Leica M11 — STREET SILHOUETTES

It would be a fib to say that I have actually tested the Leica M11 for a month. More accurately, I took delivery of it a month ago. I only started shooting it last week. To be perfectly frank, I am not particularly excited about it. Plus, I have been busy with my current state of impermanence. Fleeing the lockdown in Hong Kong with just a suitcase did not exactly prepare me for the months ahead and the possibility of not returning back to my film digitizing setup. Thing is, I might not return back to Hong Kong, given a change in personal circumstances.

Still, I had to test my M11. Like I said, it has been a month. Unfortunately, I am now in terra incognito away from my network of willing participants - not knowing what to photograph. But by chance or by fate’s design, I was presented an opportunity to go to Montana. The prospect of going where I have never gone before did excite me. The big mountains and the even bigger sky in a land so steeped in the lore of Americana. And, it gave me a chance to see if the people in the red states are really all that different from folks residing in the blue states.

In any event, I decided not to photograph the people there - and probably not anyone for quite some time. In my opinion, I believe it’s fair, since I do not want to divulge my identity or intent to anyone. That said, there was much for me to photograph in Montana. My vacation photos (if you will) are a collection of images capturing what I believe to be the essence of Americana. This change in subject focus was refreshing and meditative. If anything, I’ve been wanting to switch my subject focus for a while now. Maybe, fate is nudging me to change.

Leica M11 + Leica APO 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH @ ISO 200 - taken at S-DNG. The rest of the photos on this blog entry are taken at L-DNG.

Leica M11 + Leica APO 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH @ ISO 200

Anyway the question I have been asked is why I have gone back to digital photography? After having sold my two M10s more than two years ago? After having spent an arm and a leg on the development of the first color film in two decades? Why the Leica M11? To be frank, film is getting too expensive for the task of taking boring everday photos. And, I needed something better than my iPhone 12. This might seem like an indulgent reason to get the latest and best iteration of a digital M-mount camera. But in my case, that is why I made the splurge.

After I got my M11, the question everyone has been asking me is about its image quality? How does the M11’s image quality compare to the M10? For me, that is a very curious question. After all, both the M10 and M11 try to document the world in as accurate a way as possible - without any color bias. In that way and from my own observations, the color reproduction of the M11 and the M10 is more or less the same. Reality is reality and it is wishful (if not ridiculous) to believe that one sensor can be better than the other in making reality look better.

The sensor of a digital camera is not supposed to render color through rose colored glasses. It is supposed to be clinical and true-to-life in its reproduction of color because it’s assumed that the colors of RAW images will be processed in post. For rose colored glasses without post processing intervention, one must shoot in film. From an APO 35 to APO 35 basis, I believe the unprocessed color reproduction of the photos on this previous blog post shot on film is better than the color reproduction of the photos on this blog post shot with the M10.

So if the color reproduction is more or less the same as the M10, what is the point of getting the M11? Well, the M11 does offer more resolution - much much more. With more resolution, the M11 offers the promise of digital cropping (I mean, digital zooming). But seriously, how crucial is more resolution and digital cropping (I mean, digital zooming) in actual use? After shooting a few frames at small DNG (18 megapixels) and the rest at large DNG (60 megapixels), all I can say is that the necessity of more resolution is a fallacy of over preparedness.

It is fear of missing out that made me shoot at the 60 megapixel large DNG setting. In other words, I only shot at large DNG because I didn’t want to lose the opportunity of being able to enlarge some image detail in post. But in the end, I only digitally cropped (I mean, digitally zoomed) one image. As for DNG size, can you truly say that my thirty large DNG photos look any better than my one small DNG photo? In my opinion, I cannot tell. On top of that, it takes my underpowered MacBook Air a lifetime to import and process those large DNG files.

Digital cropping (I mean, digital zooming) only makes sense if you are enlarging an image detail shot at closer distances. If you digitally crop (I mean, digitally zoom) an image detail shot at further distances (in mimicking the reach of a telephoto lens), the image quality can look awful. Too much haze or dust in the air will distort the sharpness of the resulting crop (I mean, digital zoom). But to be fair, the same can be said of telephoto lenses. That said, the image quality is still better with a telephoto lens than digital cropping (I mean, digital zooming).

Two strikes then? How unlucky to be behind the count. What then is the selling point of the M11? Well, it seems to have a much better battery life. After charging it out of the box, I haven’t charged it again. And when I finally did take it out to shoot, many weeks later, it still had 99% battery life left. Then a week in Montana - having took around a hundred frames of mostly large DNG photos on live view - my trusty M11 still had 65% battery life left. However, it’s possible that the battery life might not have lasted as long, had I been more trigger happy in use.

Of course, battery life cannot be the selling point of a new camera. I also found it perceptibly lighter in weight. Mind you, my observation might be skewed, since I normally shoot heavier brass film Leica rangefinders. The M11 is only 0.7 oz (or 20g) lighter than the M10 (including batteries). Still, it felt good in hand. Also worth noting is the omission of a bottom plate. That made sense from an ergonomic perspective. That said, I really disliked the placement of the SD card. It is truly an inelegant design to remove the battery to access the SD card slot.

Yes, I am splitting hair in trying to demonstrate that the M11 is better than the M10. Thing is, the M11 isn’t all that different from its predecessors where it matters. I mean, it takes M-mount lenses. It has the same ISO dial and shutter speed dial. And, it also has live view. Really, it’s all pretty much the same as its predecessors, if you ask me. As for the extra resolution, it doesn’t mean a thing in the real world of on-screen viewing. Given that, what is really the selling point of the M11? Frankly, I don’t know. I scratch my head senseless wondering what that is.

Well, it does have a top electronic shutter speed of 1/16000s. Plus, it also has 64GB of internal memory, which can come in handy. Moreover the wifi pairing with the Leica FOTOS app is noticeably better (albeit still buggy, since it’s only a beta version). On top of that, its touch screen interface is much more usable. And finally, it has 15 stops of dynamic range. That is 2 more stops than its predecessors, which was already forgiving enough in remedying inept metering. In that way, I guess the selling point of the M11 are all these electronic add-ons.

But all these add-ons are on the margin of normal use. And, they require some tinkering on your part. For me, I do not care for it. But for others, it’s the improvements at the extremes that make something exceptional. In that way, the M11 can be characterized as an exceptional camera. As to whether it being exceptional makes it worth getting depends on whether one believes that those improvement at the extremes are justifiable over getting a new or used M10 or M10-R. Personally, I do not think its worth it, if you already have an M10 or M10-R.

Don’t get me wrong. The M11 is better than the M10 and M10-R. Really! But, it’s only better at the extremes. For 99% of any photographer’s actual needs, the M10 and M10-R do more or less the same. Nonetheless, better is better. And, there will always be those who demand on having nothing but the best. For them, the M11 is that camera. In any event, I believe the M11 is a lost opportunity - which is a shame. If only the folks at Wetzlar gave the M11 a hybrid optical and electronic viewfinder. Now, that would have made the M11 a truly special camera.

Leica M11 + Leica APO 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH @ ISO 200 - black, white, shadow, and highlight values have been tweaked in post

Leica M11 + Leica APO 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH @ ISO 200 - black, white, shadow, and highlight values have been tweaked in post. Cropped to 50mm equivalent - not that it was necessary.

Then again, I suppose the folks at Wetzlar had to leave something off the table for the next iteration, five years from now. Otherwise, what is there for us to want in the M12? As for my feelings toward my M11, I believe it is a very good digital rangefinder - the best I’ve ever had. However, I can’t say that it’s significantly or substantively better than the M10 or M10-R. I know my conclusion will not be satisfying for Leica loyalist. But, I can’t make up praises just because I like Leica rangefinders. In the end, the M11 is just too similar to the M10 and M10-R.

Still, getting something indulgent like the M11 has never been about making rational decisions. In other words, if you can afford it, you won’t regret the splurge. For me, I no longer have the M10 anymore, so getting the M11 isn’t completely indulgent - if you can say that this splurge isn’t an indulgent replacement for my iPhone 12.

As for the folks in Montana, I found them to be delightful. Of course, it helped that I knew how to behave like a proper guest visiting someone else’s home. Regardless, the people I met were very neighborly to me. As one resident proudly said to me, “[his] momma raised him right”.

Disclaimer

Apr 1 Leica M11

Disclaimer

Apr 1 Leica M11

Jul 25 Technology Kills Fun