Regret buying a Digital M. Can't compare to a film M

[LondonL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As the title says, I regret adding an M10 to my camera line up. I never use it! I thought I would, I thought it would be the perfect addition to my camera stable, but I never reach for it, it never grabs me. In the digital world I also have a Q-P which I adore. In the digital world fast auto focus, EVF and everything else that comes with it just seems to be better for my needs. These are not options in the film world (well ok fast AF is, but it somehow isn't necessary)

In my film world the M6 is king. I can't stop using this camera and trying the M10 has just made be love the M6 and film even more.

Anyone feel the same or have similar experiences to share?

[Advertisement]

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

[THEME]

On the contrary, developing film is just too burdensome, Leica created digital masterpieces, no way back to film for me.

What does the M6 give you the M10 doesn't?

[FrozenInTime]

I’ve been using my film Ms far more frequently than the digital ones, the Valoi easy 35 scan adapter is a game changer in ease of hybrid workflow.

AF and digital makes for a great B and occasional video camera, especially if it is compact and can be use one handed; the inexpensive G100D and 15/1.7 DG Summilux filled that role this summer.

But at this time of year, the M10M remains king of the night.

[250swb]

56 minutes ago, THEME said:

On the contrary, developing film is just too burdensome, Leica created digital masterpieces, no way back to film for me.

What does the M6 give you the M10 doesn't?

What is burdensome in photography is going down a path that isn't fulfilling. A little bit of work never killed anybody, and if aesthetically the results match the expectations it's hardly work at all. 

I agree with the OP, I've rarely used my M10 and basically started slowing down with Leica M digital use after the M240 and M246 both of which were bland disappointing cameras and gradually moved back full time to film in 35mm, medium format and large format since then. If I ever need a proper digital camera I'll use my Nikon Z7, which otherwise is on duty to copy negatives and rarely gets a look-in on the creativity front.

 

[TomB_tx]

I've used film Ms since 1968, and until the M9 came out didn't care for digital. I find using the M9 & M10 very similar to using a film M, if you set it up like film (fixed ISO, ignore the screen, etc.). Shooting both M7 & M10 it's easy to forget which is being used. That said, I don't really like "processing" on a computer. Lately I like the results just acting like I'm shooting side film, and use OOC jpgs on the M10.

[rmueller]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb LondonL:

As the title says, I regret adding an M10 to my camera line up. I never use it! I thought I would, I thought it would be the perfect addition to my camera stable, but I never reach for it, it never grabs me. In the digital world I also have a Q-P which I adore. In the digital world fast auto focus, EVF and everything else that comes with it just seems to be better for my needs. These are not options in the film world (well ok fast AF is, but it somehow isn't necessary)

In my film world the M6 is king. I can't stop using this camera and trying the M10 has just made be love the M6 and film even more.

Anyone feel the same or have similar experiences to share?

Total agreement here. I used to have a M240-P which I rarely used and sold it four years ago or so. When I go out I mostly have my M-A and/or MP in the bag and I haven't used any other camera in the last three years except the Hasselblad 905SWC which is a kind of it's own. 

I do have a X1DII-50c with three lenses for digital, however it is mostly staying at home these days. Won't sell it though, maybe the day comes again where I want to do a project with this camera

Honestly, Leica M means film to me and nothing else (I'd also never consider a digital back on my 905SWC). I do understand the digital M's are really good and attract many photographers. For me personally, I can only envision myself using a film M though.

Regards,

Ralf

 

[Helge]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I‘m using both, the M10 and the MP pretty equally. I like the interchangeability of all the lenses and the almost identical handling. The M10 is now my only digital system camera, I even use it with my longer R lenses, where I use the EVF (which I don‘t use with the M lenses).

I use the MP mainly with color slide film and BW.

MP and M10 make a perfect couple for me.

Edited October 30 by Helge

[Matlock]

7 hours ago, TomB_tx said:

I've used film Ms since 1968, and until the M9 came out didn't care for digital. I find using the M9 & M10 very similar to using a film M, if you set it up like film (fixed ISO, ignore the screen, etc.). Shooting both M7 & M10 it's easy to forget which is being used. That said, I don't really like "processing" on a computer. Lately I like the results just acting like I'm shooting side film, and use OOC jpgs on the M10.

Better still my M10-D is pretty close to the film experience (I expect the M11-D to be similar). I probably use digital/film 50/50.

[Dazzajl]

For me, the decision to use film or digital comes down to whether I’m going to be able to make a wet print or not. If the film is going to be 35mm then scanned and displayed or printed digitally, I’d rather be digital from the start. And the M8 is a wonderfully pure shooting experience for anyone looking for a digital shooter that doesn’t ’sterilise’ the moment. 

[LocalHero1953]

Cameras have different purposes, and recognising this reduces some of the angst that seems to bubble over in threads like these. Cameras can be:

1. A pleasure to look at and admire: a work of art in a cabinet
2. A joy to use to take pictures: a therapeutic object
3. A practical means of taking interesting and attractive pictures: a simple tool

I don't have any of (1) at the moment, although my Gandolfi in brass and mahogany, could be one if I put it on display. My Chroma Carbon Adventurer (5x4) and all my film cameras  are (2). My digital cameras are (3).

But any camera can be any combination of these: I like the look of my iif, but also enjoy using it. The Chroma is just pure relaxing therapy to use, but I like the look of the large format images. I think the Q2 is a marvellous work of engineering design and a practical tool.

But there's no need to feel guilt about a camera not meeting any of these descriptions. On this forum I suspect that there are lots of people for whom the pleasure of acquiring and using outweighs the end product (the image). And some (among the collectors) who buy a camera as an object, not as a tool or as something to use in practice.

[Greenhilltony]

I might feel you. As I have written in a post where the OP said he shelved the M10-P and use film M, the mechanical operation experience on film M is on another level. It’s about the mechanical force feedback from winding film and pressing the shutter button. Also the form factor difference. Though M10 has trimmed down to the same thickness of film Ms, I don’t feel the same when grabbing it without any accessories, and digital M is slightly taller in dimension. The black chrome finish also feels not elegant, not on par with the black chrome on M4 I saw in real life. Although none of these things are relevant with making good photos, they are part of the interaction experience with camera, which is essentially to please the users and make them love to use it for creation daily. And I hate using M10-P for one photographic reason: it has a short battery life that you can’t resist to put it to sleep on idle, but it takes too long to wake up when I suddenly find something interesting. Film Ms and other mechanical film camera don’t have this hassle: ready to fire once winded.

On the digital end I ended up trading my M10-P for M9-P, for it preserves the frameline window (shame for all later digital Ms) and faster wake up speed (though slower when you shoot several frames continuously). And my third party battery lasts for a whole photowalk for 8 hours and still has 30% when I got home. If I took M10-P out for the same shooting it must have changed battery once and almost ran out too.

[smkoush]

I have been using an MP since 2005. I got an M-P in 2019 and replaced it with an M10 in 2021. I very much like the convenience and image quality that comes out of the M10. However the feel of the MP is completely different. Maybe it is because I was using it for about 15 years before switching to digital M, I don't  know, but whatever it is, the MP feels much more at home to me than the M10. I don't see me going back to using only film, so the M10 is here to stay and I use it extensively, but it does not have the same connection with the process of forming an image (in lack of any other term) as the MP does for me. One thing I was surprised with is that those 2 or 3 millimeters taller body of the M10 are very noticeable when I pick the camera.  

[Pelu2010]

11 hours ago, THEME said:

On the contrary, developing film is just too burdensome, Leica created digital masterpieces, no way back to film for me.

What does the M6 give you the M10 doesn't?

People that like film don’t find it burdensome. It’s relaxing 😎. We contemplate the universe in a different manner. The M6 gives us Film grain and unsharp images that look sharp.  

[THEME]

1 hour ago, Pelu2010 said:

People that like film don’t find it burdensome. It’s relaxing 😎. We contemplate the universe in a different manner. The M6 gives us Film grain and unsharp images that look sharp.  

"Time" might indeed be the deciding factor. Being in the news and publishing business, I vividly remember the pre-digital days when having to scan negatives one by one to send around the world, oh and the costs. Digital Ms are a godsend in this regard.

[Pelu2010]

3 hours ago, THEME said:

"Time" might indeed be the deciding factor. Being in the news and publishing business, I vividly remember the pre-digital days when having to scan negatives one by one to send around the world, oh and the costs. Digital Ms are a godsend in this regard.

You are both right with the argument. But I would´t use film for a client unless he is fine with the process.

I use Film for projects that take time and space. And where the digital camera has to correct longtime exposures, so it takes double the time. 

 

[LondonL]

18 hours ago, THEME said:

What does the M6 give you the M10 doesn't?

Film is the obvious answer. But to add more to this, there is nothing else in the film world that I would rather shoot with. Film = M6. Shooting with a film M is the pinnacle for me, over something like the more modern film SLRs with great AF etc.

Digital, the M10 just doesn't have the same experience for me and I prefer other digital cameras with evf's or strong AF systems. 

I guess I can sum it up as if I shoot film, I want to shoot the M6. When I shoot digital I reach for my Q-P, Canon RP or Ricoh GR ahead of the M10. Its strange, I never thought this would the case. I want to love the M10, but I can't.

[ktmrider2]

Had both M9 and M240.  Sold or traded both.  If I want digital I want all the features of modern technology so have Nikon Zf and Ricoh GR3.  I thought about a new M10 in February while visiting Hong Kong.  Ended up with new MP which I did not really need as I had mint black M4 but had not bought new film Leica since 1996 (M6TTL)

I left the USA last month for a trip around the world.  I have spent a month diving in the Philippines and in Malaysia this week.  And I am trying to do the trip with just carry on so going light on cameras.  I left the Zf at home and traveling with MP with 35/90 combo.  It may not be much lighter than the Zf but sure is a lot smaller.  For digital, I brought the GR3.  I hate using a phone for photos but it does make it easy to send or post photos.

If push came to shove, I would mail the 90 and GR3 home.  Have traveled this way for almost 50 years including a stint as a pilot on an aircraft carrier in the early 1980’s.  Leica cameras fit easily into the cockpit.  Today, the challenge is to find film processing.

I did make a mistake last month when I mailed the 21 and 50 home.  I should have kept the 50 as the 50f2.8 Collapsible Elmar II in black is smallest and lightest M lens ever made.  I am almost thinking I should have mailed both 35 and 90 home and just kept 50.  Talk about a simple and elegant film kit.

Edited October 31 by ktmrider2

[Mr.Prime]

I use film M's too, but one of the reasons why is that Leica just doesn't make a digital M that I'd want to use (or pay the stupid prices for). The latest gear has gotten out of hand with too many pixels and lenses that are too expensive - the 35mm format digital M is now really capable of medium format quality but I don't need it and don't want to pay for it or deal with the file sizes. As for film M's, they are stuck in the past, I mean we have the M6 but no more the M7. I think Leica have lost their way.

Edited October 31 by Mr.Prime

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[WvE]

My shelved M10-P is probably the best (digital) M I have ever had, but digital doesn't do it for me anymore. I feel no passion and desire anymore to go out and shoot with the M10-P, which is kind of strange as I always loved that camera. Film got me when I looked at my old film photo's, somehow these were so much more "lively"than my digital shots. Can't tell of course how long this passion will last but I don't see it ending soon. I got self-scanning equipment (BlackLab and a Nikkor 60mm 2.8 Micro) making the whole process even more fun. I just feel more connection with a film photo than with a digital photo.        

[Borna]

I sold my M-P 240 because the files was too digital to my liking. I stick to my M6 and M8 when I need digital, its the best ever digital camera for me. At least the files and the feeling is closer to analog than any other modern digital camera.