Why I will not be getting a M11...

[harmen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The development of the digital M is clearly one of pushing past the cutting edge at all times.  There is little reason to keep MP count low, have no IBIS, limit ISO sensitivities, reduce colour accuracy, or stop shutter development.  The only question is what is the development optimising for?  For most aspects the goals would be to take away all limits.  Unlimited battery life, unlimited shutter-speeds, etc.  The only 'limitations' are design choices that pushing beyond would result in a disservice to us, users.  We want the camera to work with all M lenses.  That does not exclude SL lenses then, but it does if it leads to an increase in size of the camera, as the small size is another highly attractive feature.  It also does if it increases clutter, with simplicity of operation being another outstanding feature.  Most importantly the focusing and viewing operation is optimised to provide the opposite of what an EVF (or even SLR) does - it shows real life, with the viewfinder being nearly unnoticeable.  The direct connection with the world around is an outstanding feature that this camera is optimised for.  If it can be pushed further past the cutting edge in that regard, sign me up!

We might not have had such a wonderful manual focusing machine if digital had arrived earlier, but it can be developed further and further using all available technologies to get the most out of it.

Edited February 9, 2022 by harmen

[lct]

Seen from the outside, the M11 looks like a smart bridge between RF-M and EVF-M cameras. Still too slow for my tastes but this is a Leica flaw since the M8, although my M8.2 has shorter startup times seemingly. A faster M11-S with less digital noise could interest me possibly but i don't want to endure blackout times in the Visoflex or anywhere else in any way. A mere P&S can do it, why not a Leica? Thanks to @Photoworks, @SrMi, @Tailwagger and other M11 users here for their competence and conviction anyway. Kudos to you folks .

[IkarusJohn]

7 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

…

So to respond to your question, I'd postulate that yes, this is indeed where the M is heading long term and there simply is no way around it.  If Leica doesn't continuously adapt and adopt the current technologies available into the M, there won't be any next M at all. 

 

And that is the point.

The critical shift for me is that the M cameras tended to include developments only if they improved photography.  A significant number of the improvements in the M11 seem to me to be driven because they can be done, rather than because they are necessary.  Leica released the M-A in 2015 - was it just because of nostalgia?  Conversely, the M(240) exploited what CMOS sensors made possible.

In the future, I do see a trophy M camera which is stripped right back, with an RF, a mechanical shutter, centre-weighted metering off the shutter, the best sensor of sensible resolution, and it will sell like hotcakes.  My current digital M cameras will need replacement by then.

[LocalHero1953]

5 hours ago, lct said:

Seen from the outside, the M11 looks like a smart bridge between RF-M and EVF-M cameras.

I agree, but not quite smart enough for me. It would be a good move to split the line. Who knows but I might buy both a RF-M and an EVF-M. At the moment I am shooting film M4 for enjoyable simplicity and the CL/SL2-S when I have to perform and produce. I can't see me using the M11 for either.

Edited February 9, 2022 by LocalHero1953

[padam]

I am a bit perplexed by the M11.
I like the improvements to the body design, battery, operation, etc. and for sure, the dual native ISO BSI sensor seems like a big step up.
However, it is coupled to a small and light body with a full mechanical shutter (or a slow readout electronic shutter, no EFCS) making shutter shock inevitable. It was already a noticeable problem on the M10-R. Apart from the ES option, it only became worse. 33MP like on the A7IV would have been more than enough, but it is understandable that they would not turn backwards. I also wish video would make a comeback with these new sensors, I don't think it distracted anybody on the M240, maybe that's something they can add in the M11-P with the EFCS. Then it might look more like a 'complete' camera, which is what I would expect at this price. The M10 & M10-P might feel yesterday's tech, but they just feel like more 'complete' M cameras - to me anyway...

[SrMi]

26 minutes ago, padam said:

I am a bit perplexed by the M11.
I like the improvements to the body design, battery, operation, etc. and for sure, the dual native ISO BSI sensor seems like a big step up.
However, it is coupled to a small and light body with a full mechanical shutter (or a slow readout electronic shutter, no EFCS) making shutter shock inevitable. It was already a noticeable problem on the M10-R. Apart from the ES option, it only became worse. 33MP like on the A7IV would have been more than enough, but it is understandable that they would not turn backwards. I also wish video would make a comeback with these new sensors, I don't think it distracted anybody on the M240, maybe that's something they can add in the M11-P with the EFCS. Then it might look more like a 'complete' camera, which is what I would expect at this price. The M10 & M10-P might feel yesterday's tech, but they just feel like more 'complete' M cameras - to me anyway...

Can you point me to the M10-R shutter shock discussion?

[padam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I mean, sometimes I experience shutter shock even on the R5 (with IBIS and EFCS) and I have the SL2 (heavier but no EFCS sort of cancelling each other out)
But on a camera with less to hold onto, no IBIS, no EFCS and the highest MP count, it can only get worse...

Saw the same thing on the M10-R, way too many (slightly) blurry shots, and from my understanding, the M11 (using RF) has to do one more step with the shutter.

Edited February 9, 2022 by padam

[lct]

51 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I agree, but not quite smart enough for me. It would be a good move to split the line. Who knows but I might buy both a RF-M and an EVF-M. At the moment I am shooting film M4 for enjoyable simplicity and the CL/SL2-S when I have to perform and produce. I can't see me using the M11 for either.

To soon perhaps. If the M11 proves to be a success Leica might think that an EVF-M is not necessary. Not that i hope that...

[Tailwagger]

54 minutes ago, lct said:

If the M11 proves to be a success Leica might think that an EVF-M is not necessary.

That was my thought as well. OTOH, a lot of the conservative backlash toward the camera might well be addressed by minimizing the EVF implementation on the M and expanding it out in an EVF version. Really could go either way, but I think in the end, sooner or later an EVF M mount is inevitable.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Are you taliking about shutter shock or camera shake where a higher shutter speed is required to avoid shake. Shutter shock is where the actual use of the shutter creates a sympathetic vibration in the camera that can not be corrected by something like using a tripod. I have seen no evidence of shutter shock on my M10R or M11. Mind you I haven't done any tripod work on the M11 yet.

As for camera shake, yes, you do need to be more careful the higher the MP count gets. But that's up to the individual. I have excellent technique and very little natural body shake. I easily shoot at 1/focal length at 60MP.

Also you can shoot at lower resolutions on the M11. A lower MP sensor is built in.

Gordon

[Tailwagger]

1 hour ago, padam said:

I mean, sometimes I experience shutter shock even on the R5 (with IBIS and EFCS) and I have the SL2 (heavier but no EFCS sort of cancelling each other out)

Not that you're wrong, but if you're looking at hand held shots rather than test results from on a tripod, how do you actually know?  Could simply be not holding the cam steady enough. IBIS isn't perfect by any means and all sorts of blurring effects can be induced even with the best of implementations via a shaky hand.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, padam said:

I mean, sometimes I experience shutter shock even on the R5 (with IBIS and EFCS) and I have the SL2 (heavier but no EFCS sort of cancelling each other out)
But on a camera with less to hold onto, no IBIS, no EFCS and the highest MP count, it can only get worse...

Saw the same thing on the M10-R, way too many (slightly) blurry shots, and from my understanding, the M11 (using RF) has to do one more step with the shutter.

Thanks! 
AFAICT, the sources talk about the possibility of shutter shock but do not show any.
In my tests, I could not see any evidence of shutter shock with M10-R and M11. On the other hand, my GFX, Z 7, m43 cameras clearly show shutter-shock and must be used with EFCS.
Until someone demonstrates otherwise, I do not believe there is a shutter-shock problem with digital Ms.

Note that IBIS does not help with shutter-shock.

Edited February 9, 2022 by SrMi

[charlesphoto99]

Good lord, now people need to have 'safe' shutter speeds. Maybe Leica should have included a Siri like voice that shouts at the user when they've gone below. With the ability to choose their own 'safe word.' A pixel peepers wet dream...

[lct]

55 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Good lord, now people need to have 'safe' shutter speeds. Maybe Leica should have included a Siri like voice that shouts at the user when they've gone below. With the ability to choose their own 'safe word.' A pixel peepers wet dream...

Dunno for you but i'm used to shoot at moderate shutter speeds when i need some DoF sans digital noise. I can do it at 42MP with IBIS but sans IBIS my pics tend to blur too much. What would i do with a 60MP camera sans IBIS nor tripod? I would shoot at 33MP or 18MP i guess but i would have the feeling to use a Ferrari to go to the baker so to speak...

Edited February 9, 2022 by lct

[padam]

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

Not that you're wrong, but if you're looking at hand held shots rather than test results from on a tripod, how do you actually know?  Could simply be not holding the cam steady enough. IBIS isn't perfect by any means and all sorts of blurring effects can be induced even with the best of implementations via a shaky hand.

I've taken pictures of objects with slow shutter speeds, it is just not possible after the first shot because it is affected by the shutter vibration, it does not matter how steady I am trying to be. Better with electronic shutter, but in that case it is the rolling shutter that ruins it.
In any case, this M11 is by far the most prone to this issue with the highest megapixels.

[SrMi]

20 minutes ago, padam said:

I've taken pictures of objects with slow shutter speeds, it is just not possible after the first shot because it is affected by the shutter vibration, it does not matter how steady I am trying to be. Better with electronic shutter, but in that case it is the rolling shutter that ruins it.
In any case, this M11 is by far the most prone to this issue with the highest megapixels.

To clarify: are you describing your experience with M11 or are you assuming because of your experience with a different camera?

Note that any shutter shock affects a camera independently of its resolution. 

Edited February 9, 2022 by SrMi

[charlesphoto99]

I realize this is different subject than shutter shake, but I have literally not seen a single photograph in the M11 images thread of a moving subject. Is it incapable of that? Or just the users? And sometimes we just need to embrace the blur! 

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!

[lct]

12 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

sometimes we just need to embrace the blur! 

Not sure it would make a good ad slogan for the M11 . Nice pic BTW.

[padam]

9 minutes ago, SrMi said:

To clarify: are you describing your experience with M11 or are you assuming because of your experience with a different camera?

I tried to explain that getting access to that resolution is already challenging on cameras that are better designed in this area.
I don't oppose to having 60MP, just not in something where it feels like the rest wasn't really designed to keep up with it (just yet) and offering lower resolution feels like simply acknowledgment of this issue instead of trying to make it more usable at full resolution.
It was acceptable on the M10-R being the final model in the last generation.
But the M11 does not seem to show the improvements in this area (apart from the electronic shutter, which is not very useful on this particular sensor)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Tailwagger]

7 minutes ago, padam said:

I've taken pictures of objects with slow shutter speeds, it is just not possible after the first shot because it is affected by the shutter vibration, it does not matter how steady I am trying to be. Better with electronic shutter, but in that case it is the rolling shutter that ruins it.
In any case, this M11 is by far the most prone to this issue with the highest megapixels.

Huh? It not an echo chamber in there... or are you talking about shooting in burst mode at slow shutter speeds? I'm struggling to understand just what the point of that is. Presumably you invoke bursts to capture action, in which case you shouldn't be shooting at anything under 1/125" anyway.   I'd be the first to admit that I can no longer hand hold effectively down into the sub 1/10" range as was possible with the M10, but that has nothing to do with the shutter, but rather the level of acuity involved and the steadiness of my hands. In the other thread on shutter shock, I demonstrated that its perfectly possible to shoot a 1/2 focal length and get a sharp result. I could probably go lower, but the odds of success decrease. 

Just as it was with the M10-R, if you act casually when shooting at lower shutter speed, you risk blurring from camera shake, not shutter shock. As the above proves, it's perfectly possible to shoot with the M11 and get razor sharp results at low shutter speed, which means the shutter is well damped and any failures are on the photographer, not the camera. Throw it on a tripod and see.