Why did you decide NOT to buy a digital Leica M?

Why did you decide NOT to buy a digital Leica M?


  • Total voters
    633
I ultimately made my decision to stay with film when the M8 came out. The price at the time $5000+ USD bought an awful lot of film and paper. The same is true today at $10,000 for an M11-P. I understand why other people adopted digital imaging. I just never caught on to it & prefer darkroom printing.
 
Last edited:
I have been using Leica gear since the 1970s, as well as Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Canon, Hasselblad, and a few others. I've had various and sundry cameras from all of them need service from time to time. Without being part of any professional association with any of the manufacturers, I have seen very very little different in terms of service turnaround for all of them. Leica USA, unlike any of the others, has done me a favor or two now and then (like grandfathering in a warranty service to my first X2 when the four-way controller got flakey two months past warranty...). Only two of my digital Leica cameras have ever required a service ... that X2 and the refurbished M10-R that had definitely been knocked or dropped when I bought it, throwing the rangefinder off.

Over the past 15 years, I've owned digital Leica cameras (various Ms, SL, CL, X2, etc), most bought with a spare OEM battery. Despite at least 50,000 exposures between them, I've never once had a bad battery or seen battery performance drop to the "must replace battery" point.

I think there is way too much entitlement going on with most of the complaints I see on these various camera forums. These are robust, durable cameras with very low percentage numbers showing problems requiring service or repair. I've had more issues with other camera brands, several cameras of which required more than one trip to service to have a problem taken care of. That's not happened with Leica cameras, for me anyway...

G
You can't, afaik, buy a spare OEM battery for an M9, M10 or M11. I've borrowed an M9 and an M10 with their batteries from friends, and had to carry around a bag of original batteries that were good for maybe a half hour's use each. I think it's a bit rude to call it entitlement to find that annoying. I don't have that problem with any of a whole selection of older digital cameras.
 
You can't, afaik, buy a spare OEM battery for an M9, M10 or M11. I've borrowed an M9 and an M10 with their batteries from friends, and had to carry around a bag of original batteries that were good for maybe a half hour's use each. I think it's a bit rude to call it entitlement to find that annoying. I don't have that problem with any of a whole selection of older digital cameras.

That's news to me. I bought two spare OEM batteries for M10-M and M10-R cameras, one in January and one in March of this year. The contact I spoke with at Leica USA said that they were in short supply—too few in stock to list on the web store—but that they had supply on hand. (I don't know about M9 or M11 batteries...)

G

ps: He also told me, when I spoke to him in January, that their stock of batteries had been decimated at a date that was closely aligned with the discussion on this and other Leica oriented forums where the scare of "no batteries available" was promoted. So forums like this one do actually affect how much stock the distributors have on hand ... Panic buying en masse does no one any good.
 
I switched to Sony, the A7Cr, smaller, lighter, WAY less expensive, Full frame 61mp sensor and for me the more important auto focus. I kept a few LM lenses and was surprised to find that they are easier to focus on the Sony than they were on the Leica. I'm old you know and the small VF and Focus area of the manual focus M10 wasn't getting it done for my old eyes anymore.
 
That's news to me. I bought two spare OEM batteries for M10-M and M10-R cameras, one in January and one in March of this year. The contact I spoke with at Leica USA said that they were in short supply—too few in stock to list on the web store—but that they had supply on hand. (I don't know about M9 or M11 batteries...)

G
OEM are occasionally available but shockingly expensive, and 3rd-party are mostly not possible because the firmware forbids it. At any rate, in keeping with the thread's original purpose, I was just sharing my reasons for avoiding these cameras. I don't feel any need to argue anyone else into any particular position. I suppose I've learned now to step away from threads where brand loyalty is likely to be a factor.
 
OEM are occasionally available but shockingly expensive, and 3rd-party are mostly not possible because the firmware forbids it. At any rate, in keeping with the thread's original purpose, I was just sharing my reasons for avoiding these cameras. I don't feel any need to argue anyone else into any particular position. I suppose I've learned now to step away from threads where brand loyalty is likely to be a factor.
Digital Leica M batteries have always been expensive ... about $185-$200 per ... and that has been true since 2012 when I bought my first digital M (M9). The ones I bought this year were $210 each. That's about twice as much as what I paid for my Hasselblad 907x/CFVII 50c spare batteries. But, eh, there are lots of "shockingly expensive" things in the world. 🤷‍♂️ If I can't afford them, I don't buy them, or the things that require them.

G
 
You can't, afaik, buy a spare OEM battery for an M9, M10 or M11. I've borrowed an M9 and an M10 with their batteries from friends, and had to carry around a bag of original batteries that were good for maybe a half hour's use each. I think it's a bit rude to call it entitlement to find that annoying. I don't have that problem with any of a whole selection of older digital cameras.
M9 and M10 Leica batteries are back in stock most places. The M11 batteries have never been out of stock. M9 and M10 third party batteries are readily available from a range of vendors. Nothing for the M11 yet.
 
I perpetually dither over buying a digital M but the prices I see confuse me - people asking more for M8s than M240s, and M9s priced like M10s ("new sensor"... in 2017...). RD1 prices are similarly at M240 levels. I know there is the argument about "CCD colours", but is there another reason the M240 seems to be a poor relation? Isn't the battery issue resolved?
 
I perpetually dither over buying a digital M but the prices I see confuse me - people asking more for M8s than M240s, and M9s priced like M10s ("new sensor"... in 2017...). RD1 prices are similarly at M240 levels. I know there is the argument about "CCD colours", but is there another reason the M240 seems to be a poor relation? Isn't the battery issue resolved?
Why worry about all the different pricings? There are fads in Leica stuff just like everywhere else. Not one of the digital Ms is a bad camera, even the M9 with its sensor corrosion problem is a good camera (presuming you buy one with the replacement sensor).

I had M9, M-P 240, M-D 262, and now have M10-R and M10 Monochrom. They've all been good. I never use out of camera JPEGs so that doesn't matter at all, to me. The M10 Monochrom I bought new and is perhaps the best camera (not just Leica) I've ever owned. I bought the M10-R (used) after so as to have a color camera with the same resolution; it's terrific too, but the M10 Mono is my favorite.

Keep it simple:
- Pick a model, if you want one; find one of that model from a good dealer who offers decent support and service; go make photographs with it.
- If you don't want one, or think they're too expensive, move on to something else.

New or used: whichever you can afford, presuming a good dealer and the appropriate warranty.

This is not a momentous life decision. It's a camera.

G
 
I perpetually dither over buying a digital M but the prices I see confuse me - people asking more for M8s than M240s, and M9s priced like M10s ("new sensor"... in 2017...). RD1 prices are similarly at M240 levels. I know there is the argument about "CCD colours", but is there another reason the M240 seems to be a poor relation? Isn't the battery issue resolved?
There are no third party options for Typ 240 batteries. Leica ones are hard to get, if your dealer will or can get them for you. The series was also unpopular because of the thickness of the bodies. Leica also made the RAW files in the 240 series 12 bit and the files suffer pattern noise as a result. In general, if you can live with those problems, they are amazing cameras to use, but for the reasons above they are among the cheapest digital M cameras on the market.
 
Last edited:
There are no third party options for Typ 240 batteries. Leica ones are hard to get, if your dealer will or can get them for you. The series was also unpopular because of the thickness of the bodies. Leica also made the RAW files in the 240 series 12 bit and the files suffer pattern noise as a result. In general, if you can live with those problems, they are amazing cameras to use, and for the reasons above they are among the cheapest digital M cameras on the market.
Bolded: To say that 12 bit raw files are a direct cause of pattern noise is incorrect. An AI-bot sum up of the question "What is the relationship between bit-depth and pattern noise?" (saving me the time to extract and cite the 76 references top search query results) is pretty accurate:

Higher bit depth in a raw file does not directly prevent pattern noise but makes its effects less visible. A raw file with a higher bit depth provides more tonal information, which improves the camera's ability to distinguish fine details from subtle noise, especially in underexposed areas.

Bit depth and signal resolution

Bit depth is the number of bits used to describe the brightness and color of each pixel.

- 16-bit raw files, common in high-end systems, offer 65,536 tones per color channel.

- 12- or 14-bit raw files, more common in consumer and prosumer cameras, offer 4,096 or 16,384 tones per channel, respectively.

- 8-bit JPEGs compress this to just 256 tones per channel, which can lead to visible banding in areas with smooth tonal transitions.

How bit depth reduces visible pattern noise

A raw file with higher bit depth is more robust against the visual impact of pattern noise, which is fixed-pattern noise from the sensor's electronics. The following factors explain this effect:

- Minimizes quantization error: The analog-to-digital converter (ADC) in a camera rounds the analog signal from the sensor to a digital value. This rounding, known as quantization, introduces a tiny error. A higher bit depth provides more "steps" during quantization, making the error significantly smaller and less noticeable.

- Lowers the visible noise floor: The "noise floor" is the level of inherent electronic noise in the signal. Higher bit depth increases the dynamic range and lowers the noise floor relative to the total signal. This extra dynamic range, which is approximately 6 dB for every extra bit, provides more headroom above the noise.

- Improves shadow detail: The effect of pattern noise is most obvious when you "lift" the shadows in editing. A raw file with a higher bit depth has more subtle tonal graduations available in the darkest areas. This provides more leeway to brighten shadows without revealing the stepping (banding) or introducing color shifts that would occur with a lower bit depth.

- Distributes noise over more values: In a low-bit-depth file, the limited number of tonal values can force noise patterns to be compressed into a small range, making them more visible. With a higher bit depth, the same amount of electronic noise is distributed over a wider range of possible values, making the subtle patterns less perceptible.
Important caveats

Higher bit depth is not a guarantee of low noise: While a higher bit depth offers benefits, it does not erase the underlying physical noise of the sensor itself. An underexposed photo from a 16-bit camera can still have more noise than a properly exposed photo from a 14-bit camera.

The benefit is most apparent in post-processing: For a perfectly exposed image, the difference in noise visibility between 12- and 14-bit raw files may not be noticeable. The key advantage of higher bit depth becomes clear when pushing exposure and tonal adjustments in post-production.

So ... With an M typ 240 series camera, you have to be a bit more finicky about making correct exposures for best results. In 20,000+ exposures with the M-P 240, I found objectionable and unreducible pattern noise intruded about 5 times. I have had several other cameras that saved raw files with 10 and 12 bit data, and have only very rarely had objectionable pattern noise on a very limited number of exposures.

Perhaps this means that I am pretty fussy about assessing dynamic range and exposure with my cameras when I'm making photos... which is true. 😉

G
 
Yes. The M240 is noticeably thicker than all the other Ms -- film or digital. But, it's a very capable camera and I suspect it's the best value among digital Ms. Like mine and still use it often in rotation with my M9 and M10 (and occasional film M). I sometimes grab it to use with the digital viewfinder and it a lens of either really wide or tele. The M10 with its viewfinder is nice too.
I really hope the battery scarcity is solved soon. I only have one battery for the M240 and it's showing signs of aging. This may be the only shortcoming. Because I have an M9 and M10, I don't panic but I really do want to continue using my 240...😬. Leica or someone please come to my rescue!
 
So why don't the M9, M10, M11 all use the same battery? Looks like planed obsolescence to me. That would be like Ford having a different battery for every year of the Mustang GT.

My Olympus E1 and C-5060 (both 2003) use the same battery as my Olympus C-7070 (2005) and E5 (2010).
 
So why don't the M9, M10, M11 all use the same battery? Looks like planed obsolescence to me. That would be like Ford having a different battery for every year of the Mustang GT.

My Olympus E1 and C-5060 (both 2003) use the same battery as my Olympus C-7070 (2005) and E5 (2010).

My Olympus E-1 (2003) does not use the same battery as my Olympus E-M1 (2013) ... Hmmm. 🤔

... Different form factor, different power requirements, different needs. 💡 Same goes for M9 vs M typ 240 vs M typ 262, vs M10 vs M11...
Just as with many many many other devices.

G
 
The whole reason for the high prices of Leica in the film days were that they were well machined, robust and long lasting. You can still get your M2, M3, M4 maintained and repaired at overseeable cost over 50 years after they were made. For a Leica that contains electronics, that has changed; look at the Minilux or the CM, premium price compacts that shortly after production ceased could no longer be repaired due to inavailability of parts. Maybe for the digital M the lifespan including ability to repair is a bit better, but it will by far not meet what we are used to for the classics.

Dropping some 8000 to 10000 on a camera body alone for which in 10 years time parts 'may no longer be available', that is something that I can't see myself doing, no matter the legacy of the brand.
 
M9 and M10 Leica batteries are back in stock most places. The M11 batteries have never been out of stock. M9 and M10 third party batteries are readily available from a range of vendors. Nothing for the M11 yet.
There are now third party M11 batteries on Aliexpress, with 11% more capacity than the OEM batteries (2000 vs 1800).
 
Back
Top Bottom