Why Leica M digital at all?For only a third the money you can buy an outstanding camera of another brand. For those who already feel it, the charm of Leica M is obvious. To those who do not quite see the appeal, I offer the following:1. The camera body is small and unobtrusive; it fits in your pocket and people scarcely realize it's a professional camera at all. It allows you to blend into a crowd without attracting attention. I have fired off dozens of photos while chatting with someone who scarcely realized what I was doing, and in situations where another photographer was still taking his Canon or Nikon out of the backpack.2. The lenses are equally small and unobtrusive. You may sacrifice auto focus, but I routinely walk around with a camera and three lenses in my pocket and no one knows it. Any lens designer with a computer can concatenate a huge number of elements, correcting for every little thing, and make a 28 mm lens that is 150 mm long. The current aspherical Leica lens might be 40 mm long, and there are really excellent legacy lenses from Nikon, Voigtlander, and Leica that are 20 mm long. Those things fit in your pocket like spare change. The quality of the lenses is unmatched, and if you want to save money, the Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses are still very good for the price.3. Rangefinders are the best way to frame a photo. Why would anyone not want to see the extra space around the image, to help find the best position? And rangefinders cost money; they are precision instruments as much as any lens. I don't know exactly how much -- several thousand dollars -- but they partly account for the high cost of the Leica.4. An unbelievable variety of legacy lenses is available for the Leica M, and almost any lens can be adapted to fit because the flange is close to the film plane. There are whole suites made by Nikon and Canon in the 1950s, and there are Zeiss, Voigtlander, Schneider, you name it, going back generations, and idiosyncratic new lenses like those made by the reclusive Mr. Miyazaki. Lenses are fun things, each with its own personality, and most of the legacy lenses don't cost much. Though you actually only need three or four lenses in real life, there is no other digital camera system that can take so many legacy lenses.5. Most digital camera menus are far too complicated. The Leica is about as simple as it gets. One only needs a few adjustments beyond shutter speed, diaphragm, and ISO.6. If you must have autofocus, for example if you shoot football or basketball games with a long telephoto, Leica M is not the camera to bring. If I were an action sports photographer I would probably use an autofocus SLR.Once you're on board with the Leica M system, how does the M11 compare to other digital Leicas?I own or have owned the M10P, the M10R, the M10 Monochrom, and the M11. The differences between them are incremental. Here is a discussion of the differences:Do you really need 60 MP or is 24 enough?24 MP is already quite a lot. I've taken some excellent photos at 24 MP and actually, it is enough. Then came 40 MP and it was kind of crazy, and now we have 60 MP which seems insane. However, in favor of huge resolution, bear this in mind: The MTF of the photo is theproductof the MTF of the lens multiplied by the MTF of the camera. So having a sharper camera makes your lenses look better. It is the opposite of those who say "my old lenses will not be sharp enough for this new camera". But I would say if you want to save money and have all the advantages of the digital M format listed above, stay with a used M10P or M10R. They are wonderful cameras.Dynamic range of the sensor is what matters most-- The M11 has basically 15 stops of dynamic range, which is supernatural for a camera, though still not equal to the perceptions of the human eye. DXO gave it a rating of 100, which is equal to any other 35mm format camera on the market. The medium format Hasselblad and Pentax are only rated a tiny bit better. That is the convincing reason to buy a digital camera at all, and the real reason to buy an M11. The M10 "only" has 13 stops and a rating of 86. Having said that, I have taken a photo with the M10P that incorporated both full daylight, and darkness lit by a streetlight (under a bridge) in the same exposure. Thirteen stops is already quite a lot if you work at the camera's native ISO.BTW the idea that ISO is adjustable is not completely true. If your camera has, for example, twelve stops of dynamic range, have you noticed that every time you double the ISO, you "lose" a stop of dynamic range? What appears to be variable ISO is actually just "gain", and the act of cranking up the ISO is simply the act of throwing away shadow detail.Shutter lag is annoying- The shutter lag is not negligible for a camera that must first close its shutter before opening it. Sometimes one needs to compensate for lag and I have still not mastered the art. It is not a deal-breaker, as shutter lag is only important for certain subject matter.Little things don't matter-- I don't care how the battery charges or where the focus-peaking button is located. Focus peaking is a miracle in its own right and it allows you to use non-coupled lenses such as the Apo-Telyt 280mm FLE in R-mount. The rangefinder is not quite accurate enough to focus long telephone lenses wide open, but focus peaking takes care of that.ConclusionFor me there are many reasons to buy a digital M camera, and one real reason to buy the M11 in particular: the supernatural dynamic range and sharpness of the sensor. The other advantages of the M system - the rangefinder, the wonderful lenses, and the compactness --  can be had with the various other M10 cameras -- the M10P, the M10R, and the M10M.

I like your summary. While I have been using an M7 for 20 years, i never really managed to get enthused about the digital Ms.Until recently that is,when I came onto the M10 monochrom. This has set my brain in motion in a way I had not anticipated.I am really curious about a remark you wrote about modern sensors and older lenses. This is interesting that you actually write off those concerns. You can see what i have in my profile and will understand where I am coming from. Perhaps simply too much thinking!what would be your take regarding a 35 lux from 2005 for instance?Cheerspatrick

You lost me with the"supernatural dynamic range"LOL I think you have drunk way too much red Kool-Aid.

But no mention about color science between your other Leica cameras