airfrogusmc wrote:
THe price of the M 10 is coming down. I picked one up new in box full warrarty from pop flash in Nov of 2018 for $5800. They were as low as 5600. I was late pulling the trigger. You might be able to get a gently used one of about the same price as a Q2.
As I may have mentioned earlier, my hope for the M10-R is that it forces down the second hand price of the M10.
zhangyue wrote:
You mentioned that you can see handhold problem with M before and I think I claimed I don't have such an issue. I still don't but I think it is mostly come from I am not analytic enough for casual M images,(serious ones I have tripod or I will watch out speed to guarantee the sharpness) .
Yes, it completely depends on how one views images. I do an initial technical QC check of images at 1:1 to confirm sharpness, etc. I might sometimes be disappointed in my poor technique visible at 100%, but for typical viewing, either on-screen or in print, most such flaws will disappear due to the output medium and typical viewing distances. For exceptional images, I will accept a lower technical standard.
These are factors why I feel 40MP won't be such a big deal in 'normal' scenarios. But we're discussing this on a gear forum and of course image evaluation at 100% 1:1 pixels is typical.
As for your file storage situation. I don't know how you currently handle your files. I.e. whether you put outtakes in separate folders from selects, or just separate them via tags in software and have a massive catalog/database in LR, or similar.
I still prefer to put selects and outtakes in separate folders and eventually compress the outtakes. That said, is it worth the time and potential confusion to revisit your archive? Continuing with the status quo probably just means migrating to, or adding larger HDDs... So, it's a bit of money, but you're not spending potentially valuable extra time managing the files.
rscheffler wrote:
As I may have mentioned earlier, my hope for the M10-R is that it forces down the second hand price of the M10.
Yes, it completely depends on how one views images. I do an initial technical QC check of images at 1:1 to confirm sharpness, etc. I might sometimes be disappointed in my poor technique visible at 100%, but for typical viewing, either on-screen or in print, most such flaws will disappear due to the output medium and typical viewing distances. For exceptional images, I will accept a lower technical standard.
These are factors why I feel 40MP won't be such a big deal in 'normal' scenarios. But we're discussing this on a gear forum and of course image evaluation at 100% 1:1 pixels is typical.
As for your file storage situation. I don't know how you currently handle your files. I.e. whether you put outtakes in separate folders from selects, or just separate them via tags in software and have a massive catalog/database in LR, or similar.
I still prefer to put selects and outtakes in separate folders and eventually compress the outtakes. That said, is it worth the time and potential confusion to revisit your archive? Continuing with the status quo probably just means migrating to, or adding larger HDDs... So, it's a bit of money, but you're not spending potentially valuable extra time managing the files....Show more →
Yes, just big catalog, LR automatically sort and import my images as date folder and stay there forever. I have full backup for all of them and only current year image on my computer and rest of them on HD.
I got what you said and have no problem how othersview this pixel or IBIS or DR thing. Anything make sense for individual. Though Leica need made right decision to maximize the profit as a company.
M10R will drive M10 price down which will drive down price of M240 and M9, a good thing for all I look forward to see any additional features added to M10R.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Any chance Leica will announce a Visoflex with 5.76m-Dot together with the new M10-R?
I doubt it, but we might see a slightly upgraded one. I actually really like the Visoflex for the M10, it is small and it does what I need it to do. I don't think I would want 5.76 million dots as I would find it too big, and I don't need the extra resolution for how I use it. 2.4 million dots is actually quite fine. It basically the same resolution as the Sony A7r II and A7 III. A 3.7 million dot resolution (the same as the Sony A7r III) might be a better compromise, but personally I wouldn't want to go up much in size to get more resolution.
retrofocus wrote:
Other than more than twice the price, this is exactly what people said when Sony introduced the high res sensor with 46 MP years ago. They are now at 61 MP. And no end in sight, it continues.
Sony stuff is way cheaper than Leica stuff though. And because the ergonomics expectations on Sony cameras are less settled, Sony will often add or change things that people want to see in successive iterations. Leica doesn't really do the "feature creep" thing on successive iterations because it doesn't have things to add. People who buy Leicas already like the ergonomics, and there's less scope for incremental improvements on things like AF. For example, I don't see much scope for ergonomically improving the much-loved M10. Indeed, Leica usually goes in the opposite direction when it comes to adding "features." The M10 removed features that I valued on its predecessor (the M240), like video. I didn't like this and perceived it as a step backward, but evidently most in the Leica user community disagreed. So Leica clearly understands their market.
Also look at the popularity of the M10-D (no LCD screen) or the more expensive M-10 Monochrom (no color) - insanely popular. The latter camera (Monochrom) even appeals to me. But if I were to spend between $6500-$10,000 on a comparatively low-automation, high-resolution camera, a move from 47MP to 60 or 70 would not force me on the upgrade treadmill. I don't even know that the jump from 24 to 47MP would do that. 47MP will test the resolution of Leica lenses I already own and love, and if I had to upgrade the optics to properly feed a 47MP sensor with well-resolved content, I'd have to spend stupid amounts of money on updated Leica optics - optics that have grown increasingly ponderous (like just about every other lens released since 2010). In sum, if I were to pick a new M-camera for my Leica optics, I would probably pick something out of the existing M10, or at most a hypothetical 47MP version of the M10, and never buy another M camera again after that.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I doubt it, but we might see a slightly upgraded one. I actually really like the Visoflex for the M10, it is small and it does what I need it to do. I don't think I would want 5.76 million dots as I would find it too big, and I don't need the extra resolution for how I use it. 2.4 million dots is actually quite fine. It basically the same resolution as the Sony A7r II and A7 III. A 3.7 million dot resolution (the same as the Sony A7r III) might be a better compromise, but personally I wouldn't want to go up much in size to get more resolution....Show more →
Battery consumption would be my concern. I too like the EVF. But since I use it occasionally it's fine if it's a lower resolution.
I'd rather a few more viewing options like picture in picture or being able to use the rear touch screen (M10P, M10M) to drag the magnification point around. SO a firmware upgrade rather than a hardware upgrade.
The reason I shoot with Leica M is what it doesn't have. I bought the M 262 and a couple of M 10 because they didn't have video. I shoot with a rangefinder because of the optical rangefinder so EVF is somethign i don't care about.. I just love the way the M 10 functions.
The M 10 Mono will be my next camera but not because of the high MPs. 24 is just fine with me. But for the great high ISO performance. I'm sure I wont hate the added MPs though. Leica M has always been a camera without a lot of bells and whistles. They never went auto focus with the M (thank God) and how long did it take for them to put a meter in their Ms.
flash wrote:
Battery consumption would be my concern. I too like the EVF. But since I use it occasionally it's fine if it's a lower resolution.
I'd rather a few more viewing options like picture in picture or being able to use the rear touch screen (M10P, M10M) to drag the magnification point around. SO a firmware upgrade rather than a hardware upgrade.
Gordon
Bought the EVF and just dont know how to deal with it most time. Most time I need it, I can do with LCD as well. The only good thing I love is treat it as right angle finder but then again it is not enough to justify extra hassle to bring it and not using it most of out trip. so I sold it.
I was thinking if M is my only system and the EVF user experience is the same as SL2, I might care a little bit more then I might want a system with nice zoom and AF sometimes, so I give up that idea.
zhangyue wrote:
Bought the EVF and just dont know how to deal with it most time. Most time I need it, I can do with LCD as well. The only good thing I love is treat it as right angle finder but then again it is not enough to justify extra hassle to bring it and not using it most of out trip. so I sold it.
I was thinking if M is my only system and the EVF user experience is the same as SL2, I might care a little bit more then I might want a system with nice zoom and AF sometimes, so I give up that idea. ...Show more →
Fair enough. I agree it's far from perfect. I remember the Farnkenfinder that came with my WATE when I had my M9. The pretty average EVF for the type 240 was such a fabulous upgrade compared to that, for me. The 020 is a bit better again and does away for the need of the GPS grip the 240 required.
I rarely use any rear screen for framing, especially one that doesn't articulate. If I'm close to the ground the EVF is more appealing to me than the alternative with the rear screen.
I know the 020 has some issues (why no picture in picture??) but the alternative is far worse. haha.
Arka wrote:
….I would probably pick something out of the existing M10, or at most a hypothetical 47MP version of the M10, and never buy another M camera again after that.
I don't disagree with your assessment, but the same what you stated at the end cited above was mentioned when Sony first introduced the A7R. Now most Sony shooters are using the latest generation of this camera series with even more MP. I believe it is brand-independent that people will always feel appealed to upgrade no matter what the price might be - as you correctly said, Leica has its own group of customers, but I have no doubt that the M10-R will be a success and even later (M11?) cameras with improved features. One reason why Leica consumers indeed have an easier time to upgrade is that in opposite to Sony cameras the Leica camera price does not depreciate as much. By selling an existing digital Leica M camera, you can likely still recover about 60% of the initial investment made and vest this into the new camera.
"This is a real photographers camera - in my opinion it has the best image quality of any M camera ever made, and it’s a pleasure to use. It’s hard to see how Leica can really improve on it without making radical changes in the M11, we shall see!"
-Jono Slack
... Live in 19 hours ! 