M10R Still Worth It?

[Henners]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

M10, M10-R and M11 (other than the freezes) are all excellent and all have outstanding output. You won't be disappointed with any of them. I started with an M9, then M10-R and now M11 (and GR3/GR3x). I can't decide if I prefer the M10-R or M11, they both have their pros and cons - maybe the M10-R I felt more 'at one' with due to the M11 shutter metering shenanigans. I'd happily use an M9 as my daily too.

M10-R if you want a more 'authentic' Leica feeling and the M11 if you want extra tech (USB-C, 60mp, metering) in exchange for slightly less of the 'authentic' Leica feeling but still definitely Leica, that's my experience anyway. 

[ktmrider2]

Thanks for all the input.  I have decided to stick with what I know best-film.  Since I have a nice M4, I am probably getting a MP for the meter.  And the Fuji X-T5 will handle digital needs for the present.   

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ktmrider2]

I am still on the fence regarding the M10R.  The choice is a new film body or the M10R.  I have a mint 50th anniversary M4 which satisfies my need for a film camera.  I know I am indecisive but have not handled either M10R, MA or MP.  I guess I will decide in Hong Kong on Friday.

Thanks for the input.

[Stevejack]

2 hours ago, ktmrider2 said:

I am still on the fence regarding the M10R.  The choice is a new film body or the M10R.  I have a mint 50th anniversary M4 which satisfies my need for a film camera.  I know I am indecisive but have not handled either M10R, MA or MP.  I guess I will decide in Hong Kong on Friday.

Thanks for the input.

I had the M10R for a while, it's a brilliant camera. I switched to the M11 and have been happy with the change, it suits me for the way I like to use the camera but that's no knock against the M10-R at all. 

My film situation is similar to yours - I have a nice black paint M3 which I'll keep forever, but I wanted a camera that I could use as a daily carry which didn't have a screen, and didn't have a battery that needed charging all the time..  and I chose the MP. In truth the M3 fills my needs for what I want for a film camera, and for a daily carry I decided to swap the MP for an M10-D instead. I prefer the ergonomics of a screen-less camera, the only downside is that I need to worry about charging a battery now. 

The point of all this is - the MP is nice, but you already have a very nice film camera with the M4. I think going digital with the M10-R might give you a lot of benefits that you don't already have. 

[brickftl]

My experience: I'm new to Leica rangefinders, and haven't used manual focus since the mid 70's with my Canon AE1. Lately I've grown weary of the clinical, ultra sharp images from many full frame cameras including my Sony A7RV, and so I decided to buy a mint M10 from KEH for $4,437. Yes, higher than what I could have paid in a private sale, but I also got a 3 year extended warranty that covers mechanical issues as well as scratches. drops, etc. And I've bought from KEH over the years, and come to trust them.

I read extensively on differences between the M10 and M10R (never considered the M11 for a second because of all the lockup/file corruption issues), and ultimately ruled out the M10R for several reasons including: I almost never print, and actually prefer 24MP's over 40 because of ease of handling, don't care at all about the M10R's reputedly quieter shutter, and from what I read (others may disagree) that up to 800 ISO the M10 images are cleaner/better than the M10R, from 800 ISO to 1600 ISO it's basically a wash, and from 1600 ISO and above, the M10R is marginally better than the M10. On the rare occasions that I need to shoot higher than 1600, I'm confident that DXO RAW Prime noise reduction will make quick work of any noise issues. Finally, this video pushed me over the edge to the M10: 

 

 

[brickftl]

two other observations between M10 and M10R:

1. I read a fair number of comments that the M10 is more forgiving than the M10R in terms of camera shake, apparently because high resolution magnifies that issue. I have 2 experiences with this. First I observed that my Leica Q2 images were less sharp than images from my original Q, and I chalked this up to the higher resolution and needed to kick up shutter speed beyond what I used the Q in order to have the Q2 images sharp. Also at one point I bought the Fuji GFX50 with some truly great GF lenses, and for the longest time I had problems producing tack sharp images (which after all was needed since I used to be a pixel peeper, since recovered, and images from the medium format GFX were for many people even if they don't own up to it, the ultimate in pixel peeping). Again, I had to use the GFX at higher shutter speeds, or even better on a tripod, in order to achieve those tack sharp images. 

2. After I got the Q2, I somehow didn't enjoy its images compared to those of the Q. Then, in the process of researching differences between the M10 and the M10R, it dawned on me that the Q and the M10 use the same sensor, the 24-megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor, which is known as the "Leica Maestro-II". And the Q2 and the M10R both use the same (or close to the same) sensor (Q2 is 47.3 MPS and M10R is 40MPS). And from my experience of using both the Q and Q2, based on the foregoing information on sensors used in the M10 and M10R, I infer that were I to compare images I took from both the M10 and M10R, I'd feel the same about them as I do in a comparison of images from the Q and Q2. Finally on this point, the video I linked in my prior post makes the case for better images produced by the M10 as compared to images from the M10R.

My final comment: I could easily afford the M10R, so cost difference between it and the M10 isn't an issue in my case. Instead, I chose the M10 because I believe, for my purposes, the M10 will produce better images. I want to be clear that I'm in no way demeaning the M10R, and I'm sure its owners have solid reasons why it is the better of the 2 cameras for their purposes.

[Al Brown]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, brickftl said:

My final comment: I could easily afford the M10R, so cost difference between it and the M10 isn't an issue in my case. Instead, I chose the M10 because I believe, for my purposes, the M10 will produce better images. I want to be clear that I'm in no way demeaning the M10R, and I'm sure its owners have solid reasons why it is the better of the 2 cameras for their purposes.

M10 can get by with slower shutter speeds than M10-R for sharp images (I own both), that is a fact, but you cannot claim M10 produces better images due to operator error... The solid fact is that M10-R's images are superior - technical characteristics of the sensor vouch for technical supremacy and M10-R's sensor is much newer. Whether aesthetics have a role in "better images" of any camera I dare not say, but claiming the lesser megapixel camera produces better images due to shaky hands or pushing the shutter speed too low due to lack of minimal shutter speed rules knowledge in relation to megapixel count is neither objective nor relevant at all.

[tom0511]

the guy in the video says that the metering of m10r is taking care of highlights and underexposes more often. Then he shows the guitar photo where the m10r expose 1/2 stop brighter than the M10...how does this fit together.

Then he talks a lot of slight color differences, which I think has a lot to do with profiles of the raw converter.

The video-for me - does not tell much if anything.

[brickftl]

1 minute ago, Al Brown said:

M10 can get by with slower shutter speeds than M10-R for sharp images (I own both), that is a fact, but you cannot claim M10 produces better images due to operator error... The solid fact is that M10-R's images are superior - technical characteristics of the sensor vouch for technical supremacy and M10-R's sensor is much newer. Whether aesthetics have a role in "better images" of any camera I dare not say, but claiming the lesser megapixel camera produces better images due to shaky hands or pushing the shutter speed too low due to lack of minimal shutter speed rules knowledge in relation to megapixel count is neither objective nor relevant at all.

I respect your opinion, however it is just an opinion. The photographer in the video I linked above has a different opinion. And to be clear, when I refer to better images, I'm not talking about non-sharp images due to operator error. I'm addressing the aesthetic issues that photographer pointed out, issues that I observed in images from my Q (same sensor as the M10) as compared to images from my Q2 (similar sensor to the M10R). 

Again, to be clear, in no way am I saying that the M10 is a better camera than the M10R, rather, for my purposes, I prefer the M10. My advice to the OP is that he look at the plusses and minuses of both cameras, decide which of those plusses he wants and which minuses he wants to avoid, and then make an informed decision. Clearly for you, analyzing them lead you to buy the M10R which I expect was the right decision for you.

[Al Brown]

2 minutes ago, brickftl said:

I respect your opinion, however it is just an opinion. The photographer in the video I linked above has a different opinion. And to be clear, when I refer to better images, I'm not talking about non-sharp images due to operator error. I'm addressing the aesthetic issues that photographer pointed out, issues that I observed in images from my Q (same sensor as the M10) as compared to images from my Q2 (similar sensor to the M10R). 

Again, to be clear, in no way am I saying that the M10 is a better camera than the M10R, rather, for my purposes, I prefer the M10. My advice to the OP is that he look at the plusses and minuses of both cameras, decide which of those plusses he wants and which minuses he wants to avoid, and then make an informed decision. Clearly for you, analyzing them lead you to buy the M10R which I expect was the right decision for you.

No, I bought the M10-P after I had the M10-R. 
 

 

[brickftl]

14 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

No, I bought the M10-P after I had the M10-R. 
 

 

I'm unclear what part of my post you're saying no to.

Also that's very interesting that you bought a M10P after owning the M10R. If you don't mind sharing, it would be interesting and perhaps illuminating for the OP if you tell the reason why.

Edited February 22 by brickftl

[Al Brown]

38 minutes ago, brickftl said:

I'm unclear what part of my post you're saying no to.

Also that's very interesting that you bought a M10P after owning the M10R. If you don't mind sharing, it would be interesting and perhaps illuminating for the OP if you tell the reason why.

I’m not saying no to any part of your post.
I bought after because I collect and use special edition Ms and the M10-P Reporter - the last one of 450 made - popped up. My M10-R had 40.000 exposures made, I wanted something as a backup for when I need to send to Wetzlar and there were no new M10-R black paint cameras available anymore.

Edited February 22 by Al Brown

[brickftl]

1 hour ago, Al Brown said:

I’m not saying no to any part of your post.
I bought after because I collect and use special edition Ms and the M10-P Reporter - the last one of 450 made - popped up. My M10-R had 40.000 exposures made, I wanted something as a backup for when I need to send to Wetzlar and there were no new M10-R black paint cameras available anymore.

got it thanks

 

[lldd]

The guy in the video above has a later video where he recants his comments and then buys the M10R.  He then said the M10R is better than the M10 and the M11.  Then he buys an M11.  Hmmm...

[costa43]

If you put resolution to one side and just compare all other metrics, the m10r sensor is superior to the m10 sensor in every measurable metric. I would only go with the m10 sensor if you prefer a lower resolution camera and the added usability It gives you with smaller files and the use of a slightly lower shutter speed handheld. The other subjective reason is if you prefer the rendering. Outside of the sensor, the m10 has a better buffer by default and slightly better battery life and of course it’s a little cheaper if you go with the base model. I’m a fan of the lower resolution digital Leica cameras as I think they work better with vintage lenses and give me a look I enjoy more, a view that is not shared by many though. Saying that, I would not trade the m10r for any other Leica at the moment. I think it is their strongest offering. 

[ktmrider2]

Thanks for all the comments.  I almost purchased a Q3 instead of a M10R.  Actually, I decided to stay with film and have a new MP in black paint.

[Al Brown]

With M10-R the highlight recovery is already amazing. M10 does NOT do it to such extent.

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!

[JoshuaRothman]

Well, I decided to put this to the test. I came across a truly great deal on an M10-R and bought one. I'm now using it alongside my M10 on a trial basis. Observations so far:

• The improved highlight retention is real! And it does make some shots better, or at any rate easier to expose—for example photographs taken indoors with bright light coming in through the windows. I take a lot of photographs like this, and so this is a meaningful improvement for me.
• Perhaps because of the way I shoot, I'm not really cropping into any of my pictures. But I can clearly see that there is more detail available in the images. I'm not sure that this is making the photos better, as such, but it's there. On a few occasions I've pulled the Clarity slider to the left.
• I am finding that more of my wide-open shots are blurry at 100%. Rationally, I know that this shouldn't bother me, because I don't look at photos at 100%. But part of the fun of higher resolution is zooming in. I'm asking myself whether 24MP is the sweet spot for "pinch-to-zoom" on a rangefinder.
• I have shot a lot with the Q2, and never really loved the look of that sensor; it's always been a little too "crunchy" and "digital" for me. The M10-R sensor doesn't look that way to my eyes. But it certainly offers a more vivid, detailed look than the M10. 
• I have a sense that the colors are more neutral, and perhaps more beautiful. But actually my whole post-processing workflow needs to change with the 10-R, and I'm still struggling with PP, and so I can't say anything substantive about the colors.
• I really like the quiet shutter. (I knew I would, based on my M10M.)
• The biggest surprise has been the obvious strain placed upon my computers by the files. My M1 Mac Mini and iPad Pro, which felt thoroughly modern when I used them with the M10 and M10M, now seem really slow when I use Lightroom to edit the M10-R pictures. If I keep the M10-R, it may involve computer upgrades, which I didn't budget for. (For whatever reason, my M10M files don't seem as difficult for my computers to handle.)

I decided to give the M10-R a try in part to satisfy my curiosity once and for all. And, so far, I'm on the fence! This is obviously a great camera, but perhaps its benefits are more meaningful for landscapers than snap-shooters such as myself. I'm going to keep using it for another couple of weeks, and then decide. (The deal I got was good enough that, if I decide to sell it, I'll have lost a fairly small amount of money and can consider it a rental.)

So far, the closeness of the comparison between the M10 and M10-R, for my use—basically, everyday documentary photography—underscores what a good deal the M10 is, at least in Leicaland. But what I'm hoping for is a discernible improvement in the color rendering of the pictures—something roughly equivalent to the improvement I got for black and white images when I bought an M10M. If I see it (or maybe just think I see it, since who knows?), I may keep it.

Edited March 4 by JoshuaRothman

[Jeff S]

12 minutes ago, JoshuaRothman said:

 

• The biggest surprise has been the obvious strain placed upon my computers by the files. My M1 Mac Mini and iPad Pro, which felt thoroughly modern when I used them with the M10 and M10M, now seem really slow when I use Lightroom to edit the M10-R pictures. If I keep the M10-R, it may involve computer upgrades, which I didn't budget for. (For whatever reason, my M10M files don't seem as difficult for my computers to handle.)

 

Maybe something here will apply..

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[MarkPS]

On 2/18/2024 at 6:30 PM, ktmrider2 said:

I have the opportunity to pick up a new M10R for US$6250 and am wondering if it is still worth it or should I look at the M11?  I have been using Leicas from as far back as 1975 with my purchase of a Leica CL.  I have owned all the Leica film cameras up to and including the M6TTL.  I have also owned the M9 and MP240 which I sold about three years ago.  My present Leica is a mint black M4.  My digital system is a Fuji X-T5 and a Ricoh GR3.

Now, I am also considering a Leica MP or MA as I prefer film but processing is turning in a PIA.  If I picked up a digital Leica (have five M mount lenses), I would sell the Fuji.  Have been looking at lots of You Tube videos and have not yet handled either M10R or M11.  I have to say I enjoy the whole process of using the M4 and film.  But I also appreciate technology and the Fuji has produced some amazing results.  I usually just set it to auto everything and just monitor exposure information in the viewfinder.  So I enjoy both old school (if I buy film body it will be MA) but don't mind the camera setting the exposure. 

I am a retired pilot who is 71 years old.  I do a lot of traveling and most of my photography is either travel or family related.  I can afford Leica but kind of turned off by the "jewelry" aspect.  I know the ultimate decision is mine but am looking for any and all input.  I can see advantages to traveling with digital but it is hard to beat the enjoyment of using a Leica.  Thanks!

I bought my M10R from Adorama for $5600 about a year ago with a six month store warranty..  It is a really good camera but in some ways unforgiving.  You need steady hands to use a 40MP camera.  I also have a FUJI XT2 with several lenses.  IMHO they have completely different uses. My FUJI is more of a day to day camera. I am considering a M11 but am not sure that I will gain very much from getting one. 40MP files are huge and have a lot of pixels for cropping.