Jump to content

Long time M user considering a DSLR. Opinions on the user experience?


Simey

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So here is my quandary and my apologies if this has been discussed before. I'm a long time M user. My main use is travel photography. After using some SLRs I got my first M - an M4P in 1986, then got an M6, then a couple of years ago I got an M-E. I love my Leicas, and love my Leica lenses. I still have these cameras, even the film ones that I now never use.

 

But I have to admit, as an occasional amateur user and one who is hitting middle age, I think my skills lag behind the camera and I find myself missing shots. Either I am fumbling with the wrong lens, or I miss the focus. Here's an example:

 

15764970567_1171fb7490_b.jpgL4806734 by mrsyettigoosecreature, on Flickr

 

:mad: That gazelle was standing just a few feet from me - while I was eating lunch no less. There is no reason I should have missed focus, but I did.

 

Also, I am finding that I need longer lenses, which obviously is not a rangefinder strength. I love my Tele-Elmar 135 but that's as long as I can go.

 

So I am slowly coming around to the idea that it may be time to break down and get a DSLR and some zooms. I'm leaning towards the Canon 6D as one of the smaller full frame bodies and I am thinking about a 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8, but I am also considering the f4 versions.

 

I think I can live with the body, but when I pick up those lenses they just seem like monsters to me. The whole package is as big as my old Hasselblad! Yes, I will keep the Leica of course, but if I go this route I will probably carry the Canon and not both systems. But will my bias towards portability win over?

 

I'm sure others must have gone through this transition. Am I going to hate the size and experience? Opinions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the technical data of the picture? You measured the distance on the left eye of the animal?

To me the upper lip, the left eye and the inside of the left ear of the animal seem to be sharp.

Did you choose an f/stop with too less DOF?

Jan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use 3 systems, the M, the Nex mirrorless and Canon DSLR. I use the Canon for sports and wildlife almost exclusively. Of course the M is not optimal for long lens, autofocus applications. But the NEX (and XT1 which I have also had) are not in the same league with quality, reliable and fast autofocus as a good DSLR/lens combo. The DSLR/lens are definitely a load and that is why I leave them home unless I specifically need fast, reliable AF. If you don't shoot sports or wildlife a smaller system like the Sony or Fuji mirrorless might be more usable for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the technical data of the picture? You measured the distance on the left eye of the animal?

To me the upper lip, the left eye and the inside of the left ear of the animal seem to be sharp.

Did you choose an f/stop with too less DOF?

Jan

 

It was human error. I wear bifocals and it is getting harder and harder for me to focus accurately with the rangefinder, particularly of course with shallower dof. This was on a 135 at close distance and it was most likely on F5.6.

 

When I do hit it, the camera is fine (see below, same lens and aperture). But it is getting hit or miss enough to make me think of autofocus.

 

15765722419_18afd8a3d1_b.jpgL4806319 by mrsyettigoosecreature, on Flickr

Edited by Simey
Link
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use 3 systems, the M, the Nex mirrorless and Canon DSLR. I use the Canon for sports and wildlife almost exclusively. Of course the M is not optimal for long lens, autofocus applications. But the NEX (and XT1 which I have also had) are not in the same league with quality, reliable and fast autofocus as a good DSLR/lens combo. The DSLR/lens are definitely a load and that is why I leave them home unless I specifically need fast, reliable AF. If you don't shoot sports or wildlife a smaller system like the Sony or Fuji mirrorless might be more usable for you.

 

Thanks. How do you find carrying a heavy body and zoom as compared to an M and some lenses? I keep trying to convince myself that the actual weight difference isn't that big. It's just that only one prime is on the camera at a time with the Leica, as opposed to a zoom, which is looks so huge to me but is effectively several lenses.

 

So far I'm not convinced by the non-Leica mirrorless cameras I have seen, including even the A7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going in opposite way. I'm a Nikon D800e user with loads of great glass. But the shear weight made switch to M (240) . For rare needs of speed, stealth & safety I also bought the newly released Leica V-Lux 109. I find it bought the joy of Photography back. I don't believe Nikon D800e gives me better results, just may be D.R it may excel.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. How do you find carrying a heavy body and zoom as compared to an M and some lenses? I keep trying to convince myself that the actual weight difference isn't that big. It's just that only one prime is on the camera at a time with the Leica, as opposed to a zoom, which is looks so huge to me but is effectively several lenses.

 

 

 

So far I'm not convinced by the non-Leica mirrorless cameras I have seen, including even the A7.

 

 

If you have a prime lens on the DSLR it's not so bad, but noticeably heavier than a similarly equipped M. But if you're not lugging it around for hours at a time it's not so bad. Once you attach a 70-200 it effectively doubles the bulk and makes it front heavy causing it to be much more cumbersome. I use a 7D MkII and with the 17-55 f2.8 it's pretty versatile and not too heavy. Weatherproof and bulletproof which is nice when you're in a challenging environment.

 

I have been disappointed with the autofocus of the Nex and XT1. They are fine, but miss more than they should.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About 18 months I took up photography and bought an M240 - which I love - so I've thankfully never gone through an 'SLR stage' involving heavy cameras and large lenses.

 

However I'm now in my late forties and found that over the past few years I had become slightly long-sighted, but this wasn't a problem with the Leica in that my glasses didn't get in the way at all...

 

Recently however I found I too was 'missing focus'. A visit to my optician confirmed that my eyesight had changed slightly, calling for new glasses; after a new prescription I found I could again nail focus much more consistently. My optician reassured me that a significant change in eyesight could happen over a relatively short period of time, and should be regarded as quite normal at my age. Whilst this surprised and slightly depressed me (getting older is never easy!), I was glad that there was an obvious reason for my thankfully short-lived period of 'missing-every-shot'.

 

May I suggest that maybe you consider a visit to your optician, just to check it's nothing similar?

 

Hope this helps, and Regards.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. How do you find carrying a heavy body and zoom as compared to an M and some lenses? I keep trying to convince myself that the actual weight difference isn't that big. It's just that only one prime is on the camera at a time with the Leica, as opposed to a zoom, which is looks so huge to me but is effectively several lenses.

 

So far I'm not convinced by the non-Leica mirrorless cameras I have seen, including even the A7.

 

If you use zooms, the actual weight difference is BIG. There's no way to convince yourself otherwise. There's no point in buying the biggest Canon L zooms unless they serve a specific need that other lenses don't. Time after time, I've read comments on forums by people who say that they got tired of carrying their heavy DSLR gear and that it's now all "gathering dust" or sold off and replaced by something lighter.

 

My suggestion is to buy Canon's lightweight but excellent primes, such as the 35/2 IS and the 100/2.8L IS (great!). Canon's older (and cheaper) generation of non-L primes are not as good, but the some of the more recent ones are excellent, with superb image quality, great autofocus, manageable size and effective image stabilization. The older 135/2L is also excellent (though lacking IS) and will likely be much easier to frame & focus than the 135 tele-elmar; it's also much easier to carry than a 70-200L zoom (especially the f/2.8 version).

 

If you must have zooms, then go for the smallest, lightest zooms that will meet your needs. Consider the new 24-70/4L IS, the just released 24-105/3.5-5.6 IS STM (haven't seen reviews yet), and the 70-200/4L IS (I have this one and love it). Canon's current f/2.8 L zooms are some of the best zooms ever made, but are heavy to carry. I love the 24-70/2.8L II, which manages to be better and more durable than its predecessor, but also smaller and lighter and better handling. Zooms are great if you're frequently in a situation where you can't move nearer or further from the subject. If your photography is not so constrained, then carrying just 2 or 3 primes and moving around, changing lenses when needed, is often a better strategy (i.e. easier to carry) — and should be easy to adjust to for a long time M user.

 

The 6D is an excellent choice, very refined and not too heavy, but there is a learning curve and a period of (likely) several months where you customize the camera to your needs. The outer autofocus points are not cross-type, so you have to learn when they work and when they don't. No matter which camera you use, the only way to get past the experience of fumbling with gear is to practice a lot.

Edited by zlatkob
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I going to hate the size and experience? Opinions?

 

Size can be overcome if you 'think outside the box' and instead of a DSLR and the expected APSC or FF sensor you went with m43.

 

There are many advantages to say the Olympus E-M1 for the type of photography you do. First is the world leading image stabilisation system which is what you want for telephoto lenses. The lenses are double the focal length of a FF lens (so in m43 a 150mm is equivalent to a 300mm) but the m43 lens is a fraction of the size. You also get double the depth of field, so any slight mis-focus is compensated for with increased DOF. Ah, but you want to separate the subject from the background by using shallow DOF, well you can get fast telephoto lenses for m43 that allow you to do that. You also have a very wide range of lenses available from more than one manufacturer, the principle other being Panasonic. Leica have designed some of the Panasonic lenses which mean if you use those you can still post your pictures on LUF, particularly nice is the 25mm Summilux prime.

 

So, they are small, some of the best lenses in the world, and with high quality technology. If you don't think 16mp is enough it's a good idea to compare because you would be surprised, but if you really want pixels you could wait until next year for the E-M5 replacement that will have the ability to produce 40mp images.

 

Steve

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Size can be overcome if you 'think outside the box' and instead of a DSLR and the expected APSC or FF sensor you went with m43.

 

There are many advantages to say the Olympus E-M1 for the type of photography you do. First is the world leading image stabilisation system which is what you want for telephoto lenses. The lenses are double the focal length of a FF lens (so in m43 a 150mm is equivalent to a 300mm) but the m43 lens is a fraction of the size. You also get double the depth of field, so any slight mis-focus is compensated for with increased DOF. Ah, but you want to separate the subject from the background by using shallow DOF, well you can get fast telephoto lenses for m43 that allow you to do that. You also have a very wide range of lenses available from more than one manufacturer, the principle other being Panasonic. Leica have designed some of the Panasonic lenses which mean if you use those you can still post your pictures on LUF, particularly nice is the 25mm Summilux prime.

 

So, they are small, some of the best lenses in the world, and with high quality technology. If you don't think 16mp is enough it's a good idea to compare because you would be surprised, but if you really want pixels you could wait until next year for the E-M5 replacement that will have the ability to produce 40mp images.

 

Steve

 

 

This is good advice. I don't have an interchangeable lens MFT, but I do have the new Panasonic LX100 MFT (same as the Leica DLux109) and it delivers very nice images up to ISO1200 and usable beyond that. The autofocus is better and more reliable than any mirrorless camera I have used. I would expect the new Olympus models to be very good also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I evaluate cameras first based on the viewing experience, i.e., how I see the subject; everything else is irrelevant if that doesn't suit….IQ, size, weight, lenses, or whatever.

That's the key reason I prefer using the M…after that, the rest. I used SLRs for many years, along with various other formats, but have never bonded with the EVF world, at least not as a primary means of viewing. YMMV.

 

Jeff

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used slr cameras alongside Ms for 50 years, doing things with the slr that I cant do with the rangefinder camera. After the M rangefinder, I find the slr the next best thing, and considerably nicer than an evf. So I have a Nikon aps-c dslr, primarily to use with the pile of lenses I already have. I will almost certainly change it for a full frame model now that they have got smaller and lighter. Just avoid humongous great zoom lenses and they are fine. I also have a nex 6 to use some of my leica lenses but the evf is horrible in bright light outdoors.

 

Gerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

If You shot wildlife and sports you will need a pentaprism-or a mirror less finder. It's almost impossible to focus longer telephoto lenses on a rangefinder camera. Autofocus is nice, but is no guarantee of sharp images. I have Nikon d800, Olympus d and a Leica m 9. I often use manual focus on the Nikon and the Olympus, the autofocus is slow or useless when shooting against the light, in poor light, and when the background is moving water or leaves. So you need a fast zoom or telephoto. They are expensive and big and heavy for dslr. You can get smaller and lighter lenses for mirror less cameras. I find my Olympus excellent for traveling, but the Nikon has the best image quality. I use the Nikon for everything, but I have to consider the bulk and the weight. I always use a monopod or a tripod for shooting longer lenses. The Olympus gives me the crop factor 2 , meaning that a 200 mm. Gives the picture angle of a 400 mm. It works great with old manual focus lenses with an adapter.

I have had leicas for many years, but only for wide angle or normal lenses. They are nice for shooting people and traveling. Useless for wildlife , macro and sports. Leica is the only rangefinder camera to consider today. For the other mentioned cameras there's lots of brands to choose from. I have only experience with the above mentioned, but I guess that canon, Sony, Panasonic, Fuji and others will be just as good.

Regards Ole

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest differece will be bulk and weight. One of the solutions that occurred to me was the M 240 with an R adapter and 80-200 and a 2X APO extender, but that is quite bulky and heavy.

 

Alternatively: Although among my cameras are an R8 with DMR and six lenses (I'll probably put them for sale on the Forum before long), a D2, A D Lux 5 and two underwater cameras, with the exception of SCUBA photos I've not used them, combined, for more than a half dozen photos since Barbara gave me a V-Lux 4 two years ago. This suggests that the new V Lux (114), which has a sensor with four times the area, would be a good choice. If you want to see wildlife with the older V Lux 4 go to our site and look at photos from Panama and from the Brazilian Pantanal. For that matter, see Antarctica photos, for which I borrowed a V Lux 2 from Leica when they had my R8 and 80-200 in for unexpectedly long service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the comments. I am still pondering. I'm more and more thinking of this in the context of not giving up on my Leica, but refocussing it (no pun intended) on what it is best at and adding to that another system for other usages. I get too much pleasure from using the Leica to give it up entirely.

 

Of course, this is probably whistling in the wind as I doubt I would actually fly with both very often.

 

By the way, how is the 50mm 1.4 Canon? I'm seeing mixed reviews online.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, how is the 50mm 1.4 Canon? I'm seeing mixed reviews online.

 

It's not very good at f/1.4, but it's very good at f/2.8 and smaller. Stopped down (f/4, f/5.6, etc.) it's pretty excellent (like most lenses). So it depends on how you use it. Wide open, it just doesn't have the sharpness of the great f/1.4 lenses. The AF motor is not that good either, and their are many reports of it breaking early, although I've never had it break. Manual focus feel is poor. But it's lightweight, inexpensive, not too big (unlike the giant Sigma 50 Art or Zeiss Otus) and can be very handy.

 

The problem is that it's a very old design in Canon's system, was designed as a lower-priced lens, and is now long overdue for an update. A new 50/1.4 is probably the lens I would most like Canon to produce, although I'd be happy with an excellent 50/1.8 or 50/2.0. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon introduced a much better updated version in the next year. They've introduced excellent new versions of the 24, 28, and 35, and new lenses like the 40, so other updated primes are likely coming: 20, 50, 85, etc. Good luck!

Edited by zlatkob
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...