Category Archives: Hardware

Stuff

Leica M10 – Part I

A troubled history leads to a fine camera.

For an index of all Leica-related articles click here.

I bought a used Leica M10 the other day. What follows details how I got there.



Just arrived.

Leica’s understanding of the digital landscape was tortuous and error prone to state it mildly.

Leica M digital history: Their first effort, the Leica M8 in 2006, very late to market, used a Kodak (!) 10mp sensor and was a miscue, as it used a cropped sensor. For goodness’ sake, one of the prime reasons to use a Leica is the 35mm lens. Suddenly it was 50mm because of the crop. And your exotic 21mm became a mundane 28mm. As with all digital Ms the shutter is now metal and vertically running. The body is 14% thicker than that of the film Leica. In its defense I suppose the M8 did force Leica into learning how to make a digital camera with the M8. It just was not a very appealing one. To add insult to injury Kodak got the specs for the sensor’s cover glass wrong resulting in Leica having to offer free IR filters to owners to try and reduce poor rendering of dark fabrics. And that’s before mentioning the maximum ISO of 640 (seriously) and random lock-ups like a Windows computer of yore. A hot mess.

Then came the Leica M9 which was their first full frame sensor effort. But someone at Leica chose a manufacturer seemingly clueless about sensor engineering (yup, Kodak again) and after a while their sensors developed corrosion, rendering the camera useless. And, of course, there are no spares.



Corroded sensor in an M9.

There’s a repair shop which fits aftermarket sensors …. for $2,500. The technical information regarding the causes of corrosion is very well written on that site and recommended to all Leica M9 owners. Now that’s what I call a repair bill. Both the M8 and M9 used CCD sensors whose colors I love (my APS-C Nikon D2x used one), but the trade off is grain and a lower dynamic range compared with CMOS designs. The M9’s CCD sensor had 18mp. Nice, but the shutters in the M8 and M9 were Nikon DSLR noisy and the garish large ‘M9’ script on the front of the top plate just added embarrassment to loudness, the latter courtesy of that red dot. Surprisingly aftermarket replacement batteries are listed by Amazon.

It gets worse. Much worse. The next effort was the strangely named Leica M240 which now exceeded the size of the lovely film M body because another dope at Leica decided to add video. This porker was no less than 25% thicker than the film cameras. The sensor was designed by a Belgian company named CMOSIS and made by STMicroelectronics in Grenoble. Video in a street snapper. Uh huh. But that’s far from the worst of it. You see the aftermarket never made batteries for the camera as the market was too small to justify the tooling costs and, yup, you guessed it. Leica no longer makes the battery, so every M240 will soon be an $8,000 paperweight.



The M240 $8,000 paperweight. Fat and useless.

No, you will not find it on Amazon and Hung So Low sure as heck is not making it. It was Leica’s first effort with a CMOS sensor and had no corrosion issues. M240s can be had for under $3,000 but once the dire battery situation gets recognized they will quickly fall to zero. Worthless. If there was one really good technology development in the M240 it was Leica’s inspired crafting of a series of conical micro lenses to address and correct color fringing issues with wide angle lenses. Now that was genius indeed.

Finally the Leica M10 came along in 2017, priced at $8,995. The sensor was made by the same Belgian company as for the M240. The shutter was now reasonably quiet, like on the M3 of 1954. 24mp, a battery which is still made, no useless video, and the size was almost back to that of the M3. The heights are now identical but the M10 is still 16% (5.5mm) thicker. The button count was reduced and someone is cleaning up selling replacement stick-on logos to cover that ridiculous red dot which screams ’steal me now’. There are two things to dislike about that unnecessary red decoration. First, it screams nouveau riche when all the self effacing street snapper wants is oldveau pauvre. Second, it loudly announces ‘Steal Me Now’. The shortest shutter speed is 1/4000th and there is no electronic shutter. I bought a replacement for the red logo from AGS Supply. It looks like the screw on the M10-P but is actually retained with two-sided sticky tape, just like the red dot. Silly expensive but the alternative of a piece of tape would be an insult to the gorgeous body. The M10 is now discontinued.



The silver tape covering the garish red logo will have to do for now.
The guiding design ethos of the Bauhaus remains, first seen in the 1954 M3.

One interesting variant was the M10-D which deletes the rear LCD, harkening back to film days. I would much prefer this over the stock version, but do you really expect me to pay $2,000 more for less? The M10 was the first digital M that spoke to me on paper, but it required too much paper to buy. I decided to wait, knowing that digital devices lose value faster than a newly minted politician loses his integrity.

With the Leica M11, introduced in January, 2022, also at $8,995, Leica finally knocked it out of the park with a 60mp sensor, switchable to lower settings of 36mp or 18mp. The added sensor Back Side Illumination saw the already good dynamic range of the M10 grow by almost 2 stops. But who needs 60mp? And at almost $10,000 now without a lens you need a really good spell in the market not to feel the pain. Or wait three years for used prices to halve, like with the M10. It’s unclear who makes the sensor for the M11 but given that Sony invented BSI technology it may well be the Japanese company. The M11 offers a silent electronic shutter option for the first time. Nice. That I would like to have in the M10. There’s also 64gB of internal storage so you do not even need SD card and that 64mB will store at least 2,000 DNG/RAW files. Phew! But, then again, a 64gB SDXC card costs all of $15 so if you are buying the M11 for its internal storage a prior visit to your shrink is probably advised. It’s a current model so wait three years after it’s discontinued to snap one up at 50 cents on the dollar.

Well, here’s hoping that they keep making batteries for ‘my’ M10, even if they are ridiculously priced. The user’s manual states that batteries are only good for a scant 4 years.

Cost: But the elephant in the room is the cost of a good used M10. Even 5 years after it was discontinued it’s still silly expensive. A good user film M2/M3/M4 can be had for $1,600 so the M10 is almost thrice as much. You will not find one for less than $4,500. The way I rationalized this outlay was simple. It’s equivalent to 110 rolls of processed and scanned film. Film is as ridiculously expensive as the modern digital M. 110 rolls is not a lot. Mine came from an authorized Leica dealer with a 12 month warranty and a spare battery. Nice, as the M10 is reputed to be something of a battery hog.

One snag is that when it comes time to sell the M10 for something newer, it will have significantly depreciated from today’s cost whereas the film M bodies, if history is any guide, will continue to keep pace with inflation. That’s a sad fact of throwaway digital technology. At some point in the future there will be no key replacement parts for the M10 just as there are no batteries for the M240.

Why did I upgrade from film after returning to the Leica M3 after a 20 year absence from the brand? Well after running a few rolls of Kodak Ektar through it two things became clear. Large 13″ x 19″ prints from the scanned full frame were perfectly feasible. But start cropping and the resolution of the scanned file is simply inadequate. And that even applies to the highest quality scans made with a 36mp Nikon D800 and a dedicated ‘scanner’ setup. The scan was running out of resolving power way before the lens did and, let’s face it, who wants to depend on the tender mercies of the USPS and the interminable wait to get the mediocre scanned results from a commercial processor?

Knobs and buttons: The design philosophy of the M10 could not be more different from that of the typical DSLR. On my Nikon D800 I count no fewer than 15 physical controls on the back plus another 11 on the front for a total of 26.



Control madness – the rear of the Nikon D800.

Compare with the rear of the M10:



Severity and simplicity – the rear of the Leica M10.

The front adds just 3 controls. The design philosophy of the Nikon takes as many controls from the LCD to the body as is possible but in practice I find you set your favorite settings and hardly ever use these. The M10 allows you to place a handful of favorite settings on the screen which is first seen on the LCD when ‘Menu’ is pushed. Thereafter a second push on the Menu button gives you the myriad of settings which digital cameras revel in. Minimalism trumps maximalism in my book.

Resolving power: Some examples in later installments of this piece will show the true resolving power of my four M lenses – the 35mm Leitz Summaron f/3.5 RF, the 35mm Canon LTM f/2, the 50mm Canon LTM f/1.4 and the 90mm Leitz Tele-Elmarit f/2.8. In aggregate these cost me less than one modern used Leica lens and I rather suspect that the costliest, the 35mm Summaron, will be up for sale soon, the goggles a needless and clunky reminder of the limitations of the M3’s viewfinder, as the M10 has native frames for the 35mm Canon, which also happens to be 1 1/2 stops faster.

A related reason is that exposure measurement with the M3 is too slow for the street candid work I favor and, by contrast, every digital M body comes with aperture priority auto exposure. Sure there’s still no autofocus but with the speedy rangefinder and zone focusing that’s not a serious impediment to fast work. Yes, there’s no IBIS but I don’t miss it. I’m (still!) steady enough. And the alternative of using my Nikon D800 with its immense mass and weight for discrete street work does not solve.

In Part II I will look at the mysteries of 6-bit lens coding, proper rangefinder alignment and other arcana.

Leica M2 – Asahi Camera review

From my archives.

For an index of all Leica-related articles click here.

In April, 1959 the well regarded Asahi Camera magazine (it ran from 4/1926 through 7/2020) published an extraordinarily detailed review of the recently introduced Leica M2.



Late version of the Leica M2 with the first version of the rigid 50mm f/2 Summicorn.

Like the revolutionary Leica M3 of 1954, the M2 continued with the magnificent combined range/viewfinder but stepped the magnification down from 0.91x (almost life size) to 0.72x (not 0.75x as stated in the Asahi Camera report), to permit display of the 35mm frame. M3 users had to either use an external finder (not possible if you wanted the Leicameter fitted) or had to resort to the clunky ‘goggles’ versions of the 35mm optic to get the correct field of view. The M3’s native frames are 50mm (always displayed), 90mm and 135mm, the latter two switched either with the selector lever on the front of the camera or when the related lens was fitted.

Rumors that the M2, which was cheaper at the time, was less well made are nonsense. Yes, the rangefinder design was simplified (??? Look at Figure 4 in the Asahi Camera report – both look insanely complex to me) to lower production costs, there was no self-timer and the frame counter had to be reset manually after changing films. But otherwise everything was very much identical and, in fact, to Leitz’s surprise, the M2 became increasingly popular as photojournalists migrated to the 35mm lens. Better still, the clunky and always displayed 50mm frame in the M3 with its rounded corners (a Kodachrome slide mount legacy) was gone and the three frames in the M2 (35/50/90mm) would only appear one at a time. I have owned and used both the M3 and M2 for decades and much prefer the finder of the M2 for street snapping, as I tend to favor the 35mm lens.


Click the image for the PDF file.

The Leica M2 had several minor variations. The first version came with a button you had to hold down while rewinding the film. Not great. The second version had the same button but once depressed it stayed down until the film advance lever was worked. Much better. The Asahi Camera report picks up on this. The third version reverted to the same small lever used on the M3. It’s very unlikely you will activate this accidentally, and quite how the earlier button design saved production costs beats me. The lever design is the best of all. You can see it in the first image above. Maybe this was just another case of the old German belief : “Why make it simple when complex works just as well?”

And the originally deleted self-timer could be retrofitted if desired (at goodness knows what horrendous cost) or came standard with later production. But these are minor quibbles. There are strong grounds for arguing that the M2 was the best street M Leica ever made. The successor to the M2 and M3 was the M4 and came with a cluttered finder, showing multiple frames at once. The M5 was a design disaster. The M6 saw construction quality fall, internal screws became rivets, and the whole thing just did not feel as good in the hands, TTL meter notwithstanding. I know. I used one a lot. The single worst feature was that there was no top plate readout to take an exposure reading so you had to raise the camera to the eye to accomplish this. A camera at eye level is anathema to the stealthy approach dictated by street photography of people.

The Asahi Camera report also reviews the first rigid version of the 50mm f/2 Summicron, the finest standard lens of the time. I used one for years and it really is wonderful. Sadly, the collector market has seen to it that a half decent copy will set you back $1,200. Many of this vintage have ‘cleaning’ scratches from fools who don’t seem to understand the purpose of a UV filter, or dried up grease, or corroded/oily diaphragm blades. And haze and fungus are common. Finding a good one is no mean feat.

The scans in the PDF above are high definition at 300dpi, and were made with the excellent scanner included in the Epson T-8550 printer. To view larger images on a Mac hit Command+.

Canon 35mm f/2 – some results

Compact and sharp.

For an index of all Leica-related articles click here.

I looked at the specifications the 35mm f/2 Canon LTM lens here.

After running a roll of Kodak Ektar 100 through it I can confirm that the lens is sharp and a delight to use. The only thing I miss is an infinity lock which would make it easier to mount and remove the small optic. The only modifications I made were the addition of the requisite LTM-to-M bayonet adapter, a protective, multicoated UV filter and a red indexing dome (extremely useful), all of which you can see below.



The 35mm Canon LTM f/2 on the M3.

In addition to being in ‘like new’ condition – hard to find for a lens which is over 5 decades old – mine came from Japan for a reasonable $35 shipping fee and arrived in just 4 days by FedEx. Amazing. If our government were so efficient the nation would have no debt, we would not be wasting a $trillion annually on losing wars, and the bad guys in Russia, NK and sundry other hell holes would have long been erased from the face of the earth. One can but dream.

While the M3 lacks a 35mm finder frame, I had no difficulty composing using the outer peripheries of the viewfinder image, which approximate the field of view of a 35mm lens. Handy. The only thing to remember is that you have the 35mm fitted as the 50mm frame in the M3 is visible at all times. To remind me I installed the 35mm/135mm version of the Fotodiox LTM-to-M adapter which shows the 135mm frame as an aide memoire.

Some snaps:


Decrepit machine shop.


Capitol dome.


Capitol wedding, at f/2.


Federal style furniture. 1/15th at f/2 and you can see I am not as steady as I was!


Red, yellow and blue. This one made a gorgeous big print.

If you can find a good one the Canon 35 is a cheap substitute for the ridiculously priced Leica optic.

Is the lens sharper than the costlier 35mm f/3.5 Leitz Summaron RF? I don’t know as the Speedy Photo scans (see below) are not as good as they could be. So some comparative tests using the same scanning service are called for. More when I do those.

A note on scanning: The film was scanned on a Noritsu scanner by Speedy Photo in Tacoma. They are fast – mailed on Saturday (USPS Ground), scans on Dropbox the following Tuesday – but I cannot recommend them. The resolution – and this with TIFF scans – is poor, the images are underexposed 1 stop (my exposure measurement is with the known accurate Reflx meter you can see in the first image above) and the color balance is poor. It looks to me like their scanner or operator is in serious need of service/education. I will revert to using SharpPrints in Wisconsin who use the same scanner manufacturer. I have learned that if you avoid their free pre-paid label, which uses molasses slow USPS bulk mail, and order through their Film Developing Company site which uses regular USPS, the film should get there faster and I know their HQ JPG scans to be of excellent quality. Their very responsive person assured me that C41 color negative scans are posted within 24 hours of receipt and round trip shipping is a very fair $6.95. For some reason they insist on returning your negatives. Whatever. Next time I will try their TIFF scans to determine if there is a discernible difference compared with HQ JPGs. They told me TIFF scans take no longer to produce.

90mm f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit – some results

A fine performer.

For an index of all Leica-related articles click here.

I wrote about the ‘thin’ Tele-Elmarit here. This is an optically improved version of the earlier and heavier ‘fat’ model, with most being made by Leitz Canada. With the exception of the modern ridiculously expensive collapsible (a feature no one wants or needs) 90mm Tele-Elmar this is the smallest and lightest 90mm lens Leica has ever made, and it proves to be a fine performer. It’s also affordable. Into the light it’s flare prone but the ‘Dehaze’ slider in LRc does wonders for that defect. To keep bulk down I do not bother with a lens hood.

While it’s a tad on the long side for street photography the lens is adept at picking out architectural details and at a light 8 ozs. in a very small package it’s easy to pop it in a coat pocket on the off chance it could come in useful.

Here are some early results, all on the Leica M3 with Ektar 100 film, JPGs scanned HQ on a Noritsu scanner.








As one of the very few affordably priced and reasonably modern Leitz lenses, assuming you can find a copy without haze or fungus, the 90mm f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit is recommended. Mine cost $454 shipped and absent some minor wear on the barrel has untarnished optics, with smooth focus.

Canon 50mm f/1.4 – some results

Not half bad.

For an index of all Leica-related articles click here.



M3, 50mm Canon f/1.4 LTM and a BIG print.
I added the red lens alignment index dome.

After the interminable wait for the scans to come back from the photo lab – sometimes I just hate film – they finally arrived 9 days after mailing in my Dropbox account and I duly downloaded the Noritsu HQ scans into LRc and immediately added EXIF data. I generally search the LRc catalog by lens used as that seems to work best for my memory.

What makes a lens ‘good’? For me I care little about resolution charts, coma tests, distortion measurements, you name it. What I want is a high resolution print at 13″ x 19″ in size, often cropped from just 50% of the original. Using that criterion the Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM lens adapted to my Leica M3 is a fine lens indeed.

Here are some results, all on pokey 100 ISO Kodak Ektar. It may be slow but the grain is very fine indeed and the reds are the closest thing to Kodachrome since Kodachrome.



Barista girl. 1/15th, f/1.4. Ektar is sloooow!


Bench. f/8.


Local barber’s shop.


I couldn’t but think of Stieglitz’s famous Wall Street image.


Near-Kodachrome reds. Click the image for a larger version.


In the style of Keld Helmer Petersen.


More Keld.


Hard hat place.

If you do not want to spend megabucks on a Leica 50mm lens, the affordable Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM optic is recommended.