Jump to content

Go back to the M or stay with the SL


jimleicam3

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am sure this has been hounded away already but....I have an M3 and had used my M8 for years and loved them both.  Sold the M8 and waited for an M10.  I couldn't wait any longer, so I went with the SL.  Great camera, but I am not loving it like I did  my M8.  Right now I have a 21 mm, 35 mm, 50 mm, and a 1960ish 135 mm.  So I was about to spring for the SL 24-90 mm and my dealer calls and says he has an M 10.  It would be great to own both cameras and the 24-90 mm, but that is a huge cost.  So has anyone here, after a period of time gone back to the M system?  On the SL thread, everyone loves the SL and can't imagine using just the M 10.

Thanks for your advice.

Cheers!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an M(240) for a long time and purchased the SL.  I liked the SL so much and found I was using it so much more than the M(240) that I ended up selling the M.  After a few months I began to regret it.  While there are many things the SL does much better than the M (like focusing lenses at f/1.4, autofocus, availability of the zooms, etc.), I still longed for the M.  I didn't and still don't like the size of the SL with its zoom(s).  That's one heck of a commitment.  You can resolve that to some extent by using M lenses on the SL, but they can often feel a little awkward on such a large camera.  

 

Then the release of the M10 came.  Now I get the best of both worlds as I own both.  I generally use the M lenses on the M10, and the zoom on the SL.  I also tend to use the 21mm Summilux on the SL since you get that amazing built-in viewfinder for composition and the lens actually balances better on the SL than on the M10.  But--and this is a huge but--if I want a smaller camera to carry around for a day hike or for walking around the city, or for most family events, the M10 is my go-to.  

 

So, could I survive with just one of them?  Yes, pretty easily, but I much prefer having both.  If I could only own one, I'd probably take the additional flexibility of the SL coupled with a few favorite M lenses (and the 24-90, of course).  That would give me the AF that I need occasionally for action shots, the amazing viewfinder of the SL for critical focus of M lenses wide open, and I'd mostly be giving up the compact size of the M.  For me, viewfinder focusing is fine for most situations, but I would never consider it superior overall to through-the-lens.  I know others on this forum will violently disagree.  

 

Ultimately it depends more on you than anything else.  The image quality out of the two is slightly different, particularly in saturation, but they have a lot more in common with each other than they do differences.  I wouldn't choose one over the other for image quality reasons.  It really comes down to focus, viewfinder, automation, size/weight, and, of course, video requirements.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an M9 currently at Leica getting the sensor replaced.  A friend of mine gave me a great deal on an SL + 24-90mm.  Wonderful camera, but I know there was no way I was going to drag it around with me.  I quickly traded it for an M10 and I have to say I have no regrets.  I really, really like the M10.  It's not "love" quite yet, but it's pretty close.

 

I will forever doubt my decision to get rid of the SL, but I am happy with my choice.  I wish I could have afforded both.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I started with a M9M and then got an MP(240); when the M(246) came out I traded the M9M for it for the same battery, etc (and ELV and other changes). Then tried an SL and could't believe the EVF and have been using it for most excursions. I therefore traded the MP(240) for a Q and love it for its small size and IQ and always have it with me. I recently sent the M(246) to DAG as it was consistently back focusing. I am looking forward to being able to use the smaller RF OVF on the 246 with accurate results and smaller size for B&W work. I therefore feel that these are 3 different beasts and all have their place. Even though I traded the MP240 in, I intend to keep the M246.

Regards,

Bob

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobpittphotos/albums

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 I really, really like the M10.  It's not "love" quite yet, but it's pretty close.

 .

Same here, my M10 is a very very good friend, I have a warm relationship with it. We have a lot in common but I have to deal with some traits.

If there’s a camera I love it’s my Chamonix 45F2, but that depends a bit on which lens she wears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had M-240s and got the SL for a good price used (but didn't have the funds to by the AF lenses...) NOT a good combination for me in the end - M lenses work best on M bodies in the end...

Now have two M10s which suit almost all my needs + a 5D3 and L series 70-200 2.8 / 300 2.8 which I use rarely, but which are invaluable when the occasion arises.  Would I have kept the SL if I'd had the 70-280?  Probably - it's a beautiful combination.  But the Canon setup is pretty damn good and a fraction of the price!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the Q, the M10 and a Fuji GFX-50S, and I use them all for different situations.  The one thing I am missing sometimes is a camera with fast AF and frame rates with a good zoom and a great EVF, so I was thinking about the SL and 24-90mm combo, and tried it out for a day.  

 

It was very nice, but I would have had to sell or trade either my M10 or the GFX to afford the SL/24-90, and in the end I stayed with what I have.  The SL and zoom is a large and heavy combo, similar to my GFX set up in size, weight and price.  The M10 is so much more pleasurable to carry around IMHO, and I am loving the sensor on the M10, so I just could not give up the portability and ease of use, and the Visoflex provides a pretty good EVF so I can get perfect framing with any lens on the M10.  

 

I decided not to give up the GFX either, because the files are just incredible and give me a lot more flexibility in processing and cropping than the SL files.  

 

So for me, I would miss the M10 too much if I got the SL instead.  If I am going to carry around a big and heavy camera, I'd usually rather take the GFX.  Replacing the M10 with the SL would solve one problem (AF and the convenience of the zoom), and replace it with another (too big and heavy).  So it depends on your priorities....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi There

Well, I have both (lucky me). I never put the M lenses on the SL (almost never). 

The SL fulfils a really important function for me for weddings/events and also for nature work, but I use it pretty exclusively with the two zoom lenses (24-90 and 90-280) They're excellent and fast focusing. 

 

. . . if you don't need that, then I'd recommend getting an M10 - it really is a camera to fall in love with.

 

best

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

The M system is really the only stuff Leica makes that I will use, not at all interested in anything else since I highly value my Nikon and medium format systems for work that requires more precise framing, wide and telephoto lenses.

 

I think the M10 is fantastic, just seamless integration into using it with my M3, M6. It's not perfect by any means though, I have a list of things they could improve like the frame lines being often too bright for the lowest of light ( bring back the red option ) and the shutter release needing too much force to trigger. On the black body, a dark grey or black anodized bezel under the lens mount instead of the bright alloy one would look more refined.

 

I checked out the SL in a Leica store, holding it was akin to driving a sports car with a steering wheel made out of metal Lego bricks, not a good feeling.

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

I too seriously tried out the SL prior to the M10 coming on the scene and like many of you I found it too much of a "lump" to port around either on it's own with one SL lens mounted but especially if you're packing a couple of lenses. After a couple of weeks with a SL "loaner" I came to the conclusion that my existing Nikon 810 kit fulfilled the needs I was considering the SL for and offered other advantages to me over the SL.

 

I know everyone here on the Leica forum seems to be in love with the EVF on the SL and sure I found it to be very good, perhaps a little better than the great Leica Q which I also own, but not to such a great degree. I think the Pana' GH4 and GH5 cameras have EVF's just as good as the SL, and yes I use them both too, primarily for video work though.

That being said and perhaps it's just me as I am still not converted to the EVF world, here the M's OVF and other OVF's on my Nikon 810's make more sense and give me a "truer" idea of lighting and exposure, so that's where I land on this issue.

 

If and when I need a camera with great AF and good auto most other things, then I grab the Q. The lens on the Q is truly wonderful and I like the camera's colour science a lot.

 

I've had the M10 for about two and a half months now and I have to say that it's almost the perfect camera for me for my personal work and to some extent the pro' work too. Sure I've niggles, the fact that the 28mm frame lines are hard if not impossible to see corner to corner is really annoying and might have been a deal-breaker if I'd realised that prior to buying the camera, ( for me the OVF focal length is too long as I favour WA lenses on the M's ). I find the small menu script hard to read at times but I don't "menu dive" too much so that's sort of ok, and the ISO wheel is an unnecessary feature for me too. Just one more thing that can, will go wrong and I've never really had the need to switch ISO that often or that swiftly. I just ignore that wheel now.

I do love the size and the feel of the M10 in the hand though, and perhaps for that alone I can forgive the quibbles.

 

I did intend to trade my two M240's in when a M10 became available to me, but in the end I let just let one go and I am happy about that decision. There's still a number of things about the 240 that I like so it's good to have one of them still around.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

That being said and perhaps it's just me as I am still not converted to the EVF world, here the M's OVF and other OVF's on my Nikon 810's make more sense and give me a "truer" idea of lighting and exposure, so that's where I land on this issue.

You bring up a great point about EVF's that I also feel the same about. I have seen some really good ones and while they are pretty amazing for some things, I just don't care for the disconnect from the actual scene via the camera's electronically interpreted one.

 

And I know how silly that sounds when considering the fact that a digital image ( or film for that matter ) is already a specified or extracted pipeline of real life, even if under the watchful inclination of a photo journalist.

 

I have tried and owned EVF cameras ( Fuji X100 ) and while an effective tool, an optical viewfinder just flows much more naturally for me.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Just started to use the 24-90 on loan from my dealer, and other than the size a weight, it is wonderful.  So here is the rub:

 

SL and 24-90: very heavy and big

SL and 24-90: spot-on focus, and quick to use. Great photos

 

M10: small, light

M10: slightly slower to focus, Great photos

 

Love to own both, but not sure I can really justify the cost.

 

Thanks everyone for guiding me though this.

Cheers!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an M-P 240 and the SL, and use only M lenses. After a while I sold the 240 - It is a wonderful experience shooting SL with M lenses. The form factor of the M pulls at the heartstrings, and I will get an M10 Mono when they’re announced, But it is just so ridiculously easy to get great shots composed exactly the way I want with the SL. The images I got out of my 240 required so much post processing because of the “generously romantic” saturation, especially in the reds. Coloring rendition and white balance in the SL is so superior to the M - I save the tremendous amount of time and post processing, the images barely require any work to look amazing. I have spent some time with the M10, it may just be my opinion but I think Leica goes for a sensor with a certain saturated look with the M. I don’t think in my experience that M body cameras do anything better than the SL; They just do it differently. But I do think the SL makes it extremely easy to get fantastic images. The M requires a little bit more work, which can be fun. I think many of the complaints about how big the SL is are based on people picking them up in shops with the 24 to 90 lens on it, And it is overwhelmingly large compared to the M in that configuration. Put a 35 F2 ASPH M On it and the size really is no big deal. Bigger than an M, yes, But totally manageable and worth the weight for what you can do with it.

Edited by trickness
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so good for focusing to infinity just by turning to maximum... I had real problems with the SL and the 28 Summicron on one trek... Kept on missing focus at infinity... So long as everything's working, this is never a problem you have with an M :)

Yeah but you do have to deal with rangefinders that go out of adjustment or lenses the need to be sent out to match the body for perfect focus. I am not a landscape photographer so focusing to infinity is never huge issue for me...From a practical standpoint I think a rangefinder going out of focus and needing to be adjusted is a bigger potential issue for most people.

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...