M10 images leak

Huss said:
Leica Sofort. Sold out everywhere. The people have spoken.

Anyway, no-one minds that the M10 no longer offers uncompressed DNG files?
Click to expand...

I can't imagine it's lossy, so is there any reason why an uncompressed DNG would not be 100% the exact same as a losslessly compressed DNG?

---

On the M10: I'm so glad that it isn't a successor to the M240, but rather the M9. Seems like Leica is publicly recognizing the 240 as a misstep by calling it the M10.
 
The only feature I think it's lame to have left out is a silent shutter mode as you see on many of the latest cameras, like A7r2.

There are some events when you really want no noise. It's not rocket science, and should have been obvious. But maybe that would have required something extra physically.
 
Thanks. I have now read his review of the M10. He recommends that users of M8/M9 should now switch to an M10. Food for thought.
 
raid said:
Thanks. I have now read his review of the M10. He recommends that users of M8/M9 should now switch to an M10. Food for thought.
Click to expand...

I upgraded to a M240 a couple of years ago, but recently returned to the M9. I like the M9 better for the OOC color (maybe less neutral and more Kodachrome-like), quicker start-up, lighter weight. I find the M240 bulky, slow to wake/start-up, and OOC colors unappealing. The M10 seems to have fixed all this and as such is very tempting.
 
Huss said:
"The camera as a tool does not produce better pictures than the M/240...
If you are happy with the results of the M/240 or the MM2 it is best to skip the M10 release."
Click to expand...

When I'm honest, then there is nothing really that much better in the M10 compared to the 240, just some refinements. When even the image quality is not significantly better, I'll stick with the 240 for the next 3-4 years.
 
CliveC said:
Hybrid EVF/OVF. Dynamic projected framelines.
Better battery.
Smoother, quieter shutter.
Better dynamic range.
Larger buffer.

Cheaper (HA!)
Click to expand...

That "Cheaper" in bold letters is funny. In Germany the M10 is 20 EUR less than the M240, so it's not really cheaper at all. Only our silly mind makes us think it's so much cheaper because we expected a price raise again of 1000 EUR on the body.

Better battery life? Ok, but I never used my 2nd battery for the M240, it's already lasting so long.
 
jaapv said:
It has a new sensor - despite similar specifications, Leica insists that it is not the same as M-Q-SL. It certainly has a much higher ISO performance.
Click to expand...

Puts makes no bones and directly states it's the SL sensor with new NR algorithms that allow the better ISO. Still if it's better it's better. That's what matters.

He says the real "beef" is the sweet M3 ergos and nice finder, plus a much better shutter.

The claim of improved profiles will have to wait for the real people to get the camera and put their "problem" lenses, like the pre-asph 21 Elmarit, on there. Obviously they have worked on the default camera profile to make the the OOC more punchy.

He says it's still too heavy :cool:
 
CliveC said:
Hybrid EVF/OVF. Dynamic projected framelines.
Better battery.
Smoother, quieter shutter.
Better dynamic range.
Larger buffer.

Cheaper (HA!)
Click to expand...

My only Leica is a IIIf - which I use and in fact I used yesterday to take photos of a sculpture garden I happened upon - so I am not 100% committed to digital and I could never justify the expenditure on a new Leica. Speaking as an outsider then, what strikes me about these improvements is how late to the game Leica really is. Now I know we are talking about a "full frame" sensor and a camera optimised to use M lenses (in the latter respect the Leica digital cameras are irreplaceable), but consider that Fuji was the innovator of the combined optical-electronic viewfinder and the Olympus Pen F, for example, has an an electronic shutter option giving you full silent mode.

Not saying that the M-10 is not worth it, but Leica does seem to be behind the curve.
 
:: Mark said:
But I am not sure I would want to use a camera that expensive every day on the street - it is about double what my (2nd hand) M 262 cost here in Europe...
Click to expand...

This is exactly my thought. I'm sure it's a wonderful camera and a joy to use, an in principle I could even afford it (afford it, not justify it), but I would be too scared to bring it with me on my daily bike commute or on a trip for fear to ruin/break it or have it stolen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom