My first images with a Leica M10

L1003265%20copy-X3.jpg


L1003276%20copy-X3.jpg


L1003257%20copy-X3.jpg
 
This was from the first week of M10M ownership. It was to test a 50mm Summilux asph @1.4 so see if I will miss the Noctilux F1 I sold to buy it. I don't miss the Noct. I am the guy with too many 50mm lenses but must say all my other 50mm lenses are no longer necessary.

L1001347-1 by ray tai, on Flickr

This is very nice Ray, and I get where you are coming from regarding the 50mm Summilux-Asph

David
 
IMO, it's the lens, not the sensor that give a photo its character.


Is this conjecture or the result of testing lenses? If it is a test I sure would love to see the differences. This stuff always interests me. Thanks. And testing is the only way we can be sure. "One test is worth a thousand opinions."
 
Is this conjecture or the result of testing lenses? If it is a test I sure would love to see the differences. This stuff always interests me. Thanks. And testing is the only way we can be sure. "One test is worth a thousand opinions."

It's fifty years of experience with film and digital. I've had an M8, M9-P, and now an M10. How you "print" the photo is where the real magic comes in, but in this era of OOC .jpgs, that seems to have gone out the window.
 
It's fifty years of experience with film and digital. I've had an M8, M9-P, and now an M10. How you "print" the photo is where the real magic comes in, but in this era of OOC .jpgs, that seems to have gone out the window.


There is indeed magic to be made in the darkroom but that is not the subject here. How do the raw images differ? That's the question. I, and most others, see differences between CCD and CMOS sensors. I would opine that the lens would tweak what the sensor can do. But I am a LibArts major and we know little other than, "Do you want fries with that?"
 
Back
Top Bottom