M9 vs M10

Nick Owen

Suspended / Banned
Messages
595
Edit My Images
No
I dropped into Leica City Store at the Royal Exchange in the City of London and the assistant manager there, Ludivine Combe, very kindly let me play with their new toy. But very briefly. No scientific test this. Just a rough and ready hand-held couple of snaps shot in the shop, against the light with mixed lighting thrown into the mix. It's how I tend to work anyway. Fast, and usually in difficult and awkward situations. With my venerable 35 year old lens placed on each camera for consistency.

Anyway, instinctively - rather than thinking about it – I tried to find four words that described 'good' and 'not so good' photographs. (Thinking too hard hurts, is time consuming and is often wrong anyway).
What sprang to my lazy mind were these words:
Good: Impact, Emotion, Connectivity and Execution
Bad: Prescribed, Contrived, Posed and Cutesy.
I'm not saying these four words are correct or definitive at all, just that they sprang to my mind. They are, I guess, just my personal bias. But the point is what didn't spring to mind - at all - was the word camera.

Which I suppose is interesting since I've been considering chopping in my old M9 for the new svelte (and - cough - rather expensive at £5800 body alone) M10.

The results were pretty much as expected. The new and bigger CMOS 24mp sensor (5976 x3984) was cleaner and with better detail than the old CCD 18mp ( 5212x3468) M9 version, obviously. The camera itself was slightly smaller, the viewfinder slightly bigger, the back LCD screen much, much better and there were less buttons on the back to press. However I think I would miss the M9's dedicated delete button. And I'm not enthralled by the fiddly ISO dial on top. On balance, I think I prefer the lines of the M9 though many would disagree. The bigger LCD screen is cool, but then I don't chimp that much anyway, so the rubbish M9 screen is adequate for my use. The shutter of the M10 is way better and more discrete. Big plus there.
And the Leica Q? Fixed, big lens wide-angle point and shoot. That huge look-at-me lens put me right off. No thanks. (I know everyone else loves this camera, just my personal bias)

So much for the Q, what about image quality of the M's? Technically, no contest. M10 wins it. But does it...? This little test of mine was horrid for the poor old M9. On the other hand, the M10 was designed for this and should have excelled. And it did. I missed focus with the M9 and nailed it with the M10. (I purposely didn't spend time making sure I was in focus, just shot like I usually do with each camera). Shadow detail was far better and noise well controlled on the M10. And yet...
That noise, weirdly, from the M9 is aesthetically quite attractive. In monochrome that is. In colour it's just simply horrid. But I tend to shoot in mono a lot. The graininess/noise kinda reminds me of Tri-X film. And, in good light, the M9's CCD can give really great colour results. The M10's CMOS gives smooth digital cleanliness all day long. Which I find a little bland. Perfect, yes, but also a little plastic looking.

Is it worth me stumping up £4 grand to upgrade? Frankly, no. I've tried the cheap alternatives too. The Fuji and Sony mirrorless cameras are all fantastic but for me they are overly complicated with their electronic viewfinders filled with distractions and readouts that remind me of shooting video rather than stills. I want to concentrate on the scene in front of me, not be distracted by whats blinking in the viewfinder or battle the camera's menu system.

Which brings me back to to my opening thought. It should be obvious of course, but a camera in itself can never make a great or even good picture. It's the one in your hand that makes the difference. Whatever one you're comfortable with. Mine is the aging flea bitten mongrel dog that's far from perfect but is still loyal and has an imperfect but big heart. Or in this case, the one with the CCD.

My thanks to Ms Combe at the Leica Store City for her warm help.
https://leicastore-mayfair.co.uk/pages/visit-leica-city

M9 & M10.jpg M9M10.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have gone M9 > M240 > M10. Each one was an improvement on the previous version. The M10 really is a very lovely piece of kit. But...if you aren’t shooting in low light then you won’t need the better ISO of the M10. If you don’t chimp much you wont need the better screen (and if you don’t chimp you won’t need the delete key though!).

Essentially there’s nothing wrong with the M9, and in fact I prefer the rear wheel versus the tiny 4-way pad on the M10. My suggestion is that you save the £4k and use it to take you and your M9 to somewhere amazing to take fantastic pictures (“To take interesting pictures, first stand in front of something interesting”).

Of course, you could take a little look at the lovely Leica CL. You can put your M lens on it. It’s really super. I sold my M10 to get one and am very happy I did. Keep your M9 and get the CL and 18mm and you’re laughing.
 
Last edited:
Hello stranger :) - I tried a Leica (cannot remember which) - impressive engineering but that shape!! urgh I'd never be able to use it with my ham fisted approach. I guess the message is though, if you are comfortable with the tool you are using then unless there is a very good reason to change, stick with it!.
 
I haven't shot with the M10 but use an M9 and love what it produces. I find the files have a lovely feel to them, especially with something like the Sonnar 50 1.5. They aren't perfect at high ISO but they aren't awful either.

I like the thinner form factor of the M10 but for the cost, I think I will keep hold of the M9 for now. They don't seem to be falling in price either. I like Tobers idea of saving the £4k and using it to take you and your M9 to somewhere :)
 
Why not compromise and upgrade from the M9 to a used M240? You'd get the higher-res CMOS sensor and the better screen at half the cost of the M10, and could even use it for video :)
 
Does your M9 have the fixed version of the sensor? Now that they've killed the free replacement programme, it's an expensive fix if it corrodes. On the other hand, nearly £6k is a slightly mad price for a camera. I think I'd be tempted by Simon's suggestion of the M240, even if it looks a bit overfed compared to the M10.
 
I haven't shot with the M10 but use an M9 and love what it produces. I find the files have a lovely feel to them, especially with something like the Sonnar 50 1.5. They aren't perfect at high ISO but they aren't awful either.

I like the thinner form factor of the M10 but for the cost, I think I will keep hold of the M9 for now. They don't seem to be falling in price either. I like Tobers idea of saving the £4k and using it to take you and your M9 to somewhere :)

You sure you actually shoot with yours now mate :D

I’d love an M9 Leica, they seem far from perfect but the image quality always gets me.
 
You sure you actually shoot with yours now mate :D

I’d love an M9 Leica, they seem far from perfect but the image quality always gets me.

It has been sitting there looking a bit sad lately, I won't lie :( Was going through some pics with it the other day and I really need to get out with it again. I know I will fall in love with it again, but I've been getting carried away with the 20mm on the DF and shooting film again. Come Summer when I'm shooting less sunrises and seascapes, then it will return. It's definitely my walkabout camera.
 
Back
Top