Is an M11 in low light working for a spoiled Q3 photographer?

[Alexander108]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

First of all, there is a strong desire in my to buy an M11. I had the chance to look at it as a friend just bought it. He still owns an M6 and has a few great lenses. I never had an M and I would certainly need one lens or maybe two at the beginning. But I adore the "old fashioned" way of photography. I see that quite a few great street photographers use it.

My street photography often includes motion blur. Here's an example Q3, F/16, 1/13s, ISO 100 hand held. I sometimes even use an ND filter in daylight to achieve that.

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!

What I am really concerned about is image stabilization. It is not always about motion blur. When I look at my images I often shoot below 1/30s down to 1/4s or even longer hand held. I sometimes need to re shoot as the shot is not sharp but it generally works. Deep breath - click. Almost every low light situation is below 1/30s unless the scene dictates a faster SS.

BTW Focusing is the least I am concerned with. With zone focusing at f/8 setting the upper end to infinity I get everything in focus from 1.8m on (on my Q3 28mm). That may require some practicing but seems to be feasible for street photography. I am more a "fisher" so I wait for things to come and can focus beforehand.

Any thoughts and experiences would be appreciated. Working with a tripod for street photography is not an option for me. 

Edited August 6 by Alexander108
Typo

[costa43]

I've owned the Q3 and have an M11-P. The Q3 I could hand hold consistently at 1/8th and inconsistently up to 1/2 a second. The black, lighter M11-P I have gets me down to 1/30th consistently and 1/15th inconsistently. I would say there is a two to three stop difference in real world use between the two cameras. Strictly based on my own ability to keep still that is, some may fair much better. 

Edited August 6 by costa43

[jgeenen]

Set image stabilization off in your Q3 and compare. Then you will know what you are capable of. 

[lct]

At slow shutter speeds and 60mp, the M11 would add camera shake blur to your motion blurs i suspect. I would try the camera in person before deciding.

[darylgo]

I've heard comments that the heavier brass M11 bodies (silver, safari etc.) reduce camera shake, my experience is that the dense bodies with brass do not experience camera shake or movement as much as expected with a 60mp sensor but I rarely shoot less than 1/60th second if avoidable and I haven't shot the black body with reduced weight.  As @lct says a trial would help.  When I am at the edge of my handholding ability I'll shoot three images, one image frequently shows less camera shake.  

[Tux4711]

Please note that focal length has an impact on this. If you switch to M, you should therefore use a maximum of a 28mm lens in order to achieve similar performance when shooting your exposure times handheld. If you would switch to 21mm, you may even be able to compensate M's lack of image stabilization – just a thought.

[weatherproof]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The focal length, heavier brass body, and the leaf shutter would be the main factors for visible camera shake (in that order).

 

7 hours ago, Alexander108 said:

Almost every low light situation is below 1/30s unless the scene dictates a faster SS.

Just an FYI with a 28mm lens on an M11, most people would advise you to use a shutter speed of 1/(2x focal length), so 1/60, to avoid excessive blur. Therefore it seems your current Q3 is the better suited tool, but the wallet aches for what the heart desires.

[JNK100]

7 hours ago, costa43 said:

I've owned the Q3 and have an M11-P. The Q3 I could hand hold consistently at 1/8th and inconsistently up to 1/2 a second. The black, lighter M11-P I have gets me down to 1/30th consistently and 1/15th inconsistently. I would say there is a two to three stop difference in real world use between the two cameras. Strictly based on my own ability to keep still that is, some may fair much better. 

My experience exactly unless there is something to brace against.

[BWColor]

It’s not just about the capabilities of each system, but a rangefinder is a viewing system that you should use for an extended period of time prior to dropping a good bit of money.  28mm lenses are probably best served with a camera with a .58 viewfinder, which is a bit less common and all wider lenses are best seen without wearing glasses.  One of my most used lenses is of 21mm focal length, which isn’t served by the rangefinder viewfinder, but rather by using an external viewfinder and zone focusing.  Unfortunately, you can’t use 21mm lenses on your Q.

[Stef63]

21 hours ago, Alexander108 said:

What I am really concerned about is image stabilization. It is not always about motion blur. When I look at my images I often shoot below 1/30s down to 1/4s or even longer hand held. I sometimes need to re shoot as the shot is not sharp but it generally works. Deep breath - click. Almost every low light situation is below 1/30s unless the scene dictates a faster SS.

BTW Focusing is the least I am concerned with. With zone focusing at f/8 setting the upper end to infinity I get everything in focus from 1.8m on (on my Q3 28mm). That may require some practicing but seems to be feasible for street photography. I am more a "fisher" so I wait for things to come and can focus beforehand.

Any thoughts and experiences would be appreciated. Working with a tripod for street photography is not an option for me. 

With the 18 MP M9, I could comfortably shoot as slow as 1/8s. But as megapixels increased with the M240, M10, and now the M11, I’ve had to raise my minimum safe shutter speed quite a bit. That said, the newer sensors also bring much better low-light performance. So for my style of photography—mostly still subjects—the 60 MP sensor still gives me an edge over 18 MP.

But for your type of work, I’d definitely recommend trying before buying. The Q3 has more or less the same sensor and an already excellent lens. An M11 with a 28 Summicron, for example, wouldn’t give you any real advantage over the Q3—and might even be for you a step back in some ways. The big upside of the M11 is interchangeable lenses, but is that something you’re really looking for?

Based on the info you’ve shared and the sample shot, 28mm seems like the sweet spot for your photography. So unless you give a more complete picture of the types of things you like to shoot, I’d stick with the Q3. Just my 2¢.

Edited August 7 by Stef63

[Alexander108]

Thank you all for your feedback. I thought so. 

Knowing that there are some things that may not work well for me, I would add the M11 immediately to my setup. I believe that it would be a great extension especially with additional lenses. The desire / urge to buy one is huuuuuge. I don't really know why. There is, however, one tiny aspect that keeps me from buying it. And this is the price-tag especially as I never owned an M system and I don't have lenses which easily leads to an investment for €12,000 to 15,000 for a decent set. I would not buy the 28mm as the Q3 covers that extremely well.

So I probably wait for the M12 with IBIS, EVF and tilt screen that may never come. But that would be the ideal camera for me. The perfect blend between modern technology and the traditional way of taking pictures. (But maybe I can buy a pre-owned M11, though)

I now have to convince myself that I don't need it! Which is true. Gear does not matter, right?

Here's one from 2009 taken with a (hold tight, Worshipers of the Leica Universe!) Casio Exilim Card EX-S770 with stunning 7.4MP f/3.3, 1/6s. It may not be a masterpiece, whites of the lamps are blown out, but I still like it. That was the kind of camera I had back then in the intermediate decades between the 1990ies with my Minolta SLRs and starting over 2014 with Canon DSLRs.

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!

[M11 for me]

vor 49 Minuten schrieb Stef63:

With the 18 MP M9, I could comfortably shoot as slow as 1/8s. But as megapixels increased with the M240, M10, and now the M11, I’ve had to raise my minimum safe shutter speed quite a bit.

You can still do that! Just try. But there is one prerequisite: On your screen you have to choose the same magnification: Imagine that you take exactly the same image with the 2 cameras (both with same shutter speed and no tripod) and later in Lightroom you look at the result on your screen: Now when an object on one image has a length of 10cm on your screen then when looking at the other image that same object has to have the exact same length of 10cm.

The difference is probably that we like to see more sharpness even when magnifying to 200% in Lightroom. But 200% and 200% are not the same 🤔. Anyway in that case a higher shutter speed helps.

But what definitely helps is image stabilisation. 

Edited August 7 by M11 for me

[M11 for me]

vor 8 Minuten schrieb Alexander108:

Thank you all for your feedback. I thought so. 

Knowing that there are some things that may not work well for me, I would add the M11 immediately to my setup. I believe that it would be a great extension especially with additional lenses. The desire / urge to buy one is huuuuuge. I don't really know why. There is, however, one tiny aspect that keeps me from buying it. And this is the price-tag especially as I never owned an M system and I don't have lenses which easily leads to an investment for €12,000 to 15,000 for a decent set. I would not buy the 28mm as the Q3 covers that extremely well.

So I probably wait for the M12 with IBIS, EVF and tilt screen that may never come. But that would be the ideal camera for me. The perfect blend between modern technology and the traditional way of taking pictures. (But maybe I can buy a pre-owned M11, though)

I now have to convince myself that I don't need it! Which is true. Gear does not matter, right?

Here's one from 2009 taken with a (hold tight, Worshipers of the Leica Universe!) Casio Exilim Card EX-S770 with stunning 7.4MP f/3.3, 1/6s. It may not be a masterpiece, whites of the lamps are blown out, but I still like it. That was the kind of camera I had back then in the intermediate decades between the 1990ies with my Minolta SLRs and starting over 2014 with Canon DSLRs.

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!

Great image.

[M11 for me]

vor 11 Minuten schrieb Alexander108:

So I probably wait for the M12 with IBIS

Oh, is that really true? Then I'll join you in the queue . . .

[Alexander108]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb M11 for me:

Oh, is that really true? Then I'll join you in the queue . . .

Of course not! Wishful thinking. 🤣

[jgeenen]

Let‘s face it: the Q3 is the almost ideal slow speed street camera - it has a quiet, vibration free shutter, it has IBIS, it has AF, it has a decent High ISO performance, it has a flip screen, it has (for most applications) the ideal lens, a good battery capacity - a package hard to beat. The M camera - synonymous for street photography for decades (when the bulky competition had slapping mirrors and mediocre wide angle lenses)- cannot catch up. Of course it can beat the Q3 in individual disciplines (eg. lens selection) and one can work around (or ignore) the limitations of the system, but in the sum of features, it will always stay behind. 

 

[Alexander108]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb jgeenen:

Let‘s face it: the Q3 is the almost ideal slow speed street camera - it has a quiet, vibration free shutter, it has IBIS, it has AF, it has a decent High ISO performance, it has a flip screen, it has (for most applications) the ideal lens, a good battery capacity - a package hard to beat. The M camera - synonymous for street photography for decades (when the bulky competition had slapping mirrors and mediocre wide angle lenses)- cannot catch up. Of course it can beat the Q3 in individual disciplines (eg. lens selection) and one can work around (or ignore) the limitations of the system, but in the sum of features, it will always stay behind. 

 

You are right. Very true.

Sorry for nit picking: The Q3 has OIS, not IBIS. But it works  rather well.

[jgeenen]

vor 16 Minuten schrieb Alexander108:

Sorry for nit picking: The Q3 has OIS, not IBIS. But it works  rather well.

Of course! But if a camera has a fixed lens that is integrated part of the body, isn‘t then any OIS literally an in-Body-Image-stabilizer as well? 🥸

[JNK100]

20 minutes ago, jgeenen said:

Of course! But if a camera has a fixed lens that is integrated part of the body, isn‘t then any OIS literally an in-Body-Image-stabilizer as well? 🥸

No, there is a fundamental difference of course.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lct]

Makes little sense to compare ILC (interchangeable lens cameras) to FLC (fixed lens cameras) IMHO. Those are different beasts having their own fortes and limitations. People loving ILC can detest FLC and vice-versa.