Replaced M with SL?

[biswasg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After having read the reviews of SL on this forum, I am inclined to upgrade/replace my M9-P with the SL. I presently have a lux 50, cron 35, elmarit 28 and 90. Reason being, I struggle with the rangefinder focusing and imagine the focus assist of the SL would be better eventually moving to the AF lenses.

 

Would like to have the experience of those who have already made this switch.

 

Thanks

[steppenw0lf]

Why don't you take your favorite lens and go to a dealer to try it with an SL ? Nothing is better than the personal experience.

And yes, with 10x EVF enlargement and/or focus peaking manual focusing is (much) easier with the SL

 

I see you are from Switzerland. If the dealer does not have a SL, he can arrange with Leica and there will come a Leica guy to show the camera and let you try some shots (he usually has an Apo50 with him).

 

That's how I saw the SL the first time (in autumn 2015). But do not expect too much at the first contact. (I did not like EVF of the camera and the 24-90 lens at first sight  , but since February I have a SL)

Edited September 18, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[biswasg]

Why don't you take your favorite lens and go to a dealer to try it with an SL ? Nothing is better than the personal experience.

 

Thanks for your reply. I will be going to Photokina in 2 days and will surely be checking it out. However, I was looking for some overall experience over a period of time from those who had changed from M to SL. Best wishes.

[jrp]

My keeper rate is much higher with the SL, than with any M. I can compose pictures and focus more easily with the SL. The M system feels very clunky when I go back to it. The SL also has a better sensor than the M (high ISO noise, dynamic range).

 

But the M is much more discrete, so if you are taking a lot of street shots, you may prefer it.

 

Before putting down your hard earned on the SL, you may want to consider the Sony A7 line, which is superior technically (other than the EVF), is cheaper, has a wider range of lenses, and which is established. (The SL is a risk, only 1 year in.). However, the Sony is less well suited to M lenses, particularly at the edges.

 

Hasselblad are also introducing a mirrorless system, at a similar price point to the SL. It has been well received, but is an even riskier proposition than the SL and is suitable for a narrower range of tasks. Of course, it won't work with your existing M glass.

[ramarren]

Since acquiring the SL last November, my M-P became all but unused for a long time. Then I started using it occasionally, but only with a 35 or 75 mm lens. I later bought the M-D. The M-D is, for me, the ultimate expression of a digital M (body with just a couple of lenses, utter simplicity) and the perfect, light-carry complement to the SL. The SL is my go-to camera for everything else. I can rely on getting the shot, getting it right, every time with the SL where the M-D is more casual in use. 

 

If I could only have one camera and I wanted versatility, responsiveness, and utter surety that what I needed to make a photo of would be captured exactly as I visualized, the SL would be my choice. Without question. 

[LocalHero1953]

I also have both, and I agree with everything others have said except..........

If I really had to choose one or the other, I would choose the M240! I can't imagine a photographic life without it, even though the SL is more versatile, has a better sensor, gives more keepers etc

I'm glad I can afford both.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After having read the reviews of SL on this forum, I am inclined to upgrade/replace my M9-P with the SL. I presently have a lux 50, cron 35, elmarit 28 and 90. Reason being, I struggle with the rangefinder focusing and imagine the focus assist of the SL would be better eventually moving to the AF lenses.

 

Would like to have the experience of those who have already made this switch.

 

Thanks

 

If you are near Zürich the Leica-Store there are extremely friendly and knowledgeable. I have the Sl amd only M and R lenses 10X EVF and focus peaking are so awsome that I who has not manually focussed for at least 30 years took to manual focussing straight away. I cannot state it more it is a lot easier than I imagined and I think I am faster shooting with very few duds.

[Daedalus2000]

I made the change when I found a good opportunity to exchange the M240 for an SL. I was not sure about it, but because I could not cope with the rangefinder very well over the last couple of years and because I got afraid that the prices for the M bodies will come down soon, I did it. I have to say after using it for a couple of months I am actually very happy with it and has exceeded my expectations. I like the EVF, I like that I can preview the exposure, the weight is not that different, I can also use my T lenses (and S lenses) and if I want I can buy an SL AF lens at some point. Overall a great camera with many options.

[biswasg]

Many thanks to all those who took the time to share their experiences with the M vs SL. In summary most of you seem to be happier with the SL than the M, mainly on focusing with the manual M lenses.

 

I hope I will have some time at the Leica booth at Photokina to experience some of this myself. I specially want to check the EVF experience with the lens stopped down, does it darken or their is some auto compensation of light in the EVF close to how the image will actually be exposed.

 

The other thing I want to try is autofocusing (with the 90-280 SL lens), especially with tracking in AFc mode. One of my interest is nature photography, I am not expecting it to be as fast as that of Canon 1Dx, but still if it is usable at all.

 

The experience shared on another thread indicates that the Novoflex Adapter for Canon EOS lenses is not worthwhile, so will have to maintain my Canon gear for my wildlife and nature photography.

 

Can't add the SL to the M9P, will have to choose one. It is tending to be the SL.

[Georges]

I would start with the SL without AF lenses. 

 

Your M glass is so great and the focus help is very straightforward, so you have still some years to enjoy them. 

 

The danger is that once you try the AF in the 35-90mm range, you will go for the "lazy" solution and the zoom is good, but not as good as the M primes.

 

 

 

 

P.S. I am obviously not talking about the 90-280mm for nature photography. That is a different game.

[steppenw0lf]

You can always turn on the exposure simulation (Belichtungssimulation) by pressing the FN button twice (button in front of the camera).

The only drawback, it does not stay continually on, you have to reenable it after each shot if you want to use it with manual lenses.

 

Regarding the Canon AF adapter: Your impression is completely wrong. The adapter is well worth the money, especially for the T/S lenses or the 11-24.

But using long tele lenses adapted is always a bad idea on any existing system, as usually the cameras have special programs for optimal steering of the AF and the IS for these very special lenses (e.g. Canon has six use cases).

 

So modern extreme teles have to be used on their native cameras, for optimal functionality. That is valid for ALL platforms. There are no known exceptions until today.

If slower AF or no AF and no IS is ok, then many tele lenses work perfectly on the SL (also the old R lenses, like the 4/280 or 2.8/280). 

 

And just because tracking was your method of choice on CaNikon will not necessarily mean that it will be the method of choice with the SL, as these AF algorithms are very camera specific. Maybe you could almost call them proprietary. (and not easily exchangeable).

Edited September 18, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[jrp]

You will need to read the manual carefully when choosing AF settings. So far as I can tell, the difference between AFs and AFC is that the latter takes the shot even if the image is not in focus. To get the camera to follow focus, you need to set Dynamic tracking mode, rather than static mode.

 

Yes, you can get the EVF to brighten in the dark, or get it to show what the shot pic will look like and apply exposure compensation with the turn of a dial. A further advantage of the EVF is that it allows you to focus off centre, which is great for fast M lenses that have wavy fields of focus.

[MRJohn]

After having read the reviews of SL on this forum, I am inclined to upgrade/replace my M9-P with the SL. I presently have a lux 50, cron 35, elmarit 28 and 90. Reason being, I struggle with the rangefinder focusing and imagine the focus assist of the SL would be better eventually moving to the AF lenses.

 

Would like to have the experience of those who have already made this switch.

 

Thanks

 

Having made the switch and not an add-on I can say "life without an M is possible but pointless" - otherwise the SL behaves as expected and outperforms the M in most aspects, except mojo (which is also kind of key to make interesting images).

[Guest]

Having made the switch and not an add-on I can say "life without an M is possible but pointless" - otherwise the SL behaves as expected and outperforms the M in most aspects, except mojo (which is also kind of key to make interesting images).

 

Yes I agree that's the term mojo you need a bit of that to create anything special with any camera outfit.

[chris_tribble]

Having just started to work with the SL I feel I'll use it as I'd planned and it will beautifully complement my M240s.

The SL well be used mainly with glass at 70 and longer + 21 and wider. Using 28/35/50 (and 70 sometimes) on the SL feels slower and less intuitive then they do on the M. So far as I'm concerned lenses which had few outings (21/90/135) are now coming into their own (the 90 apo is great on SL). So far as IQ is concerned, I am really enjoying the SL files though I've never had complaints with M 240 output.