Leica M10: Is it the quintessential digital rangefinder?

An editorial view on the wonderful M10 as it nears the end of it’s lifecycle

Claus Sassenberg’s absorbing article yesterday on the five-year reign of Leica’s M10 should give us all food for thought. Are we satisfied with the M10 or should we automatically upgrade to the new “M-Elf” when it is launched next month?

The M10 is generally regarded as the best-to-date (avoiding the overused and often misused epithet of “perfect”) digital rangefinder. It certainly feels like a traditional film camera and it is much more to my taste than its rather podgy predecessor, the M240.

Strange thing about that M240, though: It runs the risk of being gently airbrushed out of Leica history because of that unfortunate naming convention, where Leica decided the camera would simply be known as “the M”. Then, to avoid entirely foreseeable confusion, it had to be described by the series number, Typ 240. All that nonsense is now over, but in the future our mind’s eye might well skip from M9 to M10.

Back at Photokina in 2014, Stefan Daniel, now Leica’s head of technology and operations, told me that the ultimate objective in the development of the M digital was to reduce it to the dimensions of the beloved M3. With the M10, introduced 30 months later, that goal was all but achieved. The “M-Zehn” is a tad taller than the M3 but matches almost exactly the dimensions of the M7. It feels good, as Claus says, and most of us are happy with the heft and dimensions of the M10. There is no call for a smaller or lighter M, as far as I know. It’s just right.

As a result, the M11 will carry on, building on the reputation of the M10 with the sort up-to-date technology necessary to sustain a four- or five-year run, a few design tweaks here and there, and a boost in resolution to probably 60MP.

But, as Claus rightly says, none of this is strictly necessary, nor has it been widely requested by rangefinder fans. The M10 is seen as the quintessential digital rangefinder and, despite the imminent arrival of the M11, I believe there is a lot of life left in the “tenner”.

Odd bod

I am in the peculiar position of owning the oddest M10 of the bunch, the screenless M10-D. I love that camera and I can say with confidence that I get on very well with its simplistic approach. By removing all non-essential options and adjustments, it is as straightforward to use as a film camera, yet it provides all the quality of output seen in all M10 models. Do I need a screen? Not really. I was very disappointed that the M10-D was prematurely discontinued and I took this signal to mean that it had been unsuccessful in sales terms. I hope, against the odds, that we will see an M11-D in time, but I’m not holding my breath.

Although the rumoured specification of the new M11 is attractive, I am not sure if I will be tempted this time around. The new Q-style bottom plate is sensible and desirable, even though the new battery renders our M10 spares obsolete. The rumoured large internal memory, sufficient to stand in as a second SD card, would be an undeniable advantage. And I’m keen on the possibility of a USB-C connection mainly for in-camera charging capability.

There’s little doubt that the M-Elf will be a blockbuster of a rangefinder, improving on the excellence of the M10 and, for newcomers, the natural weapon of choice. But many users, in common with Claus, are still happy with their Ten and will be keeping their credit cards in their pockets — at least for the time being. But never say never, as I’ve learned to my cost over the years.

I am less convinced by the possibility of a big rise in resolution, perhaps to as much as 60MP. However, I fully accept that more megapixels are necessary if the M11 is to remain competitive until 2026. It’s just that many owners feel they can do without them. On the positive side, the expected decision to allow files to be saved in a variety of lower resolutions will please those worried about storage.

What’s your view. Are all your rangefinder needs met by the M10/P/R/D or can’t you wait to get your hands on the new “Elf”, the M11?

More on the Leica M10

More on the Leica M10-D

More on the Leica M10-R



64 COMMENTS

  1. Quoting Clark Gable, “Frankly my dear, I don’t give a d@mn.” My M10-R gives me 41MP, good highlight headroom, recoverable shadows, and uses the same battery as my 2017 M10. I wouldn’t use 60MP since I’m not making museum sized prints, nor do I need to crop that much with lenses from 16mm to 135mm in my collection. Since the M11 isn’t supposed to have IBIS and its sensor also (I assume) lacks ultrasonic cleaning, there’s no attraction there either.

    No I’ll stick with my M10-series cameras for the foreseeable future, at least until Leica stops making (overpriced) batteries for them.

  2. I never liked the M240. It was the reason why I opted for two Leica SLs as my everyday setup for almost a year. The M240 didn’t feel like a proper M camera. It was bulky for an M rangefinder. It recorded videos. It did not have the original CCD sensor of the M9. Of course, all my cited reasons may seem trivial, or at the very least nitpicking. But, it doesn’t change the fact that I gravitated to the SL and as soon as the M10 came out, I opted for two M10 as my then everyday setup. From an anecdotal perspective, it makes perfect sense that the folks at Wetzlar did not bestow the full M naming honor to the M240. Something was obviously off with it. It’s like the Lamborghini Urus, or any non Porsche 911, or even the Ferrari California or Portofino. I think that the M240 was a design exercise that, when it came time to manufacture, the folks at Wetzlar had second thoughts and decided to name it something else. And after they did that, they realized that an M240 type of camera would be better served in an autofocus system, hence the SL. Thus, the M240 successor was unceremoniously dropped from any further consideration. That’s just my 2¢ worth (or two pence worth).

    As for the quintessential rangefinder, that would be the Voigtlander Bessa R3M with its 1.0 magnification, 1/125s shutter sync, and 1/2000s top shutter speed – if it were made better, that is. Or the Leica M3 with its 0.92x magnification – if it had an in-body meter. But for me, it’s the Leica M6J, with its 0.85x magnification – being the best compromise for me. That said, with the APO 35, and its improved minimum focusing distance, I might be inclined to give the upcoming M11 a go. I tried the measuring tape remedy to focus at 1 ft, and it was much more difficult than I thought.

  3. I own the M10-P, the rangefinder is brilliant, probably as good as it gets, if the M10-R (which I don’t own) improves on the sensor though (which a few people suggested) I would agree that the M10-R is probably a better pick for quintessential rangefinder.

    • Hi SlowDriver
      The M10-R definitely improves on the sensor – in every possible way, but principally in the way it handles highlights. (This is the result of a lot of comparison work over more than a year)
      All the best

  4. In the analog times lasting long was fantastic. Now Leica yearly releases several new models and most users keep them just for a while to go for the next one. So they last long in new hands as retail cameras and second hand camera dealers, Leica included, have gross profits.

  5. Just responding to David B. On the life span of Leicas: I still shoot with my D-Lux 4 and 6 and my typ 209, my TX2, my Cl and my X2 (a favorite); my M10 is still going strong, and my Q2 does everything else I need; so Sony (I do use the 6600) does not have all the advantage in longevity.
    Come to think of it, having just passed over my 80th, neither do I! But with successful cataract surgery I still have the 25/20 vision needed for a range-finder. Having bought my first Leica M with the M6, and later used the M3 for a time, the point of Leicas for me is their build, their ease of use, and their difficult to define but nevertheless particular “look.”

    • As regards longevity of Leicas, look at my two articles here. I will put in titles to use with the search box as Mike’s spam detector will halt any links:

      A Tale of Two Leicas: Oldest of times, newest of times

      Looking back with a 1926 Leica and a 1930s Super Baldina

      I hope this makes sense.

      William

    • Well the “look” of film Leicas was to do with the lenses and the films. I don’t think the camera bodies had anything to do with the “look” of the pictures ..unless you mean the “look” of the cameras themselves.

      With digital cameras, I really don’t know that the “look” of their pictures is – but maybe I’m just poor at detecting a particular “look”. And I suppose it depends what other “look” you’re comparing them with. Is there a Nikon “look”, a Canon “look”, a Pentax “look”, an Olympus “look” ..etc? To me, it depends what settings you choose: ‘Vivid’, ‘Natural’, ‘Portrait’, ‘Contrasty’, ‘Sharpen’, ‘Pastel’, ‘Night-time’..? Here on this Ricoh GXR, I’ve got ‘Vivid’, ‘Standard’, ‘Natural’, ‘Black & White’, ‘B&W (TE)’, ‘Setting 1’, ‘Setting 2’, ‘Individual Colour Setting’, etc. It can be adjusted to “look” like just about anything.

      So it seems – to me, anyway – that the pictures from pretty much any camera can be set to look like the pictures from almost any other camera. If you regularly under-expose by one stop, then maybe that’s your “look”. If you regularly use f1.7 ..then that’s your “look”.

      I really don’t think that, looking at those three pics above, say “Aha! Shot with an M10-D, or an M10!..” or whatever. Or if you look at Keith’s “It’s freezing..” article, can you identify the cameras the various pics were shot with? If he hadn’t written “..here is an iPhone photo..” would you really have known that the beached yacht was show with an iPhone?

      You say “..their [Leicas’] difficult to define but nevertheless particular “look”..” ..well I think it’s difficult to define because it doesn’t exist. That’s why it’s difficult to define. Some people say “it’s the micro-contrast”, others say “it’s the rapid fall-off from the region of sharpest focus”, others say it’s ..whatever they think it is. I can see sharpness (but really extra contrast) in film photos shot with 1970s Olympus lenses ..when compared with similar contemporary lenses of, say, the ’70s and ’80s. That’s ‘sharp’ compared with Nikon or Minolta lenses of that period. Not so sharp when compared with virtually any lens on a 4×5 camera!

      But comparing apples with apples, I really don’t think there’s a Leica “look” ..but that’s just my own opinion ..I’m sure you’ll find many other people who are convinced that there is.

      As for longevity; exactly: there’s no hard and fast rule ..I’m sure that many digital Leicas will work for several more years, and I know that one or two other brands have suddenly conked out on me (..a Sony RX100IV, a couple of pocketable Nikons, etc).

      My point was that one can’t say anything for certain! Stephen thought “..those non-innovative ‘R’ cameras, as you refer to them, will be around and usable long after the Sony SLR – style digital cameras have died a digital death!” ..but that’s just supposition. What evidence is there that Sony SLR-style digital cameras will fail fairly soon? What evidence is there that the 6-volt electronics inside a Leica R9 will continue to work for longer than the electronics in a Sony SLR-style digital camera? ..Or the electronics in any of the earlier R-series mechanical Leicas?

      My take is that it’s all supposition, conjecture and guesswork. It’s a turn of phrase, a belief that Leica products are better than other people’s products. (But what about sensors in the old Leica Digilux 2..? They suffered from a rather high failure rate, didn’t they? Leica apologists will say “..ah, but that was early days, and Leica hadn’t yet properly figured out digital cameras..” or “..those were Sony-made sensors ..not Leica’s fault!” ..but Leica put their name on the camera ..shouldn’t they have properly tested the sensors first?)

      The “look” of a photo, and longevities of individual camera brands and models are – for me – just ‘beliefs’. My M9 went back to Solms for rangefinder adjustment several times over ..not because my eyes had changed, but because the alignment wasn’t correct or consistent. Ever sent back a Nikon for viewfinder re-alignment? I haven’t, either.

      So we believe all sorts of things (..can’t mention politics, ‘cos Mike doesn’t like that!..) but just because we – or I – believe things ..that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re necessarily true ..it’s simply what we choose to believe is true.

      G’night!

      • So true David. I don’t think there is much to say on your logically put thoughts and questions… I’m glad that you are providing balanced views on this.

  6. The M3 and the M10 are not only bookends, but they are the two best user Ms for me. In between the M6 also stands out. I wish that I could get excited about sensors and all that, but I can’t. The one failing which digital Ms have is the lack of a really outstanding exposure system, compared to, say, the Nikon Matrix Metering System which has been outstanding for a long time with both film and digital. The technology is out there and I hope that the M11 addresses this issue to produce the perfect digital rangefinder camera. The main reasons why I use Leica Ms are their compact size and outstanding lens range.

    We should know all about the M11 next month.

    William

  7. Hi Dave, Thank you! I failed to mention how convenient and sensible it is that Leica has made “standard” the menu system on both the M Leicas and the SL Leicas. So easy to learn and so smooth to work with in the fieldl.

    • Yes, this is something I am sure other manufacturers could do if they so wished. It is a layer of consistency between models, I am sure the same menu system may also cover the CL and Q2.

  8. M10 – I loved my time with it, would I buy one if I could workout how to fit it into my use, then I would. But I look at the money, the previous images of my day with the M10, and the images from my X 113, and I just look and think are they way beyond 5k better. Not now. But that maybe my inner Yorkshireman calling out to my wallet, and not my feeding my GAS. I suspect if I dip back in, in the coming years a Q or Q2 will be my landing zone – as that seems to fit the middle ground – and I have long hankered after a Q.

    • I fully agree with you on Leica and the S and APS-C. The S is special order everywhere I look. Any S photographer I am aware of switched from the S to Hasselblad or Fujifilm a long time ago.
      If I was the product manager for the S “premium” dead product, I would leave it off my resume and start hunting for a job with a future.

  9. No one has mentioned THOUGHT PATTERNS and FUN. THOUGHT PATTERNS: I have the LEICA SL2. It’s menu follows sensible thought-patterns. It is natural and convenient to use (compared by me to Nikon and Canon and (oh my gosh) Sony. Separate menu set-ups for stills and movies, smooth, sensible arrangement of what one needs to access. I know some other cameras have this, but (for me) the SL2 is by far the best. It works like I think. I have the LEICA M10. It’s FUN! Sometimes I like to “play real photographer” and set the f-stop and shutter speed and focus the lens (maybe even put on a filter). It “takes me back” and reminds me that I really can make photos without having a small computer in a body. The SL2 and M10 give me the best of both worlds — rapid shooting and fun!

    • Stan you have a fan – I am with you on the menu combo’s, I hate Nikon, Canon and Sony having used all of them at some point, even for a walk around test – Sony Baffled me, Cannon was just a little too meh!, and don’t try and get my talking about the challenges of wrestling the Nikon menu system – my Df is my third Nikon DSLR, and still they make little sense to this Yorkshireman.

      However buying my little Leica X 113 way back when, opened me up to a logical, well thought through and simplistic menu system. One which is actually intuitive, and one which makes me feel at home and in control. The others, you have to almost use learned muscle memory to do the simplest task – if it is your only camera, yes you get there, but if you have different beasts for different feasts, then it highlights the challenge of working across systems to get the best results.

    • Great post Stan
      My old Mate Neil used to say that the definition of good technology was “It isn’t irritating” and that can certainly be said for both the SL2 and the M10 – they make a fine pair and are definitely fun (and not irritating) to shoot with
      If William is right, then we’ll know whether the M11 is going to be fun next month!

    • The Leica menu system reminds me of MS-DOS, Pac-Man and the Eighties in general, not necessarily a bad thing but a little more innovation would not hurt IMHO… it is indeed well organized but I very honestly think/feel the same about the one on my Canon, the Canon has more features though, so there are more entries but that does not necessarily mean the menu system itself is worse, I set up My Favorites on both systems and I go directly to My Favorites, no difference there except Leica now on most of its systems adds a status screen (which I don’t care for) and it now take me one button more to get to My Favorites on the Leica than on the Canon, so who has the best menu system…? FWIW, I love the user interface on my Hasselblad X1D II (although it also has a status screen…) and I actually also love the menu system on the T/TL2 but that was apparently a bridge too far for a lot of Leica shooters…

      • Hi Slowdriver, thanks for replying to my comment and in response to your question about A7c-
        The evf size/resolution is the most crippling factor unless you are in twenties or have a good eyesight. I sadly sold it off as the bad evf took all the joy away.
        What I’m now sporting is Fuji xe4 with the new 18/1.4 and 27/2.8.
        -minimalistic controls
        -rangefinder style body
        -very diminutive size and optional handgrip makes ergonomics even better
        -lcd screen could be used for selfies and sits flush otherwise
        -the new 18/1.4 is as good as Leica Q. Amazing pop, sharpness and bokeh. I would say it is even better as it does not distort faces as a Q does at close distance. It is slightly longer for the body but super light , with bright f1.4
        -the dinky 27/2.8 makes the camera super small and fun.
        -fuji menus are good.
        I’m no Fuji fanboy and I certainly didn’t like anything between x100 and xt3. The sensor from xt3 which is in xe4 is still good.
        I haven’t learnt playing with fuji raw files and I still use sooc and tweak in lightroom.
        I guess I should compile a small article for macfilos with some pictures.

        • Thanks for the feedback! The EVF on the A7c seems to be the deal breaker for a lot of people, too bad, obviously we also don’t know yet how serious Sony is about the A7c, that being said they did release a new 2.0 firmware earlier this month I saw, hopefully a good sign… I owned 3 Fuji cameras before Leica APS-C, image quality wise I was perfectly happy, I used Iridient Developer for raw processing, at the time it was the best option, not sure whether it still is… I must say that the new Fuji F1.4 primes look very tempting… I dropped Fuji (and Sony) to standardize on Leica across sensor sizes about 6 years ago, probably one of the dumbest things I ever did… as Leica in the meanwhile completely lost all interested in the S and the APS-C systems… I hope you are fully recovered in the meanwhile! Take care!

          • Hmmm – The new Product Manager for the S cameras is a sparkling and intelligent young man, full of enthusiasm and fantastic ideas and definitely a rising star.

            APS-C is pending I fear, I think that they reckon that like the trusty point and shoot it it will be made redundant by better and better phone cameras.

          • Hi Jono, Leica stores in the US don’t even carry the S system anymore… as Leica now mainly and almost exclusively targets the very high end market I am sure there will probably be a new mirrorless medium format solution at some point in time but I would expect a new lens mount allowing S glass to be used with an adapter, not too bad if that is case but why did Leica let it come this far? The customer base is only a tiny fraction anymore of what it once was… And Leica should get their ass kicked for the way they treated their APS-C customers, these people loyally waited for 4 years and believed corporate bullshit sentences like APS-C remains an integral part of our offerings only to wake up one day and hear Leica say that they don’t know yet… Leica should be ashamed of itself…

          • FWIW, and as a follow-up on the A7c discussion above, Sony reported a few days ago that it suspended production of the A7c… They had already done that with their APS-C cameras as well… Reason is the chip shortage… So even if Leica wanted to make a CL2 it is not entirely clear whether that in the current supply situation would even be possible, ie. whether they even would be able to source the sensors…

          • It is true, however, that as a loyal Leica consumer, I do not feel well treated by Leica with regard to the Leica APSC.
            In particular, I think they should state quite CLEARLY in which direction Leica will go or not go.
            One sign, however, is that most Leica dealers I have visited in Germany do not see any future in Leica apsc. It is true, however, that as a loyal Leica consumer, I do not feel well treated by Leica with regard to the Leica APSC. In particular, I think they should state quite CLEARLY in which direction Leica will go. One sign, however, is that most Leica dealers I have visited in Germany do not see any future in Leica apsc. Seen with those eyes, I get in doubt about what Leica wants with L Mount. I think apsc is a part of it and now they are shutting it down. Maybe.
            Seen with those eyes, I get in doubt about what Leica wants with L Mount. I think apsc is a part of it and now they are shutting it down. Maybe.
            I have APSC. I can tell you that a mobile phone is nowhere near what Leica’s APSC can do. Try putting a TL35 F.1,4 on… I easily think Leica’s APSC can carry one or two generations more.

          • Hi Kim, no disagreement here, see also my reply above to Jonathan Slack, Leica did not treat its APS-C customers well at all, and after 4 years of waiting (and quite frankly very misleading statements from Leica about their commitment to APS-C) you would expect something more than we don’t know yet… Leica owns APS-C shooters a path forward, and even though I own an SL that path is clearly not the SL, the SL has almost 2.5x the weight of the CL, it is not a solution.

  10. I agree with Brian — I just turned in my SL2-S and lenses — it was just too big and heavy to carry out and about everyday; I swapped it for a good condition M10 and refused a more expensive M10-P because I didn’t (like Jono) need the horizon line or the Dutch screen (I have that on the Sony 6600). In returning to the M (I started with the M6 and the M3, and then to the M 240, the M-P) I feel entirely comfortable again with a favorite walk-around. And if I need to crop, then the not too heavy Q2 offers the option. Not sure what the M11 could bring to the table to make me upgrade. After all, I still use the CL/TL2 and the X2 for sunny days hiking and a light bag.

    • I’m in my 60’s now and had always used lighter weight systems for travel photos. When I recently decided to go SL2s I thought I had made a crazy decision and that I might discover it would be too heavy but it turned out I was wrong.
      What I discovered is that if you carry it around all day on your shoulder or in a shoulder bag like my Billingham Hadley then..yes, it’s heavy, but if you carry it in a backpack style bag with comfortable padded straps and inserts designed for cameras ( mine is a Lowepro fastpack 250) it’s perfectly manageable. My kit is SL2s body with 24-70 Vario Elmarit zoom, 135 Apo Telyt M,
      M-adaptor, Leica mini tripod and spare batteries. I can also carry, fleece jacket, rain jacket, snacks or other food, gloves, flashlight in the same bag in the top section.Total weight on the bathroom scales is just over 5kg and I’m a little guy with narrow shoulders.
      My test walk was a hike to a local lake with some elevation at a nice steady pace. After 4.5 hours with this on my back the whole time I didn’t have sore shoulders or feel overly tired. Your mileage of course may vary. I’m reasonably fit for my age and walk everywhere..
      I should add I was still surprised by this. I thought after that hike the SL2s would feel like I wes carrying bricks. It didn’t. The Q2 would be a lovely go anywhere camera, but just to let you know even moderate hiking is quite possible with the SL2s, even more so if you decide to use a couple of lighter weight Sigma primes. For city use, I’d probably stick to one lens and throw in an iPad. Advantages for me of the SL series body is that amazing viewfinder and weatherproofing. And finally I have a camera that has a menu system that doesn’t drive me nuts and require 3 minutes to locate the self-timer while my friends stand around making fun of the photographer!!

  11. Probably both definitely right. Though going from one released M to the next one, leaving perhaps £1000 in every exchange, that’s definitely not for me

  12. Totally agree Brian with that last paragraph.Seems like only yesterday that everyone was writing Leica off as being outdated when they only had the M cameras and a few PanaLeica compacts, but look at them now.Over the years I’ve worked my way through many of the Japanese brands (with the notable exception of Canon) and I still feel the Leicas are more enjoyable to use for the reasons you highlighted.Lenses are consistent in quality too.

  13. My view is that whatever rangefinder you love is the quintessential rangefinder. The M11 will be the quintessential rangefinder based on specification. However, for me, the quintessential colour rangefinder is the M9 because of the gorgeous ccd rendering. My M10M rangefinder is the most gorgeous camera I have ever had the joy of beholding and the craftsmanship is a joy to fondle and the tonal rendering is breathtaking-I am in love!

    There will always be people who appreciate the craftsmanship and image rendering of Leica so their future is looking good in the shrinking market. Other manufacturers are on steadily cracking ice that only the fittest will survive.

  14. Tenthessential! I started and finished in the eighth. Even now I’m thinking of selling the seventh wonder M7. Really don’t miss the 1000£ viewfinder; it’s parked too often

  15. OK, I seem to be the first one to answer… And, I´ll do that with a vengeance: I´m still happily using my M9 (and my Monochrom v.1) for almost 12 years in a row! I had both sensors updated, just before Leica stopped doing it for free, and both cameras work like a charm. I´ve got used to their undeniable quirks and foibles, and own the lenses I need (plus a few too many that I don´t), and see no need whatsoever to “update” as long as they continue to work as expected. I still have my 60+ years M2 in good working order in the cupboard, although I haven´t shot film for the last 15 years.

  16. Whatever the temptation, I am fairly certain that the MP240 will be my last rangefinder camera. Even it sees less use than my CL family, aided by my original Q, X1 and X Vario. I feel well satisfied with my stable of ‘oldies’. It gives me more time to consolidate my interests and explore new avenues of darkness and lightness. 60 mega-pixels? What would I do with such abundance.

    • Well, the obvious answer to “what would I do with 60 mega-pixels” is that you would crop – so that you can go out and about with one lens and the knowledge that you can crop the image to represent two longer lenses.

      . . . or you can print BIG (if that’s what floats your boat). I always thought that 24mp was the ‘sweet spot’ but when the M10-R hit my desk in July 2019 I realised I was very wrong.

      As for storage – the last two years of images sits comfortably on the 2tb SSD of my macbook pro, with the other 20 years of digital images neatly contained on one external 4TB SSD. It’s hardly a storage crisis!

      All the best

      • I agree on storage. It isn’t a big problem. I recently bought a 4TB external disk for £74, for instance, so it is hardly a deal breaker any more. Also agree on the cropping, as featured on the Q2. And if the M11 has this ability to save files of different sizes, that gives everyone a tailor-made option.

        • Needless cropping is not a great idea, rather I see it instead as a needless and often terrible waste of our camera lenses performance what we are actually also doing via cropping is further enlarging or blowing any and every optical imperfection as well.
          Sure on the face of it more and more pixels do indeed give us all the freedom to crop but please only do so if no other option exists because not even every one of even Leica’s wonderful lenses will actually stand it.
          you will also be blowing up any and all of whichever lens is fitted’s mperfections, limitations, lack of definition etc etc as well.
          My own strongly held view being regardless of how many pixels we have available or we can afford to lose it is ALWAYS will be far better to aim for max optical performance via using the best lens you have of the right lens length for the job instead of cropping.
          And when specifically discussing digital imaging I do also very much mean best as welm if we can to only use modern lens or lenses specificaly designed for pixels rather than film, indeed I sometimes cringe when such as my fellow enthusiasts bang on about what they describe as being Leica’s ‘Legacy’ lenses for although most were for film useage back in the day, Legacy’ nowadays for me at least is just another way of saying obscalete and most likely past it for digital photography use.

        • I’m late to the party as was in the hospital due to covid. All very interesting conversation here.
          Mike, it is all good to say more resolution means we don’t have to carry an additional lens, memory is cheap nowadays, etc.
          However, I believe this is purely a case where Leica is stuck technology wise with the M or whatever the definition of M is for the sake of being pedantic.
          I do not think I’ll achieve the same look with a crop using a wide angle lens. Besides the M lenses are small so that wasn’t an issue in the first place, ever.
          I would repeat my suggestion that I might have posted here long ago and even elsewhere on Steve Huff.
          – M size full frame camera, with native M mount or even L
          -In built EVF, could be used to view pics too and menu settings
          -lcd screen or no screen
          -ibis if possible
          -resolution no more than 35MP like Sony A7IV. Gives sufficient option for cropping without being unmanageable
          -some inbuilt grip or at least included grip accessory

          • Thanks for the additional input, Mahesh, and I am sorry to hear that you were laid low with Covid, even to the extent of having to go into hospital. I am sure we all hope you have fully recovered. Mike

          • Hi Mahesh, I fully agree with you, IMHO also the L-mount will never become truly popular if it does not have such a body, I believe we will probably see an M11 and Q3 first though, 2023 or 2024 would be my guess, BTW, how was your experience with the Sony A7c? That is the only FF body that comes close.

      • Print big? I am already running out of wall space and I don’t do exhibitions. Now, if I was a globetrotter, maybe. I can’t see those days returning in my lifetime. Cropping? I try to fill the frame with my MP240, and am not averse to changing lenses. So cropping is not an important feature for me.

        I am sure new goodies will be very tempting and find plenty of buyers worldwide. Meanwhile , dark winter evenings often find me rediscovering and re-editing digital images residing, out of sight, on my various archive storage discs, taken on a variety of cameras and lenses, once the latest in their class. Their quality often amazes me.

  17. .
    Leitz was originally a microscope manufacturer, and then – to expand their range of products – to ‘diversify’ – they (..the son of the original Leitz, anyway..) decided to offer ‘Barnack’s camera’. The firm then became known for its cameras, rather than for the microscopes ..or its other products such as binoculars.

    But Leica – as the firm now is, and named after its cameras – really needs to diversify again: it’s pretty much painted itself into a corner (..though it did begin to offer silly watches and other trinkets – what happened to those?).

    It’s been constantly re-offering pretty much the same ‘M’ camera since 1954 – at first a film camera, then digital versions of the same thing – and a few assorted pocket cameras, and then the massive ‘S’ variants. But what else can it offer? Andreas Kaufmann got into ciné lenses, like Zeiss ..but there hasn’t been much diversification into other specialist optical equipment that I know of.

    Yesterday I had my eyes tested ..with, it tuned out, four separate Zeiss devices; a visual field tester, an eye scanner, a something else, and another something else ..all Zeiss products. Zeiss and Olympus seem to have the microscope business all sewn up (..I can’t remember having seen a Leitz microscope recently..) ..and I don’t think much more can be squeezed out of yet another 1954-style ‘M’ product, as they still have that ‘no-wider-than-28mm’ viewfinder, the silly back-to-front, unimproved 1954 focusing mechanism which means that an ‘M’ is super-accurate with wide-angle lenses, but increasing inaccurate the longer the lens that you put on it!

    Where’s the innovation? M-11..? No thanks. I prefer the smaller, much more versatile Sony SLR-style digital cameras, or the Canon ‘R’ for Canon lenses. The ‘M’ series has now become a dead end, like the non-innovative Leica ‘R’ series, which died way back in 2009.

    • I can’t disagree with any of this and, perhaps, that’s why I’m painting myself into a corner in retaining the M10-D as “my” rangefinder for when I feel the need. Increasingly, though, I’m using the SL2, the little Ricoh GRIII and, even, the Panasonic S5 instead.

    • What heresy David!
      More seriously though, the market for cameras has shrunk radically over the last 10 years (point and shoot cameras actually gone). The cameras that are left are increasingly expensive, so that the SL2 is now no more expensive than high end offerings from Nikon, Sony and Canon.

      However, there is always going to be a market for proper cameras, but it’s going to be the sort of market that a smaller company like Leica can actually do well in. . . . and they are doing well. Much harder for their big competitors to shrink their operations economically.

      With the youngsters who went back to film getting to the age when they can afford an M camera there is a whole new market appearing there. M cameras are becoming iconic again (something they haven’t been since the 70’s) and the latest digital M cameras can produce just as good images as the Sony A1!

      You might prefer your more versatile Sony SLR-styled cameras, but whilst other people like shooting with M cameras (whether film or digital), then Leica are likely to prosper. Certainly, the mood amongst the dealers and Leica staff I talked to in Wetzlar in December was not that of a company ‘painted into a corner’, quite the contrary.

      All the best

      • Jonathan, or Jono,

        From today’s online adverts:

        “Leica SL2 Digital Camera Body, £5,529” from – pretty much the lowest prices – Wex Photo/Video here in the UK.

        “Leica SL2 with Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-70 f2.8 ASPH Lens, £7,200” from the very reputable Clifton Cameras.

        Now what about the latest Sony A7 Mk IV ..with a 61 megapixel sensor? £2,399 from Park Cameras, and that’s about the average price. (The top-of-the-line Sony A1, average price: £6,499, is a much higher spec camera, with 30fps, 8k 30p video, etc, beyond what the SL2 delivers.)

        Nikon Z7 II 45 megapixel full frame mirrorless camera With Nikkor Z 24-70mm and 4k video? £3,449 at Park Cameras. That’s £3751 LESS than the SL2 complete with a 24-70mm lens (though the Nikon lens is one stop slower than the Leica lens).

        Canon R5 body (not the huge professional sports photographers’ R3, but the top-of-the-range amateurs’ version) with 45MP CMOS sensor and ISO range 100-51200, up to 8 stops image stabilisation, 12fps mechanical and 20fps electronic shutter with 8K 30p 12bit RAW video? £4,299 at Park Cameras.

        So the SL2 varies from between about £1,230 (Canon R5) to about £3,130 (Sony A7IV) or £3,751 (Nikon Z7II) MORE EXPENSIVE than similar-range Nikon, Sony and Canon cameras (..and that’s £3,751 more expensive than a Z7II with both outfits including a 24-70mm lens!)

        So I really can’t agree that “..the SL2 is now no more expensive than high end offerings from Nikon, Sony and Canon”. It’s generally about £3k more expensive – by my reckoning.

        But I think this article is about the “..Leica M10: Is it the quintessential digital rangefinder?” ..and presently the Leica M10, without any lens, costs roughly – depending on whether M10-P or M10-R, and which body texture and colour you choose – between £6,250-£7,500 at Park Cameras. That’s about £700-£1,971 MORE than an SL2..! ..Does less, costs more! ..the usual Leica pricing tactic. Just compare the cost of Mike’s screen-less M10-D with an M10 which DOES have a lens!

        The usual – or maybe by now old-fashioned – internet acronym is, or was, ‘ROFL’.

        • I did read somewhere (and several years ago) that the mechanical rangefinder represents some £1,000 of the cost of a typical M, whether film or digital. I suppose this must account for some of the difference.

          • B-but how can it STILL account for “..some £1,000 of the cost of a typical M..” ..surely the cost of fitting those rangefinder components (cut-out frame-line masks, little prisms, etc) MUST have been coming down year by year where they’re made in Portugal.

            If they haven’t, then the business really isn’t running efficiently. Or maybe the cost has been coming down ..but Leica’s kept the cameras’ price high to reinforce that idea that the ‘M’s are superior cameras ..you know, saying of Leicas “..because I’m worth it!”

            (Think of the Stella Artois beer slogan: “Reassuringly expensive”.)

        • Whatever – I wasn’t really talking about the value for money (and of course you don’t include cost of ownership – but I acknowledge the fact that Leica is expensive). Nobody is ever going to buy a Leica because it’s a good deal. Also worth mentioning that I didn’t say ‘equivalent spec’ cameras, but ‘top of the range’ cameras.
          BUT
          That wasn’t my point, which was about whether Leica need to diversify (as you suggested) and whether they had a future as they are – which they clearly have.

          • .
            “..Nobody is ever going to buy a Leica because it’s a good deal..”

            You’re thinking, then, just what I’m thinking: that Leicas – unless they’re old ones at reasonable prices – are NOT a good deal. My thoughts exactly. They’re over-priced and under-perform.

            So do people buy them because – as you suggest – they are a poor deal? If so, why?

            Because, I think, people are bamboozled by the PR, and often think that they’re joining some kind of mythical “élite”. It’s a case, I think, of ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’. As Brian says below, it’s important to him that he enjoys “fondling” his M10-M (..but in that case, it seems to me, it might just as well be some over-priced camera-shaped teddy bear).

            Leica lenses are very good – though others’ are nowadays equally good – but the cameras themselves, I think, under-perform for the price. As you suggest, they are not a good deal if you want the best capability at a reasonable price. Some people, though, feel good paying more money than is reasonably sensible for a new camera; it is, I think, a self-congratulatory thing: “Look, I can afford this, even if it’s not a good deal!” ..a bit like choosing to eat in the most expensive restaurant you can find ..just because you can! (..even if the food’s rather weird).

            If you couldn’t cuddle it, though, would you pay over the odds for, say, an unreasonably expensive gas or electricity supply, or pay a third more than what the taxi meter shows ..or pay for a first class seat because you want to be considered to be the kind of person who buys a first class seat, and wants to separate themselves from the hoi polloi who buy standard class seats?

            I don’t think that people buy Leicas because they are a “good deal”: I think that, generally, people buy one so that they can congratulate themselves on having bought one ..it’s what’s called ‘recursive’.

    • David, you do realize those non-innovative ‘R’ cameras, as you refer to them, will be around and usable long after the Sony SLR – style digital cameras have died a digital death! My own M cameras have outlasted 20 odd years of digital creations already.

      • Let me think ..when did I get my first digital camera? Ah; 1997. It was – and still is! – a Sony ‘Mavica’ FD7, with a built-in unobtrusive 10x zoom lens, auto-focus, and saving about 22 photos (of 0.3 megapixels each) on a standard plastic ‘floppy’ disc, then costing 30 pence each. So rather cheaper than Polaroids, which were then the only other ‘instant’ photos.

        1997-2007-2017 ..so it’s about 24 years old (I got it at Christmas ’97). And still going strong.

        Of course, my 2009 super-duper, extra-expensive, top-of-the-range, ‘solidly-engineered’ Leica M9 died “..a digital death..” after just four years, and had to have a new sensor fitted (but at no cost to me, once Leica had recognised that the sensors they’d fitted into the M9 series were of inferior manufacture).

        So what’s the lesson here? ..well, as long as you can still get the batteries – which you can – a 24-year-old Sony digital camera (..the first of its breed, able to take photos to within three-quarters-of-an-inch up to infinity, and with a huge-range, and pretty much invisible compact zoom..) STILL WORKS!, whereas a supposedly top-marque, bought-sans-lens Leica failed after four years.

        So my betting is on the Sony SLR-style A7 series NOT actually dying “..a digital death..” any time soon.

        “..My own M cameras have outlasted 20 odd years of digital creations already..”

        Well, yes: my 1954 M3 is still going strong (..and with better focusing and an almost-life-sized finder; better than any of the subsequent-to-present M finders..) with another whole bunch of mechanical cameras, too (Konica, Reid, Kodak, etc) ..but some film-type ‘sensor’ technology has, in the mean time, died: no more Kodachrome, far narrower range of film types and available processing. The high ISO capabilities of current digital cameras, though, have really beaten film hands down, of course.

        I dare say there are Austin 7s still running around the roads somewhere – maybe Mike knows: perhaps at Brooklands – but I prefer the smoother ride and lesser maintenance of a more recent car (my 2003 Audi). Do I miss the starting handle ‘convenience’ – in emergencies – of my 1947 Ford Pop? Er, no.

        So, coming back to the point: I don’t envisage my Sonys dying anytime soon..

  18. Hi Mike
    Interesting about the M240 being lost – I thought they should have called the M10 the M11 – thereby at least leaving a marker for the M240. Especially as it is apparently the ‘most sold’ digital M camera.

    As for the M11, until we see one we can’t really judge whether its advantages are worth the modernisation. I can see an argument for the M10-R ending up as the classic digital M (not for the extra resolution, but because the sensor is simply better than the other variants).

    All the best

    • I’ve been harbouring these thoughts about the M240 for a long time. You are right, they should have skipped the M10 and left it as a placeholder for the M240. Or, better still, they should not have been seduced into believing they could continue ad infinitum with the “M” without giving us poor sods a point of reference. I suspect Dr K was entranced by Apple’s policy of “a MacBook is a MacBook is a MacBook”. But this leaves the consumer having to talk about “Late 2019” or “Mid 2018” variants and this is even more confusing. Another example is Porsche with the 911. But you have to remember the series, 996, 997 etc. All very confusing. At least, though, Leica soon learned the error of its ways in terms of nomenclature.

          • Actually, the M262 (no live view) is the “real M9 and a half” The M262 is the M9 with a CMOS sensor 🙂

        • Or the magic 9 3/4?

          By the way, I still very much like my M262 to this day. Its only shortcoming is a massive propensity to colour drift with quite some non-Leica lenses. Apart from that a Leica M which represents quite well “das Wesentliche”. I think the M262 with its beautiful silent shutter and its lower weight thanks to the aluminium top plate is heavily underrated.

      • Mike, I remember talking to Stefan Daniel and the then CEO of Leica when the M240 was introduced. They were very much into the Porsche analogy. The M was the M, like the classic 911, and Leica would have Type numbers just like Porsche. Merely a coincidence that the then CEO drove a Porsche!
        Obviously, that naming convention went the way of the Dodo, and the next M was properly named M10.
        Well, we will know soon enough. For myself, I am very happy with my tow M10-P’s, but I may sell one to buy an M10-R.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here