Jump to content

M10 to M10-R Upgrade Questions


MikeMyers
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 15 Minuten schrieb Demigorgan:

Here we are in a Leica forum. Look at your profile picture. Very few spend as much as we do on cameras and lenses. Most people think we are crazy for doing it.

Everything you said in this post anyone could say about you and your Leica gear. 

If you're having a bad day, please don't attack me personally.We treat each other with respect.
My answer referred to #37 and Ken Rockwell.
I don't blame anyone, everyone, like me, can buy whatever they want.
But the fact remains: If you buy good / expensive pots, you can't cook well. It is important that you have fun with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

But the fact remains: If you buy good / expensive pots, you can't cook well.

“Everything you said can be said about you and your gear”

How is that attacking you? 😅

I’m giving back to you what you said about everyone else. 

and now you’ve said something worse. So you have a $10,000 Leica. By your logic does that mean you can’t take pictures? 

Im not saying that. YOU said it. 

Edited by Demigorgan
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Demigorgan,

First, the gear isn't worth $10,000. But I can take pictures with it, but it doesn't make me a good photographer with it. I'll leave it up to the viewer how good or bad I am, although I've only shown test photos with the M at the moment, without any photographic or artistic claim.
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding: quality equipment alone does not make anyone a good photographer/cook/driver, etc. It depends on skill level.
And I didn't address anyone directly with it, I meant it in general and not related to Leica alone, but in general.
By the way, I know some Sony photographers whose equipment costs are not inferior to those of Leica or Hasselblad. But even these are not good photographers per se.
I hope I've made myself clear and cleared up a misunderstanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well what makes a good photo can be subjective... bit like what makes a good song... and like music some photos that are as revered as early Beatles songs would do as poorly as a Beatles song if it was presented unheard of in today's contemporary music scene (whatever that might be), so perhaps the metric should be getting the shot in which case seeing as there's cameras that track movement, only fire when they detect a smile, automatically focus on the eye with a shallow DOF lens (even all of those things at once) and the Leica M does none of these things, one could argue that the M is a poor choice for being a technically good photograph maker... much like how most folks can drive faster around a wet race track with the traction control and ABS on rather than off, and in this scenario the lap time is king.. much like getting the shot is (even for hobbyist drivers and photographers)

The counter argument would be emotive I think.... I don't need no stinking computer taking my shots for me I love that the M is basically a manual camera and I love the craft of using it (and I do personally feel that way...) 

This is a gear forum, sure we can sometimes fall into talk about the craft but posts on gear get all of the attention really.

If it was a craft forum then it wouldn't be about one particular brand

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, M Street Photographer said:

@Demigorgan,

First, the gear isn't worth $10,000. But I can take pictures with it, but it doesn't make me a good photographer with it. I'll leave it up to the viewer how good or bad I am, although I've only shown test photos with the M at the moment, without any photographic or artistic claim.
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding: quality equipment alone does not make anyone a good photographer/cook/driver, etc. It depends on skill level.
And I didn't address anyone directly with it, I meant it in general and not related to Leica alone, but in general.
By the way, I know some Sony photographers whose equipment costs are not inferior to those of Leica or Hasselblad. But even these are not good photographers per se.
I hope I've made myself clear and cleared up a misunderstanding.

Well  I don’t know any Sony (body only) that costs $9,000. Or a little sony 50f2 prime that costs $9,000. What Sony user ever spent near $20,000 on a Sony and a little 50f2?

Very few spend as much on camera gear as we do. Yes you have to go to hasselblad for that honor  

Yes. You with a custom Strat it’s just noise. If I give it to John Meyer is another thing. 

This is obvious. but John Meyer isn’t playing $200 guitars. 

So simply saying “the gear doesn’t matter” isn’t true either. It does matter very much. Some of these guys work with the guitar manufacturers just to get the guitar exactly the way they want it. 

Actually gear matters a lot. 

Yes that a Ferrari in my hands and a Ferrari in a formula 1 champion’s hands is a different thing. We all know that I think. 

I don’t know why people always feel the need to say “cameras don’t take pictures. People do”. Like this is some sort of revelation nobody had ever heard before. 

My point is this is a Leica forum. We all love Leica gear and spend more than most to get it. so I don’t understand these posts on this forum. 

Edited by Demigorgan
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

A lot of emotions shared in this thread! Photography holds a passionate place in our hearts-as cheesy as this statement may be, it is true! 

Is there a world where we have arrived in the digital whelm at the point of diminishing returns?

Have any of you pondered this thought:  wouldn't it be cool if Leica made the M platform upgradable(for lack of a better term). A camera where you could change sensors. And on this note, sensors, (leica-specific sensors) are treated more like their M-lens counterparts-with each having it's own interesting and beautiful attributes technically and artistically? 

A "GREEN"( this word kinda makes me wince) digital camera(non-throw away-that last for ever and ever- and the marketing steers us towards identifying the prowess of each individual sensor as if it were like the difference between Van Gogh or a Rembrandt. 

Then plucking down 6 to 9k on a camera body might not seem so stressful, fearful, and riddled with all the question's and idea's posted in these endless threads with people sharing, arguing, getting more confused and restless.

could the M10-p be the last camera I need to buy? or is there a future M that has it all and even the things we in 2023 couldn't even imagine until 2030 and on- including black paint? Or, maybe, the ancient sensor that was put into the M10-p becomes a highly sought after dinosaur that is more valued than the newest generations sensors because there was a mineral that used in the manufacturing of this sensor that is no longer available, thus this camera body is now selling for $15k on the black market.  

can I get a witness? and someone wake me up from this dream?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

of coarse this has been pondered, how foolish of me. 

I would challenge the notion that this is not technically feasible with something else that has already been said and that is if we can put a man on the moon certainly we could have interchangeable sensors. 

even without the interchangeable sensor idea- just embracing the concept that past bodies and there sensors are uniquely beautiful over the latest generation might relieve peoples nerves. Yet another concept fully vetted I'm sure.

but I cannot argue against the fact that this might be economical suicide or feasible.

remember that general motors tried to kill the idea of electric cars back in the day and look at us now. This was probably already mentioned as well!

man, i'm striking out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC Leica did in fact have a removable 'digital' section for the R which could be swapped back and forth for film.

I remember looking at that and thinking how good an idea it was because they could simply have updated the digital part every so often rather than the whole camera.

I suppose removable backs for older Hasselblads and so on are the same.

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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...