<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>m mount on pho.tography.org</title>
    <link>https://pho.tography.org/tags/m-mount/</link>
    <description>Recent content in m mount on pho.tography.org</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://pho.tography.org/tags/m-mount/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Leica M11 &#43; Summilux 50mm f/1.4: The Argument</title>
      <link>https://pho.tography.org/2026/04/12/leica-m11--summilux-50mm-f/1.4-the-argument/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 12 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://pho.tography.org/2026/04/12/leica-m11--summilux-50mm-f/1.4-the-argument/</guid>
      <description>Every discussion of Leica eventually arrives at the question of whether the price is justified. The M11 body costs around $9,000. The current Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH adds approximately $5,500. Thirteen thousand dollars for a rangefinder with no autofocus, no video, no continuous burst worthy of the name, and an optical viewfinder that requires the user to manually compensate for parallax error at close distances. The question is fair. The answer is complicated.</description>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>
