I rarely post gear threads. As I've stated multiple times in multiple threads, all cameras and lenses are tools. Pick the best tool or combination of tools that meets your needs.
I recently purchased a Leica M10 Monochrom. I've shot Leica in the past--had an M9, an MM, and still have an M(240). I have a collection of Leica lenses. Stopped shooting Leica after my son was born. Many limitations shooting an M body with a rapidly moving kiddo. Wanted AF. So shot Sony for a bit (A7R2 and A7R3). Went back to shooting Nikon for a bit (D850, N7). Missed using my Leica lenses and also really missed shooting in monochrome using the MM. I had many issues with the MM, but the M10M addresses many of them and decided to buy it.
Why shoot with a monochrome camera?
The Leica M10M isn't cheap and on face value is limiting compared to a color camera (either Leica or other brand). A monochrome camera limits your options compared to a color camera regarding creation of a monochrome file. Color files give your more options. But a file from a monochrome camera offers advantages regarding sharpness and also usable ISO values. In a more abstract sense, there is also something to be said about shooting in monochrome if your output is going to be monochrome.
So what are the real advantages of a file from a monochrome camera in a practical sense?
Twofold. Improved sharpness since each pixel is contributing to the final image (a simplified answer to a complex question). Improved ISO performance.
Can you provide concrete examples that support your argument that a monochrome camera is "better"?
As it turns out, yes. With my color sensor cameras (Sony A7RIII, Nikon D850, Nikon Z7, Leica SL2) my usual "acceptable" ISO is 1600. That is the break point where image quality starts to break down with a RAW file. ISO 3200 is something I sometimes use, but the noise and loss of detail isn't ideal or optimal.
With the Leica M10M, ISO 12.5K is usable. This translates to about 3 stops of usable ISO. Not necessarily important when shooting with a tripod. Not necessarily important when using external lighting (i.e. flashes/strobes). *Very* important when shooting in available light.
M10M, Voigtlander 75/1.5 @ f/2.8, 125th sec, ISO 12,500
Unfortunately, all pics posted on this site are degraded. Sharing a crop of the above which shows the detail retained at ISO 12.5K and the relative lack of noise in the image:
Note well that this image was shot at ISO 12,500. I would *never* shoot an image with any of my color cameras at this ISO as the images would not be usable. Yet this image from the Leica M10M @ ISO 12.5K is not only "acceptable" considering the high ISO, but actually rivals image quality of some camera/lens combos at base ISO. This is phenomenal performance by any metric.
In a practical sense, being able to shoot with an ISO of 12.5K has very, very meaningful benefits for anyone who shoots in available light. I really can't overstate this. It can be a game changer.
The increased resolution independent of ISO from shooting monochrome has advantages as well for some types of shooting (i.e. landscapes in particular, though many subjects as well).
This isn't a good option for action or sports. It's not an ideal tool for all types of shooting. But for the types of shooting it is meant for, it does really, really well.
I'm not arguing that any normal person should run out and buy an M10M. But I would argue that it is a very unique tool that can do some things that no other camera on the market can. Whether it is a tool that fits your needs/budget is a separate question. But I am very, very happy with it.
I will say that most Leica M lenses aren't up to the challenge of the sensor on the M10M. Despite their heritage, they are poor performers as they weren't designed for this exacting sensor.
The Zeiss ZM 35/1.4 performs very, very well (it is perhaps the best performing M lens of any focal length by any manufacturer including Leica). Recent Voigtlander offerings such as the VM 21/1.4 and 75/1.5 perform very well. The upcoming VM APO-Lanthar 50/2 should perform very well. This is nice since the best performing lenses on the M10M don't require the Leica tax and are actually affordable.
[Edit: pointed out in the final paragraph that the Zeiss ZM 35/1.4 is a really stellar performer, perhaps the best M mount lens in existence—a reason to shoot Leica M if 35mm is a focal length you use regularly.]
I recently purchased a Leica M10 Monochrom. I've shot Leica in the past--had an M9, an MM, and still have an M(240). I have a collection of Leica lenses. Stopped shooting Leica after my son was born. Many limitations shooting an M body with a rapidly moving kiddo. Wanted AF. So shot Sony for a bit (A7R2 and A7R3). Went back to shooting Nikon for a bit (D850, N7). Missed using my Leica lenses and also really missed shooting in monochrome using the MM. I had many issues with the MM, but the M10M addresses many of them and decided to buy it.
Why shoot with a monochrome camera?
The Leica M10M isn't cheap and on face value is limiting compared to a color camera (either Leica or other brand). A monochrome camera limits your options compared to a color camera regarding creation of a monochrome file. Color files give your more options. But a file from a monochrome camera offers advantages regarding sharpness and also usable ISO values. In a more abstract sense, there is also something to be said about shooting in monochrome if your output is going to be monochrome.
So what are the real advantages of a file from a monochrome camera in a practical sense?
Twofold. Improved sharpness since each pixel is contributing to the final image (a simplified answer to a complex question). Improved ISO performance.
Can you provide concrete examples that support your argument that a monochrome camera is "better"?
As it turns out, yes. With my color sensor cameras (Sony A7RIII, Nikon D850, Nikon Z7, Leica SL2) my usual "acceptable" ISO is 1600. That is the break point where image quality starts to break down with a RAW file. ISO 3200 is something I sometimes use, but the noise and loss of detail isn't ideal or optimal.
With the Leica M10M, ISO 12.5K is usable. This translates to about 3 stops of usable ISO. Not necessarily important when shooting with a tripod. Not necessarily important when using external lighting (i.e. flashes/strobes). *Very* important when shooting in available light.
M10M, Voigtlander 75/1.5 @ f/2.8, 125th sec, ISO 12,500
Unfortunately, all pics posted on this site are degraded. Sharing a crop of the above which shows the detail retained at ISO 12.5K and the relative lack of noise in the image:
Note well that this image was shot at ISO 12,500. I would *never* shoot an image with any of my color cameras at this ISO as the images would not be usable. Yet this image from the Leica M10M @ ISO 12.5K is not only "acceptable" considering the high ISO, but actually rivals image quality of some camera/lens combos at base ISO. This is phenomenal performance by any metric.
In a practical sense, being able to shoot with an ISO of 12.5K has very, very meaningful benefits for anyone who shoots in available light. I really can't overstate this. It can be a game changer.
The increased resolution independent of ISO from shooting monochrome has advantages as well for some types of shooting (i.e. landscapes in particular, though many subjects as well).
This isn't a good option for action or sports. It's not an ideal tool for all types of shooting. But for the types of shooting it is meant for, it does really, really well.
I'm not arguing that any normal person should run out and buy an M10M. But I would argue that it is a very unique tool that can do some things that no other camera on the market can. Whether it is a tool that fits your needs/budget is a separate question. But I am very, very happy with it.
I will say that most Leica M lenses aren't up to the challenge of the sensor on the M10M. Despite their heritage, they are poor performers as they weren't designed for this exacting sensor.
The Zeiss ZM 35/1.4 performs very, very well (it is perhaps the best performing M lens of any focal length by any manufacturer including Leica). Recent Voigtlander offerings such as the VM 21/1.4 and 75/1.5 perform very well. The upcoming VM APO-Lanthar 50/2 should perform very well. This is nice since the best performing lenses on the M10M don't require the Leica tax and are actually affordable.
[Edit: pointed out in the final paragraph that the Zeiss ZM 35/1.4 is a really stellar performer, perhaps the best M mount lens in existence—a reason to shoot Leica M if 35mm is a focal length you use regularly.]
Last edited:
