M Leica – Camera or Lenses?

Because I prefer shooting with a rangefinder.

9 (45%)

Because I want to use Leica and other M lenses.

11 (55%)

Total Members Voted: 20

Voting closed: October 30, 2011, 08:03:58 am

[BernardLanguillier]

I see the M10 as having advantages and disadvantages over the M240. If I felt the M10 was fully satisfactory I'd be using it now. There again I've yet to use any camera that is.

What disatvantages do you see with the M10?

Cheers,
Bernard

[KLaban]

What disatvantages do you see with the M10?

Cheers,
Bernard

Greatly reduced battery capacity, no video, no level and continuous only via menu.

I was disappointed with the inclusion and implementation of the ISO wheel - there have been issues with cameras getting stuck on one ISO setting. I was also disappointed that the batteries, dioptres, grips, L brackets etc. aren't compatible with the M240 which makes for a much more expensive and unwieldy two camera system. I was hoping that base ISO would be genuinely low rather than 100 ISO which is a pull setting and that there would be an industry leading EVF as in the SL as well as a silent or near silent shutter.

To summarise, although there are certainly improvements the M10 wasn't the camera I was hoping for and I couldn't justify upgrading to a two camera M10 system when used M240 bodies are now relatively cheap and plentiful. The reality is the M9, M240 or M10 will allow you to chase the "look".

Other's opinions will of course differ.

Best
Keith   

[BernardLanguillier]

Thanks, that makes sense.

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Keith,

Base ISO is a property of the sensor and a sensor takes 3-4 years to develop. Base ISO is essentially connected to the full well capacity of the pixel.

A camera maker can resorts to some tricks to lower base ISO, like adding a grey filter in the front of the sensor or reducing pixel aperture by artificial means.

I could agree on the other matters. But Leica's vendor of sensors pretty much decides what they can do with base ISO.

I would also guess that Leica uses Panasonic as technology partner and that may limit their choices of sensors. Their present vendor of CMOS sensors, TowerJazz is owned by Panasonic.

Best regards
Erik

Greatly reduced battery capacity, no video, no level and continuous only via menu.

I was disappointed with the inclusion and implementation of the ISO wheel - there have been issues with cameras getting stuck on one ISO setting. I was also disappointed that the batteries, dioptres, grips, L brackets etc. aren't compatible with the M240 which makes for a much more expensive and unwieldy two camera system. I was hoping that base ISO would be genuinely low rather than 100 ISO which is a pull setting and that there would be an industry leading EVF as in the SL as well as a silent or near silent shutter.

To summarise, although there are certainly improvements the M10 wasn't the camera I was hoping for and I couldn't justify upgrading to a two camera M10 system when used M240 bodies are now relatively cheap and plentiful. The reality is the M9, M240 or M10 will allow you to chase the "look".

Other's opinions will of course differ.

Best
Keith

[Jim Kasson]

A camera maker can resort to some tricks to lower base ISO, like adding a grey filter in the front of the sensor or reducing pixel aperture by artificial means.

Don't forget the CFA's effect on base ISO.

Jim

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Jim,

Thanks for elaborating on the issue! I was considering mentioning it, but I would guess it to be a rare case for a camera vendor to reduce the transparency of the CFA to get lower ISO.

But, would a camera vendor be unhappy with it's CFA design and change it, it could have an effect on base ISO. We may have seen something like that going on at Phase One, with the Phase One Thrichromatic, but who knows what they actually have done...

So, you are absolutely right.

My main point was that the base ISO the result of the sensor design, but very clearly CFA design also plays a role.

Best regards
Erik

Don't forget the CFA's effect on base ISO.

Jim

[ShawnBK]

I've been shooting w/M240 for a few yrs w/24 & 75mm Leicas & w/results I'm quite happy with, but I wish at higher ISO I'd have less noise in blks. I left my Nikon D800E & Hasselblads, I do reminisce @ them but doubt I could go back. I feel bad that Rangefinders can't find an easy solution for longer reach lenses beyond 135mm & even that with difficulty in focusing. Maybe Nikon's new offing would address that.

[Rob C]

I've been shooting w/M240 for a few yrs w/24 & 75mm Leicas & w/results I'm quite happy with, but I wish at higher ISO I'd have less noise in blks. I left my Nikon D800E & Hasselblads, I do reminisce @ them but doubt I could go back. I feel bad that Rangefinders can't find an easy solution for longer reach lenses beyond 135mm & even that with difficulty in focusing. Maybe Nikon's new offing would address that.

Would a Visoflex housing work?

[KLaban]

All you need is the EVF.

[ShawnBK]

I have been using EVF-2 since I bought M(240). But sometimes highlights r not that precise as in rangefinder focusing. IMHO. Maybe it is just me.