davewolfs wrote:
Any risk with ordering from Europe to US (warranty etc)?
Given the strength in USD you can save about $800.
Hi Dave,
Probably not. But, forget the US/NA Passport Protection and I would expect that the camera may have to go back to Wetzlar for any work rather than be worked on in Allendale, NJ (at least through the Warranty Period).
sebboh wrote:
i always thought the thumb wheel made the m9 look bigger?!? it's the thickness of the frame that matters for gripping it though, and i'd bet the m240 is ~3mm thicker in that regard even if the m9 wheel sticks out a bunch. show me a picture of the two next to each other both flat on their base if you want to prove they're the same size.
We will just have to see how long before you are able to revise your conception the M240 is bloated compared to the M9. That will be interesting
It's noticeably heavier, that's true. I guess you are thinking the top cover is 4mm thicker? See the thread at LUF. Top plate on 262 is 38mm, --one guy does measure M9 at 37 across the top. Edward mentions .04mm. At the widest point the M9 appears to actually be thicker.
You having been living a lie for years.........
"I can confirm, using a digital vernier caliper my camera is:
42mm deep (from thumb rest to lens mount)
138.5mm wide (excluding lugs, 139mm wide when including base plate retainer)
81mm high (base to top plate)
Top plate is 38mm deep (41.2mm deep at thumb rest)
Thickness of the area one would grip the camera, with right hand, in use is between 36.7 - 38.7mm thickness "
Now an earlier post a guy measures the top plate on M9 at 37mm. So maybe you can claim you were right all along, just more sensitive, with a very fine definition of "bloat"
For myself, I was delighted to be wrong about it. I had been listening to people like you and reading those stupid measurements, and that was a real reason against the M240 in my mind.
The idea a M240 is bloated compared to the M9 is BS. Inaccurate. A myth. The real reason it lives are those measurements, which completely support the contention.
For you and any other early recipients of the camera, I would like to know a few things... We already know start up time isn't much, if at all, faster than the M240. How is image playback? Is it immediate, with smooth zooming of an image, or is there still some lag? Also, as you may know, with the M9 and M240, when ISO was set above a specific threshold (ISO 1000 for the M240), the buffer depth dropped to about half and the frame rate also decreased. It meant the shot to shot responsiveness of the camera degraded (considerably, IMO). I'd love to know if Leica has finally fixed this!
And as Edward suggested, it would be great to have you join us in the Leica images thread here in the Alt forum.
davewolfs wrote:
Any risk with ordering from Europe to US (warranty etc)?
Given the strength in USD you can save about $800.
Good question... you'll have the Leica AG warranty... whether or not Leica US will honor it... you may have to contact Leica AG to force Leica US to accept it. My concern would be receiving something DOA (happened to me with the new 28 Cron). I'd ask the shop to unbox and do test shots with the camera to ensure it works properly. Maybe offer to pay an extra 100 Euro for the service, if they balk.
Otherwise I'd be inclined to wait ~6 months for availability to improve then shop around in the US, indicating you will buy domestically if someone is willing to come close to the EU export price.
uhoh7 wrote:
We will just have to see how long before you are able to revise your conception the M240 is bloated compared to the M9. That will be interesting
It's noticeably heavier, that's true. I guess you are thinking the top cover is 4mm thicker? See the thread at LUF. Top plate on 262 is 38mm, --one guy does measure M9 at 37 across the top. Edward mentions .04mm. At the widest point the M9 appears to actually be thicker.
You having been living a lie for years.........
"I can confirm, using a digital vernier caliper my camera is:
42mm deep (from thumb rest to lens mount)
138.5mm wide (excluding lugs, 139mm wide when including base plate retainer)
81mm high (base to top plate)
Top plate is 38mm deep (41.2mm deep at thumb rest)
Thickness of the area one would grip the camera, with right hand, in use is between 36.7 - 38.7mm thickness "
Now an earlier post a guy measures the top plate on M9 at 37mm. So maybe you can claim you were right all along, just more sensitive, with a very fine definition of "bloat"
For myself, I was delighted to be wrong about it. I had been listening to people like you and reading those stupid measurements, and that was a real reason against the M240 in my mind.
The idea a M240 is bloated compared to the M9 is BS. Inaccurate. A myth. The real reason it lives are those measurements, which completely support the contention.
I'm counting the days till your retraction..........Show more →
yeah, i'm talking about the smooth body part, not the levers buttons or bulges, measuring the top plate or base plate seems reasonable to me. i just said it felt bigger holding one than the other and estimated 3mm. it could be .4mm or 1mm or whatever i'm not reading the LUF thread because i can't bear to read LUF threads. from your summary it sounds like they got different measurements on their m9 top plate than you did on yours? i'm willing to accept the difference is smaller than my 3mm estimate if that makes you happy.
my bloat comment was more about the m240 continuing the m9's bloat tradition. i always thought the m9 was too bloated as well (being used to an m6) and when the m240 came out it just seemed to be continuing that trend and worsening it. that's why this m10 design makes me very happy.
Gary Clennan wrote:
I personally would like to hear all the bad stuff about the M10 to avoid buying one.
Here's a bad one for you Gary
I'm a bit disappointed with the ISO dial. Initially I thought you could just turn it to set the ISO. Now it seems you need to pull it up beforehand, then push it back in place. While I understand the reasoning behind this, it makes it slower and not anymore convenient than using the dedicated ISO button on the M240/262. I think Leica screwed this one up.
I was out today with my M9 and accessing the buttons on the back with gloves on is really frustrating so I am curious to hear how the dial works with gloves. As Sean Reid points out in his review you don't need to push it back down if you expect to change ISO frequently even if that increases the chance that you might change ISO unintentionally of course. He even suggests that someone comes up with some product to keep the dial in the up position.
rscheffler wrote:
Rick, thanks for your M10 first impressions!
For you and any other early recipients of the camera, I would like to know a few things... We already know start up time isn't much, if at all, faster than the M240. How is image playback? Is it immediate, with smooth zooming of an image, or is there still some lag? Also, as you may know, with the M9 and M240, when ISO was set above a specific threshold (ISO 1000 for the M240), the buffer depth dropped to about half and the frame rate also decreased. It meant the shot to shot responsiveness of the camera degraded (considerably, IMO). I'd love to know if Leica has finally fixed this!
And as Edward suggested, it would be great to have you join us in the Leica images thread here in the Alt forum. ...Show more →
I was also interested in the responsiveness of the M10. I agree the M240 feels slow. My impression of the M10 is that it starts up faster. Maybe twice as fast... some lag on start-up. My impression was that it was ok. Reviewing pictures and zooming seemed fine as well.
joakim wrote:
I was out today with my M9 and accessing the buttons on the back with gloves on is really frustrating so I am curious to hear how the dial works with gloves. As Sean Reid points out in his review you don't need to push it back down if you expect to change ISO frequently even if that increases the chance that you might change ISO unintentionally of course. He even suggests that someone comes up with some product to keep the dial in the up position.
I haven't had the chance to try one yet, but judging from online videos, the dial is quite stiff, at least when new, but I think it could loosen up a bit with use. It would definitely be a good option for glove wearers. I don't think however that it's a good idea to keep it in the up position as it seems to touch the forehead depending on how close you normally hold the camera. I would have preferred just to be able to turn it without the pulling up.
edwardkaraa wrote:
I'm a bit disappointed with the ISO dial. Initially I thought you could just turn it to set the ISO. Now it seems you need to pull it up beforehand, then push it back in place. While I understand the reasoning behind this, it makes it slower and not anymore convenient than using the dedicated ISO button on the M240/262. I think Leica screwed this one up.
Plus, it is one more thing for me to break.
I can't even keep the marks off my two RF windows.
Bubble wrote:
I never see so much leica for sale at B/S forum.
Always lots of Leica in there, and i've seen lower prices. When we see M240s going for 3k, wake me up
Before Xmas a good price on a nice one was 3500. M9s had come up to about 2600 from a low of 2200.
I'm a bit disappointed with the ISO dial. Initially I thought you could just turn it to set the ISO. Now it seems you need to pull it up beforehand, then push it back in place. While I understand the reasoning behind this, it makes it slower and not anymore convenient than using the dedicated ISO button on the M240/262. I think Leica screwed this one up.
I hear ya. In principle, I think it is a pretty good idea. I think they could have just provided a good amount of resistance on the operation of the dial and scrapped the "pop up" feature. I would be tempted to leave it up all the time which may (or may not) snag on stuff.
I agree and my initial impression was that the ISO dial seemed fidgety. As I stated I felt the M240 implementation was fine.
What I do like about the ISO dial is that at a glance we can now see all exposure parameters. Yes, I understand ISO is not technically an exposure parameter. But, it is nice to see it without having to activate the menu.
Also, for fast shooting it is easy to move the dial to A. Auto will be much more practical now that higher ISO settings are going to produce very acceptable results.
But, mostly, this camera has a real organic feel to the way I believe people are going to interact and shoot with it. Like I said in my review, I believe a lot of film folks are going to resonate with this camera. Also, M9 shooters are going to find it closer to the M9 experience in the context of less stuff crammed into the M experience of shooting.
I know some are going to think this M10 is all about Leica trying to produce a nostalgic camera that is crippled for the sake of making it like film or something. But, for me, I enjoy and relate to a camera like this. I'm not a professional that has lots of needs, nor am I interested in specs, bells and whistles. The performance of this camera is fantastic. Beyond that I'm not at all interested in measuring how fast it wakes up or if it has the best DxO rating.
I am interested in the experience. The kind of pictures I take and how good I think they are does seem to be dependent on how I interact with the camera, and that interaction seems to play a factor in my creativity and how inspired I am at the moment a photograph is made. And, of course it is directly related to my enjoyment of photography - and that is important, to me.
The ISO dial I am thinking is going to fall into that category of how I interact with this very basic, organic camera. I'm pretty sure that once we get used to working with it we are going to wonder why we ever liked going into the menu for ISO.
Let me make a comparison between the ISO dial and screenless M versions. Shooting the M10 yesterday for only an hour was a bit of a revelation in the context of finally understanding why anybody would want a camera without a screen. I never understood this - thought it was silly and illogical. But, I now have a glimpse of it... once I set up the M10 I found myself not using the screen or needing the menus for anything. The ISO dial is going to play well with the concept of how we take and create photographs. We are all going to appreciate the ISO dial once we really start shooting this camera.
I'll make a prediction. The ISO dial is going to be as misunderstood and controversial as the M camera versions without screens. To some (those who don't use M cameras) it will be just proof of how silly Leica and its owners are.
ps From what I know about how you shoot and what you like to create, I believe you are going to come to love the ISO dial. We'll soon develop the skill to change the ISO as fast as we you did with menu. More importantly, it will become intrinsic to the whole of this camera. Folks that buy this camera are going to love it (the M10).
I read that too. Much ado about nothing? By the way, didn't Leica say that all lens correction is now done in camera now? Clicking on lens correction in LR doesn't seem to do anything.
Probably not. But, forget the US/NA Passport Protection and I would expect that the camera may have to go back to Wetzlar for any work rather than be worked on in Allendale, NJ (at least through the Warranty Period).
Rich
My experience is that cameras bought in Europe or elsewhere can be serviced, also under warranty, at Leica US, but I've always found service at Solms or Wetzlar quicker and more reliable.
_______________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine
I agree and my initial impression was that the ISO dial seemed fidgety. As I stated I felt the M240 implementation was fine.
What I do like about the ISO dial is that at a glance we can now see all exposure parameters. Yes, I understand ISO is not technically an exposure parameter. But, it is nice to see it without having to activate the menu.
Also, for fast shooting it is easy to move the dial to A. Auto will be much more practical now that higher ISO settings are going to produce very acceptable results.
But, mostly, this camera has a real organic feel to the way I believe people are going to interact and shoot with it. Like I said in my review, I believe a lot of film folks are going to resonate with this camera. Also, M9 shooters are going to find it closer to the M9 experience in the context of less stuff crammed into the M experience of shooting.
I know some are going to think this M10 is all about Leica trying to produce a nostalgic camera that is crippled for the sake of making it like film or something. But, for me, I enjoy and relate to a camera like this. I'm not a professional that has lots of needs, nor am I interested in specs, bells and whistles. The performance of this camera is fantastic. Beyond that I'm not at all interested in measuring how fast it wakes up or if it has the best DxO rating.
I am interested in the experience. The kind of pictures I take and how good I think they are does seem to be dependent on how I interact with the camera, and that interaction seems to play a factor in my creativity and how inspired I am at the moment a photograph is made. And, of course it is directly related to my enjoyment of photography - and that is important, to me.
The ISO dial I am thinking is going to fall into that category of how I interact with this very basic, organic camera. I'm pretty sure that once we get used to working with it we are going to wonder why we ever liked going into the menu for ISO.
Let me make a comparison between the ISO dial and screenless M versions. Shooting the M10 yesterday for only an hour was a bit of a revelation in the context of finally understanding why anybody would want a camera without a screen. I never understood this - thought it was silly and illogical. But, I now have a glimpse of it... once I set up the M10 I found myself not using the screen or needing the menus for anything. The ISO dial is going to play well with the concept of how we take and create photographs. We are all going to appreciate the ISO dial once we really start shooting this camera.
I'll make a prediction. The ISO dial is going to be as misunderstood and controversial as the M camera versions without screens. To some (those who don't use M cameras) it will be just proof of how silly Leica and its owners are.
ps From what I know about how you shoot and what you like to create, I believe you are going to come to love the ISO dial. We'll soon develop the skill to change the ISO as fast as we you did with menu. More importantly, it will become intrinsic to the whole of this camera. Folks that buy this camera are going to love it (the M10)....Show more →
Thank you very much for all the valuable information, Rick. To be honest, I really love the idea of an external analog ISO dial. This is one of the main attractions and features of this camera. I'm not happy with the implementation but maybe I'll get used to it once I have the camera.
I read that too. Much ado about nothing? By the way, didn't Leica say that all lens correction is now done in camera now? Clicking on lens correction in LR doesn't seem to do anything.
Rick
Hi Rick,
I have no idea if it's ado or no-ado
I just thought that was something some of my friends here would find interesting. It does seem the firmware is a bit more rushed than is normal, but the camera is real, that's for sure. I'm sure they will get on it with an update shortly. And maybe it really is a fundamentally new sensor. Certainly the output is very different from SL, but the SL files are quite pliable, and that aspect could have been explained by the in camera profile. But my link says the color matrix suggests something new. Anyway the files look alot more like the M9, and the ISO is alot like the A7rii, which is more than I expected on both counts.
I'm a fan of M10, but any great character has facets faulty and excellent, that's what makes them interesting.
BTW While I don't like dials in vulnerable places, myself, I'd be surprised if the ISO dial becomes controversial. You describe it's usefulness very well. I don't like the menu for ISO on the M9, though it's simple at least and quick, as Edward notes, and would prefer a dial to check, exactly as you say. I'd prefer it recessed and better protected, because I drag my M in the backcountry, everywhere. But it's not that big a deal.
I think the only real "fail" I can see so far is that the M10 is heavier than M9, or M262. I'm sure many will say "Oh, I like it that way." But I doubt those people would be complaining if it was 100 grams lighter, as it should be. If fact I'd bet they'd be quite happy. That is not the end of the world either. This seems to be the best digital rangefinder ever made.
