Should I go m10 or… (first Leica digital)

[ETrucco]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hopefully my final question, would both the mp and the m10 with good light and up to iso800 approx work well?

[ETrucco]

On 8/25/2025 at 12:43 PM, Casey Jefferson said:

M-P files behaved the same like regular M240, just the color signature is different, more neutral for lack of better words.

M-P240, f2 @ 1/30sec, ISO1600

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!

 

M10-P, f1.4 @ 1/60sec so they're equal, ISO4000

 

M10-P had noise reduction turned off, I believe M-P had the NR turned off as well (if anything it'll be like +10). Slider adjustments are comparable, raised shadows quite a bit for both shots. M-P dark sky and cloth shadows already showing some banding...

Hopefully my final question, would both the mp and the m10 with good light and up to iso800 approx work well?

[Casey Jefferson]

2 hours ago, ETrucco said:

Hopefully my final question, would both the mp and the m10 with good light and up to iso800 approx work well?

You'll get some green mess in the deep shadows in MP pretty easily if you lift them...

[ETrucco]

3 minutes ago, Casey Jefferson said:

You'll get some green mess in the deep shadows in MP pretty easily if you lift them...

Well I guess up to what iso is that camera good at?

[Casey Jefferson]

3 hours ago, ETrucco said:

Well I guess up to what iso is that camera good at?

At this point I don't think I can produce more info, if you can rent or borrow you'll be more educated on what you want to know. I bought mine and sell it and don't regret it knowing certain camera isn't for me.

[Chris W]

6 hours ago, ETrucco said:

Well I guess up to what iso is that camera good at?

High ISO performance seems to have been improved with each new camera model. M240 is better than the M8 and M9, M10 is better than the M240.

[Chris W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, pgh said:

@Le Chef has a valid question. I'm not the person to answer it.

Yes, pics from Fuji and Hassy on the same sensor look different.

But the default raw files from my Leicas also look different when I import them into LR vs. C1.

 

Sure, no one has said otherwise. 

A lot of people seem to be talking about a magenta cast when they upload their M11 raw files into Lightroom or Capture One. With a few clicks you can adjust the white balance and fix it. You can then save your own default preset on import. But the magenta is there in the raw file out of camera. When I upload my M10raw files they look very good from the get go (I have used both Lightroom and CO). No magenta cast.

I found it harder to remove the (overly) warm glow in my M240 raw files in the couple of years I owned it. Simply moving the white balance to a cooler setting impacted everything in the scene in a way I didn't like. Forum members here pointed me to a custom camera profile. In the end, I just preferred raw images that looked more like the scene straight out of camera, so I sold the M240 and bought my M10.

[ETrucco]

4 hours ago, Casey Jefferson said:

At this point I don't think I can produce more info, if you can rent or borrow you'll be more educated on what you want to know. I bought mine and sell it and don't regret it knowing certain camera isn't for me.

Fair enough.  I live in PR so rentals sadly are not possible.  I had one in hand a few months ago (while on travel) for a few shots but not long enough to actually form an opinion except that I liked it at least for that scenario but I had nothing to compare with.

I appreciate the help.  I might just bite the bullet and return if I don’t dig it.

[costa43]

I would suggest going for the one that you can afford without compromising on the lens. At one point or another, I have tried a digital M from every generation and have gotten pleasing results from each of them. You end up adapting to the camera you have and learning it's quirks, whether it be colour science/highlight retention/ISO capabilities etc. 

Edited August 27 by costa43

[Casey Jefferson]

50 minutes ago, ETrucco said:

Fair enough.  I live in PR so rentals sadly are not possible.  I had one in hand a few months ago (while on travel) for a few shots but not long enough to actually form an opinion except that I liked it at least for that scenario but I had nothing to compare with.

I appreciate the help.  I might just bite the bullet and return if I don’t dig it.

I give you a different perspective, I wouldn't get the M10-P if my M9 hadn't died recently. With Lightroom AI noise reduction I can shoot at ISO2500 @f1.4 1/45 just fine. ISO performance is pretty overblown, the lens is the one you should be focusing on (pun intended). The M10-P is way more liberal to shoot with, but more work to get the color grading right. All 3 generations have very nice thing to offer, just stick to what you can afford and get a nice lens you'll enjoy more than you'll anticipate.

[ETrucco]

I already have a 50 summilux (fav), a 40mm summicron and a voigtlander 35 skopar.  So lenses I think I am good for.  Then your take is enjoy during day light and good light the mp240 and save some money instead of buying the m10?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 8/26/2025 at 11:25 PM, Le Chef said:

If you read up you will see I’m not arguing, I’m asking questions. And I keep asking because none of the answers so far clarifies my question of how much off ”the look” is derived from the camera processor’s interpretation of RAW data and how much is derived from the post software’s interpretation. The question is how much can be attributed to each?

This is an impossible question to answer imperically but the answer is both.

Camera manufacturers mostly use similar sensors. Most come from Sony Semi-conductor. But even with the same base silicon they can add custom filter stacks and CFA's. It's known that the SL3 and M11 uses the same silicon as the A7R5 but the micro lenses, CFA and UV/IR filter depths are all different between the three cameras. So there's a hardware difference for sure..

Then there's software. Some camera manufacturers like Leica, Hasselblad and Fuji will work with the bigger raw converters to get something close to their vision, Fuji provides data to Adobe and C1 for the film simulations for example. Hasselbled also provides data to Adobe but not C1 as C1 won't deal with them (C1 is part of the Phase One group). Canon works with no one so the raw converters try to reverse engineer everything.

Then there's the look of the individualnraw converters. C1 try's to make a more *finished* looking file from the get go. Adobe tries to make the files more open and flat looking. DXO basically requires no input at all if you want. The output of each will interpret the data given slightly differently.

As for the M11 magenta cast. It's party hardware based. All M's except the M10R are slightly or severely more sensitive to UV than other brands. They have weaker UV/IR cut filters in the stack than say, Canon or Sony. You could use a UV/IR cut filter on your lenses like we had to on the M8. But frankly it's on the user to know that the calibration tab in Lightroom makes it trivial to remove any UV casts that you perceive and it can be applied automatically to every imported M11 file.. If there's a tool available to makes changes globally and a user doesn't bother to learn that the software has a simple fix then it's on them. The M11 doesn't have a magenta cast problem. Some photographers have a not being able to use their software problem.

And I haven gotten into the effects of different lens glass and coatings, filters, exposure, white balance, light sources etc. You can change the colour of your files simply by swapping out a Leica lens for a Voigtlander one.

Gordon