p.2 #1 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
helimat wrote:
OK, I didn't realize the level wasn't in the standard M10.
I haven't found the wifi to be too hard to use on mine, although it was a little buried in the menu. Thankfully, Fred noticed it can be actioned right from the info screen, which speeds things right up. (Again, M10-P/R/M only)
Good to see things are improving with each model, although I wish they had included the standard meter, for times when super accurate metering isn't as critical as a quick boot up.
I can see why USB-C would be an advantage as well.
Yes, one can access WIFI very easily with the M10-P/R/M from the info screen. However, it's so slow to create a WLAN connection (wifi). I just timed this and the M10-R takes 33 seconds while the M11 takes a mere 2 seconds!
Why such difference? The M10-R always generates a barcode while the M11 does not.
p.2 #3 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
M11M come to me. M10M seems pretty fast startup tho? I just used Leica Fotos and it does take a while to connect but I don't use this much (on any camera). If it were fast/seamless to auto-connect, I would use it more I think.
I think the quality of life upgrades are worth it.
Is there a thumbsup that doesn't take the functionality for hotshoe?
p.2 #5 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, one can access WIFI very easily with the M10-P/R/M from the info screen. However, it's so slow to create a WLAN connection (wifi). I just timed this and the M10-R takes 33 seconds while the M11 takes a mere 2 seconds!
Why such difference? The M10-R always generates a barcode while the M11 does not.
p.2 #7 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes! I'm testing it against my M10-R this weekend and will decide which one to keep.
Excellent, I look forward to reading your thoughts on it versus the M10-R. I've been struggling recently to get perfectly sharp infinity photos handheld at any shutter speed with the M11, and I'm not sure if it's shutter shock or just the harsh reality of 60mp without IBIS.
p.2 #8 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
I am also interested in hearing how the lack of IBIS affects shutter speeds and ISO settings needed to acheive critical sharpness. Especially in relation to the higher noise the the higher resolution sensors have.
These are the main things that have been dampening my interest in the M11. I have been thinking to wait for the first M with IBIS which surely must be coming.
p.2 #9 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
1bwana1 wrote:
I am also interested in hearing how the lack of IBIS affects shutter speeds and ISO settings needed to acheive critical sharpness. Especially in relation to the higher noise the the higher resolution sensors have.
These are the main things that have been dampening my interest in the M11. I have been thinking to wait for the first M with IBIS which surely must be coming.
M11 noise is very low for 60mp – it's the equivalent of the GFX 100S when used in 35mm crop mode.
I have my shutter speed limit for Auto ISO set to 1/250 sec., which for me is necessary when shooting handheld. For casual shooting, I find this works well. But there is something about infinity focus that really causes me to struggle to get perfect sharpness at 100% magnification even at 1/4000 sec. I experience similar issues with the electronic shutter, so I'm starting to think that IBIS is a requirement for tripod quality infinity shooting at this pixel density.
p.2 #10 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
I will probably start a new thread with my tests showing crops etc...
Summary so far in regards to image quality:
1) M11 and M10-R have identical highlight recovery. This is not so trivial to test because for the results to be accurate, both DNG files must have identical histogram for the overexposed images and the cameras have different base ISO. (64 vs 100). I was able to get this done with the help of exposure compensation. When the overexposed images (3 stop) have equal histograms and the 3 stops are recovered in Lightroom, the results are identical.
2) Read Noise: M11 at ISO 64 has around 2/3 stop lower read noise compared to the M10-R at ISO 100. Read noise level is similar when both are set to ISO 100 but still, the M11 does slightly better.
3) Vignetting level is the same. Leica likely adjusted this with newer firmware updates. When I tested this with firmware v1.0, vignetting was higher for the M11. Now they are equal. (FW 1.4.0)
4) Do not use M-DNG (36.5MP) or S-DNG (18.4MP) because it degrades IQ. The M10-R DNG file (40.9MP) is noticeably sharper compared to the M11 + M-DNG (36.5MP). The M11 60.3MP file downsampled to 36.5MP (using PS regular bicubic) is also noticeably better than the M11 + M-DNG.
5) Colors: The M11 color palette is very different compared to the M10-R's. The reds and blues have a magenta bias and the greens have less yellow. Personally I prefer the M10-R colors out of the camera. This is perhaps a moot point since the DNG files can be profiled in post.
So far, aside from the 20% extra resolution, the main benefit for the Leica M11 compared to the M10-R in terms of IQ is the lower read noise at ISO 64. This could be significant for shadow recovery using a single image when shooting landscapes for example. When shooting multiple images for the same scene and averaging them in post or bracketing in camera, this becomes a moot point though.
p.2 #11 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
None of the pros really seem relevant, (to me), except for the improved sensor.... yes perhaps the wifi as well, but that's something that i dont really care for.
Looks like leica needs to hire better software engineers, it's always the same with new releases, buggy operation, and crap software. My m240 suffered from occasional hiccups, thankfully my current m10 doesn't go through this. Also, the slow start up times seems to never be improved... even with the m11.
p.2 #12 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred Miranda wrote:
I will probably start a new thread with my tests showing crops etc...
Summary so far in regards to image quality:
1) M11 and M10-R have identical highlight recovery. This is not so trivial to test because for the results to be accurate, both DNG files must have identical histogram for the overexposed images and the cameras have different base ISO. (64 vs 100). I was able to get this done with the help of exposure compensation. When the overexposed images (3 stop) have equal histograms and the 3 stops are recovered in Lightroom, the results are identical.
2) Read Noise: M11 at ISO 64 has around 2/3 stop lower read noise compared to the M10-R at ISO 100. Read noise level is similar when both are set to ISO 100 but still, the M11 does slightly better.
3) Vignetting level is the same. Leica likely adjusted this with newer firmware updates. When I tested this with firmware v1.0, vignetting was higher for the M11. Now they are equal. (FW 1.4.0)
4) Do not use M-DNG (36.5MP) or S-DNG (18.4MP) because it degrades IQ. The M10-R DNG file (40.9MP) is noticeably sharper compared to the M11 + M-DNG (36.5MP). The M11 60.3MP file downsampled to 36.5MP (using PS regular bicubic) is also noticeably better than the M11 + M-DNG.
5) Colors: The M11 color palette is very different compared to the M10-R's. The reds and blues have a magenta bias and the greens have less yellow. Personally I prefer the M10-R colors out of the camera. This is perhaps a moot point since the DNG files can be profiled in post.
So far, aside from the 20% extra resolution, the main benefit for the Leica M11 compared to the M10-R in terms of IQ is the lower read noise at ISO 64. This could be significant for shadow recovery using a single image when shooting landscapes for example. When shooting multiple images for the same scene and averaging them in post or bracketing in camera, this becomes a moot point....Show more →
The 2/3 stop read noise difference – does that include scaling down the 60mp M11 file to 40mp?
Edited to add: P2P also shows an advantage to the M11 at ISO 200 due to the dual gain kicking in, then they come close to being equal again at ISO 400. (P2P footnotes say the read noise chart is not for comparing models, but putting these two specific models together seems to match up with how they compare in real life.) When shooting for critical shadow recovery for single shot images with the M11, I try to do ISO 64 and 200 exclusively, as long the light cooperates.
p.2 #13 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
I’ve heard other report 36MP isn’t as good as 60MP but I’m not seeing that on my camera. But I don’t use it enough to say definitatively. I do use 18MP a lot and have no issues with file quality.
Colour is subjective and subject to other influences (software etc). I prefer the M11 in my LR based workflow.
ALL the benefits of the M11, to me, are not IQ based. The M11 is a *little* bit better than the M10R but not by enough to justify an upgrade. Any improvement would be disguised by my sloppy technique anyway. However the battery life, long exposure abilities, USBC charging and improved metering are definitely worth the upgrade.
If you shoot street and you’re happy with an extra battery in your pocket then keep your M10R. If you shoot landscapes or commercial work (dual memeory in the M11) or in larger shot numbers then the M11.
p.2 #14 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
flash wrote:
I’ve heard other report 36MP isn’t as good as 60MP but I’m not seeing that on my camera. But I don’t use it enough to say definitatively. I do use 18MP a lot and have no issues with file quality.
Colour is subjective and subject to other influences (software etc). I prefer the M11 in my LR based workflow.
ALL the benefits of the M11, to me, are not IQ based. The M11 is a *little* bit better than the M10R but not by enough to justify an upgrade. Any improvement would be disguised by my sloppy technique anyway. However the battery life, long exposure abilities, USBC charging and improved metering are definitely worth the upgrade.
If you shoot street and you’re happy with an extra battery in your pocket then keep your M10R. If you shoot landscapes or commercial work (dual memeory in the M11) or in larger shot numbers then the M11.
The issue with the 36/18 modes is they are not as good as scaling down the files in post after the fact. They are also not as sharp/crisp as a native sensor at that resolution, which I imagine is what FM is talking about comparing the 36mp mode M11 images to the native M10-R 40mp images.
In the official M11 thread here in the Alt/Leica forum, I did post a comparison of scaled down versus the M11 lower resolution mode files. The lower res files need sharpening in post and sharpening on export, and then they come close enough to the 60mp files scaled down to the same size. It takes a 300% magnification for me to see the difference. That in my book is close enough to "no difference". One difference that is significant: Over on DPR, Jim Kasson helped me through doing an aliasing test on the 60mp versus the lower res modes – the lower res modes have significantly more aliasing compared to the 60mp files scaled down to the same res. So yes, for casual shooting the 36/18 files are fine. But if storage is not an issue, I would always use the full 60mp.
p.2 #16 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
highdesertmesa wrote:
The 2/3 stop read noise difference – does that include scaling down the 60mp M11 file to 40mp?
Edited to add: P2P also shows an advantage to the M11 at ISO 200 due to the dual gain kicking in, then they come close to being equal again at ISO 400. (P2P footnotes say the read noise chart is not for comparing models, but putting these two specific models together seems to match up with how they compare in real life.) When shooting for critical shadow recovery for single shot images with the M11, I try to do ISO 64 and 200 exclusively, as long the light cooperates.
Yes, that's with both files at 40.9MP which gives a lower read noise benefit to the M11. When comparing both files at their native resolution at 100% in LR, noise levels after a 2 or 3 stop recovery look about the same. That's apples to oranges though and I prefer to always compare "normalized" files side by side.
Also I only tested base ISO so far. I didn't test higher ISO.
p.2 #17 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
genji wrote:
So the M11 is an excellent 60mp landscape camera. What a farce.
¡Digital spec hysteria!
The high resolution is useful to me to achieve multiple FOV where applicable. Cropping is more important to me than being able to make wall-sized prints. I don't have much room in my home for large wall-sized prints and looking out the windows is more interesting to me than staring at my photos
That said, I wish the M11 had the SL2-S sensor and in a few years we could have gotten a 50mp stacked sensor in an M11-R.
p.2 #18 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
highdesertmesa wrote:
The issue with the 36/18 modes is they are not as good as scaling down the files in post after the fact. They are also not as sharp/crisp as a native sensor at that resolution, which I imagine is what FM is talking about comparing the 36mp mode M11 images to the native M10-R 40mp images.
In the official M11 thread here in the Alt/Leica forum, I did post a comparison of scaled down versus the M11 lower resolution mode files. The lower res files need sharpening in post and sharpening on export, and then they come close enough to the 60mp files scaled down to the same size. It takes a 300% magnification for me to see the difference. That in my book is close enough to "no difference". One difference that is significant: Over on DPR, Jim Kasson helped me through doing an aliasing test on the 60mp versus the lower res modes – the lower res modes have significantly more aliasing compared to the 60mp files scaled down to the same res. So yes, for casual shooting the 36/18 files are fine. But if storage is not an issue, I would always use the full 60mp....Show more →
Yes, downsampling the native 60.3MP to 36.5MP using PS's bicubic will provide better results. That's with bicubic "smooth gradients". If you use Bicubic "sharper" or "automatic", it will provide even shaper results than using the resolution modes in-camera.
Also, the M10-R native 40.9MP files look sharper and more contrasty compared to M11's M-DNG files when using the same settings in post (sharpening, white balance and Adobe Standard profile). I will post crops of that soon.
I really dislike the M11 dedicated color profile and that's the camera's JPEG engine. I'm using Adobe Color or Adobe Standard for my M11 DNGs at the moment. The Cobalt M11 profiles are also great.
p.2 #19 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, downsampling the native 60.3MP to 36.5MP using PS's bicubic will provide better results. That's with the bicubic "smooth gradients". If you use Bicubic "sharper" or "automatic", it will be even shaper than using the resolution modes in-camera.
Also, the M10-R native 40.9MP DNG looks sharper and more contrasty compared to M11's M-DNG files when using the same settings in post (sharpening, white balance and Adobe Standard profile). I will post crops of that soon.
I really dislike the M11 dedicated color profile and that's the camera's JPEG engine. I'm using Adobe Color or Adobe Standard for my M11 DNGs at the moment. The Cobalt M11 profiles are also great. ...Show more →
Don't get me started on the M11 JPEGs. Leica has never been known for good JPEGs, but the ones from the M11 are pretty lackluster. Add to that – try shooting one of your wide aperture lenses that have a lot of vignetting and see what kind of crazy keyhole vignetting you get with the in-camera JPEGs. There is some sort of issue/error with the curves they're applying. I got Leica to submit the issue as a ticket to their product specialist team, so maybe they'll fix it. No such issue with previous M cameras that I know of.
I prefer Capture One's M11 color profile over Lightroom's. For the Q2 it was the opposite.
p.2 #20 · 8 reasons why I love the M11 compared to the M10
As for color, the M10-R DNGs reminded me of my Canon R5 images. The M11 DNGs remind me of the GFX 100S. SL2-S is the camera with the color I've liked the best – still thinking about going back to that camera or (re)adding it alongside the M11.
