Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Leica M10 Review  (Read 4083 times)

Sal_VE

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #40 on: January 30, 2017, 05:21:45 AM »

It seems like a small step up from the M (240) considering the price. What kills me thoug is the image quality generated by the review camera/lens combination:
1. outstanding true and natural colors, not the full saturated overkilled of other DSLR
2. Excellent definition and Perfect sharpness, not too much that usually shows in average lenses digitally super corrected
3. wonderful out of focus, maintains structure so that the different image planes are well separated but I still can understand what is the backgroud about.
I cannot find this level of subleties in other cameras/lens and, for me, this is all it matters, all I want for my best pics.
It does have its limitation but you would not have a camera this size and quality with.... autofocus, Viewfinder, image stabilization.....
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #41 on: January 30, 2017, 07:18:47 AM »

It seems like a small step up from the M (240) considering the price. What kills me thoug is the image quality generated by the review camera/lens combination:
1. outstanding true and natural colors, not the full saturated overkilled of other DSLR
2. Excellent definition and Perfect sharpness, not too much that usually shows in average lenses digitally super corrected
3. wonderful out of focus, maintains structure so that the different image planes are well separated but I still can understand what is the backgroud about.
I cannot find this level of subleties in other cameras/lens and, for me, this is all it matters, all I want for my best pics.
It does have its limitation but you would not have a camera this size and quality with.... autofocus, Viewfinder, image stabilization.....


An intriguing post, Sal.

I was wondering if you could show me the source for your point No.1? I'm probably missing some information here, but I don't quite grasp how that might have been measured objectively.

Rob C

KLaban

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 131
    • Website
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #42 on: January 30, 2017, 07:55:35 AM »


An intriguing post, Sal.

I was wondering if you could show me the source for your point No.1? I'm probably missing some information here, but I don't quite grasp how that might have been measured objectively.

Rob C

I can only imagine Sal is referring to his subjective view of in camera processed jpegs???
« Last Edit: January 30, 2017, 08:38:58 AM by KLaban »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #43 on: January 30, 2017, 08:44:57 AM »

I can only imagine Sal is referring to his subjective view of in camera processed jpegs???

;-)

Rob

P.S.

I went for an eye test this morning, and the young lady made me feel quite young again. Obviously, she must be rather good at her job.

Anyway that aside, I had made a picture (attached) of the basic problem that I encountered wearing the current set, and she asked me who had made the illustration for me. (She is not only able to see the dashing young man-about-town behind the disguise, but also the artist deeply hidden a few layers further in.)

I was going to tell her that the camera makes great pictures, is a wonderful artist in its own right, but thought that her PhD might not actually be relevant to the conversation, so I desisted, flashed another beguiling smile her way, flushed with pleasure, and admitted guilt (for the artwork shown to her - gotta be careful in this litigious world. My granddaughter told me that).

Seems the prescription has changed rather a lot in the past couple of years, but I'm good for my age. Which tells me not a lot.


« Last Edit: January 30, 2017, 09:11:25 AM by Rob C »
Logged

KLaban

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 131
    • Website
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #44 on: January 30, 2017, 12:56:56 PM »

I had my annual optician's appointment a few weeks back - used to be less regular but following serious issues they need to keep an eye on me - pun intended. Seems that con gafas my eyesight is better than 20/20.

Who'd have thought it?
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2008
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #45 on: January 30, 2017, 04:34:58 PM »

I too recently had a thorough eye exam. Got a huge kick out of seeing the colorful insides of my eyeballs. Modern medical imaging tech is so fab! Also got a clean bill of (eye) health and a minor prescription change.

Without specs my zone of focus is ~6" in front of my face, Ī a small fraction.

-Dave-
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #46 on: January 30, 2017, 05:52:32 PM »

It's ironic, really.

When I was about forty-four I realised that I was having difficulty getting the enlarger focussed, so I had a pair of specs made and that was that. Shorty afterwards, I decided to give up all ideas about continuing darkroom work because of the realities of water on this island and, added to that, the fact that my work had become 100% transparencies. So apart from reading the Sunday Times now and then - when I could prise it away from my wife - those glasses remained in their case.

However, at the other end of the visual scale, my distance vision appears to have been somewhat extraordinary at that time. Friends of ours owned a penthouse on the Paseo Maritimo in Palma, and I remember sitting out on the roof terrace they had, looking at some ships at anchor in the Bay of Palma. I happened to remark about the company insignia on the funnel of one of them, and our friends' son called me out on it. He suggested that I knew something about that ship already, or it would have been impossible for me to read the stuff on the funnel: far too far away. That annoyed me a little bit, but I told him nope, never seen the thing in my life before, and that as he knew perfectly well, I didn't live in Palma. Anyway, he went indoors and returned with binoculars, and yes, I had been right. Whether his own vision was impaired or not, I don't know. Obviously, to me I thought seeing what I saw was normal.

Anyway, years later I started to experience difficulty focussing the digital Nikon, and the problem was that if I could nail focus rapidly, then I was okay, but if not, then I'd hunt focus so long that I could never be sure where the hell the point of maximum crispness really lay. I had no af lenses in those days. A few years later, I mentioned this to the doc. whilst there on another matter, and he set me up for an appointment at the local hospital. I ended up being diagnosed with glaucoma, and the result has been that my early distance abilty has vanished but I can now read the tiniest print without any problems whatsoever. Talk about reversal development! If there's a positve, it's that I no longer need specs to use the computer.

Rob

dempski

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #47 on: February 01, 2017, 10:44:10 AM »

On first impression, the M10 looks like an overall improvement to the M240, especially for normal focal length street, travel, and low-light photography.  But unfortunately, the EVF feature I use most has been omitted, the electronic level tool.  Among my many projects are landscapes using wide and ultra-wide lenses, and this tool is critical for ease of use, maintaining framing integrity, and minimizing distortion.  I leave it on all the time when using the M240 and EVF.  Street shooters in urban environments may get by with a grid because of the availability of vertical and horizontal lines, but in the natural world these are not always readily available.

Iím worried that this is a signal that Leica feels ultra-wide photography belongs elsewhere, and are withdrawing underlying support for its lenses on the M platform.   Why else give us access to a better EVF, but withhold the tools we want the EVF for?  M ultra-wide lenses work well on the SL, but that camera is hardly an ideal travel camera, being larger, heavier, and intimidating when photographing people.

Iíve asked Leica if the tilt-meter hardware is onboard, but they have not responded.  Perhaps Kevin could use his contacts and find out for all of us??
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #48 on: February 01, 2017, 02:35:20 PM »

On first impression, the M10 looks like an overall improvement to the M240, especially for normal focal length street, travel, and low-light photography.  But unfortunately, the EVF feature I use most has been omitted, the electronic level tool.  Among my many projects are landscapes using wide and ultra-wide lenses, and this tool is critical for ease of use, maintaining framing integrity, and minimizing distortion.  I leave it on all the time when using the M240 and EVF.  Street shooters in urban environments may get by with a grid because of the availability of vertical and horizontal lines, but in the natural world these are not always readily available.

Iím worried that this is a signal that Leica feels ultra-wide photography belongs elsewhere, and are withdrawing underlying support for its lenses on the M platform.   Why else give us access to a better EVF, but withhold the tools we want the EVF for?  M ultra-wide lenses work well on the SL, but that camera is hardly an ideal travel camera, being larger, heavier, and intimidating when photographing people.

Iíve asked Leica if the tilt-meter hardware is onboard, but they have not responded.  Perhaps Kevin could use his contacts and find out for all of us??

It could simply be that for that specific camera they have other plans; perhaps as they are now a multi-model company they will make different strokes for those different sorts of folks. Good idea: if you are into the system and have the money for the lenses etc, then specialised bodies make sense, too. I don't imagine anyone serious about their work within that price bracket lives by one body alone!

If they have ironed out all their early glitches, then they are probably going to be very successful - I wish them well. Regardless of my personal doubts of the suitability of the sytem for myself, had I the free funds to risk, I would buy one just to find out.

Rob C

Sal_VE

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #49 on: February 01, 2017, 04:06:25 PM »

Rob,
I own a Sony 7RM2. I had a Nikon D800E and before a Canon 5D M2. None of them gave me the color and White balance fidelity that I get with my M240. Is it the lens or the the sensor, I don't know but the subtlety that I see in Leica's color is clear. The color is less saturated and the transition is more gradual. Of course I have compared them side by side with raw pics. Look at skin tones of raw files processed with C1. The difference is subtle but is there. I believe it depends in part from the lens and in part from the curve applied to the raw data.
If you like puchy pics with lots of saturated colors than Sony, Nikon and Canon are better. As I grow older I start to appreciate small differences, gradual tones. Sharp detail and strong contrast are for reprduction. Soft focus and nuance are for artitistic pleasure. Whenever time allows I go back to shooting medium format film where I find the tonality we have lost with digital.
It is a personal view of course. I do not expect other to agree. But would it be a boring world if we all thoght the same?
May I suggest the book "Naturalistic photography" written by P.H Emerson in 1899? Art is not in the details but in the picture as a Whole.
Sal
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #50 on: February 01, 2017, 04:15:44 PM »

Rob,
I own a Sony 7RM2. I had a Nikon D800E and before a Canon 5D M2. None of them gave me the color and White balance fidelity that I get with my M240. Is it the lens or the the sensor, I don't know but the subtlety that I see in Leica's color is clear. The color is less saturated and the transition is more gradual. Of course I have compared them side by side with raw pics. Look at skin tones of raw files processed with C1. The difference is subtle but is there. I believe it depends in part from the lens and in part from the curve applied to the raw data.
If you like puchy pics with lots of saturated colors than Sony, Nikon and Canon are better. As I grow older I start to appreciate small differences, gradual tones. Sharp detail and strong contrast are for reprduction. Soft focus and nuance are for artitistic pleasure. Whenever time allows I go back to shooting medium format film where I find the tonality we have lost with digital.
It is a personal view of course. I do not expect other to agree. But would it be a boring world if we all thoght the same?
May I suggest the book "Naturalistic photography" written by P.H Emerson in 1899? Art is not in the details but in the picture as a Whole.
Sal


If you were back in film days, you could have done what I did with a friend: he shot Pentax and I shot Nikon, both of us on half-a-roll of the same film. That way, processing was identical as was film batch. Using the same target, we were able to compare quite well.

I did have to make some prints from Leica-shot transparencies, and I thought the film colours were very attractive.

However, digital introduces so many variables, starting right at the beginning with basic camera set-up right through processing, that I think comparisons can be pretty meaningless.

The trick is to love what you have.

Rob C

Mike D. B.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 623
    • Mike's Images
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #51 on: February 02, 2017, 02:20:34 AM »

The trick is to love what you have.

Rob C
And that is very cost effective.

Sal_VE

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #52 on: February 02, 2017, 03:33:01 AM »

I agree that is not possible to remove all variables. There will Always be differences between the 2 test. Although I will post two samples of the same shot, with the following:
- Sony 7Mr2 + adapter+ 50 summicron M
- Leica M240, same lens
same aperture, same exposure. Both raw and no curve applied (C1 linear curve)
Beside the obvious difference in file size, there is a slight difference in tonal rendering along the Whole scale of darks trough highlights. This difference is reflected in the color rendering.
Is it dynamic range? Perhaps.
The difference is even stronger using sony's lens. But here I add another variable
As soon as I can locate those file in my Archives they'll be posted for your evaluation.
As you say, I'm very happy with my Leica results. Happier with film, for what is my pictorial ideal.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15902
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #53 on: February 02, 2017, 06:28:42 AM »

I agree that is not possible to remove all variables. There will Always be differences between the 2 test. Although I will post two samples of the same shot, with the following:
- Sony 7Mr2 + adapter+ 50 summicron M
- Leica M240, same lens
same aperture, same exposure. Both raw and no curve applied (C1 linear curve)
Beside the obvious difference in file size, there is a slight difference in tonal rendering along the Whole scale of darks trough highlights. This difference is reflected in the color rendering.
Is it dynamic range? Perhaps.
The difference is even stronger using sony's lens. But here I add another variable
As soon as I can locate those file in my Archives they'll be posted for your evaluation.
As you say, I'm very happy with my Leica results. Happier with film, for what is my pictorial ideal.


Re film, I agree wholeheartedly. But, I simply don't want to go back to the time-lag that the process inevitably involves, and the logistics here in the Med are too annoying to be worth the effort.

Rob

alainbriot

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 727
    • http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #54 on: February 02, 2017, 07:14:35 PM »

What I both like with Leica is that the M series was able to move from film to digital capture with no major modifications of the camera except that capture is now digital instead of film.  It's a classy transition that brings users the advantages of digital capture without losing the characteristics that made Leica Ms popular and succesful.
Logged
Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10065
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #55 on: February 02, 2017, 07:23:26 PM »

What I both like with Leica is that the M series was able to move from film to digital capture with no major modifications of the camera except that capture is now digital instead of film.  It's a classy transition that brings users the advantages of digital capture without losing the characteristics that made Leica Ms popular and succesful.

True, but can the same not be said of DSLRs and MF cameras too?

- I use my D810 the same way I used to use my F100
- There is basically no difference between an Hassy H1 and a H6D-100c
- ...

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

alainbriot

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 727
    • http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #56 on: February 02, 2017, 07:30:24 PM »

True, but can the same not be said of DSLRs and MF cameras too?

- I use my D810 the same way I used to use my F100
- There is basically no difference between an Hassy H1 and a H6D-100c
- ...

Cheers,
Bernard

I have no experience with these two cameras so I'll take your word for it.  The main difference with the Leica M is how long it has been around, being the first camera to have made use of 35mm film.  For me the fact that Leica Ms still don't have autofocus is the most remarkable aspect.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2017, 07:35:12 PM by alainbriot »
Logged
Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10065
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #57 on: February 02, 2017, 10:19:03 PM »

I have no experience with these two cameras so I'll take your word for it.  The main difference with the Leica M is how long it has been around, being the first camera to have made use of 35mm film.  For me the fact that Leica Ms still don't have autofocus is the most remarkable aspect.

I find those very hard to focus accurately, but the M is indeed a nice option.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

adias

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 224
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #58 on: February 02, 2017, 10:35:57 PM »

... the Leica M  ... being the first camera to have made use of 35mm film. 

I do not think Leica was the first manufacturer of 35mm cameras - LINK.

alainbriot

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 727
    • http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Re: Leica M10 Review
« Reply #59 on: February 02, 2017, 11:41:56 PM »

I do not think Leica was the first manufacturer of 35mm cameras - LINK.

Thanks for the history lesson.  I had no idea.  However, none had the impact of the Leica, certainly not on me since I had never heard of them.
Logged
Alain Briot
Author of Mastering Landscape Photography, Mastering Composition, Creativity and Personal Style., Marketing Fine Art Photography and How Photographs are Sold.
http://www.beautiful-landscape.com
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up