Anyone who chooses to thumb through the previous decade’s worth of ULTRAsomething articles will be faced with an incontrovertible truth — that a photo’s technical quality carries little (if any) weight in my evaluation of its acceptability. For me, a photo’s feel will always supersede its fidelity. So it probably seems paradoxical, if not downright criminal, that I have been tasked with testing each iteration of that über-fidelity wonder known as the Leica Monochrom.
The curious fact is that I am, in actuality, a technical guy — complete with an Electrical Engineering degree and a lifetime spent designing and developing electronic music products. So while I do possess the jaunty jargony jive to parse through a camera’s technical merits, I’m also aware they’re only a fraction of the camera’s overall gestalt. And ‘gestalt’ really is the best term to apply to the M10 Monochrom — a camera that relies as much on limitations as on fidelity to create a greater whole. Gone is the modern convenience of autofocus, elaborate AI-infused picture modes, video capabilities, and the ability to record any color other than grey. In its place is an all-new custom-designed 41-megapixel sensor of impeccable ability, and an ergonomic design aesthetic essentially unchanged (because it hasn’t needed to change) since 1954. That’s how you make a nice, hot, steaming bowl of gestalt soup.
This, the third generation of the Monochrom recipe, has inherited the M10 form factor and all the little niceties that product line delivers. It shaves a few mm of bulk off the once bloated digital body, and now features the quietest shutter I’ve heard on a Leica (and I have several old models of analog M and Leica IIIs). As with the second-generation Monochrom, Leica asked me to perform a detailed technical analysis — this time comparing image differences between the new version, its previous incarnation (the Model 246), and the current generation of color M10.
Unfortunately, due to some hiccups in customs, the camera arrived only two days before my scheduled trip to Tokyo. So the time required to perform the technical comparisons would be particularly tight. As the Monochrom’s battery charged, I hastily outlined what sort of controlled photos I would take in an effort to see how much, if any, additional fidelity Leica could squeeze out of this thing.
By the time the battery charged to 80%, Vancouver was engulfed in the darkness of night. I switched on the M10 Monochrom, snickered sardonically as I rotated the new ISO dial to 12,500, walked out onto my balcony and took a single, hand-held shot of the city using one of the slowest lenses I own — the Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH. I walked back into the office, popped the SD card into the Mac, fired up Lightroom, and got blown over like that guy in the classic Maxell Tape ad. There was seemingly no way the fidelity of a late night, high ISO shot could be this good. There was precious little noise, scads of detail, and oodles of malleable dynamic range. When I pushed the shadows so hard they resembled daylight, there was no visible banding. And what shadow noise did get amplified was a random, fine, and organic dusting.
I’d taken only one shot, and I already knew I was going to buy it. I didn’t need to run any comparison tests — I needed only to walk around the condo putting Post-It® Notes on things I’d have to sell in order to afford it. But just to be sure, I took the camera on a little walk around Vancouver that night. I checked the images on the Mac when I returned, and immediately opened a new pack of Post-It® Notes. This camera was going to be mine — whatever it cost. I’ve had 4.5 years of hands-on experience with the old Model 246, and I know exactly what it’s capable of and what its images look like — and there is no way it could have done what I’d just asked of the M10 Monochrom. The next night, in the world’s least-scientific comparison, I took the borrowed M10 (color) on a similar walk — it’s a nice camera, but for B&W photography, it wasn’t even in the same league.
I packed my bags for Japan — taking the new M10 Monochrom and two other digital cameras. I could have packed lighter, because the Monochrom was the only camera I used for the entire two weeks in Tokyo — though the other cameras did end up generously donating their SD cards to the Monochrom cause.
There’s nothing quite like photographing with a camera for two straight weeks to know whether or not it’s the camera for me. Even so, my experiences aren’t going to tell you whether or not it’s the camera for you. I can only say that the new M10 Monochrom has eliminated virtually every reservation I had about the old model 246.
My biggest beef with the older Monochrom was its thickness. It never felt right in the hand. The aftermarket Match Technical Thumbs-Up™ helped (as does the requisite soft-release), but its bulk never settled into my palm. And since a firm grip and a wrist strap are the only way I carry a camera, I was often painfully (literally) aware of the camera’s extra size and heft. On my first night out with the new M10 Monochrom, I kept trying to advance the film after each exposure. And for the first week in Tokyo, I would do the same — take a shot, then reach for the non-existent advance lever. Clearly, Leica has finally nailed the body, feel, and handling of a digital M. By the second week, I’d re-trained my thumb to not reach for the “film” lever after every shot — though with the analog and digital bodies now having such similar haptics, this means I’ll probably forget to advance the film when I shoot my analog M bodies.
And speaking of mechanical improvements, this new shutter is quiet. Wicked quiet. Almost leaf-shutter quiet. If discretion is your thing (and electronic shutters aren’t), you will not be disappointed. The whispered snick of its release sound is quieter than any of my M film bodies — by far.
The camera also appears more drizzle-ready than previous digital M cameras. There is no longer an open port for the EVF, nor are there holes for a microphone (since video capabilities have wisely fallen from the spec sheet). And while there has been apocryphal evidence of people gleefully shooting the previous Model 246 in the rain, I was never willing to test fate. If Leica wasn’t assigning an actual IP rating to its weather-sealing, I wasn’t risking it.
But with an assurance from Leica that the new M10 Monochrom will be fine “as long as it’s not raining cats & dogs” (their words), I braved shooting the Monochrom during a few “kittens & puppies” showers. Over time, I’m sure new apocryphal stories will appear on the internet from people claiming to have shot the M10 Monochrom in the driving rain, but here’s the thing: I live in Vancouver — the rainiest city in North America. Our “dogs” are newfies. For all I know, dachshunds might qualify as “dogs” in Wetzler, Germany. Then again, when it’s raining newfies & cougars here in Vancouver, I’m not all that inclined to go out shooting anyway — so it’s a bit of a moot point. Suffice to say, if I’m OK getting a little wet, the new Monochrom probably is too.
I should mention the ISO dial. It rocks. Of course all you M10 owners have known this for the past few years — but it’s new and exciting stuff for us Monochrom shooters. Oh, and the embedded JPG image is actually a useful size now. Thanks, Leica!
If these were the only changes, I’d undoubtedly be drooling over the new M10 Monochrom… and honestly, this is all I expected from Leica — that we would get the new M10 body with, basically, the same tweaked 24-megapixel sensor as before — much like what the M10 got when it was updated from the model 240.
But no. Leica chose to use an entirely new, custom-designed 41-megapixel B&W sensor, and let me tell you… there is NO going back to the M246 for me.
The sensor is simply remarkable. I was initially a bit skeptical of its higher resolution, since the model 246’s old 24-megapixel sensor already has a theoretical limit of approximately 80 lp/mm — far in excess of the 40 lp/mm resolution specs on their MTF lens charts. Leica’s more optically superior lenses (such as my oft-used 21 mm f/3.4) show around 80-90% transmission at 40 lp/mm on center, and about 50-60% in the corners. So it would seem obvious (and it’s visually apparent) that the lenses still have something more to give to an 80 lp/mm sensor. But the 41-megapixel M10 Monochrom’s sensor has a theoretical resolving limit of over 100 lp/mm. Would there still be anything left to extract at that resolution? I’m not one for conducting studio tests, so my experiments were rather rudimentary — I simply locked the cameras to a tripod and used various lenses to photograph distant buildings from my downtown balcony. Basically, when comparing images from the M10 Monochrom and the old M246, I wasn’t able to distinguish any extra detail. But with higher spec’d lenses, the details that did exist most certainly exhibited greater edge sharpness. In practical terms, this means the new M10 Monochrom will allow for ridiculously aggressive cropping, massive prints, or both — provided your lenses are up to the task of feeding this sensor all the data it can handle. It’ll be interesting to see what Leica’s lens designers do now that 40+ megapixels is gradually becoming the new norm.
I was also somewhat concerned all this extra resolution would mean blurrier photos. Granted, since I rarely bother to stop walking when I shoot, all my photos tend to be a bit blurry already — so my trepidation was admittedly rather benign. But what if I did want a sharply focussed photo? Would I be able to handhold the camera and still extract all that extra edge sharpness afforded by the new sensor? Basically, as we know, the higher the resolution, the more susceptible an image is to slight amounts of motion blur. The old “set the shutter speed to 1/f” rule was long obliterated. With the previous generation, I was more inclined to an absolute lower limit of 1/2f. With the M10 Monochrom, 1/4f is the more practical choice for handheld shots with maximum sharpness. Fortunately, this new sensor actually exhibits much better shadow detail, lower noise, and improved high ISO performance, so the cautiously faster shutter speeds are easily compensated.
What’s even more important, is that Leica has somehow managed to increase the camera’s low light fidelity while increasing its pixel density. So, while the M246 and M10 Monochroms both have the same recommended maximum speed of ISO 12500, the new model actually delivers impressive and downright stunning results at this setting. Whereas, frankly, I considered anything north of 6400 to be a “push mode” in the old M246. And speaking of push modes, both cameras allow for an ISO 25,000 push, with the new M10 Monochrom also allowing 50,000 and 100,000 options. I sometimes shot the new M10 Monochrom at ISO 25,000, and was perfectly satisfied. ISO 50,000 is usable if you don’t manhandle the image too truculently in post-processing, but at 100,000 there is simply too much banding for it to be your first choice should you wish to photograph infinite voids in deep space.
It’s still sometimes possible to make patterns appear in the noise floor of an M10 Monochrom file when you rotate or geometrically distort an image. Anyone who’s seen this with either of the earlier Monochroms will continue to see it with the new M10 version. The extent to which these patterns are visible has always been dependent on a RAW converter’s interpolation algorithms. For example, when I use Lightroom to render a file, I see more pattern noise than when I use Exposure 5. The good news is, the M10 Monochrom goes an extra stop or two beyond the M246 before it starts to visibly band, and any noise patterns that do result from geometric distortion are finer and easier to correct. If I’m going to aggressively shove pixels around on a high ISO file, I’ve found that a single application of Photoshop’s Despeckle tool (applied before the editing process) is all that’s required to virtual eliminate any patterns from forming. As mentioned, other RAW converters may minimize the artifact, as does shooting in JPG. It’s a rather minor problem with many workarounds, and anyone shooting with an earlier version of the Monochrom who hasn’t noticed it previously, probably won’t notice it now.
In hopes of making this article appear more fair and balanced, I actually strained a brain muscle trying to think up something ‘negative’ to write. I suppose one thing I find a bit irksome is that the camera’s GPS system requires that the Visoflex electronic finder be attached to the body. This is fine if you’re a Visoflex user. But mine sat on the table in my Tokyo Airbnb the entire time I was out shooting — which means I need to rely on my memory to identify the location of each photograph. And let’s just say I’m not as young as I once was.
At this point, there’s no reason for me to “sell” readers on the advantages of rangefinder cameras for the sort of candid, reactionary photography I prefer. Nor, after two previous iterations of Monochrom, is there any more reason to discuss why shooting a black & white camera is so liberating, and why its images are so much higher fidelity. If you’re not already in agreement, this article won’t convince you. But if you are, then you likely have only one question: “Is the M10 Monochrom the camera of my dreams?”
And the answer to that question depends on how detailed or colourful you dream. If you already have a second generation M246 Monochrom, the decision to update depends on how you answer a few additional questions:
1) Are you reasonably happy with the handling and ergonomics of the M246? If yes, then the M10 Monochrom’s additional benefits (thinner body, dedicated ISO dial, quieter shutter, fewer moisture entry points) might not be important enough to warrant the extra expense. If no, these physical updates alone might just sway you.
2) Do you crop aggressively and print big? If no, you’ll likely see little actual benefit to having a sensor with 75% more pixels than the M246. The old model’s 24-megapixel sensor is excellent, and it already resolves the vast majority of detail provided by Leica’s exceptional lenses. So while the “wow factor” you’ll experience when you view a file at 1:1 resolution is exhilarating, the amount of extra hard drive space and computer processing time you’ll need to shove all those extra pixels around might not be. If you do crop aggressively (guilty) and/or print big, then the M10 Monochrom’s extra pixels (when fronted with a modern, high-calibre lens) will create a noticeably higher fidelity output than a resized version of a similarly cropped M246 file.
3) Do you frequently shoot at night, or in dark spaces, or in areas of very high contrast? If no, the sensor’s ability to extract another stop or two of Zone 1 detail (while simultaneously reducing the amount of visible banding in those zones) probably won’t justify the extra expense for those few times it does matter. You can always add a bit of random noise to the shadows in Photoshop, which will pretty much eliminate any banding or geometric patterns created by rotating or skewing an image. Sure, the old model 246 won’t have the same level of Zone 1 detail as the M10 Monochrom — but technically, there isn’t supposed to be any detail in that zone anyway. However, if you do shoot frequently in the aforementioned conditions, you’ll appreciate making far fewer trips to Photoshop to dither away any banding issues, and you will marvel at being able to push those Zone 1 details comfortably into Zone 2, if not Zone 3.
As far as deciding between the color version of the M10 and the M10 Monochrom, I can only suggest one thing — if you’re even waffling about this, then perhaps you’re not quite the certifiably uncompromising B+W fetishist for whom Leica builds this. Obviously, with the M10 Monochrom you lose the ability to ever shoot in color — and if that matters to you, then none of the M10 Monochrom’s other advantages (i.e. cleaner shadows, better ISO performance, higher resolution) will matter to you nearly as much as seeing blue skies and green trees.
For me and my dreams, the new M10 Monochrom eradicates nearly every grumble I had with the previous model. So if there’s any way at all I can gather enough crap to sell on Craigslist, I’ll be buying one.
©2020 grEGORy simpson
ABOUT THE PHOTOS:
The camera’s image quality is, as you would expect, outstanding. I’ve included only photos taken at night and at high ISO because they’re the sort I believe benefitted the most from the M10 Monochrom’s new sensor.
If you’re looking at these photos and wondering why they don’t exactly showcase all that “image quality” I’m touting, I’ll refer you to the article’s opening paragraph, where I wrote “a photo’s feel will always supersede its fidelity.” When deciding on a camera, the primary dictates are how well the camera handles; how quickly I can get the shot; and how likely it is I can salvage the shot should I not have enough time to achieve proper focus or exposure. It’s the paradox mentioned in the article’s title: the fact I require such a high fidelity machine to succeed as a low-fidelity photographer.
Also, these photos reflect the fact I shoot many types of lenses to convey different moods. Sometimes those moods require a sharp, contrasty lens, and sometimes they require the opposite. So this series features a host of different lenses, including Leica’s 21mm f/3.4 Super-Elmar-M ASPH, 28mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH, and an old 1980’s Canadian 35mm f/2 Summicron. Also represented are a Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 Nokton ASPH, and a Minolta-M Rokkor 28mm f/2.8. How a camera deals with vintage and third-party optics is every bit as important to me as how it deals with the latest tech from Wetzler.
REMINDER: If you find these photos enjoyable or the articles beneficial, please consider making a DONATION to this site’s continuing evolution. As you’ve likely realized, ULTRAsomething is not an aggregator site — serious time and effort go into developing the original content contained within these virtual walls.
Thank you so much for this enlightening review. Never wanted so much a camera after reading an article.
Kindest regards.
David
Thanks, David. It’s been a real privilege to shoot with this camera for the last month. It’s definitely worthy of any desire directed its way.
What cliched nonsense. Not an original thought anywhere.
Darn. If only I possessed the creativity to think of an appropriate reply…
I’ll be ignoring any further comments to this exchange. ULTRAsomething strives to be an inclusive site that welcomes constructive discourse, though silly discourse is still its preferred trade…
your patience knows no bounds…
Nice! Yours is the first review I’ve read on this new camera. I think you get along well with it (but I do worry about your thumb having nothing to do…). It seems to be a winner in terms of design and execution.
I am almost sold, except for a.) its too expensive for me; b.) I think my M2 and Delta 400 get me 90% of the way there; c.) I’ve been shooting a lot of color lately, something this camera can’t do (heck, even my M2 can do color!); d.) I don’t tend to shoot in the dark. Can this camera do daylight photos, too?; and e.) did I mention it costs a LOT of money?
I currently own a M-D 262. I will be selling it. I have owned a M 240, a TL2 and previously a M9. I found the M9 and M240 (and the TL2) to be rather clunky to use and frustratingly uninspiring to shoot. The M-D was purchased as a sort of transition between my film Ms and the digital world, hoping to square the circle, if you will. But I have discovered that I just don’t enjoy most of Leica digital products. My X2 was the closest they came (for me) to the spirit of their film cameras, but it had its share of issues as well. (it’s been replaced by the tiny Canon M6 and its very small handful of decent lenses. Much more “digital” to use, but small and good image quality. Plus, I expect very little out of it. I expect a lot from Leica).
Anyway, the point of this circumlocution is that Leica doesn’t do it for me digitally, and I keep loading up my Ms and Barnacks with film, and enjoying the hell out of them. For me, Leica = film. I am old enough now that I just don’t want to fight it anymore. I don’t need this camera. I think sometimes, that perhaps the SL2 would be nice, but, see a. and e. above. Plus, those lenses are HUGE.
I really hope you can pawn off enough of your belongings to buy the M10M. I would like to see what you will do with it, and enjoy it vicariously through your blog posts.
Good to hear from you in the middle of the month!
For me, historically, I find my approach to photography (and what I photograph) is very different when shooting film vs. digital. It’s like speaking two entirely different languages, and I communicate very differently depending on the camera I use. When Leica’s Monochrom range became available, it took me quite some time to get fully comfortable with it, because shooting it and processing it is very much like a third language. But it’s a language I’ve come to really enjoy speaking. My only real issue was the “clunky” bodies on earlier Leica digital products, but I can assure you that this is no longer an issue. Now my biggest concern is that, by raving about the new M10 Monochrom, I may have substantially reduced the resale value of my M246 — and I NEED that sucker to sell ’cause, as you point out, the new model isn’t exactly inexpensive.
Great to see how the M10 Monochrom has (re)lit your fire (smile)! Nakano-5:00pm and Kitchen: Shibuya just outstanding.
Thanks, Lester. Yeah, I was getting to the point where I was starting to think, “maybe I’ll just forget about digital for awhile, and buy myself 500 rolls of Tri-X and a freezer to put it all in.” Then the M10 Monochrom arrived at my door — providing both the match and the gasoline.
Egor does reviews? How un-Egoric.
Sad to see that he does them so well. Don’t make a habit of it. 😉
Is Egor a mole? Does he blink blindly in daylight? Methinks this may be the first camera review comprising field tests conducted solely after dark. Perhaps the camera should have been named Afterdarchrom.
Hi Grant: If I’m going to do something as pedantic as reviewing a brand new digital camera, I figured I should at least counter it with a bit of farcical folly. And thus was born the idea of using only night shots. It may surprise you to learn that daylight shots do actually exist, and might even (possibly) appear in some future essays of the non-review type…
Egor,
Thanks for this very interesting article.
I wonder if you would address the issue of lost color-based texture in monochrome cameras. I have a Sony A7RIII converted to monochrome, and it was interesting for a while. But I gradually came to realize that converting a color based image into BW has certain advantages over a monochrome sensor in providing a greater range of midtone differentiation.
Is the M10 Monochrom so sensitive that such midtone differentiation is so well preserved that this is not a disadvantage?
Mike
Hi, Mike: Thanks for writing. I’ll give you my take on what you describe. Take it with two grains of salt, because it’s based solely on my experience and what I know of sensor design. Basically, the only advantage I’ve ever found for shooting B&W images on a color sensor is the ability to apply color filtration AFTER taking a shot — this gives you the ability to completely alter the totality of an image in post-processing. Whereas, in the ‘old days’ (or in the case of us Monochrom shooters), such color filtration needs to be applied to the front of the lens and is thus recorded with the image. So if you used a red filter, and wish you used a green filter, you’re out of luck — whereas with a color file, you can experiment to your heart’s content. Honestly, I’ve never seen a single drop of extra “texture” from a color sensor. Any extra texture that exists is probably not real, since a color sensor achieves color by measuring luminosity and filtering it through a mosaic pattern (such as a bayer filter), then re-assembling the image through de-mosaicing. This results in interpolations that might think there’s texture where there isn’t any. So I would say that the midnote differentiation you get from a monochrom is *real*, whereas any midtone textures you get from a color conversion are the result of demosaicing. But none of this really matters. All that matters (ultimately) is which one you prefer.
Thanks for your take, Egor. It sounds like the M10 M is a great camera.
It’s a beautiful machine that at least in your hands renders a street photograph like no other. The thing is useless though for much of anything other than street photography or perhaps portraits or I would own one. Put that sensor and processor in a mirror less camera that will accept zoom lenses please.
I’d probably own more digital cameras if other manufacturers would release sensors without those pesky bayer filters… so maybe its a good thing (for my bank account) that other companies don’t…
Yeah I’d buy one too. Excellent review, as always, lovely photos too.
Other priorities first though. A Hasselblad 907x Is due in for me any time. I’ve been waiting for that for half a year. Hmm. If I put $100 a month into a piggy bank and get on the M10 Monochrom waiting list, I might have enough money by the time my turn comes around. Worth a thought… ?
G
If my math is right and my crystal ball is calibrated, that piggy bank should be full right around the time I’m reviewing the fourth generation Monochrom.
LOL! Hopefully the third generation Monochrom will be both available and discounted then.
One can only hope and allow the imagination to roam… 🙂
It was your comparison of the M9M and M246 that got me to buy the M9M in the first place. I never had any real interest in the M246. A slight resolution increase, bulkier body, waaaay more money (new vs used of course). Well I was/am hoping to see a similar bowl of fruit and buildings comparison. It is the only time once every 3-5 years I expect a technical review from you.
But who are we kidding, I knew I was going to upgrade even before I read on leica rumors it was 40mp (since when does Leica do anything other than rip the color array filter off a 2-3 year old M?!) But I appreciate your take and enthusiasm. Makes me feel like the kidney I’m selling was worth it.
Just remember: That kidney farming thing is a one-shot deal.
We’ll see, quite a few advancements in stem cell technology these days. Might have to sell a M10M to be able to afford a new kidney though.
Have you reached any conclusions about which existing M lenses are up to fully utilizing the new sensor? I can’t see for sure on internet files, of course, but your 21f/3.4 SEM shots are especially promising.
tim
Hi Tim: I didn’t have access to Leica’s 50mm APO f/2, which (if memory serves) is their best MTF spec’d lens. Though my 21 f/3.4 is certainly no slouch. As mentioned in the article, I wasn’t able to resolve any extra distinguishable detail, but what details were distinguishable most definitely had improved edge sharpness with the new M10M — and this extra sharpness could not be replicated with the old M246 using artificial means inside Photoshop.
Granted, these particular tests were done by locking the camera to a tripod, so it’s doubtful whether or not the extra resolution will have much of an effect with my usual, more cavalier approach to camera handling — which usually involves both a moving subject and a moving photographer. But it’s nice to know I have it, should I want it. I could even see sharper edge contrast (under ideal conditions) with ‘lesser’ performing lenses — meaning even they still have a little something to give at 100 lp/mm… even if it’s only 5 – 10%. For now, I like to think of these new sensors as “incentive” for a new breed of lens designs (which, no doubt, I’ll be unable to afford). But for me, right now, the extra resolution is not a hinderance, and sometimes a help.
When I saw the M 10 Monochrom announcement I started searching for a shot-by-shot comparison of my current Monochrom 246 and the new camera. I had the older CCD Monochrom 1st and it took me a while to decide to move to the 246. But this new camera jumped out to me more than the 246 did at the time. I do sometimes print BIG. My biggest color print is a four by eight foot monster. Note: put together from many many tripoded clicks of the camera. I also do have the Sumicron 50mm APO Asph lens. But my three big questions were:
Can my lenses resolve enough to take advantage of the extra pixels? I also have the Summilux 90mm and an Elmarit 28mm.
How much better is the dynamic range?
How good is the low light capability? With my 246 I am pretty much fine with a well exposed shot at 4000 JPG straight out of the camera. And with a bit of noise reduction I am good to 10000.
Your literary drooling is just about good enough to answer my third question. But I was still hoping to find some full sized images taken with both cameras to compare. If I didn’t live in Colorado with no dealer ever going to have a camera in the store I would go do testing myself. Not an option. Any chance you will be doing a few A-B comparisons? Also, are any of the images in your post available in full size?
In any case, thanks for your great write-up. Best review I have found. All the other ones spend most of their time talking about why the lack of a filter over the sensor is so great.
Hi Reid. Thanks for your comments/questions:
1. If my math is correct, we’ve now got a sensor capable of differentiating a little over 100 lp/mm… Most of Leica’s MTF charts depict curves only up to 40 lp/mm resolution. Some of Leica’s lenses (like your 50 APO or my 21 3.4 have very high transmission at 40 lp/mm, so it would stand to reason that these lenses still have some amount of transmission at 100 lp/mm. How much? Hard to say without doing some scientific measurements. But there is no doubt I see more edge sharpness (though no additional detail) with the M10M compared to the M246. At 4′ x 8′, this will definitely make a difference (compared to upsizing, anyway). Web images? No… not unless you’re cropping away the majority of an image (which I’ve done on occasion). Unless those lens MTF charts are down around 40% or less on a 40 lp/mm reading, I’d guess they might still have a TINY bit of something extra available at 100 lp/mm… is that alone worth the money? For the way I shoot, it wouldn’t be. But for you? Perhaps.
2. I’m not sure what Leica’s published specs are, but I felt (how’s that for ‘scientific’?) that I was getting at least an extra stop or stop-and-a-half of clear, clean, usable shadow detail over the M246. Maybe even more? Obviously, this being the Monochrom, clipped highlights remain clipped highlights. So the dynamic range, of course, is entirely dictated by the shadow regions. And this is where the new camera really shines, in my opinion. So, if we’re to believe my knee-jerk assessment. I’m getting somewhere between 1 or 2 stops of extra dynamic range (depending on ISO of course, which eats up some of that overhead).
3. See above. And see the article. Low light capability (and improved handling) are the very reasons I’ll be doing everything in my power to scrape together the funds to buy one.
4. Literary drooling is my stock in trade. :-p I will not be posting any full-size comparison details. I feel like there are other sites that do a really good job with this sort of thing (like reidreviews.com). I’ll stick to what I do best — taking grainy, blurry, poorly exposed photos using an impeccably high-fidelity camera.
Thank you –– I suppose. I was hoping to find a reason not to take this new body so seriously!
For me, it would be a return after many other Leicas, etc., to my 1971 M4. If I scrape together most of my current equipment for trade, I guess I’ll be going this route.
Kirk
Hi Kirk: Whilst scraping together equipment to sell, don’t forget to save back a lens or two. :-p
Thanks Egor,
Your explanation is great, except of course for #4. That is totally BS. Your shots are far from “grainy, blurry, poorly exposed photos”. They are really great. I’ll use your Nakano and Shibuya shots as evidence. They are outstanding.
Thanks again for your great article.
Lovely and compelling review. Well done, and very honestly done too. I’m checking the closets for stuff to move…
Thanks, Geoff. Hopefully your closets are bigger than mine…
On the LUF I noted that the camera was truly lovely, but for now, was resisting the urge, and communing with the MM1 more closely. In part, this is to resist GAS, as there is plenty still in the closet (too much!), and in part, the onslaught of night shots with no grain is both alluring and a bit too much…
The size of the M10M, the quiet shutter, and the usability, not to mention the extra pixels (yes, do like to crop, allows one to extend use of one lens in the field) are all totally compelling. As I’m in love with MFDB (Credo 60), so would this work well as a traveling landscape and street camera without qualms…
Will see how this unfolds. Over time, the rush might diminish and there would be cameras in stores…. in some future!
Egor,
Fantastic article! Written like a true user. Funny, insightful and hitting all the right buttons. Thank you.
Nice to hear from you again, Tracy. Glad you liked this one. Felt like “old times” to be reviewing a camera (well, one made this century, anyway).
Great article. As an owner of the original Monochrom I have been looking for a reason to upgrade. Sadly, you just pushed me over the edge.
Hi Glen: No way. I didn’t push you. You slipped and fell off that edge all by yourself. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it…
Remarkable photographs, and from a camera seemingly made for urban night photography. I’ve been following the Monochrom since the first version hoping someone else would jump into the fray with a more affordable monochrome sensor. Doesn’t appear to be in the cards.
But 829,500 pennies.
Thanks, Shaun. For me and the way I shoot, I’m able to “justify” (rationalize?) the expense because photography is an extremely important part of my life (creatively, physically, and mentally). Plus, because I actually *am* a rangefinder shooter who works in b&w, I don’t really need to invest in any other camera systems… except for my film cameras, of course. I, too, would like to see others produce b&w cameras (Ricoh… cough, cough), but I don’t really see it happening — the market is simply too small, and the development/marketing costs too high for most companies to bother with a niche product.
What keeps me hopeful is that Canon went out of their way to produce an Astro camera. Astronomical photography must to be a smaller segment than potential B&W photographers. It doesn’t seem that much of an engineering challenge to remove the color filter array from the sensor (I mean, don’t put one there in the first place), tweak a few menu settings, possibly a more insistent overexposure warning. I’m looking into having one of my Sony bodies converted to B&W. All users of the converted cameras seem very pleased with the results, higher sensitivity, and more resolution.
Hi Egor,
Fantastically interesting review, thanks!
I produce pretty satisfying b&w conversions with my current kit (incl. M10).
But I’d love to get a Monochrom M, and your review confirms that this generation’s model might be the ideal one to make that investment.
What really prevented me from purchasing earlier iterations is the question of filters. One can easily tweak tone relationships in any post-processing software if starting with a colour raw file. One cannot do that in the same way with a monochrome file.
So my questions to you:
1. Do you use filters on your lenses (yellow, orange, green, etc) ?
2. If yes, how much does it affect rangefinder focus accuracy on a 41MP sensor, knowing such filters change the light wavelength mix that hits the sensor ?
3. If no filters, do you miss the colour channel mixer when tweaking your images in post?
Thanks again for your review and thanks beforehand for any additional insight,
Alan
Hi Alan. Thanks for the questions, which I will attempt to answer (though probably quite poorly):
1. I rarely used filters when shooting with the M246, and mostly only for the first 6 months with that camera. I do use them more frequently on my film cameras (Tri-X), though.
2. I have not yet used filters with the M10 Monochrom… though it would be an interesting thing to do, just for ‘science’s’ sake.
3. I do not miss colour channel mixing one single bit. This kind of surprised me. Back when I was testing the original M9 Monochrom, I was obsessed with losing the ability to ‘correct’ tonality in post. But the more I used that camera, the less I cared — there were so many other advantages, and the purity of the monochrom images made it relatively easy for me to dodge/burn the tonality I desired (granted, it’s not the same as turning blue to black or green to white, but this isn’t something I normally do anyway). I ended up not buying the M9 monochrom, but I did buy the M246 when it came out. And I remember I *started* shooting that camera using standard colour filters, until I decided they were more trouble than they were worth, and I was perfectly happy to dodge/burn any tonality adjustments.
Keep in mind that these are only my experiences, and may not relate to you or your needs. I’m more Provoke school than Group f/64 school.
Hi Egor,
Great article and a compelling read.
I feel like I have been on a waiting list for this camera since Cartier Bresson was a boy.
Anyway, I picked mine up today and the battery is just charging. It is late and it is raining in London but the night is still young!
I’m going to start out trying to manage the massive files by leaning on the 24MP JPEGs and wonder if you think I should just accept my lot and roll with the DNG?
Many thanks!
Hi Stuart: Personally, I always roll with the DNG. Shutting off a camera’s JPG option is one of the first things I do (along with disabling the rear screen’s auto-review capabilities and setting the date). Have fun!
Thanks for this great review and some stunning pictures of Tokyo that made me feel highly nostalgic!
Forgive my ignorance, but what exactly is “The old “set the shutter speed to 1/f” rule”?
I’m not a novice but am clearly missing some foundational knowledge!
Hi Ben. Thanks for commenting.
The old “set the shutter speed to 1/f” thing is a rule-of-thumb chestnut from way back in the 35mm film days. Basically, it assumes that (unless you have nerves of steel), the slowest shutter speed you can handhold without seeing motion blur (caused by camera shake) is the inverse of the focal length. So if you have a 50mm lens, you can handhold 1/50s. If you have a 28mm lens, you can handhold 1/25s. A handheld 100mm lens would ‘require’ a 1/100s shutter speed, etc. This was all to be taken with a grain of salt, since so many other factors are at play. But it was kind of the starting point for figuring out how slow of a shutter you could get away with and still have a sharp photo.
In these times of cameras with in-body (or in-lens) image stabilization, impeccably sharp lenses, and high-resolution sensors, it’s even more meaningless now than it once was. In the case of the M10 Monochrom, there is SO much resolution that (if you zoom in to 100%), you might easily see a tiny bit of camera shake blur that would not have been visible on a lower resolution sensor or on film. That’s why I suggest that 1/4f is a better ‘rule of thumb’ for this camera. For example, if you’re shooting a 50mm lens, you might want to set the shutter no slower than 1/200s (50mm x 4) if you want to assure the sharpest possible image while handholding the camera… along with, perhaps, a reduction in your caffeine intake.
As is plainly obvious (if not in this article than in most of my other articles), I really don’t care one bit about camera shake, motion blur or any of those other things. So I mention the whole 1/f thing as a courtesy to those who do care about such things. :-p
Thanks so much Egor – that makes sense and I really appreciate you taking the time to educate me! I was aware of a rule of thumb along those lines but didn’t connect it to what you were saying.
I picked up my M10m on Wednesday and I’m still exploring it – I really thought it would be like my M10p minus colour and plus some resolution and low light performance but I’m finding it to be a completely different beast and I’m loving exploring the new possibilities it offers.
Thanks again for the review above and the response to my question,
Ben
> … but I’m finding it to be a completely different beast …
This is the entire raison d’être for the Leica M Monochrom.
Ben, Egor has explained it well.
In his blog for the technically adept, Jim Kasson did some testing with a 24 MP Sony A7 mk II. https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/rules-of-thumb-for-handheld-shutter-speed/
Even for that camera, 4x faster shutter speeds were needed for ‘ultimate’ resolution, without stabilization.
cheers
First look at your site. That was an excellent review, thanks. I got to it from Jono Slack, and got to him through Sean Reid. Yes, I’ve been researching. I ordered the M10M last week, my first monochrome. I have a Q2, so that covers the color, should I need. Ordinary color to B&W conversion has not proven satisfying, doesn’t scratch the itch.
Your images, and Sean Reid’s, with that sharp yet creamy look, have got me near panting for that box to get here.
Hi Michael: Welcome to the site. Glad you enjoyed the review, and I hope you enjoy your new M10 Monochrom even more. There’s definitely a bit of a learning curve when shooting with a monochromatic camera — both in how you expose and in how you process your images. But the rewards are vast. The day I first shot with the original Monochrom in 2012 was the day I started greatly disliking doing colour-to-bw conversions. :-p
> I have a Q2, so that covers the color …
If you need a camera that ‘covers the colour’ then the Leica M Monochrom is not for you.
Hi 01af – I would disagree with this. Photographers can have more than one area of interest, and there’s nothing wrong with having the right tool for achieving whatever your goal is at the time. If you sometimes need a screwdriver, that doesn’t mean you don’t sometimes need a hammer. I shoot a lot of film, but even though the Monochrom is a digital camera, I would never say that the Monochrom isn’t for me because I like film. Similarly, I often slip a Ricoh GRIII into my pocket every time I leave the house — even if I’m just going to the grocery store. Again, I don’t think this means I can make a blanket statement that “the Monochrom isn’t for me” — but I can make the statement that “the Monochrom isn’t for me if my desire at the moment is to slip a camera into my back pocket just in case I stumble across something that ‘needs’ photographing.” Heck, once or twice a decade, even I ‘need’ to shoot something in color, but the Monochrom is still absolutely “for me.” :-p
Too late, I already got one. Purity tests are boring
I’ve been to Vancouver many times and Maine Coons and Newfies are fact!
Thank you for this, and whatever you have written in the back-catalog that I will eventually discover. I own (and shoot) an M9 Mono, the 246 and I’m on the list for this … yes, a fanatic but … hell, there are no “buts”. Donation headed your way.
Mark Twight
@wfmft
Superbly pitched and scripted vignette of what this enchanting/ baffling camera is all about. Much appreciated. Judging from the wee technical part of your commentary , looks like one needs one of the modern M lenses such as the expensive 50mm f2 APO or the 35f1.4 currently being tagged with the camera to get the most out of the resolving power of the sensor ??
I had a play with one with the EVF – cannot focus a RF for toffee with my eyesight problems – and was immediately hooked because the focus peaking was so very clear and quick to deploy. It has gotten right under the skin.
I am itching to see someone use this camera with M lenses in the mountains. Twice a day, mainly in winter, in the high mountains, there is beautiful hard light designed for mono work. I’ve used the SL2 with SL zooms to yield very satisfying results in such conditions. However, the freedom of not carrying such bulk and weight up a mountain on skis will only yearn stronger as I head towards 60. Apart from Ragnar Axelsson, Icelandic photojournalist, using previous iterations of the Monochrom for his book/ exhibition ‘Glacier’ are you aware of anyone else using M10 Monochrom in the mountains ? Depth of field matters and I wonder if diffraction on M lenses is a worry/ limiting factor beyond f5.6.
I just took my M10M and 50 APO to the mountains a couple of weeks ago – I’m very happy with the results of that lens – my IG is @benbux if you’re interested.
Thanks. I’m off to your Instagram posts now. I was inclined to a Q2 to support SL2 having cashed in lenses I just don’t carry up the hill but it struck me I hardly ever aspire to shoot colour for 5-6 months in winter and so I ended up with an M10M in hand.
Very nice article and lovely photos
What i missed here where photos shot in the sun ,all shots where in low or even dark light where the camera shines. The problem is with highlights, I saw a lot of photos where this 40 Mega sensor “burns” the high lights .
I own the M9 Monochrom( I also owend the 246) and find it has the same problem . Highlights are blown out, so one has to overcome the problem by underexposing or by using filters
I truly would love to see results in sunny ( highlight) condition), so maybe it is time to write a new article LOL.
I also think the B\W photos lack some contrast, ( They are a bit greyish) , at list In my eyes. I love my high contrast\high sharpness results I receive from my M9M
Thank you
Danny
Hi Dan:
Much like the M9M and the M246, the M10M requires you to rethink your digital exposure tactics. Monochrom cameras have only a single luminosity channel (rather than splitting luminosity into RGB). So if you accidentally overexpose a color digital, you may still have some data to recover from one of the three color channels. Exposing with a Monochrom camera means you *always* need to watch your highlights — and if you want to retain detail in a certain highlight area, then you need to make sure nothing gets ‘blown out.’
This isn’t really “underexposure” — it’s “proper” exposure. But if you’re used to exposing on film (or color digital), it’s a different way to think about exposure. Much like we had to learn new techniques when we moved from film to digital; one needs to learn new techniques when moving from color digital to monochromatic digital.
Part of the reason I chose to include only night shots (besides the fact I’m a contrarian) is that the camera has SO MUCH more useful, clean, and detailed data in the shadow regions. So by showing night shots, I show how much information can be extracted from shadow regions. If you think about it — if you shoot in bright light and lower the exposure to prevent blowouts, then the shadows in your RAW files will initially look darker on a Monochrom than a Color camera… but because these shadows are so clean and detailed, they can be brought up into a higher zone without bringing up the noise (as would happen with color).
So what this means is that the M10M has even more usable dynamic range than the previous versions. You still shoot to protect the highlights, but then you have more shadow data to boost in post.
Regarding the photos that “lack contrast.” You can blame this on me, not the camera. The M10M files are highly malleable, and can be made to look however the photographer intends. Personally. I like a rich, soft set of greys… so that’s how I chose to process these images. Just as with printing, the ‘artist’ gets to choose how he wants his photos to look. And I choose “grey.” 😉
Can you give any basics as to how you process your files, please ?
Hi Crispin: I usually just let the photo tell me what it needs… I rarely do anything special. It’s mostly a matter of adjusting the gamma curve until the image has an overall tonal balance that I like. Once that’s done, I’ll dodge and burn, so as to make sure the eye traverses the photo the way I want it to, and doesn’t get drawn toward something of lesser significance. Basically, I do exactly what I used to do when I was young and foolish and making prints under an enlarger. Only now I’m old and foolish and doing it with a mouse. For my own photos, I’m a major believer in less = more. I also recognize that my taste in processing may very well not be to the taste of others.
Thank you for the reply, which is much appreciated. I’m sure more polish than foolish.
Greetings from Singapore.
Thank you