Thinking about getting a Leica m10-r next week.

[Le Chef]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wish I could join you on this adventure, but every time I pick up a 10 or 10R I’m frustrated by the lens blocking the bottom right hand corner of the OVF. The idea of seeing “outside” the frame lines is lovely but when a third of the OVF is blocked by the (35 or 50) lens this seems a little tongue in cheek. I can’t see how there could be a remedy other than using the Visoflex or Live View on the LCD which seems to defeat the idea of an OVF.

Is there one?

Edited May 13, 2024 by Le Chef

[Advertisement]

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

[lencap]

OP -  You seem to have a clear idea of what you want, and that's a great start.  You mentioned that you're 65 years old, and I came to a similar decision when I was a bit younger, several years ago.  I wanted to return to the M body (film/M7) and did years ago after shooting many different cameras over the years. At first things were pretty good, just a learning curve about parallax composition challenges.  Then problems I discovered along the way, for me, made things more challenging and less fun.  It was related to aging more than desire/skill.  I developed cataracts, along with some deterioration in my eyes creating "floaters", a now permanent situation that surgery didn't eliminate.  My eyeglass lenses address astigmatism and other issues, making it difficult to use the eyeglasses easily - fogging in humid conditions, flare from astigmatism, etc.

The combination of these challenges made it difficult to enjoy the primary benefit (in my opinion) of small Leica lenses - shooting wide open to get the bokeh that the lenses are famous for.  Getting critical focus with a Summilux (or even Summicron) quickly with great accuracy repeatedly, for me, proved much harder than I anticipated.  I found that I shifted to hypercritical focusing to avoid the many missed shots.  That worked, and frankly that's what early Leica shooters used when shooting documentary subjects, but that shooting style created a very different image.  The shots were fine and well composed, but the greater depth of field didn't isolate the subjects as I intended.  The problem grew worse as the FL increased.  Trying out 75/90mm FL lenses resulted in selecting f/5.6-f/8 aperture settings to get any semblance of focus, and even then it was hit or miss.  

My eyesight is the limiting factor, not the camera or the lens.   But because of my eyesight the M body experience became far less enjoyable than I hoped.  It can be done, but it isn't easy.  It also had me changing ISO settings to offset the closed down aperture settings, which in turn also affected my final image.

The bottom line is that as much as I want to use the M body and a 50mm Summilux, the reality is that I get far better images and composition with the SL body/lenses.  I know, it's not an M, and I still desperately want an M, but Mother Nature seems to be winning this debate.  I also tried a Fuji, but didn't find it as satisfying as a true M body camera.  Same issue with the Q, great size, but the 28mm FL was very challenging in terms of avoiding distortion and framing a more narrow image.  I wound up with a lot of cropping/editing, somewhat negating the whole point of FF shooting.  The Fuji's 35mm FL equivalent was a better fit for my style, but the images still required cropping/editing, and the color tones for people were fine, but not for landscape.  Their S-Trans sensor is the reason, at least it seems to be. 

Give some thought to how you compose, your preferred aperture, and FL.  From there see how your photos are actually shot.  If you're primarily a 50mm shooter, maybe the M will work, and maybe the Summicron will sacrifice some bokeh magic for more flexibility in composition and a higher "hit rate".  If your eyesight is fine now, enjoy the M world - it's wonderful, just be aware than changing eyesight may cause you to make some changes in the future.

Edited May 13, 2024 by lencap

[otto.f]

3 hours ago, lencap said:

OP -  You seem to have a clear idea of what you want, and that's a great start.  You mentioned that you're 65 years old, and I came to a similar decision when I was a bit younger, several years ago.  I wanted to return to the M body (film/M7) and did years ago after shooting many different cameras over the years. At first things were pretty good, just a learning curve about parallax composition challenges.  Then problems I discovered along the way, for me, made things more challenging and less fun.  It was related to aging more than desire/skill.  I developed cataracts, along with some deterioration in my eyes creating "floaters", a now permanent situation that surgery didn't eliminate.  My eyeglass lenses address astigmatism and other issues, making it difficult to use the eyeglasses easily - fogging in humid conditions, flare from astigmatism, etc.

The combination of these challenges made it difficult to enjoy the primary benefit (in my opinion) of small Leica lenses - shooting wide open to get the bokeh that the lenses are famous for.  Getting critical focus with a Summilux (or even Summicron) quickly with great accuracy repeatedly, for me, proved much harder than I anticipated.  I found that I shifted to hypercritical focusing to avoid the many missed shots.  That worked, and frankly that's what early Leica shooters used when shooting documentary subjects, but that shooting style created a very different image.  The shots were fine and well composed, but the greater depth of field didn't isolate the subjects as I intended.  The problem grew worse as the FL increased.  Trying out 75/90mm FL lenses resulted in selecting f/5.6-f/8 aperture settings to get any semblance of focus, and even then it was hit or miss.  

My eyesight is the limiting factor, not the camera or the lens.   But because of my eyesight the M body experience became far less enjoyable than I hoped.  It can be done, but it isn't easy.  It also had me changing ISO settings to offset the closed down aperture settings, which in turn also affected my final image.

The bottom line is that as much as I want to use the M body and a 50mm Summilux, the reality is that I get far better images and composition with the SL body/lenses.  I know, it's not an M, and I still desperately want an M, but Mother Nature seems to be winning this debate.  I also tried a Fuji, but didn't find it as satisfying as a true M body camera.  Same issue with the Q, great size, but the 28mm FL was very challenging in terms of avoiding distortion and framing a more narrow image.  I wound up with a lot of cropping/editing, somewhat negating the whole point of FF shooting.  The Fuji's 35mm FL equivalent was a better fit for my style, but the images still required cropping/editing, and the color tones for people were fine, but not for landscape.  Their S-Trans sensor is the reason, at least it seems to be. 

Give some thought to how you compose, your preferred aperture, and FL.  From there see how your photos are actually shot.  If you're primarily a 50mm shooter, maybe the M will work, and maybe the Summicron will sacrifice some bokeh magic for more flexibility in composition and a higher "hit rate".  If your eyesight is fine now, enjoy the M world - it's wonderful, just be aware than changing eyesight may cause you to make some changes in the future.

Old guys can also have back problems, a thing to consider when thinking of SL, I had to sell it because of that. In situations where the OVF of the M10-R  is a bit difficult for my old eyes I use the EVF

[dpitt]

3 hours ago, Le Chef said:

I wish I could join you on this adventure, but every time I pick up a 10 or 10R I’m frustrated by the lens blocking the bottom right hand corner of the OVF. The idea of seeing “outside” the frame lines is lovely but when a third of the OVF is blocked by the (35 or 50) lens this seems a little tongue in cheek. I can’t see how there could be a remedy other than using the Visoflex or Live View on the LCD which seems to defeat the idea of an OVF.

Is there one?

Yes, there is a solution. 
Of course, I can see most of my lenses in the lower right corner of the VF, but most of them never block anything inside the frame.

I bought the M8 and M9 because I wanted to have a capable FF camera without the bulk that usually comes with it. When I discovered that an M9 with lens mounted could fit in my pocket I looked for tiny lenses mostly. Carrying it like this is very convenient IMO...

So, lenses like the Summicron 35, Summicron 40C became my favorite. And with this size you never cover the 35mm frame. Later I bought the Summicron 50 v4 and the Macro Elmar 90. These are not pocketable, but very small and light for their class and they also do not cover their frame at all. Some 28mm lenses and other 35 mm lenses like the Summiluxes have the same tiny size.

I now have a few lenses like the Summicron 90 mm that do cover a large area of the VF. But because of weight and size alone, they do not feel like real M lenses to me. They feel more at home on my SL.

So, maybe I am not so frustrated by lens blocking as you, but there is little to get frustrated about because I chose for compactness in the first place. Seeing outside the frame is essential to me, seeing in the bottom right corner of the VF less so.

[charlesphoto99]

13 hours ago, Le Chef said:

I wish I could join you on this adventure, but every time I pick up a 10 or 10R I’m frustrated by the lens blocking the bottom right hand corner of the OVF. The idea of seeing “outside” the frame lines is lovely but when a third of the OVF is blocked by the (35 or 50) lens this seems a little tongue in cheek. I can’t see how there could be a remedy other than using the Visoflex or Live View on the LCD which seems to defeat the idea of an OVF.

Is there one?

Yes. Use an slr or mirrorless camera. M's have never been about being seeing exactly what you'll get (how could they, not viewing through the lens itself?) but instead about the magic and mystery of discovery after the fact of the moment captured. They are about simplicity in regard to speed of use. It's why Cartier-Bresson called his book the Decisive Moment and not the Decisive Framing. That said, once one works with an M for awhile, one gets to understand where things fall within and without the frame, and blockage of the frame just isn't ever a concern or even a passing thought to me, in the least. It would be a very rare shot where I would place an important subject in that bottom 1/20 of the finder with say my 50 'lux. 

M is for Mindset, and unfortunately Leica has tried their best to dispel that notion by adding gizmos to the latest iterations to try and make it more less so and and more like all the other camera out there. Dispel yourself of the notion that it should act like an SLR or EVF, and you'll go a long ways to bonding with the M experience. 

[Lelmer]

15 hours ago, Le Chef said:

I wish I could join you on this adventure, but every time I pick up a 10 or 10R I’m frustrated by the lens blocking the bottom right hand corner of the OVF.

....

After some time, you don't notice it anymore...and with most lenses (i.e. 50 mm Summilux), it is negligible 🙂

[Le Chef]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Yes. Use an slr or mirrorless camera.

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt, got the video. That was 40 years ago. I will try again with an M as my AD has been very helpful, but otherwise will stick to my Q3 and CL and bag of lenses.

[Mikep996]

" I also have a deposit on a Q3 but my heart tugs for the Leica m-mount so I may cancel the Q3 order and get the m10r. "

 

If you are talking about just taking photographs: From many years of shooting Leica Ms - film and digital - my last trip (10 days to Italy)  I took my M10R with 28/50/90 lenses and my Q2.  I split the days between them - never carried both at the same time.  I finished that trip deciding that the Q2 could be my "only" digital camera.  The Q2 produced more "good" pics than the 10R did, EVEN when cropping the Q2 image to an equal size of the 10R/various lenses.  I will readily admit that some of that could have been due to the ease of using the Q2 vs some missed focus shots with the 50mm 1.4 Lux.  

Obviously there can be more involved in the choice.  If you've always wanted a Leica M, than a Q won't satisfy that "need."  If you think you will be making wall prints of the images then a cropped Q image to a 90mm equivalent won't be sufficient though on a computer screen you won't see any meaningful difference unless you enlarge further on screen to pixel peep.  I've done that specific comparison - 90mm M10R vs cropped Q2 -  many times.  Nobody picks out one over the other consistently ON A COMPUTER SCREEN.  A print is a different deal.

Of course, there is a lot to be said for the way an M feels - I don't think any other 35mm-size camera has that great feel in the hand.  Might be good to borrow/rent an M if you can to see if you really enjoy what it offers.  The key to me with the Leica M has always been that I ENJOYED shooting with it more than any other small camera. That was the main point for me I had more FUN using it compared to other 35mm film/full frame digital cameras.  

Apropos of nothing...Not sure how we managed to take a small film format like 35mm and now refer to it as full frame.  I shoot 4x5 film and "full frame" (35mm) film looks like "barely any frame" film in comparison!   But that's a different, and unrelated subject.

[Le Chef]

I still look over my shoulder to my first “real” camera bought in 1980 which was an Olympus OM2. It was easy to shoot with manual focus obviously, compact, and blessed with simplicity of controls. I’m currently happy with my Q3 and CL. I can shoot manually but it’s not as enjoyable as the old Olympus or how I always thought an M would be. Focusing is no issue - still have muscle memory - it’s the darned lens photobombing the OVF that is a distraction that irritates me.

[dpitt]

2 hours ago, Le Chef said:

I still look over my shoulder to my first “real” camera bought in 1980 which was an Olympus OM2. It was easy to shoot with manual focus obviously, compact, and blessed with simplicity of controls. I’m currently happy with my Q3 and CL. I can shoot manually but it’s not as enjoyable as the old Olympus or how I always thought an M would be. Focusing is no issue - still have muscle memory - it’s the darned lens photobombing the OVF that is a distraction that irritates me.

IMO the M range is the only system  for FF sold today that is designed for MF. All the others are AF designs and some also allow for MF...

e.g. In the OM2 days (for me my Nikon FE) we always automatically focused with max aperture, and we had half moons and prisms to help with critical focus. Now, all we get is a OVF and ground glass optimised for F4 (in case of general DSLR) or focus peaking. Both are inadequate with fast lenses. 
Other than the M system, which is a joy to use for MF, the only thing that works for me is magnification, and sometimes I have to manually open/stop down the lens to be sure focus is perfect.

Edited May 16, 2024 by dpitt

[RexGig0]

On 5/12/2024 at 8:36 PM, Le Chef said:

I wish I could join you on this adventure, but every time I pick up a 10 or 10R I’m frustrated by the lens blocking the bottom right hand corner of the OVF. The idea of seeing “outside” the frame lines is lovely but when a third of the OVF is blocked by the (35 or 50) lens this seems a little tongue in cheek. I can’t see how there could be a remedy other than using the Visoflex or Live View on the LCD which seems to defeat the idea of an OVF.

Is there one?

Yes, there is a remedy. Several remedies. First, avoid locating one’s subject in the blocked portion of the frame.

Secondly, we can choose a compact lens, that does not block the viewfinder.

Thirdly, whenever feasible, shoot with both eyes open. One eye, usually one’s “dominant eye,” uses the viewfinder. One’s other eye is available for scanning the landscape. I kept both eyes open while shooting SLRs and DSLRs, so, continuing to do so with rangefinders seemed normal. Unfortunately, I am “left eye dominant,” so, when holding an M camera horizontally, the camera body, itself, blocks much of my view. A remedy, for left-eyed shooters, is to tilt one’s head to the left, lowering the left eye, and the camera, until the right eye can see over the top of the camera. Another remedy is to learn to favor vertically-oriented images. 😉

Those of us who operate motor vehicles know that we cannot see the roadway, that is in the area blocked by the front of our vehicles. The same principle applies, when using a Leica M camera, whether it is the lens, or the camera body, that is blocking part of our view.

Then, there are optical viewfinders, and electronic viewfinders, that can be inserted into the flash shoe.

Finally, there is the simple technique, developed through experience, of “instinctive shooting,” looking over or past the camera, to compose the shot. Often done when one has distance/scale focused, rather than using the rangefinder to focus, it also works when ones first focuses with the rangefinder, when looks over/past the camera to compose.

[colonel]

On 5/8/2024 at 1:21 PM, AllenB said:When I do pull the trigger on the m10r which may be next week, I'm looking to purchase one or two lenses to get me started, a 28mm and a 50mm (which will travel well with my x100VI) and was wondering which non-Leica 28mm and 50mm folks would consider.  I've been researching some Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses and many seem to match up well with the Leica lenses from what I've read.

I would never travel with two camera systems, thats just me. Before you go on any extensive trip, I would use the M10 alot. Decide if it works for you. The X100IV has inferior sharpness and detail (even with seemingly more MP) , but it is AF. It is a not a camera I would recommend for sport, but nevertheless if you want any kind of tracking you wont get that with the M10.

Leica RF, for travel photography that included moving targets (e.g. street). is all about pre-emption and to a certain extent pre-focus.

 

[AllenB]

On 5/29/2024 at 11:27 AM, colonel said:

I would never travel with two camera systems, thats just me. Before you go on any extensive trip, I would use the M10 alot. Decide if it works for you. The X100IV has inferior sharpness and detail (even with seemingly more MP) , but it is AF. It is a not a camera I would recommend for sport, but nevertheless if you want any kind of tracking you wont get that with the M10.

Leica RF, for travel photography that included moving targets (e.g. street). is all about pre-emption and to a certain extent pre-focus.

 

And I totally get that, but I often travel with two different cameras, it was my Sony a7rv and x100v (prior to the VI).  I've done over 20 countries in the last 12 months and always had two cameras.  I like the x100v for video (I never used the Sony video) and times when I don't have a lot of time and want to shoot fast.  The m11P (I passed on the m10r) will be for my more methodical self where I want to take my time and enjoy the process, will even use it for landscape at times.  I have time before our next big trip to West Africa so I'll be practicing a lot.  I also don't do sports, I'm a street shooter probably 90% of the time.

Received this today so I'm a pretty happy camper.

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!

Edited May 31, 2024 by AllenB

[colonel]

4 hours ago, AllenB said:

And I totally get that, but I often travel with two different cameras, it was my Sony a7rv and x100v (prior to the VI).  I've done over 20 countries in the last 12 months and always had two cameras.  I like the x100v for video (I never used the Sony video) and times when I don't have a lot of time and want to shoot fast.  The m11P (I passed on the m10r) will be for my more methodical self where I want to take my time and enjoy the process, will even use it for landscape at times.  I have time before our next big trip to West Africa so I'll be practicing a lot.  I also don't do sports, I'm a street shooter probably 90% of the time.

Received this today so I'm a pretty happy camper.

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!

Congrats. Update us with how it goes. I also use voigtlander lenses extensively, the latest range is excellent

[crons]

On 5/8/2024 at 7:21 PM, AllenB said:

I just turned 65 and have wanted a Leica since I was a young guy in the Navy and was the base photographer. I finally feel I've slowed enough in life to appreciate the art of photography at a different pace from my normal run-n'-gun a7rv days, though I still have some of that in me.  I also travel the world a lot and carrying all that Sony gear has become a nightmare, especially getting through TSA.  And I know some may suggest an a7c but that camera doesn't speak to me at this point in my life.

So, I have my eye on a used m10r in Like New condition and want to get everyone's feel for what I may expect and what to look for in moving from Sony to this camera, and I know it's a rabbit hole.  I also have a deposit on a Q3 but my heart tugs for the Leica m-mount so I may cancel the Q3 order and get the m10r. 

I just returned from Canada, Japan, Korea, Austria, Hungary, Czech Republic, England, and Germany and I went into just about every Leica Store I could find to calm my desire for a Leica while traveling.  I even considered getting an M11 while traveling but was amazed to find that prices were so much higher abroad, the freezing of the m11 also made me reluctant to purchase one.  

When I do pull the trigger on the m10r which may be next week, I'm looking to purchase one or two lenses to get me started, a 28mm and a 50mm (which will travel well with my x100VI) and was wondering which non-Leica 28mm and 50mm folks would consider.  I've been researching some Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses and many seem to match up well with the Leica lenses from what I've read.

Well, I know this is a lot to digest, and you can probably see that this has been on my mind for a long time, so I'd appreciate any suggestions to guide me into this next rabbit hole in my camera journey of life.  I also posted this on the Fred Miranda group but wanted to get feedback from a Leica-dedicated group so thanks in advance for your help.

If you can get into a mint or new M!0R go for it. I prefer to buy new myself. 

As far as lenses I went the voigtlander and zeiss planar route. I ended up with 2 summicrons. One 35 and one 50 (both purchased new).

The Planar can't be compared to the 50mm summicron. I liked the B&W from it but the color photos have way too much contrast and look quite harsh. I also had a 50f1.5 Nokton and a 50f2 APO-lanthar. The most Leica like is the APO-lanthar. If you don't mind the size I would recommend that. I mind, so since that's my main focal length I went ahead with the 50 Summicron "v5" and it is the best 50mm lens ever made by anyone. Not only the rendering but the feel of the lens can only be equaled by that APO-lanthar. 

As for the other lenses I had a 28 Ultron II. Also a nice lens and if i liked 28mm I would still have it.

With 35mm I wanted to stay away from the too much contrast look from the 28 Ultron so I went with the 35f1.4 Nokton. The rendering of that lens is beautiful, I just never really bonded with it and the distortion can in fact get in the way sometimes. Every time I used it I just wanted the feel of the 50 summicron. On the Nokton the feel of the focusing is too stiff, although it did get a bit better over time and it occasionally binded going from close to infinity. (Again all my lenses are brand new). The feel of the 50 Planar as far as focusing was very inconsistent all the way through. It just obviously feels like a cheaper lens once you're used to a Leica lens. 

I emphasize my lenses are brand new because a lot of people buy used lenses on ebay or god knows where and there are issues that pop up with them from too loose or too stiff focusing to loose elements to weird aperture play, etc etc. I'm just talking about a Leica lens as they are when you get them brand new compared to other cheap new lenses. 

The other annoying thing with the 35f1.4 Nokton is the focus tab is too shallow so my finger would slip off of it all the time as I was trying to focus. 

Anyway, I've just replaced my 35 Nokton with the 35 Summicron.ASPH II. Again, just like the 50 summicron it is perfection as far as the action all the way through and the tab is perfect. Your finger just fits perfectly. The rendering goes together nicely with the 50. What a pair of lenses. 

It felt weird for me to have such a nice feeling camera with the feel of the cheap lenses. Now they go together seamlessly. 

Nothing wrong with the cheap lenses. Some of them are really great, but they really can't Compare to the Leica lenses. 

Thats my experience. imo buying cheap lenses is a must. For me they were a way to figure out what it was that I wanted before I made a big purchase. I only own 2 lenses so for me it makes sense to just go for it and get the best one. For those who own a lot of lenses then buying cheap lenses makes more sense. 

If I was your age in the last part of my life and was buying my dream things I wouldn't waste time buying cheap lenses. I would buy something to get me through the next few months or to figure out which focal lengths i wanted and then save up as quickly as possible and just get the Leica lenses.

As a personal preference I don't like lens hoods. I'll keep the once that comes with the 35 just in case I need it some day, but the lens is so small without it. I don't want things intruding in the frame lines. 

The 50 summicron v5 has my preferred design which is an integrated hood. I like my lenses small and without giant hoods. For my voigtlander lenses they always gave them to me for free and they never left the box.

Edited June 2, 2024 by crons

[otto.f]

On 6/2/2024 at 8:31 PM, crons said:

but they really can't Compare to the Leica lenses.

I would make an exception for the 28 Ultron II which seems a bit better than the Summicron 28 asph. Over the whole range though, Voigtländer has become so good, that comparing is very well possible and smart to do before deciding. If I still stick to Leica it’s 9 out of 10 because of the size and my dislike of Voigtländer’s separate hood habit. 

Edited June 4, 2024 by otto.f

[crons]

23 minutes ago, otto.f said:

I would make an exception for the 28 Ultron II which seems a bit better than the Summicron 28 asph. Over the whole range though, Voigtländer has become so good, that comparing is very well possible and smart to do before deciding. If I still stick to Leica it’s 9 out of 10 because of the size and my dislike of Voigtländer’s separate hood habit. 

I agree. If I shot 28mm I would still have the 28 Ultron II. Photos really do look just like a summicron (maybe the difference i noticed was a higher contrast look). It's all brass and the focusing is butter. 

Edited June 4, 2024 by crons

[Lelmer]

On 6/2/2024 at 8:31 PM, crons said:

.. the 50 Summicron "v5" and it is the best 50mm lens ever made by anyone.

....

Have you ever tried the Summilux 50mm Asph? 🙂

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[crons]

13 minutes ago, Lelmer said:

Have you ever tried the Summilux 50mm Asph? 🙂

Same issue as the APO-lanthar. Too big and heavy. Better the little cron. 

[Lelmer]

8 hours ago, crons said:

Same issue as the APO-lanthar. Too big and heavy. Better the little cron. 

Your choice 🙂