Looking

[asiafish]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I love Leica, shoot with an M-E and M Monochrom (v1) as my primary cameras and a Leica X (Typ 113) for business travel.  for film I shoot an M5.  These two systems (M and X) cover most of what I like to shoot, with the only exception being wider than 28mm or longer than 90mm, where I just don't enjoy working with a rangefinder.

 

I have owned DSLRs previously (Canon 6D and later Nikon Df) and they were very good, very versatile tools.  I liked the autofocus better on the Canon (simple, but EXTREMELY accurate even in low light) and the control layout (real dials) and ability to use vintage lenses better on the Nikon.  Both had image quality that was everything I could ask.  I sold them to fund my M kit, and occasionally still need the capabilities of a DSLR with a zoom lens that my current equipment lacks.

 

So now the SL is out, and I am wondering if it is the right answer.  It is MUCH more expensive than a Canon 6D or Nikon Df, as are its lenses.  Of course I would expect the Leica lenses to be vastly superior to Canon's or Nikon's, but enough to justify the cost?  A Canon 6D with 24-105mm f/4 L is a very boring product, but when I took that exact combination to Germany and Austria two-years-ago the results were fantastic.  Would those results be any better with the Leica SL and its 24-90?  Would it be so heavy that I would leave it at home and only bring my M-E?  I did exactly that last year and left my DSLR at home and took the M-E and X113 to Korea, and while I missed the convenience and versatility of a zoom lens, I got by and returned home with fewer pictures, most of them of similar quality to my DSLR shots the previous year, but a few of the very best shots really showed off the advantages of the Leica 50mm f/2 Summicron over the Canon 24-105mm f/4 L.

 

I will buy an SLR or mirrorless camera in the next week or two to fill in the gaps of my current Leica system.  My main use for a DSLR type camera is for events, alongside my Leica M kit, and for casual, family travel where I prefer to just carry one camera with one lens that covers 24mm through at least 70mm, preferably up to or slightly past 90mm.

 

So thoughts?

 

SL and its 24-90 zoom are in the $10,000 range

Nikon Df with 24-120 f/4 about $4000

Canon 6D with 24-105 f/4 for $2000

 

If this was to be my primary camera I would splurge for the Leica.  If the goal was to enjoy vintage lenses I would go for the Nikon, but my M kit more than satisfies that desire now.  The Canon is definitely good enough in terms of image quality, but there is no joy of use in its melted lump of black rubber look and feel.

[Peter H]

.................................................

So thoughts?

 

SL and its 24-90 zoom are in the $10,000 range

Nikon Df with 24-120 f/4 about $4000

Canon 6D with 24-105 f/4 for $2000

 

If this was to be my primary camera I would splurge for the Leica.  If the goal was to enjoy vintage lenses I would go for the Nikon, but my M kit more than satisfies that desire now.  The Canon is definitely good enough in terms of image quality, but there is no joy of use in its melted lump of black rubber look and feel.

 

For an occasional use camera, I'd go for the least expensive option that will satisfactorily do the job, and save my hard-earned photography budget for the camera and lenses I get most satisfaction from.

[Advertisement]

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

[screwmount]

If I were you, I would buy an SL and a second one as backup!

[ramarren]

I use all my cameras a lot, so "occasional use" for me is a relative thing. 

 

What I'm whittling my camera mess down to is: 

 

• Leica X typ 113 for casual shooting when I just don't want to carry anything more. A Pentax K-01 and 21/43 lenses fills the same role when I'm willing to carry "just a little more", and for the sake of its funkiness, although I bought it mostly because I just think it's a goofy, neat thing. 
• Leica M-P kit with 24, 35, 50, and 75 mm lenses. That's my RF mojo kit, supplemented by an M4-2 film body. Love shooting with it; the M-P and 'Lux 35 often suggests to me that I really don't need the X or K-01 at all, and they might go.
• Leica SL kit ... I've got a full range of Leica R lenses to use with it (19mm to 250mm) and I'll get the 24-90 lens for convenience and 'all in one' practicality. This will be my main 'technical' kit; I could do with nothing else. I have a couple of R film bodies too. 
• Olympus E-M1 kit ... my current 'technical' kit. Likely up for sale once I become comfortable with the SL kit, but a terrific camera and lenses. I'm too attached to it to sell it at the moment, even though the SL kit will do everything it does.
• Hasselblad SWC for specific projects and when I'm in the mood for that kind of thing. 
• Polaroid SX-70 for specific projects and when I'm in the mood for that kind of thing. 
• Other cameras (Nikon film SLRs, Rollei 35S, 6x6 folders, etc) for when I'm in the mood or am overwhelmed with nostalgia. 

 

... So thoughts?

 

SL and its 24-90 zoom are in the $10,000 range

Nikon Df with 24-120 f/4 about $4000

Canon 6D with 24-105 f/4 for $2000

 

If this was to be my primary camera I would splurge for the Leica.  If the goal was to enjoy vintage lenses I would go for the Nikon, but my M kit more than satisfies that desire now.  The Canon is definitely good enough in terms of image quality, but there is no joy of use in its melted lump of black rubber look and feel.

 

 

Given what you've said you want, I can't help but feel that all three of those are overkill. An Olympus E-M1 with the M.Zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8 zoom lens (equivalent to a 24-80mm lens, and faster than the alternatives) is smaller, lighter, has more features, and costs less ... and the photo quality from it is top notch despite the smaller format and all that. It is a marvel of a camera, a miniature professional camera that shoots way beyond its size and spec sheet. 

[asiafish]

I use all my cameras a lot, so "occasional use" for me is a relative thing. 

 

What I'm whittling my camera mess down to is: 

 

• Leica X typ 113 for casual shooting when I just don't want to carry anything more. A Pentax K-01 and 21/43 lenses fills the same role when I'm willing to carry "just a little more", and for the sake of its funkiness, although I bought it mostly because I just think it's a goofy, neat thing. 
• Leica M-P kit with 24, 35, 50, and 75 mm lenses. That's my RF mojo kit, supplemented by an M4-2 film body. Love shooting with it; the M-P and 'Lux 35 often suggests to me that I really don't need the X or K-01 at all, and they might go.
• Leica SL kit ... I've got a full range of Leica R lenses to use with it (19mm to 250mm) and I'll get the 24-90 lens for convenience and 'all in one' practicality. This will be my main 'technical' kit; I could do with nothing else. I have a couple of R film bodies too. 
• Olympus E-M1 kit ... my current 'technical' kit. Likely up for sale once I become comfortable with the SL kit, but a terrific camera and lenses. I'm too attached to it to sell it at the moment, even though the SL kit will do everything it does.
• Hasselblad SWC for specific projects and when I'm in the mood for that kind of thing. 
• Polaroid SX-70 for specific projects and when I'm in the mood for that kind of thing. 
• Other cameras (Nikon film SLRs, Rollei 35S, 6x6 folders, etc) for when I'm in the mood or am overwhelmed with nostalgia. 

 

 

 

Given what you've said you want, I can't help but feel that all three of those are overkill. An Olympus E-M1 with the M.Zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8 zoom lens (equivalent to a 24-80mm lens, and faster than the alternatives) is smaller, lighter, has more features, and costs less ... and the photo quality from it is top notch despite the smaller format and all that. It is a marvel of a camera, a miniature professional camera that shoots way beyond its size and spec sheet. 

 

I thought about APS-C or M4/3, but honestly when serious portability is a factor I always just bring my X113 and will continue to do so.  This will be for family travel, and low-light/high-ISO is also useful.  

[asiafish]

For an occasional use camera, I'd go for the least expensive option that will satisfactorily do the job, and save my hard-earned photography budget for the camera and lenses I get most satisfaction from.

 

I've got a 6D with 24-105 f/4 L kit and the very cheap 50 f/1.8 STM in my cart at B&H.  I'll probably pull the trigger.

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I also had a clean out.  Formerly, I had a Nikon F5 and lenses, Hasselblad 500cx and lenses, prism, film backs etc etc, Canon G10 and other ... stuff.  My Nikon gear got nicked, and I looked at what I had and sold the lot - lock stock and barrel.

 

Instead, I bought an M9 and a 35 Summicron.  I was deliriously happy, and slowly built on that system from there.  I've ended up with an M3 (bought cheap, CLA'd and used reasonably frequently), Monochrom (because the images blew me away), M60 (because I didn't like the direction of the M(240), and loved the simplicity of this camera), and M-A (my M9 had sensor corrosion, so I persuaded Leica to upgrade an M-A instead of the M(240)).  I also have 8 or so M lenses, spanning from 15mm (a Zeiss) to 90mm.

 

Along the way, I also acquired an SWC, but that's a different story.

 

The SWC aside, what I wanted and have got is one system, that is basically the same in operation - simple direct control of aperture, shutter, ISO and focus (through a rangefinder) in the 28 to 90 range (the 15 is a little problematic).  I'm adding a 28 Summilux to that as 28 & 50 are my most used focal lengths, and the Summilux really does sound absolutely fantastic.

 

For some time, I've wanted to add to this core system.  I don't want a compact - I have my phone if I want to stuff a camera in my pocket.  I've gone most of my life with a camera slung over my shoulder, and I see no reason to change.

 

But, there is a gap - no video (apart from a GoPro, which my son seems to have helped himself to), no telephoto beyond 90mm, no macro and no AF.  When do I need these?  Birds, wildlife, sport etc.  There is place for dSLR cameras and for the Sony A7 series - they can do things that aren't a rangefinder's strengths.  Undoubtedly the cheapest option would be to invest in a second hand Nikon or Canon system, and smallest an A7.  The problem for me, is I've already done exactly that.

 

The A7 was an exercise in frustration. I took it on a motorbike tour I did last year from Miami to New York, with the 24-70 FE zoom (I think it was something like that) - I was shocked at how badly the AF worked.  I spent the entire time fighting with the AF, menus and the camera generally.  It drove me nuts.  The images were okay, but using M lenses, not as good as using an M camera - and what's the point?  The M cameras work fabulously with M lenses ... So, it went.

 

I then tried a Nikon, with a long zoom, macro and whatnot.  I was back where I started - big, complex and not really complementary with my M system.

 

So, will the SL fit?  No idea - looks like it might, with a telephoto and perhaps one zoom.

 

The point of all this?  Think about what pictures you take and what you will use and enjoy.  For a pocket camera, I have a very good camera on my phone - 8MP and it is always with me.  For a compact camera, I have an M with the best lenses money can buy for that system - it is fantastic.  When do I want a 2kg dSLR equivalent, with a huge zoom on it?  I'm not sure - there are uses, and being able to switch in the lenses I have is very appealing.  I could see myself doing a motorbike trip with the SL, the 24-90 zoom, or 180mm tele and a couple of good primes, and M-A for backup.  I could also see it sitting on the shelf, making me feel guilty over the cost.

 

But, it would add to my system in a way the Nikons and Sonys haven't.  Your system is for you, but I would suggest you have a clear idea of what you're doing.

 

Cheers

John

Edited November 3, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[asiafish]

What I'm whittling my camera mess down to is: 

 

• Leica X typ 113 for casual shooting when I just don't want to carry anything more. A Pentax K-01 and 21/43 lenses fills the same role when I'm willing to carry "just a little more", and for the sake of its funkiness, although I bought it mostly because I just think it's a goofy, neat thing. 
• Leica M-P kit with 24, 35, 50, and 75 mm lenses. That's my RF mojo kit, supplemented by an M4-2 film body. Love shooting with it; the M-P and 'Lux 35 often suggests to me that I really don't need the X or K-01 at all, and they might go.
• Leica SL kit ... I've got a full range of Leica R lenses to use with it (19mm to 250mm) and I'll get the 24-90 lens for convenience and 'all in one' practicality. This will be my main 'technical' kit; I could do with nothing else. I have a couple of R film bodies too. 
• Olympus E-M1 kit ... my current 'technical' kit. Likely up for sale once I become comfortable with the SL kit, but a terrific camera and lenses. I'm too attached to it to sell it at the moment, even though the SL kit will do everything it does.
• Hasselblad SWC for specific projects and when I'm in the mood for that kind of thing. 
• Polaroid SX-70 for specific projects and when I'm in the mood for that kind of thing. 
• Other cameras (Nikon film SLRs, Rollei 35S, 6x6 folders, etc) for when I'm in the mood or am overwhelmed with nostalgia. 

 

Love the X113.  Sometimes I even bring it along with my M kit instead of a 35mm lens.

 

My M kit includes the M-E and M Monochrom, with 28, 35, 50 and 90mm lenses.  I don't own a 75mm and very rarely use the 90mm as my hit rate is poor and I don't like the small frame line.  I had a loaner M240 while my M-E was in for sensor replacement, but really see no reason to upgrade until perhaps the next generation or the one after that.  I love the CCD files as their starting point is quite close to my end point, so very little PP is required.  In addition to modern Leica lenses, I also own a trio of vintage Zeiss Sonnar pattern 50mm lenses.  A 1937 uncoated 5cm f/1.5 Sonnar, a 1941 coated 5cm f/2 Sonnar T and a 1963 Zomz 5cm f/1.5 Jupiter 3 which is a Soviet knock-off that is every bit as good as the original.  This is my serious kit, which I absolutely love shooting.

 

I don't own any medium format or film SLRs, but do occasionally switch out my M-E or M Monochrom and shoot film in my M5, which is a late two-lug, fully serviced and made like-new by Sherry Krauter.  It is my favorite of all of my cameras, but usually I want the convenience of digital.

 

DSLR will be my "technical" and also will be used for some events.  Sometimes there is just no substitute for something with fast autofocus and a zoom lens.  I know it is more expensive, bigger and heavier with no image quality benefit in many conditions, but I prefer full-frame for an interchangeable lens camera.

[ramarren]

I thought about APS-C or M4/3, but honestly when serious portability is a factor I always just bring my X113 and will continue to do so.  This will be for family travel, and low-light/high-ISO is also useful.  

 

The E-M1 works just fine, on par with the Sony A7 and almost the Nikon D750 (have one of those right now), right up to ISO 6400 and almost to ISO 12500. And is faster shooting than either, while taking up 1/2 to 2/3 the space. It's great for travel ... it's what I've been carrying when I wanted something with more automation and/or flexibility than the M-P or X, and didn't want to lug the SLR gear around. :-)

[thighslapper]

I also had a clean out.  Formerly, I had a Nikon F5 and lenses, Hasselblad 500cx and lenses, prism, film backs etc etc, Canon G10 and other ... stuff.  My Nikon gear got nicked, and I looked at what I had and sold the lot - lock stock and barrel.

 

Instead, I bought an M9 and a 35 Summicron.  I was deliriously happy, and slowly built on that system from there.  I've ended up with an M3 (bought cheap, CLA'd and used reasonably frequently), Monochrom (because the images blew me away), M60 (because I didn't like the direction of the M(240), and loved the simplicity of this camera), and M-A (my M9 had sensor corrosion, so I persuaded Leica to upgrade an M-A instead of the M(240)).  I also have 8 or so M lenses, spanning from 15mm (a Zeiss) to 90mm.

 

Along the way, I also acquired an SWC, but that's a different story.

 

The SWC aside, what I wanted and have got is one system, that is basically the same in operation - simple direct control of aperture, shutter, ISO and focus (through a rangefinder) in the 28 to 90 range (the 15 is a little problematic).  I'm adding a 28 Summilux to that as 28 & 50 are my most used focal lengths, and the Summilux really does sound absolutely fantastic.

 

For some time, I've wanted to add to this core system.  I don't want a compact - I have my phone if I want to stuff a camera in my pocket.  I've gone most of my life with a camera slung over my shoulder, and I see no reason to change.

 

But, there is a gap - no video (apart from a GoPro, which my son seems to have helped himself to), no telephoto beyond 90mm, no macro and no AF.  When do I need these?  Birds, wildlife, sport etc.  There is place for dSLR cameras and for the Sony A7 series - they can do things that aren't a rangefinder's strengths.  Undoubtedly the cheapest option would be to invest in a second hand Nikon or Canon system, and smallest an A7.  The problem for me, is I've already done exactly that.

 

The A7 was an exercise in frustration. I took it on a motorbike tour I did last year from Miami to New York, with the 24-70 FE zoom (I think it was something like that) - I was shocked at how badly the AF worked.  I spent the entire time fighting with the AF, menus and the camera generally.  It drove me nuts.  The images were okay, but using M lenses, not as good as using an M camera - and what's the point?  The M cameras work fabulously with M lenses ... So, it went.

 

I then tried a Nikon, with a long zoom, macro and whatnot.  I was back where I started - big, complex and not really complementary with my M system.

 

So, will the SL fit?  No idea - looks like it might, with a telephoto and perhaps one zoom.

 

The point of all this?  Think about what pictures you take and what you will use and enjoy.  For a pocket camera, I have a very good camera on my phone - 8MP and it is always with me.  For a compact camera, I have an M with the best lenses money can buy for that system - it is fantastic.  When do I want a 2kg dSLR equivalent, with a huge zoom on it?  I'm not sure - there are uses, and being able to switch in the lenses I have is very appealing.  I could see myself doing a motorbike trip with the SL, the 24-90 zoom, or 180mm tele and a couple of good primes, and M-A for backup.  I could also see it sitting on the shelf, making me feel guilty over the cost.

 

But, it would add to my system in a way the Nikons and Sonys haven't.  Your system is for you, but I would suggest you have a clear idea of what you're doing.

 

Cheers

John

 

My story and rationale as well......

 

The SL seems to fit well and solve the 'big lens' and 'AF' gap in my Leica arsenal .... so I will have a unified system that will do just about anything ...... and expecting one camera to do the lot is really an unreasonable expectation anyway, whatever anyone else says on this forum about the competition. 

 

I should be able to use lenses that on the M were a bit of a pain ...... and it was never built to have large R series or Visoflex lenses dangling off the front anyway. 

 

Will find out tomorrow if 'a fool and his money are soon parted' or whether I have made a good tactical decision ..... 

Edited November 3, 2015 by thighslapper

[asiafish]

Just pulled the trigger on the Canon 6D.  Fast enough.  Good enough image quality.  More than versatile enough.  Cheap enough.

I'm sure I would enjoy the SL much more, but not $8000 more.

[asiafish]

My story and rationale as well......

 

The SL seems to fit well and solve the 'big lens' and 'AF' gap in my Leica arsenal .... so I will have a unified system that will do just about anything ...... and expecting one camera to do the lot is really an unreasonable expectation anyway, whatever anyone else says on this forum about the competition. 

 

I should be able to use lenses that on the M were a bit of a pain ...... and it was never built to have large R series or Visoflex lenses dangling off the front anyway. 

 

Will find out tomorrow if 'a fool and his money are soon parted' or whether I have made a good tactical decision ..... 

 

I'm sure the SL will be lovely.  I've played with the S2, and the interface is fantastic, and almost exactly the same on the SL.

[davewolfs]

Your numbers for Nikon are off.

 

A Nikon 24-120 can be had for 599. A D750 for 1300-1400. The Grey market Nikon stuff is silly cheap these days.

[rramesh]

Electronics is a depreciating asset. There will always be a 'best' or 'better' every few months. You just need to buy what you absolutely need and will use, for now and for the next couple of years, as obsolescence sets in pretty quickly. Of course, do note that a 'not current' model will still take great picturess.

 

If you are unsure, wait and rent if you can. There are many places like LensRwntal and Lumoid that do this in the US.

[Leicaiste]

Electronics is a depreciating asset. There will always be a 'best' or 'better' every few months. You just need to buy what you absolutely need and will use, for now and for the next couple of years, as obsolescence sets in pretty quickly. Of course, do note that a 'not current' model will still take great picturess.

 

If you are unsure, wait and rent if you can. There are many places like LensRwntal and Lumoid that do this in the US.

 

 

I have all the R and M lenses I would ever need and more. 

 

IMO the SL is the best current solution for my needs. And I have been thinking about it for years, and tried many solutions. 

 

I would love it to have IBIS though. 

 

And a more leicable design, but I understand that the very short depth of the body didn't gave the designer much room for an R8 or S design.

 

Anyway I ordered it.

[earleygallery]

I love Leica, shoot with an M-E and M Monochrom (v1) as my primary cameras and a Leica X (Typ 113) for business travel.  for film I shoot an M5.  These two systems (M and X) cover most of what I like to shoot, with the only exception being wider than 28mm or longer than 90mm, where I just don't enjoy working with a rangefinder.

 

 

Seems my response is too late, but, firstly if you bought an SL and 24-90 you're really only getting 24mm instead of 28mm compared to your M so why bother?!

 

My suggestion was going to have been to buy a s/h DSLR, Nikon or Canon.

 

I think you made a good choice in the 6D however, but again, only 24mm at the wide and 105mm and the long end seems very little gain for effort.

[zlatkob]

If the 6D is still in consideration, I would not buy it with the 24-105L lens.  That's good lens, but if instead you buy the 24-70/2.8L version II you'll have a much better lens. Roger Cicala of LensRentals.com calls it "the best standard-range zoom ever made. By any manufacturer."

 

Edited to add:  oops, I see you already bought the 6D!  Anyway, I highly recommend the 24-70/2.8L II.  It's really, really good.  Beautiful bokeh.  Not too big.  Durable.  Has a lock switch.  Etc.

Edited November 4, 2015 by zlatkob

[asiafish]

Seems my response is too late, but, firstly if you bought an SL and 24-90 you're really only getting 24mm instead of 28mm compared to your M so why bother?!

 

My suggestion was going to have been to buy a s/h DSLR, Nikon or Canon.

 

I think you made a good choice in the 6D however, but again, only 24mm at the wide and 105mm and the long end seems very little gain for effort.

I will add 16-35 and 70-200 f/4 lenses

[asiafish]

If the 6D is still in consideration, I would not buy it with the 24-105L lens.  That's good lens, but if instead you buy the 24-70/2.8L version II you'll have a much better lens. Roger Cicala of LensRentals.com calls it "the best standard-range zoom ever made. By any manufacturer."

 

Edited to add:  oops, I see you already bought the 6D!  Anyway, I highly recommend the 24-70/2.8L II.  It's really, really good.  Beautiful bokeh.  Not too big.  Durable.  Has a lock switch.  Etc.

I don't really need f/2.8 in a standard focal length zoom as my Leica M kit fills the fast lenses and moderate focal length niche for me, and is what I shoot most.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount