should I get a M10M

[brickftl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

background: I'm a rangefinder newbie, bought a M10 3 weeks ago (haven't shot manual focus since shooting Tri-X on my manual focus Canon AE1 about 45 years ago), absolutely love it and am hooked. Love shooting it in color, no complaints. Also, although I've done plenty of landscape photography (including traveling to New Zealand last November with a bunch of photogs), in my heart I'm a street shooter.

Last night I went downtown, shot a bunch of images at f2 (widest aperture of my cv 35/23 ultron), they're posted at this link. https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2024-2-24-Key-West-eveningnight-/n-K5jRc7

The first two were shot at ISO 200, then one at 800, then the rest either 1600 or 3200. Oh, and my previous worries about not having bought the M10R with its increased low light performance went away when I looked at my images after running them through DXO Raw Prime.

I was never really into black/white, but after converting last nights images from color to black/white (and please chime in with critique if you think my processing is too heavy handed), I'm sort of hooked, not to replace shooting color which I also love (examples with my M10 here: https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2024-2-23-Key-West-garden-club), but as an adjunct when I'm in a black/white mood. 

So my question is how much better could I expect last night's photos would have been had I shot with a M10M paired with a faster lens? I've read that the M10M tonality and overall aesthetic is well beyond what I could produce with color images processed as black/white.

Any thoughts on me getting a M10M as a second camera together with faster lens? And when you ponder that question, related to it was that I had a really tough time focusing my M10 in low light, I had trouble making out the 2 images in the viewfinder as I tried to bring them together with the focus ring.

 

Edited February 24 by brickftl

[dpitt]

Great images! I do not have a M10M, but in general you could expect to have 1-2 stops extra in ISO performance from a monochrom.

I think that I can see a small difference between shots at 200 and 800 ISO, compared to the 1600 and 3200 ISO shots. Not so much in extra noise, but in reduced dynamic range.
Now, I am still using 2 oldies like the M8 and M9 which sill struggle much more with high ISO. In very low light, I often use a well known trick on this forum for better results.
Using your M at base ISO and underexposing by a few stops is often better than exposing properly with higher ISO.

It is important to find the actual best ISO value for your camera. For my M9 and M8 it is ISO 160, for the M10 it looks like its more like ISO 320.
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm
Although I am sure ISO 200 will also be very good.

So, next time when you are indoors you could do this:

1. Set ISO at base ISO 200 (or maybe 320 / not auto ISO)
   It will only work at the base ISO, if you try a middel value like ISO 800 or higher, it will probably not be as good.
2. Set camera to DNG or DNG + JPG
   You will need the flexibility of DNG to make this work
3. Set your lens wide open
4. Choose the minimum shutter time to avoid motion blurr. Depending on the lens used and technique, you will end up with something between 1/16 and 1/60.

Now just shoot away, regardless, and your images will probably be underexposed. In my case, sometimes the back screen when reviewing will be almost black.
In PP you can now use the HDR sliders shadows and highlights to control the light. And in most cases you can add +1 to +3 with the exposure slider too.

The advantage is that for my M9 ISO 160  +3 is at least as good as ISO1280. And in some cases you will see in PP that you only need +2 to make it work. If you would have shot at ISO 1280 yo would have wasted one stop of noise.

Then with DXO prime results could be improved even more. I never tried/needed that.

Edited February 24 by dpitt

[Advertisement]

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

[brickftl]

thanks, I'll try that. I was thinking of a cap at 800 ISO based on something I read that the M10 can well handle that without too much noise.

[dpitt]

8 minutes ago, brickftl said:

thanks, I'll try that. I was thinking of a cap at 800 ISO based on something I read that the M10 can well handle that without too much noise.

You will probably find that ISO 200 +2 stops works better than ISO 800. And yes, there is a limit of acceptible noise, but this way you are sure you did not overdo it and on top of that it helps against clipping the highlights.

ISO 200 and F2.0 at 1/15 will do most of the time, maybe create a test situation for yourself indoors and test how far you can go with the M10 in really low light.

Edited February 24 by dpitt

[JTLeica]

3 hours ago, brickftl said:

thanks, I'll try that. I was thinking of a cap at 800 ISO based on something I read that the M10 can well handle that without too much noise.

Don’t do that, you can’t rescue a blurred image but you can rescue a noisy image. Exposure the image as brightly as you can without losing any data and you’ll end up with less noise overall, as noise isn’t just ISO based it’s light based mostly 

Edited February 24 by JTLeica

[AceVentura1986]

23 hours ago, brickftl said:

background: I'm a rangefinder newbie, bought a M10 3 weeks ago (haven't shot manual focus since shooting Tri-X on my manual focus Canon AE1 about 45 years ago), absolutely love it and am hooked. Love shooting it in color, no complaints. Also, although I've done plenty of landscape photography (including traveling to New Zealand last November with a bunch of photogs), in my heart I'm a street shooter.

Last night I went downtown, shot a bunch of images at f2 (widest aperture of my cv 35/23 ultron), they're posted at this link. https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2024-2-24-Key-West-eveningnight-/n-K5jRc7

The first two were shot at ISO 200, then one at 800, then the rest either 1600 or 3200. Oh, and my previous worries about not having bought the M10R with its increased low light performance went away when I looked at my images after running them through DXO Raw Prime.

I was never really into black/white, but after converting last nights images from color to black/white (and please chime in with critique if you think my processing is too heavy handed), I'm sort of hooked, not to replace shooting color which I also love (examples with my M10 here: https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2024-2-23-Key-West-garden-club), but as an adjunct when I'm in a black/white mood. 

So my question is how much better could I expect last night's photos would have been had I shot with a M10M paired with a faster lens? I've read that the M10M tonality and overall aesthetic is well beyond what I could produce with color images processed as black/white.

Any thoughts on me getting a M10M as a second camera together with faster lens? And when you ponder that question, related to it was that I had a really tough time focusing my M10 in low light, I had trouble making out the 2 images in the viewfinder as I tried to bring them together with the focus ring.

 

I’ve come at this from a different angle. I just got an M10M but have shot w M9 and M9M for ten years, so I can identify w having both versions of the same camera: common batteries, common chargers, common UI and controls. Having both ensures flexibility too. However, chances are you’ll favor one over the other. 

I got my M9 first and then my M9M 3 years later. Since acquiring the M9M, I shot the M9 very infrequently. I don’t regret it, tho, as even w the M9 I tended to be a BW shooter. The M9M files are way more malleable and have greater dynamic range and lower noise than the M9 files. That same dynamic probably holds true for the M10 vs M10M files. 

I gather you’re the opposite of me, tho, a color shooter who maybe dabbles in BW occasionally. In that case, getting the M10M comes down to cost as even used they’re pricey. 

Can you get “better” BW pictures from an M10M over the M10? Probably. Is it worth the extra $5,000 - $7,000 k for the experience and slightly better files? Only if you’re a dedicated BW shooter, as I am. 

For most shooters, a BW conversion in Lightroom will suffice. 

All that said, the M10M is a FANTASTIC camera. I love mine but YMMV. 

[brickftl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

59 minutes ago, AceVentura1986 said:

I’ve come at this from a different angle. I just got an M10M but have shot w M9 and M9M for ten years, so I can identify w having both versions of the same camera: common batteries, common chargers, common UI and controls. Having both ensures flexibility too. However, chances are you’ll favor one over the other. 

I got my M9 first and then my M9M 3 years later. Since acquiring the M9M, I shot the M9 very infrequently. I don’t regret it, tho, as even w the M9 I tended to be a BW shooter. The M9M files are way more malleable and have greater dynamic range and lower noise than the M9 files. That same dynamic probably holds true for the M10 vs M10M files. 

I gather you’re the opposite of me, tho, a color shooter who maybe dabbles in BW occasionally. In that case, getting the M10M comes down to cost as even used they’re pricey. 

Can you get “better” BW pictures from an M10M over the M10? Probably. Is it worth the extra $5,000 - $7,000 k for the experience and slightly better files? Only if you’re a dedicated BW shooter, as I am. 

For most shooters, a BW conversion in Lightroom will suffice. 

All that said, the M10M is a FANTASTIC camera. I love mine but YMMV. 

thanks for that. After much consideration I've decided to forego getting the M10M, and instead am going to spend a boatload on a faster lens - Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH 2022 Version. The extra stop of light from my current f2 lens should improve my b/w conversions sufficiently that getting a M10M isn't needed.

[Jeff S]

The primary benefit of the Monochrom cameras I’ve owned (M9M, M10M) has been to provide a different shooting mindset, not because of IQ differences from color-based counterparts. Because they don’t produce color (software-based neural filters aside), I’m not distracted by looking for or thinking about potential color pics.  Much like the experience from my B&W film days.  
 

I own an M10R as well, but never use it alongside the M10M, which would defeat this purpose.  I can produce superb.. or mediocre.. prints using either camera, mostly because of me, not the gear.  That said, one does need to learn how to adjust methods to optimize results when using different tools.

Jeff

[Olaf_ZG]

On 2/24/2024 at 3:04 PM, brickftl said:

background: I'm a rangefinder newbie, bought a M10 3 weeks ago (haven't shot manual focus since shooting Tri-X on my manual focus Canon AE1 about 45 years ago), absolutely love it and am hooked. Love shooting it in color, no complaints. Also, although I've done plenty of landscape photography (including traveling to New Zealand last November with a bunch of photogs), in my heart I'm a street shooter.

Last night I went downtown, shot a bunch of images at f2 (widest aperture of my cv 35/23 ultron), they're posted at this link. https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2024-2-24-Key-West-eveningnight-/n-K5jRc7

The first two were shot at ISO 200, then one at 800, then the rest either 1600 or 3200. Oh, and my previous worries about not having bought the M10R with its increased low light performance went away when I looked at my images after running them through DXO Raw Prime.

I was never really into black/white, but after converting last nights images from color to black/white (and please chime in with critique if you think my processing is too heavy handed), I'm sort of hooked, not to replace shooting color which I also love (examples with my M10 here: https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2024-2-23-Key-West-garden-club), but as an adjunct when I'm in a black/white mood. 

So my question is how much better could I expect last night's photos would have been had I shot with a M10M paired with a faster lens? I've read that the M10M tonality and overall aesthetic is well beyond what I could produce with color images processed as black/white.

Any thoughts on me getting a M10M as a second camera together with faster lens? And when you ponder that question, related to it was that I had a really tough time focusing my M10 in low light, I had trouble making out the 2 images in the viewfinder as I tried to bring them together with the focus ring.

 

I took a look at the first link, great images… but, one in color. So, no, dont buy a mm.

[JoshuaRothman]

I own an M10 and an M10M. When I bought the M10M, I could immediately see the difference in the files, but I wasn't sure if I'd keep it. I held onto it because I hoped to explore the "mindset" that @Jeff S mentions, with which I was familiar from shooting film. I wanted a digital equivalent to the experience of shooting Tri-X.

In fact, I've ended up using the M10M in a different way. Essentially, it's my low light camera. It mostly comes out after dark. Over the holidays, I used it to photograph a lot of family gatherings; even in dim light I could shoot at f/8, allowing me to capture a big complicated party using layered compositions. I've made many special pictures of my kids using the M10M in very dim light. I love the way these pictures look. I own a 21mm f/3.4 SEM. I now use this lens indoors at night for moving subjects, without flash. I rarely did this with my M10.

Sometimes I take the M10M out during the day, often with a fairly slow (and small) lens. I've done some traveling with it; I like how I can put a 28 f/2.8 Elmarit ASPH on the camera and get incredible results in all kinds of light. I also sometimes put a 50mm lens on the M10M and set out to make beautiful portraits.

Overall, however, I haven't developed the "mindset"; I just use the M10M when the light is right. I love black and white pictures and love the results from the camera. It's a keeper for me. I'm about 65% with the M10, 35% with the M10M.

Edited February 26 by JoshuaRothman

[250swb]

On 2/24/2024 at 2:04 PM, brickftl said:

 

Any thoughts on me getting a M10M as a second camera together with faster lens? And when you ponder that question, related to it was that I had a really tough time focusing my M10 in low light, I had trouble making out the 2 images in the viewfinder as I tried to bring them together with the focus ring.

 

I think you just need to improve your B&W post processing and leave the M10M on the shelf. You don't need to use a monochrome camera to 'see' in B&W because we can imagine in B&W instead. That's how it was always done, you see something with your colour vision and imagine it in B&W. Before long you'll know in advance which images you'll be converting to B&W in post. For night shots set the camera and the ISO to Auto and use a smaller aperture if you can to cover any miss focusing. 

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

You don't need to use a monochrome camera to 'see' in B&W because we can imagine in B&W instead. That's how it was always done, you see something with your colour vision and imagine it in B&W. 

Just to be clear, that’s not what I’m referring to when I refer to B&W mindset. I can ‘see’ equally well in B&W when using any camera; the world is after all in color, and requires B&W imagination, regardless of camera.
 

The benefit of a Monochrom camera for me is that I’m not distracted by also looking for or considering pics that would look good as a color picture while using it.  I’m only concentrating on making B&W pics, just as when I loaded B&W film.  Color pics require a different visual approach for me. This focus is what creates my B&W mindset, not the ability to ‘see’ in B&W.  Two very different issues for me. 

Jeff 

[sometimesmaybe]

On 2/26/2024 at 1:31 AM, brickftl said:

thanks for that. After much consideration I've decided to forego getting the M10M, and instead am going to spend a boatload on a faster lens - Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH 2022 Version. The extra stop of light from my current f2 lens should improve my b/w conversions sufficiently that getting a M10M isn't needed.

i think that's very wise. 

if you need more speed, the CV Nokton 35mm f1.2 v3 is worth considering. it's not too big and it gives you 1.5 stops of additional light over the Ultron. unless you can use the RF in dim light, a visoflex might also help 

  

[brickftl]

27 minutes ago, sometimesmaybe said:

i unless you can use the RF in dim light, a visoflex might also help 

  

I'm actually going to try that. I used the live view combined with magnification yesterday when I was inside some bars and it enabled me to snap some pretty decent pics. Since then I realized the M10 has focus peeking, so I turned it on too.

[Stevejack]

I think black and white is far more about the quality of light, rather than the quantity. Sure it can look ok in very low light, when colours would otherwise appear muddy, and you can definitely push the files more in post without them falling apart. But colour has the definite advantage in low contrast scenes where the luminance values are not as easily separated from one another. 

I made the switch to the monochrom after realising that the vast majority of my colour images were converted to black and white. I just prefer it - but I also prefer the type of lighting that suits black and white most; high contrast scenes with lots of deep shadows and interesting areas of light. When I'm out with a camera I'm always drawn to the light first and foremost. How the light is painting the subject. Colour is hardly considered when I have a camera in hand, so it's an easy choice for me. 

In my studio work I light the subject specifically for black and white.  People sometimes ask me to supply a colour version of a particular image and I have to apologise and refuse, because in colour the lighting setup I use just doesn't look good, especially on skin tones - it's too 'crunchy'. 

The other side of it is that colour is just a lot harder, especially in street. To make a successful colour image takes a lot more experience and you have more to juggle in your composition. I think maybe as I gain more experience as a photographer and learn more about colour theory, I'll start really enjoying the challenge of shooting in colour. For now I just prefer to think and shoot in black and white. 

Edited February 27 by Stevejack

[250swb]

On 2/25/2024 at 2:31 PM, brickftl said:

thanks for that. After much consideration I've decided to forego getting the M10M, and instead am going to spend a boatload on a faster lens - Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH 2022 Version. The extra stop of light from my current f2 lens should improve my b/w conversions sufficiently that getting a M10M isn't needed.

But a Summilux isn't going to make focusing easier, what it will do is make focusing far more critical if used wide open and you are likely to have more missed focus shots especially in low light. It will also not make the B&W conversions any better. Look up Depth of Field (DOF) tables for different lenses. An example, if you are five meters away from your subject at f/1.4 you only have a total of 1.77 meters DOF either side (one third in front and two thirds behind) of the critical focus point. So if you can focus accurately on your subject (it's light enough, they aren't moving, etc) anyone or any thing outside of a 1.77 meter depth (more or less) will be out of focus and anything up to that point will render increasingly softer. But at f/2 that goes out to 2.5 meters depth. So even if you set the lens to the hyperfocal distance a subject at 5 meters will be in an area of 'acceptable sharpness' (and only you can judge what is acceptable) from between 4.3 meters and 6 meters, and still only one thing will be tack sharp, except using the hyperfocal scale you won't know exactly what that thing will be until you chimp the shot.

 

Edited February 27 by 250swb

[JTLeica]

On 2/25/2024 at 2:31 PM, brickftl said:

thanks for that. After much consideration I've decided to forego getting the M10M, and instead am going to spend a boatload on a faster lens - Leica Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH 2022 Version. The extra stop of light from my current f2 lens should improve my b/w conversions sufficiently that getting a M10M isn't needed.

Before shelling out a tonne on the lens, consider a few other options Brick, the 35 ASPH while a lovely lens, is not really head and shoulders above the competition...

Consider these:

35mm Zeiss F1.4 Distagon - All round better than the Leica by some way, higher contrast (may help your BW conversions too), but larger than the Leica

35mm Voigtlander Nokton II - Close to the Leica performance, maybe a slightly softer mid frame (reported by some) - Wouldnt matter if you are shooting wide open portraits etc

35mm Voigtlander F1.2 III - The third iteration is superb! Probably as good at the Leica and half a stop faster, and cheaper, and larger but not too large.

Just thought I would help delay your decision and confuse you a little more, Brick 😬

[KFo]

I do have the 35 Summilux Asph, the one before the integrated lens hood...nice lens and useful in low light if you feel that you need it.  Can't comment on the CV or Zeiss in that regard.

Focusing in the dark is a challenge, but with practice combined with a knowledge of zone focus, distance estimation and the range finder you can overcome it without wasting time with LV or a accessory view finder.

I do shot BW alot on my M10P.  Particularly at night or marginal (mixed light sources).  For my thing I find the M10P completely satisfactory in this regard.  At night I do not endeavor to reveal  all the details in shadows.  Thats part of the atmosphere...  I am not certain that your images would benefit from a greater tonal range.

I do run my M10P with .jpg on and set to BW so I get BW previews (when chimping for example) and a set of low overhead easily reviewed BW images when I download.  Sometimes the .jpgs are the keepers as well.  It might be worth a try if night is only an occasional foray for you. 

[brickftl]

3 hours ago, KFo said:

I do have the 35 Summilux Asph, the one before the integrated lens hood...nice lens and useful in low light if you feel that you need it.  Can't comment on the CV or Zeiss in that regard.

Focusing in the dark is a challenge, but with practice combined with a knowledge of zone focus, distance estimation and the range finder you can overcome it without wasting time with LV or a accessory view finder.

I do shot BW alot on my M10P.  Particularly at night or marginal (mixed light sources).  For my thing I find the M10P completely satisfactory in this regard.  At night I do not endeavor to reveal  all the details in shadows.  Thats part of the atmosphere...  I am not certain that your images would benefit from a greater tonal range.

I do run my M10P with .jpg on and set to BW so I get BW previews (when chimping for example) and a set of low overhead easily reviewed BW images when I download.  Sometimes the .jpgs are the keepers as well.  It might be worth a try if night is only an occasional foray for you. 

I've reached the same conclusion as you, so I'm sticking with the M10 which by the way I'm absolutely in love with. I like the deep shadows and find that the improve the overall look as opposed to lifting them which sometimes makes the image look a bit flat.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[brickftl]

5 hours ago, JTLeica said:

Before shelling out a tonne on the lens, consider a few other options Brick, the 35 ASPH while a lovely lens, is not really head and shoulders above the competition...

Consider these:

35mm Zeiss F1.4 Distagon - All round better than the Leica by some way, higher contrast (may help your BW conversions too), but larger than the Leica

35mm Voigtlander Nokton II - Close to the Leica performance, maybe a slightly softer mid frame (reported by some) - Wouldnt matter if you are shooting wide open portraits etc

35mm Voigtlander F1.2 III - The third iteration is superb! Probably as good at the Leica and half a stop faster, and cheaper, and larger but not too large.

Just thought I would help delay your decision and confuse you a little more, Brick 😬

thanks for that info. Interestingly, I had the Zeiss with adapter on my Sony A7rii years ago and thought it was absolutely superb. To me it achieved that moody, excellent micro contrast look that I've come to love with Leica images. But I ended up selling it because at that time I hadn't embraced manual focus (and my TechArt adapter which was supposed to make it auto focus worked only about 20% of the time) and also because it's too heavy. That said, below is an image I took with it that achieves the look I love. Also, I can't argue with your comments on the cv 35/1.2 but rejected it because first it is a bigger lens than the summilux, and I'm trying to pare down weight/size as much as possible because my silver M10 isn't exactly light, but second, at this stage in my life, I can afford the summilux and, well, I just want a top notch Leica lens. The only other lens I'll probably get is the summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph, either version 2 or 3. And for my purposes, those 2 lenses are all I want or need. Again, thanks for commenting.

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!