Jump to content

Is an M10/11 what I am looking for?


CapuchinSwing

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 5/13/2022 at 12:49 PM, CapuchinSwing said:

I am looking for the camera system that will inspire me the way the X100 did, but with some other requirements:

  • Full frame sensor
  • Small, compact size 
  • Gorgeous to look at and hold
  • Great glass available; ability to swap lenses
  • Something for travel, street, family, everyday

Like probably everyone on this forum, I believe that Leica M cameras (35mm or digital) are the most beautifully minimalistic cameras I've ever seen or held. 

I used it in a variety of settings, both indoors and out, and I was focussing most of my subjects with the split-image method. Focussing in bright conditions was OK, just slower than things would normally be with an AF lens. But I found that it was noticeably harder for me to focus in dim lighting, as it's harder to see sharply when you're over 50 (if not sooner). As for results, the photos I took were generally well-focused, and everything about the IQ was beautiful. It felt great in my hand and was a great combo of weight and size.

Using the camera for about a week, I guess I became skeptical that I would be able to make the thing "sing" the way so many others have. Vision-wise, my eyesight is probably fairly typical for someone my age (55). I do wear reading glasses, but the diopter makes that irrelevant.

  • For anyone else who started using an M10/11 without prior RF experience, did I give up too soon?
  • Should I have used zone or hyperfocal focussing in dimmer light?
  • Had I hung in for a month, would dim-light focussing seem easier? Are there tips?

I am looking for something dead simple like the M.

Best,

Bill

Well, I used Canon DSLRs for very serious purposes, from 2010 to 2018, and added some Nikon gear, too, largely because my wife is an avid` Nikon shooter. I added the Leica M system in 2018, at age 56. Some thoughts:

Why full “frame?” 24mm x 36mm is just one frame size, among many. There are larger digital frame sizes; so there is nothing “magic” about “full frame.” APS-C can work quite well, too.

For a smaller overall size, did you ever try using an SLR with a nicely compact 35mm f/2 or 28mm f/2.8 lens? An SLR can be an amazingly portable and minimalist package, if used with a compact lens. I am much less likely to fumble or drop my DSLRs. Thank goodness for camera straps!

Rangefinder focusing, in dim light, IS difficult, indeed. Zone/scale focusing is a solution. It is notably easier to do this with 21mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm lenses, than longer focal lengths. Zone/scale focusing beats AF for speed, because the shooter need not wait for the AF to lock onto the subject. The trick is learning to judge distance, and DOF.

Hyperfocal also works, especially with 28mm and wider.

One need not buy into the Leica M system to give zone/scale focusing, or the use of hyperfocal, another try. I was using zone/scale focusing, with some manual-focus Nikon lenses, on Canon and Nikon SLRs, for quite some time, before I added the Leica M system.

One week is not enough time to master rangefinder focusing, so, maybe you did give up, too soon.  I would think, however, that other aspects of M system shooting should have “clicked,” within a week.

There are times that I simply cannot find enough contrast, in a scene, for rangefinder focusing to work. (I do not claim to have truly mastered rangefinder focusing; I am uncertain.)

Again, these are just some thoughts. The questions can be seem as rhetorical; I am not expecting answers to be posted. (I pruned your narrative, considerably, to help me see the most relevant parts.)

 

 

 

Edited by RexGig0
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that you gave the Leica a suitable try and it didn't really do anything for you. IMO, it's not an acquired taste - you either like the manual focus/rangefinder or you don't.  For me it works better than autofocus which often seems to grab onto what I don't want it to focus on.  BUT obviously, that depends totally on your shooting style/what you primary subjects may be.

You gave it a shot!  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m 63 (how did that happen?).  I’ve dabbled in a number of cameras, formats and systems since my fist camera in the 1960s, and ditched many of them.

There isn’t a camera out there which does everything you might want to do.  That is a quick and easy way to become buried in gear.  My suggestion is to think about what you need in photography.  My journey has been similar to yours, except more through Nikon.  The bit between the Nikon FM-2 and the Leica M9 was a bit of a cul de sac for me - too many menus, too big, too plasticky, too much automation and just too much of everything. 

The Leica paradigm was what I had been looking for (without realising it) since my last FM-2 died in the mid-1990s.

Looking at your list, I do think there is benefit in giving the M system another try.  Were I you, I’d look seriously at an M10-R (black paint if you can find one), and get a magical 50mm lens (50 Summilux-M ASPH or the APO Summicron would be my choice), and a nice 28 (I use the Summilux), or a 35 (there’s been lots of discussion on this - I’m currently using a Zeiss 35 Distagon ZM, and really like it).

Then take the time to understand the camera.  For me, cameras are less about them meeting my needs and more about me understanding the camera - only then do I know if it’s a keeper.  I wouldn’t fret about getting perfect focus all the time.  That will come, and you can add an EVF for those tricky situations.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 5/13/2022 at 1:49 PM, CapuchinSwing said:

...

Here's where the plot thickens. Full-disclosure, last summer I actually bought and returned an M10-R and a (non-APO) Summicron 35mm f/2. I didn't keep it for very long and made sure to return it in perfect condition.

Because this is a sizable chunk of change, I wanted  to really make sure that I was making the right decision, especially since I was new to the whole rangefinder shooting experience.

I used it in a variety of settings, both indoors and out, and I was focussing most of my subjects with the split-image method. Focussing in bright conditions was OK, just slower than things would normally be with an AF lens. But I found that it was noticeably harder for me to focus in dim lighting, as it's harder to see sharply when you're over 50 (if not sooner). As for results, the photos I took were generally well-focused, and everything about the IQ was beautiful. It felt great in my hand and was a great combo of weight and size.

Using the camera for about a week, I guess I became skeptical that I would be able to make the thing "sing" the way so many others have. Vision-wise, my eyesight is probably fairly typical for someone my age (55). I do wear reading glasses, but the diopter makes that irrelevant.

  • For anyone else who started using an M10/11 without prior RF experience, did I give up too soon?
  • Should I have used zone or hyperfocal focussing in dimmer light?
  • Had I hung in for a month, would dim-light focussing seem easier? Are there tips?
  • Would the new Visoflex 2 make a big difference for me in low light?

With the M11 now selling for the same price as the M10-R, I am tempted to give it another try. Should I just buy another, give it more indefinite "field test", and if it doesn't pan out again, just sell it, and look at any potential loss as a "rental" cost?

...

 

@CapuchinSwing  In thinking about your post, you seem to want to bond with an M camera (M10R or M11, as the case may be).  You also seem spooked by the cost of one of these cameras and the 35/2 Summicron you bought, causing you to return it after a week (yes, these cameras and lenses are costly - but with good reason).  Given that this was your first experience with rangefinder photography, it does not surprise me that you did not immediately bond with the M10R.

Photographing with an M camera is very different from photographing with a DSLR; it requires a different skill set.  This skill set is not that difficult to learn, but it does require some commitment on the photographer's part. 

As for low light photography, I am a glasses wearer and I will be 65 in August ( and I always shoot with my glasses on).  I don't really have much trouble shooting with my M cameras in low light; It seems to me that low light photography with an M camera is doable - it just requires a bit of practice.  As for the M camera rangefinder mechanism, it is the best rangefinder that I have used, easily surpassing the Hasselblad XPAN and even the Mamiya 7 II.  IMHO the M camera (film or digital) is the easiest of the rangefinder cameras to learn rangefinder photography with.  Like everything else in photography, repetition is the mother of skill.  And like everything else in life, you get out of it what you invest into it in terms of your time and effort.

So to answer your questions,
1:  Did I give up too soon?  IMHO, you need more time than just a week to grasp rangefinder photography. 
2:  Should I have used zone or hyperfocal focussing in dimmer light?  Both of these techniques are helpful, particularly if your subject is moving. 
3:  Had I hung in for a month, would dim-light focussing seem easier?  Based on my experience, I think the answer is yes.  Low light focusing with a rangefinder camera is a learned skill. 
4:  With the M11 now selling for the same price as the M10-R, I am tempted to give it another try. Should I just buy another, give it a more indefinite "field test", and if it doesn't pan out again, just sell it, and look at any potential loss as a "rental" cost?  If I were in your shoes, that's the approach I would take.
 
If you can forget about the price of the camera and lens and make a commitment to rangefinder photography for the long haul, I think you will get the hang of it.  Make it a year long project; commit, read and learn all you can about rangefinder photography, pick the brains of the people who work at your Leica dealer and on this forum - and shoot, shoot, shoot and then shoot some more.  Shoot at least a handful of images every day, the more the better.  I would make it my priority to shoot 25 to 50 images daily, or more if time permits.  That's a decent amount of practice to see some improvement in your technique fairly soon.  At the end of a year, reevaluate.  My guess is that much sooner than a year you will get good at shooting with your M and you will be hooked.
 
There is another option, which may be a good path for you:  Get a Q2 (or Q2 Monochrom, if you are drawn to black and white photography).  Both are outstanding cameras with fantastic sensors and lenses.  This approach will require commitment to learning to maximize the Q2 platform's one and only lens, the 28mm f/1.7 Summilux which is just another skill set that can be acquired and honed through practice.
 
Best of luck to you - I hope some of the above will be helpful. 

 

 

 

Edited by Herr Barnack
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
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...