom UniWB white balance (using the grey card color choice on the camera). Using these steps: https://blog.kasson.com/using-in-caera-histograms-for-ettr/8-a-one-step-uniwb-procedure/

Almost forgot to set ISO fixed and constant aperture/exposure across all frames during the procedure (kind reminder if you are trying to replicate).

Outcome: UniWB is still effective and relevant on M11. The built-in "blinkies" and histogram are based on a JPG rendition of the current scene, based on current white balance (AWB, daylight, custom, ...). This leads to an exposure that is not optimized to 'expose to the right' (ETTR), which may blow red or blue channels, or lead to a habit of always under-exposing to avoid the issue. UniWB is not perfect but tweaks the channel balance to give red and blue the same weight as green, so that the histogram, blinkies, and auto-exposure algorithm are based on the "peak" channel closest to maximum brightness.

As stated before, since the custom white balance turns the color preview in a greenish tint, UniWB 'ruins" color JPG (I only shoot DNG) and most photographers would set JPG mode to b/w (e.g. I use high-contrast BW) to render the EVF and preview images in black and white (... also helps with red focus peaking outlines).

How much of a benefit UniWB brings is hard to say, as it depends on your regular motives. In my experience on average you would not notice any difference in practice; it's maybe 5% of the time you would notice a visible difference in highlights (less unintentionally blown) or shadows (more details). For me, UniWB is more a feel good measure - I am getting the most out of my camera, and not wasting any of its technical potential regarding exposure settings.

I keep meaning to try it for myself... I'm a little uncertain how much benefit it will bring with the shutter curtain metering in my M10 (and M9) but it might have more benefits when using the LV mode/metering 

I guess that if 95% of the time it makes no difference and 5% it's better then most of us would take that deal!

Off topic... but I did try that thing where you shoot middle grey and calculate how much headroom you have in the RAW... but personally I found that caused more problems than it fixed 😅

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2022 at 6:20 AM, Artin said:

Well in the so called ?? Trade of lithography when we had a magenta cast it was considered warm cast, and a cyan was called cool cast. 

I know this is an old post, but just now reading it. In digital photography, a cool white balance versus warm white balance is determined by Kelvin and not Tint.

To illustrate how this works in Lightroom or Capture One when processing a RAW file:

  • Example A – Tint slider biased toward magenta + Kelvin slider biased toward yellow = warm photo
  • Example B – Tint slider biased toward magenta + Kelvin slider biased toward blue = cool photo

 

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...