Owners: M10R vs M11 - Pros and Cons

Richard G said:
These discussions have saved me a lot of money. Might wait for the M12. Still coping fine with my M9-P I’ve had for over 12 years.
Click to expand...
I would have been happy enough with my M9 for far longer than I owned it if the sensor corrosion issue hadn't hit it. Given that did happen, and Leica offered a very good price for it against a new M-P typ 240, I went for the M-P 240 and was delighted with it. It was a much much more responsive camera than the M9 and simply worked much better for me.

A few years of camera salad later, I bought the M10 Monochrom, loved it even more and bought the M10-R to have an identical color capable body. I'm happy at this point with these two digital M bodies ...

- The lack of IBIS has never been a problem for me.
- The necessity of removing a baseplate to change card or battery has never been a problem. ... I use a 128G card that can store so many raw exposures I've never come near to running out of space in a session...
- I don't know about short battery life. My usual shooting session is between 30 and 100 exposures in a hour or two walk, or between 100 and 400 exposures on a copy stand, and I've never even run low on battery in those sessions. These M10 models are the only two digital cameras I've owned that I'm fine with just one backup battery...!
- The metering when using the RF is fine, as it has always been with all my metered Leica Ms, and the metering options with Live View seems fine too for the little I've used it.
- I never charge a battery in-camera even on my cameras that support that (Hasselblad 907x at present). Much rather not stop what I'm doing and charge the battery; I just put a fresh battery in while the exhausted one is sitting on an external charger.
- I can get a exposures out of the camera and into my processing system using Leica FOTOs without needing a wired connection or taking the camera off the tripod at all.

The M11-D model is the first M11 that has piqued my curiosity. I had one of the M-D 262 bodies for a while, foolishly sold it, and still miss it ... the M11-D is the first D model since that one which seems to have improved upon it. But there are those moments when I look at what I do nowadays with a camera and wonder if I should not just sell all of what I have, buy a Leica Q3 43, and enjoy it.

I doubt that will happen any time soon. LOL! :ROFLMAO:

G
 
I own a regular M10, and I love using this camera. I have no clue what an M11 is like or what the M10-R is about. I am happy with my "old" M10.
 
I own a M10-r.
I don't use it so much, I prefer my film M cameras, but when I use it, I don't have battery issues and I don't find annoying the baseplate: I never used the lcd nor the live view and I can shot all day long without running out of battery.

the cons? The 40mpx, I think they are useless for my photography, probably I should have bought a M10-p.

other cons? It's digital...
 
I don't understand the concern about camera shake, blur or unsharpness -- insert here whatever term you'd like to use to describe it -- supposedly becoming significantly more problematic with higher resolution/higher-megapixel sensors, or claims of a need for faster shutter speeds or tripods to minimize that unsharpness.

The unsharpness caused by camera shake or even lens aberrations is going to be the same regardless of the resolution of the sensor employed, assuming all other factors are equal. Images or prints from any sensor resolution, if viewed at the same absolute size -- for instance 8x10 or 16x20 -- will show exactly the same amount of unsharpness, blur or camera shake.

It is true that higher resolution sensors may allow higher magnification of the image, and in that case any unsharpness in the image would also be magnified to the same extent as the original image is increased in size. But at similar absolute image sizes, there should be no difference in the amount of unsharpness between a lower resolution and higher resolution sensor. The image from a higher res sensor would almost certainly benefit from the finer grain pattern of that sensor. Fine details would likely be more visible and I am sure the fine details of the unsharpness would also be resolved more clearly. But it would just be a slightly more detailed image of the same unsharp scene.

That small difference wouldn't put me off from buying or using a higher res sensor and it would't cause me to change my photographic approach such as using a tripod when previously I wouldn't. Although I'm certain others will likely feel differently.
 
Last edited:
luuca said:
I own a M10-r.
I don't use it so much, I prefer my film M cameras, but when I use it, I don't have battery issues and I don't find annoying the baseplate: I never used the lcd nor the live view and I can shot all day long without running out of battery.

the cons? The 40mpx, I think they are useless for my photography, probably I should have bought a M10-p.

other cons? It's digital...
Click to expand...
I have to reload film in my M6TTL and M4-2 a lot more frequently than I need another battery or SD card in my M10-R. ;)
 
Agree with Brusby 100% re camera shake. That concern is from the same school that says a Hasselblad is a waste of money unless you use a tripod. That said, digital declares some motion artifact more than film in 35mm format for the same shutter speed. But some motion artifact is good, eg Jane Bown’s favourite exposure, 1/60s at 2.8.

I handled an M11-D in the Melbourne Leica store ten days ago. I’d be interested. I hadn’t looked up the price in Australian dollars, however: just under $16,000.

When I went for the silver M9-P I considered it would be a good companion for the M2. They look so similar and operate almost the same. With one I’m technically 15 years behind in technology. With the other, the M2, I’m less than ten years behind: the MA is almost the same camera, but actually a couple of frame lines inferior to the M2.

I do get low on battery, and accept that the successors to my M9 are better and I will likely get one in the end. No-one credits this, but the shutter of my Monochrom M is so much nicer and smoother than the M9. Leica are fabled for their background improvements in ostensibly the same model camera, during a production run, and even while servicing a camera.
 
Just a note of support for the M9. Those files are fine! First camera I owned that approached MF film resolution at its base ISO. Stock up on compatible batteries! That will be the limiting factor over time, I think.
 
Out to Lunch said:
Someone on the Internet claims that the Leica engineers forgot to include in the M11-D software allowing you to format your memory card in-camera. Oops = Hoppla in German.
Click to expand...
I can confirm the one I tried in the Melbourne Leica store seemed not to have an option to format a card despite all my searches, and the sales guy's looking. That doesn't mean that it's *not there*; maybe they forgot to provide access to it.

I do not like formatting cards using the SD standard off device because in my experience cards formatted this way work less well than ones formatted in camera, including when measuring write time using software to look directly at what the processors are doing.

Irrespective of my views and experience, if this is absent it's a pretty major omission. I still really want one, I'm just not sure what I would do with a colour camera.
 
I’ve skimmed through the comments and may be repeating things that have already been said…also, I don’t own a M10R so can’t speak to the subtle differences.

Here are some thoughts: one of the main reasons I got the M11 is due to the increased resolution because I want to shoot wide and have the option to crop - the extra resolution keeps the quality at acceptable levels.

I haven’t had freezing problems.

I have been annoyed at the start up times when the camera goes to sleep, sometimes missing the shot/moment.

I’m not bothered by the shutter sound.

I can shoot all day without reserve and have never come close to running down the battery - haven’t bought a back-up battery as I’ve had to with other digital cameras in the past.

I don’t see a magenta cast - occasionally adding some magenta to some images to get colors to look like I like.

The sensor is very responsive in low light (not as incredible as my Q2M but that’s another story). However I regularly shoot at 1/250 and 200/400 asa and am very happy with the results. Due to this light sensitivity, I rarely have to shoot at slower shutter speeds, however…

I have no issues with shooting at 1/30 and getting the same consistent results in sharpness that I get with my MP. I have no fear of shooting in dark situations with a slow shutter with my M11. This shot was with a 28 Elmarit but I regularly use a 50 Summilux which is a heavier lens and still don’t have issues of blur due to higher resolution when shooting 1/30 or 1/60. It could be that I use certain breathing methods when releasing a slow shutter but I certainly don’t miss having any assist with camera shake built into the M11. Though I have never used the M10R, I suspect it is the same in this aspect and I’m not sure it is due to lower resolution.

LightShaft24-2.jpeg
 
Out to Lunch said:
Someone on the Internet claims that the Leica engineers forgot to include in the M11-D software allowing you to format your memory card in-camera. Oops = Hoppla in German.
Click to expand...

They didn't forget; they intentionally do not include card formatting capability in all the M cameras they've made that do not have an LCD screen (the M60, M-D 262, M10-D, M11-D). The logic is that since you do not have an LCD on the camera to review the contents of the storage card, it is safer for the user to format it on their computer system where they can check there is nothing of value on the card. The worst thing for any user is to accidentally delete data... and it would be darn easy to do that with, say, a 128G card that's nearly full with .DNG files.

I format all my SD cards with the SDCardFormatter.app from SD Association. It's available free of charge for Windows, MacOS, and Linux, and does the best formatting of SD card devices possible.

One guy on another forum returned his new M11-D because of it. That's his choice ... I think it's close to absurd.

G

... Okay, so now I'm waiting on Leica to fulfill my personal desires too ... An M11-D Monochrom and a Q3 43 Monochrom. I hope that I'll be waiting for a long time because that's a big chunk o' cash ... ;)
 
Last edited:
It could be an issue of quality control not being uniformly applied to all produced M11 cameras. Just a thought. Such lack of precision can happen.
 
raid said:
It could be an issue of quality control not being uniformly applied to all produced M11 cameras. Just a thought. Such lack of precision can happen.
Click to expand...
Of course, except same as my 246, Leica has looked at it and says that it is fine and that they "cannot replicate the problem". It seems their 'testing' is ~50 frames, at least from what the processor tells me. The camera has never locked up within 50 frames. But it fairly frequently does it in 250-500 frames and very often in 500-1000.
 
In the development of the digital M's, Leica had to pivot from being a finemeckanic company, to one that develops its own software. And software is hard to do elegantly and well. My gut tells me the "lockup" problem is an unanticipated -- and difficult to diagnose -- software error. The user is using the camera in a manner that seems entirely logical to a photographer, but gives the software fits from time to time.
 
Benjamin Marks said:
In the development of the digital M's, Leica had to pivot from being a finemeckanic company, to one that develops its own software. And software is hard to do elegantly and well. My gut tells me the "lockup" problem is an unanticipated -- and difficult to diagnose -- software error. The user is using the camera in a manner that seems entirely logical to a photographer, but gives the software fits from time to time.
Click to expand...
I agree entirely. It is definitely not mechanical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom