Arka
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
 Re: Nikon 105mm f/1.4E ED Image Thread | |
Elijah wrote:
Arka wrote:
charles.K wrote:
With the utmost respect to Arka, I would not use Leica M lenses on the Sony's again. My intention still is to acquire a M10 with Leica M lenses as my compact/small/light to go system.
I seriously considered an M10 for my M lenses, as I loved the M240 despite its many, many operational quirks. But the lack of video and the continuing sluggishness of the electronics in Leica's "state of the art," particularly as compared to the A9, turned me away. The M10 is a lovely camera, but lacks the "ready to shoot" responsiveness and basic feature set I would expect of a camera costing nearly $7000.
Other than no video option, what do you mean lacks “ready to shoot” responsiveness?
My M10 is phenomenal in every aspect. I couldn’t ask for more out of the Leica. They really hit the spot with M10 design and features.
Comparing the M10 to A9 is just plain ridiculous. They’re completely two different horses.
You’re saying sluggish... for example, I was seriously impressed with how M10 handles WiFi and it’s features. Much better than my D750.
I'm glad the M10 is working out well for you, but it was never going to be satisfactory to me - that became very clear to me after borrowing it for a weekend. I was and still am a big fan of Leica, especially their lenses. I'd probably buy something like an interchangeable lens Q minus the rangefinder. But as of now, I won't limit my beloved M glass to M cameras. Why? Lots of reasons big and small. One example - it's baffling to me that the start-up time of the M10 is not significantly improved over the M240, and that startup time depends, at least in part, on the type of SD card in the slot. My 1D Mark II from 2003 had instant startup, but a $6500 camera in 2017 still requires up to 2s to get ready to shoot? That's unacceptable. I worked around it on the M240 by letting it go to sleep. but this was something that I felt Leica really needed to improve, and they didn't. More decisive for me than that, though, was the loss of video capability. I have used video on the M240 on countless occasions to capture irreplaceable memories. I refuse to give up that option on my daily-use camera.
Also, I don't agree that A9 and M240 can't be compared. The M and Alpha cameras are imaging equipment capable of utilizing M-lenses - those similarities alone makes them comparable. So, that's exactly what I did. You may think it ridiculous, but I'm glad I considered the option and moved my M glass over to the Alpha platform - I am much happier and generating more images I love, often using lenses that would have been very difficult for me to master on the M (e.g., Summilux 75 f/1.4 wide open... I struggled mightily to master the 90mm f/2, often resorting to the 1.4x magnifier). I wanted a lightweight, fun-to-use, high IQ camera capable of dealing better withy moving subjects than my M240. For those considerations, the A9 came out way ahead, $2000 cheaper, and without a wait list. Also I can autofocus Leica M lenses on it! What a powerful capability to have for moving subjects! No more worrying about focus shift, rangefinders or lenses going out of calibration, slow startup, and middling high ISO performance. And there's almost class-leading mirrorless video performance. I couldn't be happier.
|
