1bwana1
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
Nomads wrote:
@1bwana1@
More accurate on AUTO, yes. I already said the M11 metering is done like every other mirrorless camera with the sensor. I think everyone knows this.
I am dead on accurate with my M10R every single time. I can do that because I know the camera. I explained how I understand what it is telling me. Again it isn’t the camera, it’s the photographer.
If you give me an M11 and I use it in the same way I use the M10R, it’ll take me a while to understand what it is telling me (what you refer to as “more accurate”) and the result will be exactly the same as now with the M10R. I’ll be dead in accurate every time.
Note I said “I will be” accurate, and not “the camera” will be more accurate.
I may say, oh, okay, this is like my Fuji. I can put it on multi meter and point it and shoot it. So that’s a win. Less thinking on my part making the M11 “more accurate” just like I was used to before. But this doesn’t change my result. I will still be accurate no matter which camera I used.
As far as the file size, you’ve just pointed out yet another reason I will never get any other digital M than the M10R. 40MP is perfect. Not too much. Not too little. 60MP is complete overkill for my use and all it’ll do is make the files difficult to work with. And I’m not buying an M11 to shoot it at 36MP. I can just shoot my M10R at 40MP.
So
- I get perfect exposure with my M10R and I am not clipping highlights
- It has the perfect file size not forcing you to buy a whole new computer
- as you just pointed out the M10R and the M11 files are very close
- It has all day battery life because the batteries are small and I can just have one in my pocket.
- It gives me the traditional Leica M operation. I like the clean bottom.
- It’s less complicated
- it’s brass and not aluminum
I don’t see a reason to buy an M11 over an M10R. As I pointed out, I believe the reason some people want it is because they want to be on AUTO and operate it like a general use mirrorless camera. The M11 is a step closer to a fully automated point and shoot camera that will compute everything for you so the only thing you have to do is focus. But people want the camera to do that too, so they want an EVF Leica M.
Now you’re down to moving the focusing ring and the Leica M does the rest. This isn’t the experience I want.
The struggle and practice you need to understand what the M10 meter is telling you so you can have accurate exposure every time is part of the fun of using the M. The M11 just took that away. Just generic WYSIWYG. ...Show more →
Sounds like you have found the perfect camera for you.
Nomads wrote:
- I get perfect exposure with my M10R and I am not clipping highlights
By more accurate I mean the meter is more accurate so it gives a finer level of information for the photographer to operate on.
The meter gives more information, and can evaluate in more ways. Of course we can all learn to compensate for the capabilities of a light meter or other components when we know the camera well.
I, and most I know don't shoot our Leica M cameras in Auto mode. The M11 can be used to give you exactly the same experience as the M10-R.
The M11 is no where near a WYSIWYG experience when using the Range Finder. It is exactly the same as the M10-R. In fact the M10-R is exactly the same in live view or when using the EVF. It is just better in those two modes than the M10-R.
Nomads wrote:
- It has the perfect file size not forcing you to buy a whole new computer
That is just a personal point on a continuum. There are many M10 24mpx users who would say the same thing about moving to the M10-R. No file size is objectively perfect. The pixel binning capabilities of the M11 can eliminate the need for a new computer. In fact the smallest size can be better worked with on a worse computer than the M10-R files. I don't get your point here.
Nomads wrote:
- as you just pointed out the M10R and the M11 files are very close
Yep, Dynamic range and malleability is not a differentiator between these cameras when each is shot at its maximum resolution. The M11's uniques pixel binning modes just give you more file size options without a crop. The reduced size options have a wonderful side effect. They add a stop of dynamic range making those smaller files more malleable. No down sides to the M11 in this regard. Just more options. One file is not better than another.
Nomads wrote:
- It has all day battery life because the batteries are small and I can just have one in my pocket.
I find the battery life difference to be a much bigger thing than that. I can shoot the M11 for multiple days on a single battery. I would have to switch batteries every day with the M10. It is a small thing, but it matters to some of us.
Nomads wrote:
- It gives me the traditional Leica M operation. I like the clean bottom.
Again personal. I have a half case on my M10-P that includes a flap, and ARCA Swiss capability. I found the film change simulation bottom ridiculous in concept, and a pain. I am glad I found a work around for that. But I never got attached to it by shooting Leica Film cameras.
Nomads wrote:
- It’s less complicated
As in all things, more power and flexibility brings more complications I guess. But I have found that with the new menus and configurable buttons the M11 is much easier and more efficient in actual use. This has resulted in shots I would have not gotten on the M10-R.
Nomads wrote:
- it’s brass and not aluminum
My Silver M11 is all brass as well. Once again, personal choices.
In my experience, the M11 takes nothing away. The M10-X cameras are also wonderful. I don't know what the need to rationalize the differences for you are. But most make no objective sense as the M11 can be shot exactly the same. The M11 can be everything that the M10-R can be with some added options/benefits. If those are not attractive to you, save the money and keep shooting the M10-R. You would gain nothing by changing cameras.
|
