IkarusJohn Posted June 2, 2016 Author Share #1241 Posted June 2, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I understand that. I guess what I'm saying is that the idea of having a single camera that does all is gone. Sure, most sensible people own one Leica (if they own a Leica at all), but then I'm not sure Leica owners are sensible, on the accepted meaning of the word. To own a Leica, you first have to "get it"; then you have to save your pennies to buy one, and a lens; once you've bought the lens, you want another one; and another one; then the Leica owner thinks, a Monochrom would go nicely with my M(240); then the draw of film (either as a novelty for those raised on digital or nostalgia for those who still think in film terms); and finally, Leica owner thinks the whole Visoflex thing is a bit half-arsed, and buys an SL ... I take my hat off to the single Leica, single lens people here - I envy your self-discipline and your commitment to photography, rather than to beautiful equipment which is a pleasure to use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 2, 2016 Posted June 2, 2016 Hi IkarusJohn, Take a look here What do you want in the next digital M?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1242 Posted June 2, 2016 The only quibble I have is with"most of them" My perception is different. There may be regional differences, though. The R was relative more popular in Germany than elsewhere for instance. Do you really believe that "most" German Leica users did own "both" an M and an R camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1243 Posted June 2, 2016 [...] To own a Leica, you first have to "get it"; then you have to save your pennies to buy one, and a lens; once you've bought the lens, you want another one; and another one; then the Leica owner thinks, a Monochrom would go nicely with my M(240); then the draw of film (either as a novelty for those raised on digital or nostalgia for those who still think in film terms); and finally, Leica owner thinks the whole Visoflex thing is a bit half-arsed, and buys an SL ... [...] Or a Sony body... or nothing else. Not everybody can afford to spend $13k (with zero lens...) for hobby photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 2, 2016 Author Share #1244 Posted June 2, 2016 True Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1245 Posted June 2, 2016 The SL is also a non starter for me for different reasons but i would not mind to get an electronic rangefinder at all provided i don't have to watch a mini TV set all the time. Now adapters like the VM-E for Sony can be very usefull indeed. It helps to hold the camera more comfortably and allows for close focusing down to 20 or 30cm with M lenses. Great experience really but i'm not trying to sell you my Sony . I like EVF for some things OVF for others. I'd welcome a hybrid system, but I could live with a purely electronic one, assuming a Q level price tag. But certainly I have a longer list on the SL myself. As to adapters, I recognize that they can be very useful, but I've had some bad experiences and prefer to avoid them. That said at $1700, I can accept them as a solution. At $7500? I pass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1246 Posted June 2, 2016 Do you really believe that "most" German Leica users did own "both" an M and an R camera? Not most, but a larger proportion than you imply. In that sense, most not as in less than 50 % is technically correct technically, but it was a fair number. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1247 Posted June 2, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I did not imply anything Jaap. I just said (or tried to say) that most Leica users did not, do not and will not buy both an M and an R or an SL camera. Pretty obvious if you ask me but YMMV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1248 Posted June 2, 2016 Its been a pipe dream of mine to have one camera for all circumstances After many years of trying I have come to the conclusion this is not possible The M is fine 95% of the time, which is all it needs to be It isn't, and will never be, a RX100 IV, or a 1DX, but since the types of photography these excel in are very occasional for me, to say the least, I certainly don't need the latter, and use the former infrequently enough to mean its a relative waste of money - although I still have it I shoot between 90mm and 18mm virtually all the time. The endless sea of new cameras and new features is interesting but thoroughly exhausting and has little bearing on improvements in personal photography which are largely to do with a good eye and experience Amateur photography should IMHO be for your own enjoyment predominantly. If you are trying to take pictures to satisfy other people or drive up flickr ratings, that's fine as a hobby, but not what I want from photography I want to capture the atmospheric moment, which made me feel something at the time. The tool has to have the utility to use and get out of the way, as well as being good looking enough for me to feel pleased about having when I am not using it. I guess not having the later requirement would save a bundle of cash I regard with suspicion though, none here of course, those who can not find a useful tool out of the myriad of equipment on the market today, and the desperate requirement for some new feature or form factor will suddenly make a perfect camera for them for ever .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1249 Posted June 2, 2016 Sensor cleaning system, keep the frame-line lever and simultaneous Monochrom release. Yes please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1250 Posted June 2, 2016 I did not imply anything Jaap. I just said (or tried to say) that most Leica users did not, do not and will not buy both an M and an R or an SL camera. Pretty obvious if you ask me but YMMV. Personally I always had R + M but the SL was indeed one bridge too far, predominantly because of size and heft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lax Jought Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1251 Posted June 2, 2016 I kinda feel that 95% of us shoot between 90mm and 18mm too. All the time. "I shoot between 90mm and 18mm virtually all the time." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayewing Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1252 Posted June 2, 2016 Personally I always had R + M but the SL was indeed one bridge too far, predominantly because of size and heft. This is my problem regarding the SL. I am sure that it is a wonderful camera but I find it difficult to justify the outlay as I suspect I would not use it very much due to the size and weight. At present I have an Olympus M43 system which I use when I need a long telephoto for wildlife The X2 crop factor helps and of course it has the benefit of AF and a very effective IS system for all lenses and a dual stabilisation system in the case of the latest 300mm F4 lens. I suspect that many more Leica M users have another make of camera than are prepared to invest in an M + SL. Of course if I was half my age (78) I miight have a different view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1253 Posted June 2, 2016 This is my problem regarding the SL. I am sure that it is a wonderful camera but I find it difficult to justify the outlay as I suspect I would not use it very much due to the size and weight. Because of the native lenses, or the camera itself? The M, with EVF attached, is actually taller than the SL, and only .3 inches less wide, and .2 inches less deep. The M with EVF weighs 1.65 lb vs 1.86 lb for the SL. (Forgive the US measures.) Folks here who are troubled by every mm, and every gram, will have a different view, but personally I find the SL not radically different from an M.....when an M sized lens is attached (not accounting for the small adapter). With the zoom(s)....well, that's another story. And I think the SL 50 Summilux will also be huge compared to its M counterpart. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Lowe Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1254 Posted June 2, 2016 After carrying the SL w/ M mount glass for a few days I think an M with more "SL-like" features would be pretty redundant. The SL is the best option if you want SL-like features. It felt barely any different to carry around vs. a current digital M in terms of mass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted June 2, 2016 Share #1255 Posted June 2, 2016 Because of the native lenses, or the camera itself? The M, with EVF attached, is actually taller than the SL, and only .3 inches less wide, and .2 inches less deep. The M with EVF weighs 1.65 lb vs 1.86 lb for the SL. (Forgive the US measures.) Folks here who are troubled by every mm, and every gram, will have a different view, but personally I find the SL not radically different from an M.....when an M sized lens is attached (not accounting for the small adapter). With the zoom(s)....well, that's another story. And I think the SL 50 Summilux will also be huge compared to its M counterpart. Jeff I found the grip on the SL made it feel uncomfortably bulky for extended use. It feels well balanced with SL lenses though, with which a smaller body and grip would feel wrong and awkward I'm sure. But as an alternative to a naked M with a small M lens, it certainly feels like a big step up into another category of camera altogether, which is fine because it is indeed a different type of camera. At least, I believe it is, and after using an SL for a couple of days, the relief I felt in getting back to an M was very real. I would only consider it an appropriate body for AF lenses, or if I already owned a large arsenal of R lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bencoyote Posted June 3, 2016 Share #1256 Posted June 3, 2016 This thread is now on page 64. I dropped off reading it a while ago and probably haven't seen anything between about page 10 and page 64. Now the thread seems to have wandered off to all the things that people really like or don't like about the SL and other cameras. What is the group consensus what do people realistically want from the next M? I'm up to about 20k shots on the two Leica M's that I've owned and now have about 1.5 years of experiences with them. It has improved my photography considerably and taught me a huge amount about how not to rely on technology but skill. So my list of things that I really want in the next M is actually really small. Better dynamic range Warning when you exceed 1/FD in viewfinder. Flip the color of the LED framelines or something. When I'm looking through the RF I can't tell if I'm in the too-slow-zone Ability to turn off noise reduction when doing long exposures. A real bulb mode. Even with all my workarounds there are still a few things that I haven't figured out how to do. Forget the JPGs and all the menu items associated with them like they did on the M-D Use the same EVF as the T. Then I think for many uses we can dispense with the screen by using the EVF for occasional live view for ultra-wide lenses, macro, and to check exposure in very difficult situations. For those people who don’t need a an EVF and don't do those things. It might be nice to have a hot-shoe mounted device that is just a GPS module without the EVF. WiFi or Bluetooth and a control app very much like the one for the T. This would be used for review of shots during downtime and set the very few camera settings. A low weight option that uses the 262 milled Aluminum top rather than brass A S, SL, & T style battery. Get rid of the baseplate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted June 3, 2016 Share #1257 Posted June 3, 2016 This thread is now on page 64. I dropped off reading it a while ago and probably haven't seen anything between about page 10 and page 64. Now the thread seems to have wandered off to all the things that people really like or don't like about the SL and other cameras. What is the group consensus what do people realistically want from the next M? I'm up to about 20k shots on the two Leica M's that I've owned and now have about 1.5 years of experiences with them. It has improved my photography considerably and taught me a huge amount about how not to rely on technology but skill. So my list of things that I really want in the next M is actually really small. WiFi or Bluetooth and a control app very much like the one for the T. This would be used for review of shots during downtime and set the very few camera settings. + a LTE sim socket Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted June 3, 2016 Share #1258 Posted June 3, 2016 Because of the native lenses, or the camera itself? The M, with EVF attached, is actually taller than the SL, and only .3 inches less wide, and .2 inches less deep. The M with EVF weighs 1.65 lb vs 1.86 lb for the SL. (Forgive the US measures.) Folks here who are troubled by every mm, and every gram, will have a different view, but personally I find the SL not radically different from an M.....when an M sized lens is attached (not accounting for the small adapter). With the zoom(s)....well, that's another story. And I think the SL 50 Summilux will also be huge compared to its M counterpart. Jeff I can't disagree more Every 50g here and there can be justified but soon you go over a threshold for simply uncomfortable. Granted this threshold is different per person I carry the camera in my right hand for more then an hour continuously in a number of bursts through the whole day, when I am abroad, and commonly once a day when I am at home. The M240+Zeiss 35mm f1.4 is my limit but I am enjoying the M262 combination now a bit more Just to be clear I am not advocating for a reduction of the M weight, the 262 suites me fine, merely an absolute stop on any more What drove me to try Leica M many years ago was the realisation that I had often stopped taking my 5D out of the car many times if I "thought" this stop would have no opportunities as I couldn't be bothered with the weight, and thus lost many photos. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayewing Posted June 3, 2016 Share #1259 Posted June 3, 2016 Because of the native lenses, or the camera itself? The M, with EVF attached, is actually taller than the SL, and only .3 inches less wide, and .2 inches less deep. The M with EVF weighs 1.65 lb vs 1.86 lb for the SL. (Forgive the US measures.) Folks here who are troubled by every mm, and every gram, will have a different view, but personally I find the SL not radically different from an M.....when an M sized lens is attached (not accounting for the small adapter). With the zoom(s)....well, that's another story. And I think the SL 50 Summilux will also be huge compared to its M counterpart. Jeff I was writing in the context of using longer telephoto lenses. I prefer the M240 for wide to 90mm lenses but longer than that range there is a real problem of size and weight of the lens. I agree that the SL is not very much larger than the M240 but really I would prefer the M to be a bit smaller and lighter though I appreciate that this may not be possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpk Posted June 3, 2016 Share #1260 Posted June 3, 2016 - improved ISO i.e. no banding - perfect focus adjustment - silent shutter - ultrasonic sensor cleaning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.