Leica M10 Monochrom 41 MP

[pauld111]

It will be interesting to see how these naysayers suddenly change their minds and actually buy one. We should do a running tally just for fun.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

... I have high hopes for this next Monochrom but they better address making the camera a "shooter." The M10 is so slow!! Start up time is a joke, whether turning on or from sleep. ...

I've been using Leica digital cameras for 13 years, ... and I've had a quite the love/hate relationship. One thing I've sadly learned is how they are liabilities.

When they get it right I'll return to a digital Leica, until then I've been liberated by film.

I don't quite understand complaining about digital M cameras being so slow - even calling them "liabilities" - while in the next paragraph claim to be "liberated by film".

I've used Leica film cameras for most of my life. And I've had an off-and-on love-hate relationship with digital Leica M cameras going back to the M8, but certainly not [love-hate] because they're too slow. I felt the M9 almost had it at 18 megapixels and its FF sensor. And the M240 was a significant improvement.

The M10 is certainly faster than any Leica M film camera in every respect - and it offers the opportunity to rapidly (for a Leica M camera) bracket - an option never even available on any Leica M film camera.

My M9, M-P 240, and M10-P have never been liabilities. The M8? well, I'm not so sure. I'd have to give you that one 🙄.

 

[Huss]

Well ... you just ran your colours up the mast as they say! 😛😛😛

I’m not interested in it because I cannot use it on any film body and do not understand why it is not an AF lens. But as a Field of Dreams exercise they knocked it out of the park.

Funny thing is this Nikon lens rationalizes a (used) Leica Noctilux.95 for me. For a little less money than the Nikon I can have the Leica lens that works on film AND digital bodies including a Nikon Z7!

 

[Darthfeeble]

Bigger will always be a sales approach. More is better, longer, lower, wider, more chrome has been the auto industries mantra for as long as cars have been sold. People understand more MP, even when they have no idea what a pixel is.

 

[tightsqueez]

I don't quite understand complaining about digital M cameras being so slow - even calling them "liabilities" - while in the next paragraph claim to be "liberated by film".

I've used Leica film cameras for most of my life. And I've had an off-and-on love-hate relationship with digital Leica M cameras going back to the M8, but certainly not [love-hate] because they're too slow. I felt the M9 almost had it at 18 megapixels and its FF sensor. And the M240 was a significant improvement.

The M10 is certainly faster than any Leica M film camera in every respect - and it offers the opportunity to rapidly (for a Leica M camera) bracket - an option never even available on any Leica M film camera.

My M9, M-P 240, and M10-P have never been liabilities. The M8? well, I'm not so sure. I'd have to give you that one 🙄.

How long do you wait until your Leica film wakes up? How about turn on? My Nikon D1x that was issued to me at my first newspaper gig in 2001 starts up and works faster than the M10. Rapidly bracket... you're kidding? What are you bracketing? Decisive moments?

So you save your money, buy your "precious" and then it breaks... only to find out it spends most of its life somewhere within the Leica bowels. Seriously, I have known people who have had Leica digital cameras and it spent more time with Leica than shooting with its owner. This is a liability; the most repaired, unreliable, costly camera I have ever used. But you know what... My second Leica M8 was an absolute beast. Me and that camera were blown up 26 times and it never skipped a beat. What do I know!

Thank god for mechanical lenses and film cameras.

 

[ktmrider]

Only here would people complain about an $8000 f.95 lens when Leica's is north of $11,000. And I suspect the Nikon has more features but I am sure the Leica name is worth $3000.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Funny thing is this Nikon lens rationalizes a (used) Leica Noctilux.95 for me. For a little less money than the Nikon I can have the Leica lens that works on film AND digital bodies including a Nikon Z7!

That’s the spirit! Makes perfect sense to me, just do it!
(Says the King of the rationalizers.) I love it when something comes along that makes the thing I couldn’t afford yesterday seem like a bargain, almost a must have.
Go team! I need some company over here in happy/crazy land. It’s not a bad place at all. Come on down!

 

[Huss]

Only here would people complain about an $8000 f.95 lens when Leica's is north of $11,000. And I suspect the Nikon has more features but I am sure the Leica name is worth $3000.

Leica's lens is a wee bit smaller. And it works with film kameras.
More to it than just a name.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

How long do you wait until your Leica film wakes up? How about turn on? My Nikon D1x that was issued to me at my first newspaper gig in 2001 starts up and works faster than the M10. Rapidly bracket... you're kidding? What are you bracketing? Decisive moments?

So you save your money, buy your "precious" and then it breaks... only to find out it spends most of its life somewhere within the Leica bowels. Seriously, I have known people who have had Leica digital cameras and it spent more time with Leica than shooting with its owner. This is a liability; the most repaired, unreliable, costly camera I have ever used. But you know what... My second Leica M8 was an absolute beast. Me and that camera were blown up 26 times and it never skipped a beat. What do I know!

Thank god for mechanical lenses and film cameras.

Wow! Then I can't blame you for your loathing.

My experience has not been so dramatic. I absolutely hated the M8, not so much because it wasn't reliable (it actually was), but because of those annoying IR-Cut filters and its small sensor; I had two - the first one was replaced under warranty because it was delivered with substantial sensor dust. My Leica dealer (Tony Rose at Popflash) insisted they replace it.

I don't know anyone who's had the trouble you've had.

 

[icebear]

When the original Monochrom was created, the roots were to be taken from Bresson, as a sort of tribute. I had that camera for over three years (four different copies) and it was anything but a tribute to Henri. Both the MM and M246 were flawed sensors, however I have preferred the original sensor's output. The M9/MM camera platform was and is a complete dog. ...

I have high hopes for this next Monochrom but they better address making the camera a "shooter." The M10 is so slow!! Start up time is a joke, whether turning on or from sleep. And why does the exposure compensation show in the viewfinder before the actual shutter speed? The M240 was like this... so annoying! The M9/MM had a little dot in the finder to show you had some type of compensation.

41MP? Why? All the inherent flaws of using and shooting with a rangefinder will be exaggerated. The prints you could make with the original 18MP were absolutely insane. I don't think Leica has what it takes to support a 41MP camera, not at least to fit in a M sized camera. The camera needs to be quick, agile, and ready to go on a moments notice. It's not what the M10 offered. Turn on and use another camera by Nikon/Canon and it's amazing how responsive they are in comparison.

...
I've been using Leica digital cameras for 13 years, ranging from the D-Lux 3, M8, M9, MM, M240, M10 and I've had a quite the love/hate relationship. One thing I've sadly learned is how they are liabilities.

When they get it right I'll return to a digital Leica, until then I've been liberated by film.

I will be happy... said the person who never owned a digital Leica. Ha ha.

Tim, we all want a good Monochrom. I want one too. But as I said, these cameras are liabilities. How many A7rII's can you buy for a new Monochrom? Five? Six? I loved my Sony A7s, it just worked and worked.

I had a M240 that was fine. My M10 had dead pixels across the entire frame that needed remapped. Overall, my favorite M digital.

They just feel "buggy." The responsiveness just isn't quite there yet.

Yeah, I feel you on the Sony. I sold mine, just wasn't the same as a rangefinder. They don't play well with most wides. I see the 28 Lux does well but... whatever. I had that lens for a year and went back to the 28 Cron. Couldn't be happier.

Fingers crossed for the next Mono!

How long do you wait until your Leica film wakes up? How about turn on? My Nikon D1x that was issued to me at my first newspaper gig in 2001 starts up and works faster than the M10. Rapidly bracket... you're kidding? What are you bracketing? Decisive moments?

So you save your money, buy your "precious" and then it breaks... only to find out it spends most of its life somewhere within the Leica bowels. Seriously, I have known people who have had Leica digital cameras and it spent more time with Leica than shooting with its owner. This is a liability; the most repaired, unreliable, costly camera I have ever used. But you know what... My second Leica M8 was an absolute beast. Me and that camera were blown up 26 times and it never skipped a beat. What do I know!

Thank god for mechanical lenses and film cameras.

Indeed sounds like a love/hate relationship between you and the Leica M digital.😀

You admit the prints from the MM are insane - I take that as a "positively insane" statement for the quality. But at the same time the camera platform is a complete dog.😕
Sounds you can't make up your mind and as a consequence stay with Sony or Nikon which are so much better cameras, faster, more reliable, cheaper, all around better tools anyway.

This for me is a lot like choosing the wrong tool in the first place and then blaming the tool for not doing the job. Taking a sushi knife and using it to debone a pork shoulder and complaing that it just doesn't perform well.🙄😉

If you buy a Leica M camera as user (not as a dentist😉) you are buying it for certain aspects of the handling and optical quality. Meaning the camera gets out of the way of you taking the image. You use the tool, you take the image. If you have your ducks in a row, you can achive "insane" technical quality images. The artistic aspect is on you alone - like with every other camera as well. No auto everything algorythm is making choices for you. You can read the specs, compare the numbers with the latest and greatest offering from some other company and make your decision. Just choose the camera with the largest number of total points at the bottom line and "buy now". Later on starting to complain about all the things that are so much slower with the M, yeah well ...😀

Rant mode off.😛

 

[Michael Markey]

This for me is a lot like choosing the wrong tool in the first place and then blaming the tool for not doing the job. Taking a sushi knife and using it to debone a pork shoulder and complaing that it just doesn't perform well.🙄😉

Not the same at all I would suggest.
Surely it is reasonable in this day and age to expect start up times comparable to what is considered the norm and for the device to function free of bugs and glitches that requires frequent repair.

Hardly a case of the "wrong tool " but a case of bad design and / or bad quality assurance procedures .

 

[shawn]

Not the same at all I would suggest.
Surely it is reasonable in this day and age to expect start up times comparable to what is considered the norm and for the device to function free of bugs and glitches that requires frequent repair.

Hardly a case of the "wrong tool " but a case of bad design and / or bad quality assurance procedures .

How long did yours take to turn on? My M240 will take a shot in 2 seconds after turning it on. My Sony A7RII takes anywhere from 1.2 seconds to more than 7 seconds to a shot from turn on.

That is slower than film (less so if you have to advance the film) but in every other metric the M240 is faster. Shot to shot is faster than film. Shots above 37 are *dramatically* faster. I just took 1 image a second and went to 60 before stopping. The camera never filled its buffer and this camera has the smaller 1gb buffer. Early 90s I used to work weddings and we had multiple bodies just to deal with film changes and that was on F3s with MD4s (or F4S) and they could rewind/change out film much faster than any Leica film camera.

Shawn

 

[Michael Markey]

How long did yours take to turn on? My M240 will take a shot in 2 seconds after turning it on. My Sony A7RII takes anywhere from 1.2 seconds to more than 7 seconds to a shot from turn on.
Shawn

I don`t have one .
My A7R2 and the A7S before it seemed satisfactory although I must admit that my A7r2 does can have its own glitches .

 

[tightsqueez]

Indeed sounds like a love/hate relationship between you and the Leica M digital.😀

You admit the prints from the MM are insane - I take that as a "positively insane" statement for the quality. But at the same time the camera platform is a complete dog.😕
Sounds you can't make up your mind and as a consequence stay with Sony or Nikon which are so much better cameras, faster, more reliable, cheaper, all around better tools anyway.

This for me is a lot like choosing the wrong tool in the first place and then blaming the tool for not doing the job. Taking a sushi knife and using it to debone a pork shoulder and complaing that it just doesn't perform well.🙄😉

If you buy a Leica M camera as user (not as a dentist😉) you are buying it for certain aspects of the handling and optical quality. Meaning the camera gets out of the way of you taking the image. You use the tool, you take the image. If you have your ducks in a row, you can achive "insane" technical quality images. The artistic aspect is on you alone - like with every other camera as well. No auto everything algorythm is making choices for you. You can read the specs, compare the numbers with the latest and greatest offering from some other company and make your decision. Just choose the camera with the largest number of total points at the bottom line and "buy now". Later on starting to complain about all the things that are so much slower with the M, yeah well ...😀

Rant mode off.😛

Not so sure how this confuses you.... The original MM anywhere from ISO 400 till about 1600 yielded amazing files on their own, especially 400-640. The shadows were endless. Take quick successfully shots and you start to run into problems. I've owned four separate MM cameras and used them with dozens of various SD cards too. Guess what? All the cameras would randomly freeze, choke up, delete images, not save images, batteries would last minutes if it was cold out, rangefinder would go out of whack like it was its job. And then there's sensor corrosion. To be honest that was least of my issues. And that's the point... these cameras, these newer digital cameras, DO get in the way of the job, your vision, etc. The human race will go extinct by the time you get your camera back from Leica servicing for all I care.

And I completely understand what the M Leica offers, as I have for the last 20 years. I haven't chosen the wrong tool. It's been years since using a Nikon or Sony. We should expect more from a Leica M digital, we really do. I just got so sick and tired of them not performing to the standard of what using an M is all about. So yes, the Leica is my chosen camera because of the finder, as I can shoot with both eyes open, I can set the focus, shutter and aperture without even looking at the camera just by learning how the camera "feels." The camera is small, unobtrusive, quiet, simple... on and on.

But guess what? The half baked, half assed QA and engineered guts of these cameras insert into the M philosophy like a cancer.

It's not that I don't want them to get it right, I totally do. I'd be right in line again, and I'd use whatever model it happens to be and I'd use it like I stole it... like any other photographic tool which supports capturing moments and one's vision. Hell, if I had the money I'd buy three current digital M's just to makes sure I'd have a good working one at any given moment! Ha ha!

Until then, I have an M6 which has been utterly perfect for the last 20 years and an M3 that I adjusted the focus to nail 0.7 meter with a 50 APO glued to it.

These do not get in the way, never have.

 

[tightsqueez]

Wow! Then I can't blame you for your loathing.

My experience has not been so dramatic. I absolutely hated the M8, not so much because it wasn't reliable (it actually was), but because of those annoying IR-Cut filters and its small sensor; I had two - the first one was replaced under warranty because it was delivered with substantial sensor dust. My Leica dealer (Tony Rose at Popflash) insisted they replace it.

I don't know anyone who's had the trouble you've had.

Yes, it's been pretty crazy. But I've learned to regroup, lick my wounds and move on. Maybe I expect too much?

I never hated the M8, maybe because it was my first junk digital M, and not today years later. My first M8 died on I think the first combat mission. I simply threw the thing in a box and picked up my film cameras like nothing happened. My second M8, like I had mentioned earlier was tough as nails. Perfect.

 

[Huss]

..

Until then, I have an M6 which has been utterly perfect for the last 20 years and an M3 that I adjusted the focus to nail 0.7 meter with a 50 APO glued to it.

These do not get in the way, never have.

Can I ask if/how often you had those serviced in the time you had them?
For all the Mechanical Perfection claims made for the MP, it seems that the M6 was more reliable.

 

[icebear]

Not the same at all I would suggest.
Surely it is reasonable in this day and age to expect start up times comparable to what is considered the norm and for the device to function free of bugs and glitches that requires frequent repair.

Hardly a case of the "wrong tool " but a case of bad design and / or bad quality assurance procedures .

I take my MM out of the bag and switch it on, once I have it in front of my eye, I frame and focus it's ready to take the image when I press the shutter. I never missed a shot because of "slow start up time". You can read the specs and read reviews and even go to a store and take the camera around the block to get a feel for it. You know what you get, or you haven't done your homework before forking out that much money for a decidedly old fashioned camera. Complaining afterwards about the specs that you could have read all along? 😎

Not so sure how this confuses you.... The original MM anywhere from ISO 400 till about 1600 yielded amazing files on their own, especially 400-640. The shadows were endless. Take quick successfully shots and you start to run into problems. I've owned four separate MM cameras and used them with dozens of various SD cards too. Guess what? All the cameras would randomly freeze, choke up, delete images, not save images, batteries would last minutes if it was cold out, rangefinder would go out of whack like it was its job. And then there's sensor corrosion. To be honest that was least of my issues. And that's the point... these cameras, these newer digital cameras, DO get in the way of the job, your vision, etc. The human race will go extinct by the time you get your camera back from Leica servicing for all I care.

And I completely understand what the M Leica offers, as I have for the last 20 years. I haven't chosen the wrong tool. It's been years since using a Nikon or Sony. We should expect more from a Leica M digital, we really do. I just got so sick and tired of them not performing to the standard of what using an M is all about. So yes, the Leica is my chosen camera because of the finder, as I can shoot with both eyes open, I can set the focus, shutter and aperture without even looking at the camera just by learning how the camera "feels." The camera is small, unobtrusive, quiet, simple... on and on.
...
Until then, I have an M6 which has been utterly perfect for the last 20 years and an M3 that I adjusted the focus to nail 0.7 meter with a 50 APO glued to it.

These do not get in the way, never have.

The digital M is roughly about the same size a your M6 or M3. You can't have maxed out specs and bullet proof construction within the constraints of this size. I hear you about the warts and all of the digital M. I also love it but I arranged myself with its limitations. Besides the 2x sensor replacement of my MM and 1x M9, I didn't have any issues. I used only Lexar SD cards, download on my PC and format the card in camera and use it only in this camera, never had issues.
If you love the M because of all things you mentioned, you have to compromise with all the things that are not perfect.

And for the M3 - how many shots have you missed because you had to change film? I get like close to 400 shots on one card and changing a card is positively quicker than changing a film in an M3.😉

The M10 most likely isn't the perfect camera but it's pretty darn good. Complaining is on very high level, I think.😎

 

[Michael Markey]

You know what you get, or you haven't done your homework before forking out that much money for a decidedly old fashioned camera. Complaining afterwards about the specs that you could have read all along? 😎

Can`t argue with that , which is exactly the reason I`ve never bought one and why I use my Leica glass on other bodies. 😉

 

[danielsterno]

There must be something wrong with me...
16mp is just fine for me ... 24 may be a luxury i might consider
Beyond that, megapixels get wasted on Me, no need , no care

hear hear !.....

 

[tightsqueez]

Can I ask if/how often you had those serviced in the time you had them?
For all the Mechanical Perfection claims made for the MP, it seems that the M6 was more reliable.

More often than not for the M9/MM. I'd have to really dig deep and locate my correspondence w/Leica. The M240 was fine. The M10 went back after a month.

All four MP's I've owned had issues, although I've had very little problems with the M2/3/4/6 cameras.