Leica The New Leica M11 will cost $8995 USD

agentlossing

Hall of Famer
Location
S. Oregon Coast
Name
Andrew L
I shouldn't really give an opinion, since I am one of the peasant class which Leica quite clearly doesn't allow into the courtyard. But it's an interesting change. The black paint model (the one people like the "brassing" with best) is aluminum, so it literally won't brass, I suspect Leica faithful won't like the silver scratches and scuffs in black paint. There's no old-timey bottom plate anymore, just your typical lever for the battery. The sensor is used for metering, meaning it's really always doing live view, you're just operating with the screen turned off when you're using the RF. These choices, to me, seem to subtly dilute the Leica tradition a bit, in the interest of inarguably better, but more industry-standard and not so unique, features.

Also I'm a bit skeptical of the multi-resolution modes, since what is essentially pixel binning is known to reduce sharpness. It might be a hard choice for M11 photographers to pick between more manageable RAWs with a bit less detail vs. huge, uber-detailed RAWs. It's an awkward compromise.
 

albertk

Veteran
Of course we need to know too how well it stands out in the field with non-Leica glass.
For instance, in the Lumix S5 (similar BSI) the 40mm M-Rokkor does not work- the corners curve off like as if there is a tennis-ball inside. Other lenses like 50mm Canon F1.4 LTM give lousy corners wide open too.
 

rayvonn

Hall of Famer
Location
London
I think the price does still stick out. No biggie though, that’s always been the case. This time though, the position is a bit different to the past. The M is slowly turning into less of a rangefinder and more of a mirrorless camera, prodding customers towards live view and that EVF. For these more modern non-rangefinder features, I can’t see how, if that’s the priority and for manual useage as well as AF, one wouldn’t be better off using canikonsonyfujim43 cameras which have been specialising and improving this for years. Also in terms of optical quality, there has been a serious levelling up and evening out to the point where, say, the Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 is every bit as good optically as an APO Summicron 50 (I didn’t believe it till I saw it), maybe just maybe even better(!). But all this is irrelevant to those of us that use RF cameras for the traditional reasons ie the very simple process and mechanism, focus patch (or pre focusing), shoot, that’s it. To these people, and I am one of them, the new features of the latest model won’t really be needed, with the (mainly older/ classical) M mount lenses being largely responsible for the mythical “Leica Look” if it exists - all of which can be acquired for a fraction of nine grand if cost is your concern.

My only concern for Leica is those turnaround repair times, I worry that today’s customer that gets into the M11 as their first Leica purchase might not find what was acceptable in the past acceptable now, 2 to 3 months is a long time for anyone outside the bubble.
 
Last edited:
One of you provided a link to Jono Slack's review of the M11 in the other thread, he talked about how impressed he was. I saw the amazing photos and it did make me think for a brief moment whether I want it.

Then I intentionally went over to read his review of the M10 from a few years ago when he was talking about how impressed he was by that.

Then that reminded me of a few years even further back when the M240 came out and people were (mostly) going nuts over that. And then the M9 a few years before that.

And now, I kinda feel I don't really need the M11. All these previous M models are still very good cameras.
 
Last edited:
I've had my M8 for 12 years, bought one 3 months old for $2500 with 400 clicks on it. Leica used a cover glass that is very stable and resilient to humidity. Also has a 5% IR leakage.

Bought the M9 11 years ago, in early 2011- gave a chance for early issues to be worked out.
Bought the M Monochrom in December 2012.

Leica moved firmware development to an in-house group, originally used an aerospace company that knew what it was doing. Once firmware development was moved inhouse the number of annoying bugs increased dramatically. Failing to cock the shutter until after the buffer clears is one of the most annoying issues on the M9 that started with the newer versions of firmware. Has not, and never will be, corrected. There is also an annoying problem with the M Monochrom where the shutter is cocked multiple times. The firmware is not professional, it is not reliable.

The sensor cover glass problem of the M9 and M Monochrom is well known. Leica/Kodak chose a glass that corrodes with humidity, and tried to seal it. The seal failed. Until Leica announces what type of glass was used and I see the data sheets from Schott or other manufacturer- I would not trust the "Two Layers of Thin Glass Cemented into a Sandwich". If the cover glass is easily replaced, that would be fine. If the underlying layer corrodes with humidity then it most likely must be cemented from underneath to the sensor. I will not spend $9000 without knowing how this was implemented. Both my M9 and M Monochrom required new sensors, one under repair and the second for $950.

Leaving a traditional light meter out of the design means increased shutter lag and noise. Defeats the point of using a rangefinder camera.

The good news: prices of M10 and M240 bodies will drop as people need bragging rights for 60mpixels. M9 prices- seem to hold steady as they are the last of a breed.

The price of the new camera, $1000 more than my M Monochrom was in 2012. I could buy one now if I wanted to. I do not. I'm an engineer, and used to making decisions on architecture and specific components used. With Leica- they do not understand digital.
 
Last edited:
I've had my M8 for 12 years,

With Leica- they do not understand digital.

I wish I could continue to use my M8.2 but it has a permanent sensor issue. I still have it though.

What you said about metering off the sensor sounds like it could be a problem but I'd like to see it in the wild. I mean, surely they'd considered the potential issues. Surely.

Having said that, I remember when they were spruiking the M240 before its release. They touted the video function like it was going to be the next cinematic marvel but my god, the video function was riddled with basic issues. They had no idea what they were getting into.
 
My primary interest when it comes to new camera models is ISO performance. It's the dominant (by far) concern I have with my personal work and the occasional paid gigs I used to do. I'm confident in producing decent images with all of the previous models as long as (lack of) ISO performance doesn't get in the way.

I've found that the M10's ISO has been performing quite well though. With the M8.2, M9-P, and M240, I certanily felt that the ISO was just not performinig well enough. The M10 has been fine so I haven't felt the need to jump on the next model.

The only other gripe I have with the M10 is its dynamic range, it could be better. Weirdly enough the M240 seems to have better dynamic range than the M10. But this is just a minor gripe.
 

rayvonn

Hall of Famer
Location
London
My primary interest when it comes to new camera models is ISO performance. It's the dominant (by far) concern I have with my personal work and the occasional paid gigs I used to do. I'm confident in producing decent images with all of the previous models as long as (lack of) ISO performance doesn't get in the way.

I've found that the M10's ISO has been performing quite well though. With the M8.2, M9-P, and M240, I certanily felt that the ISO was just not performinig well enough. The M10 has been fine so I haven't felt the need to jump on the next model.

The only other gripe I have with the M10 is its dynamic range, it could be better. Weirdly enough the M240 seems to have better dynamic range than the M10. But this is just a minor gripe.

With those earlier models, I just won't go above base iso, sometimes even at night. Sounds ridiculous in this day and age but it is actually possible with lenses in the F1 to F1.5 range.

My CCD M-E 220 is from 2015 and has had all the sensor work done on it by Wetzlar as a precaution so in terms of health it's not really going to get any more up to date than that. When it does eventually brake, then it'll probably be an M10 for me. By that time, the M12 should be around, eh.
 
With those earlier models, I just won't go above base iso, sometimes even at night.

I mostly never went above ISO 320 with the M8.2. ISO 640 with the M9-P.

But I haaaaaated the fact that the M240 at ISO1200 looked absolutely horrible in the slightest questionable lighting (eg. that time I photographed in the interior of a cafe/restaurant during a DAY TIME wedding).

My CCD M-E 220 .... When it does eventually brake, then it'll probably be an M10 for me.

I imagine a fully worked and serviced ME should last a lot longer than the M12. Nevertheless, you'd love the M10.
 

christilou

Legend
Location
Sunny Frimley
The price is par for the course and cameras such as the Sony A1 et al are catching up in price. What upsets me is the £600 price of the new style add on viewfinder. I've been looking at hi res cameras lately and most of the reviews I have read have highlighted poor low light performance. This is giving me pause over the Q2 and also this new M11. I'm finding the 24 megapixels of my SL2s are producing great detailed shots when used as a screen saver on my 27" iMac screen.
 
24MPixels is a good resolution for matching up with vintage lenses.

The low-light performance of the M11 is enhanced by the pixel-binning, which will average out noise and increase dynamic range. Small pixels do not have as much electron-collecting material as one with a large pixel. Adding multiple pixels together is a way of emulating larger pixels.

I've never had a problem with using my M9 at ISO2500: uncompressed DNG, fully charged battery, and slow SD cards. Same with the M Monochrom at ISO10,000. It matches the Nikon Df for low-light performance. The M8- I use m8raw2dng for low-light.
 

William Lewis

Top Veteran
Location
Hayward WI
Name
William Lewis
I agree with Brian here. My 240 at 24 MP and a handful of vintage lenses has been a wonderful performer for me. Daytime, I run at ISO200. Nighttime, I run at ISO3200. It works for me for what I want out of it. Sometimes people talk about Oh this could be sharper or there's too much noise/grain at high ISO. I don't need scalpels and I don't need available darkness - perhaps the light level of a theater show or a bar with friends on occasion. Within the limits I set it works fine. If it doesn't, I still have my D7100 too.
 
Top