Jump to content

Should I trade my SL for the M 10?


jimleicam3

Recommended Posts

While I own the M10, I see the SL as having identical sensor and image quality traits, but, with image stabilization, more accurate auto focus, an incredible viewfinder, and no parallax errors or frame line errors.  The SL probably also focuses closer as well.  In short, a camera that delivers a superb image quality at least on par with the M10, but with a high percentage ratio of potentially sharper images. That sounds like a Leica investment that would pay off and which you'd appreciate if you took a once in a lifetime trip to someplace like China, and desired to have as many great images as possible.

Really the most logical answer in this scenario isn't any Leica tool, unless perhaps you are very experienced with the M and use it the way that it was designed by used with degree of fluency and dexterity that that implies.

 

I don't see the point of the SL personally, it offers nothing that other brands don't offer at a better price...and you get a better sensor with the other brands. The SL is pretty much about brand appeal.

Then again, nothing Leica makes IMO makes any sense as practical purchase, except the M - and there is a reason the brand was built on that tool. 

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

Really the most logical answer in this scenario isn't any Leica tool, unless perhaps you are very experienced with the M and use it the way that it was designed by used with degree of fluency and dexterity that that implies.

 

I don't see the point of the SL personally, it offers nothing that other brands don't offer at a better price...and you get a better sensor with the other brands. The SL is pretty much about brand appeal.

Then again, nothing Leica makes IMO makes any sense as practical purchase, except the M - and there is a reason the brand was built on that tool.

 

I’m guessing you’ve never used an SL.

 

The SL is a wonderful camera, especially with M lenses, especially wide or long M lenses, or fast M lenses. You can nail focus, exposure and depth of field every time because of the EVF, with M lens correction built into the body. I’ve shot with M’s for over 20 years and find the SL to be a superior tool for getting exactly what I want, when that’s what I need. The SL white balance and color accuracy in my experience are more accurate than M’s and require less post.

 

The SL is no less valid than the M because it offers these things, just as the M is no less valid because it doesn’t offer them.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

"In China", as I gave as an example, there are many photographic situations where quick autofocus will aid in a keeper photograph that might otherwise be missed with manual focus.  (You'll probably counter my argument with zone focus and the ease of manual focus). The Chinese are not always so tolerant of photographs by anyone, to include foreigners, and a paparazzi type photograph, offered by the the autofocus SL, can be helpful in those situations.

 

May I say that if a particular photographic scene you feel the subject is not happy to be photographed or might not be willing to be photographed even though you might have taken the photo unknown to the subject, then photographic ethical-wise, one should not take that photo anyway, should we then go again to find other worthy opportunities...  ?   

 

In all of my special China Cultural/Photographic Expeditions design and leadings, right at the beginning, I always quote Sebastiao Salgado's saying of: "If you take a picture of a human that does not make him noblethere is no reason to take this picture. That is my way of seeing things." to our expedition participants as a guideline...   (even when one can use a modern "autofocus SL", shouldn't still be ethically thinking...?)

 

Therefore in my own photo taking around the world, I have all people photos from real film slides to pocket digital camera snapshots by following this rule, and still come up with naturally consent, promoting the subject's "beauty" and cultural identity, positive, pleasant images...  

Edited by yst
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m guessing you’ve never used an SL.

 

The SL is a wonderful camera, especially with M lenses, especially wide or long M lenses, or fast M lenses. You can nail focus, exposure and depth of field every time because of the EVF, with M lens correction built into the body. I’ve shot with M’s for over 20 years and find the SL to be a superior tool for getting exactly what I want, when that’s what I need. The SL white balance and color accuracy in my experience are more accurate than M’s and require less post.

 

The SL is no less valid than the M because it offers these things, just as the M is no less valid because it doesn’t offer them.

I've used the SL, but I've also used Fuji and Sony mirrorless which offer from almost equal to definitively better image quality at a lower price. The SL isn't bad, I just cannot for the life of me see the logic in paying a premium a second rate sensor in a camera body that offers nothing practical over its competitors. It's a value proposition for me. The M is pricey, but it still does something nothing else does, so it's the only option. The SL doesn't have that going for it, at least not in my opinion and not for how I use cameras. 

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

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The M and the SL are two completely different systems. Each one has advantages and disadvantages. If someone want a small camera and would manily unse focal length berween 18 mm and 90 mm, the M 10 is a wonderful camera, provided he does not need an AF. If focal lengths below 18 mm and telelenses as well as macro lenses are used often(adapted

with the Novoflex adapter) , and a perfect finder is necessary the SL system is the

better choice. In my opinion the finder of the SL ist the best one on the market at thetime beeing. And the rwo zooms are bulky but very, very good. All these things are very expensive, but worth every cent and in my opinion better than the products of the competition. I had a top system of Canon before and a Leica M 240 - which was very good butI had to change because of problems with my eyes. As far as the Canon is concerned,

which I sold because of financial reasons - I did it not regret a single second - I

kept some special lenses for use with the SL. What concerns the M 240 and my M lenses I would like to have it or a M 10 in addition to my SL - but this is only wishful thinking because of the problems with my eyes. So I have a Sony RX 10 III in addition to my SL, which is a very good camera when I do not need the SL and do not want to change lenses and need a long tele -provided high ISOs are not necessary.

In principle it is the old story of horses for courses and everyone has to make his own

decisions.

Edited by HeinzX
Link to post
Share on other sites

M10 is probably the best your money can get. As most users have already commented on the performance being top of the league, the size and weight is unreal for a full frame carry everyday kinda gear, it becomes very personal.

 

Coming from film background, at first I found it difficult to bond with a digital M, especially one with an LCD screen in the back. But there's something about the M10 that after using it for a while, you realize how refined a camera it is. I couldn't bond with digital cameras before because they don't feel personal to me, the M10 breaks the barriers.

 

Size of M10 = personal

SL = great tool

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used the SL, but I've also used Fuji and Sony mirrorless which offer from almost equal to definitively better image quality at a lower price. The SL isn't bad, I just cannot for the life of me see the logic in paying a premium a second rate sensor in a camera body that offers nothing practical over its competitors. It's a value proposition for me. The M is pricey, but it still does something nothing else does, so it's the only option. The SL doesn't have that going for it, at least not in my opinion and not for how I use cameras. 

 

How have you used the SL - in a professional situation? When you don't have time to fiddle around or you'll miss a moment? When you need to process two hundred images in a day to get to a client? When your photos will be seen by thousands of people? Or did you play with it for a couple of hours and pronounce judgement after using it casually?

 

With M glass, the SL provides better image quality than Sony or Fuji - Reid Reviews and others have said so. But honestly, megapixels and edge to edge quality are for crap debates on internet forums. Why I love the SL - like the M! its the tactile experience, it feels like a Leica, I can use my Leica brain with it. It loves the M glass. It doesn't feel like a camera thats killing me with menus or like I'll throw away in 4 years. The SL sensor is superb but yeah, it won't make a bad photograph into a good one.

 

Lots of people don't "get" the appeal & price of the M. 99% of them could take better photos with the SL than with an M and I wonder sometimes if thats part of the reason why so many M loyalists slag off the SL. The SL is a Leica, its not a Sony or Fuji, anybody who compares them is missing the point entirely.

Edited by trickness
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

How have you used the SL - in a professional situation? When you don't have time to fiddle around or you'll miss a moment? When you need to process two hundred images in a day to get to a client? When your photos will be seen by thousands of people? Or did you play with it for a couple of hours and pronounce judgement after using it casually?

 

With M glass, the SL provides better image quality than Sony or Fuji - Reid Reviews and others have said so. But honestly, megapixels and edge to edge quality are for crap debates on internet forums. Why I love the SL - like the M! its the tactile experience, it feels like a Leica, I can use my Leica brain with it. It loves the M glass. It doesn't feel like a camera thats killing me with menus or like I'll throw away in 4 years. The SL sensor is superb but yeah, it won't make a bad photograph into a good one.

 

Lots of people don't "get" the appeal & price of the M. 99% of them could take better photos with the SL than with an M and I wonder sometimes if thats part of the reason why so many M loyalists slag off the SL. The SL is a Leica, its not a Sony or Fuji, anybody who compares them is missing the point entirely.

If you don't get the appeal or price of an M, (or an SL) that is understandable. The thing with the M is that there isn't any other option. So even if the price is unjustified, if you want the rangefinder experience, you pony up.

 

Given that I make my living doing this work, yes I have tried the SL as a professional. It's a nice camera. I just don't find it worth it. Actually, Leica's in general, in my professional experience, have been relegated to the back up tool for my professional work because, beautiful and lovely as they are, the bugs and glitches they come with, and the maintenance they require are the true issue. 5 Nikon DSLR's, 2 Fuji, 2 Sony and never had a one hiccup on a job for me. My M8 and now M10 both (already) don't have that same track record. Additionally, I never understood the complaining about the Sony or Fuji menus. I set them up, and they work just fine on high pressure/quick turnover/big name client shoots. It's like anything else - learn the tool. Yes the Sony gives you more options, but you don't have to use them all or worry about them. Most professionals I know eschew Leica in the professional arena, or use them as backup for a reason. You're not gonna bring your least reliable piece of equipment to a shoot that's gonna be responsible for your next month's worth of income or more. Well, at least, as a businessman, I wouldn't do that. Especially with Leica's focus on building themselves as collectible/luxury brand over being an actual professional tool. 

 

The Zeiss glass on the Sony is every bit as good as M glass (yes, it is a bit different, but not worse) and sometimes actually even better, if that's important - which you seem to not think - I do because sometimes I print pretty large, so the 24 mp sensor can be pretty limiting. Personally, I don't find the tactile experience of the SL - which is a bit nicer than the others - but not M level better - worth the drawbacks that come with it, but that's up to personal preference. The fact is, if you want the best image quality in a mirrorless that can keep up with most professional demands (slr's still exist for a reason), you don't need to throw down a few extra thousand on the Leica name/liability.   If you want a rangefinder, at any level of quality whatsoever, you do. I love the M, but it's a terrible purchase on paper. The best justification I have for it is that I've used M6's for over a decade so it feels like home, but if I'm being coldly analytical, my pictures from my M are no better or worse (except for the lower resolution) than my pictures from my other cameras. I still see the world mostly the same way - perhaps slightly looser in the RF. 

Edited by pgh
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear PGH, you are entitled to your opinion.  You might find a more agreeable conversation in the Fuji Bar down the street, or maybe the Sony Bar just around the corner.  Those of us who spend a good deal of time shooting with our Leica SLs and Ms don't really come to this forum for the pleasure of having someone tell us, in a superior voice, that our cameras are substandard and overpriced and so are our lenses. Many of us have spent many years using these cameras and lenses and have a good sense of their strengths and weaknesses and relative value. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear PGH, you are entitled to your opinion.  You might find a more agreeable conversation in the Fuji Bar down the street, or maybe the Sony Bar just around the corner.  Those of us who spend a good deal of time shooting with our Leica SLs and Ms don't really come to this forum for the pleasure of having someone tell us, in a superior voice, that our cameras are substandard and overpriced and so are our lenses. Many of us have spent many years using these cameras and lenses and have a good sense of their strengths and weaknesses and relative value. 

I'm not intending to reply in a 'superior' voice - I was responding to the insinuation that my opinion was not informed by professional experience - which was wrong.

 

I love using the M - but I'm not a 'brand' devotee for any particular brand - I just am a devotee to finding the best tool for the given job. I'm not on the forums for the other brands because...well...honestly, I've never had much anything to say or ask because I've never had to trouble shoot with those cameras. I came here for answers on the problems that arise with owning Leica these days. That said, I still very much enjoy and heavily use my M10. This thread is about the merits of the SL and the M. I'm stating why I think the M has merit, and the SL does not. This isn't forum that's supposed to lack informed criticism as far as I can see. 

 

That last part about many of us spending many years with these cameras - yea, I am in that boat. I don't think there's anything overpriced about a used M6. You could have an old M3 or whatever banging around and be making beautiful work with it, and it very much is a good value. I'm talking about the newest Leica digital tools in that sense - Leica - and what it is making these days - is not the same Leica from 1970 or 1990, and I think it's okay to make that distinction. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

May I say that if a particular photographic scene you feel the subject is not happy to be photographed or might not be willing to be photographed even though you might have taken the photo unknown to the subject, then photographic ethical-wise, one should not take that photo anyway, should we then go again to find other worthy opportunities...  ?   

 

In all of my special China Cultural/Photographic Expeditions design and leadings, right at the beginning, I always quote Sebastiao Salgado's saying of: "If you take a picture of a human that does not make him noblethere is no reason to take this picture. That is my way of seeing things." to our expedition participants as a guideline...   (even when one can use a modern "autofocus SL", shouldn't still be ethically thinking...?)

 

Therefore in my own photo taking around the world, I have all people photos from real film slides to pocket digital camera snapshots by following this rule, and still come up with naturally consent, promoting the subject's "beauty" and cultural identity, positive, pleasant images..You

You're suggesting that famed Leica travel photographer Sebastio Salgado never once took a paparazzi style grab shot of someone?  Remember that he gained his fame with a camera before the days of auto focus.  I'm sure that he would have been even more of a prolific photographer had he had access to the Leica SL.  That is the orignal point of my comment about the SL, that the auto focus technology of today lets anyone grab a once in a lifetime image, with a higher degree of accurate focus and sharpness, over a manual focus in some dim lit situations. At least for my eyes and need for reading glasses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're suggesting that famed Leica travel photographer Sebastio Salgado never once took a paparazzi style grab shot of someone?  Remember that he gained his fame with a camera before the days of auto focus.  I'm sure that he would have been even more of a prolific photographer had he had access to the Leica SL.  That is the orignal point of my comment about the SL, that the auto focus technology of today lets anyone grab a once in a lifetime image, with a higher degree of accurate focus and sharpness, over a manual focus in some dim lit situations. At least for my eyes and need for reading glasses.

Salgado and many others (maybe none so much as McCurry) have made a career off of exploitation to some degree or another. In photographing we all need to come to terms with, and configure our own personal set of ethics. The most we can ask for is that the photographer is as aware as possible in regards to what they are doing - are that they are honest with themselves about their motivations when they step in to the fray of representing another person. (IE it could be argued that it is a selfish act to use someone else's likeness to make your home office wall 'prettier'). Photographing is a violent, intrusive act in many ways (there is a lot of writing about this if one cares to explore the notion) and it's an act taken too lightly by many, but the flip side is that representational art work is an extremely important contributor to cultural discourse.

 

Many photographers who behaved brashly in younger days also changed their approach in later days, due to evolving sentiments dealing with exactly these issues. It might be fair to give Salgado the benefit of the doubt in regards to his motivation - but the premise of justifying a camera choice because it is better at taking grab shots of strangers in areas where they disapprove of the act is insensitive at best and won't sit well with many, and for good reason. 

 

Buttttt if you're gonna make that argument where the fastest/most reactive camera is the best tool, I still think that the best answer isn't a Leica of any stripe. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not intending to reply in a 'superior' voice - I was responding to the insinuation that my opinion was not informed by professional experience - which was wrong.

 

It wasn’t an insinuation, it was a question...lighten up, Francis.

 

That said, you did not really elaborate how you used the SL “professionally” in your reply. And you are so dismissive of the camera that it sounds a lot more like preconceived notions and bias about its performance than actual experience.

 

THAT’s an insinuation :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did trade in my SL for the M10.

It's a personal choice though - the SL is technically a more well-rounded camera with a lot more options - electronic shutter, interval timer etc. But there were a few reasons why I switched to the M10 and 6-7 months later, I am still happy with my decision:

 

- To me, a Leica is still an M. Once you take away the rangefinder, you are left with a digital tool which is just another version of what is on the market. The SL feels like a polished, clinical tool rather than a camera that has an emotional connection like an M.

- in terms of colour and dynamic range, I almost think the M10 is superior. Some may disagree as I haven't done any scientific tests but in general, the shadows hold a lot more cleanly recoverable data than what I used to get with the SL

- the SL is great but some of it's features are handicapped - the dual card slot for example is a case in point. The 2nd card slot is slower than the 1st. This affects the startup time of the SL. Also, if you use 2 cards, if one is full, the SL has to constantly warn you when you switch on the camera (or come back from sleep mode). This can be extremely annoying if you want to capture a moment instantly. Obviously the workaround is to either just use 1 card, or to not use the sleep mode - but that's not how the camera was designed so....

- the electronic viewfinder in the SL is great for fast aperture critical work but I found that in street photography at least that I was obsessing with accurate focus too much and trying to shoot at f/1.4-2 too much and ergo, being too slow for candid photographs. Obviously this is is just me but the M releases you a tad by being more loose and because you pay more attention to the distance scale etc.

 

The M10 is to me (as it seems to be to most everyone online) the best digital M ever - in terms of everything - size, handling, viewfinder and technical image quality at high ISO. The SL is great but it's strength definitely lies with it's native autofocus lenses. There is none of the charm of the M if that's important to you. :)

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the M, simple, easy to use, less bells and whistles, but I do need the AF for kids, and video functionality. many people praised about SL with M lens, somehow it is not easy to use for me. it is not easy to get feel of the "in focus" the red outline sometimes are not that noticeable, and when turning the barrel of SL lens I have to read the upper window to know the distance to the subject. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My Leica experience/background is Leicaflex SL2, M4, M6, and M9 when it came out.

 

The M9 developed the sensor issue and I returned for replacement to Leica USA right at the end of the August 15 eligibility for free repair date . After four months of waiting for it to be returned I decided to buy an M10. I've used for a month and it is a excellent evolution and advancement over the trusty M9. I purchaed the R to M lens adapter so I can use my eight old R lenses (from my SL2) with the M10 (along with my four M lenses) and I bought the excellent Type 020 EVF. Brilliant camera.

 

While continuing to wait for my M9 to be returned I became aware of the Leica Update program and I decided to use it to trade the M9 towards an SL.

I also purchased the M to L lens adapter.

 

It took me a few days to grasp fully the OS / Menu / Options system on the SL but once I did (consulting the manual often) I found it to be excellent and very efficient. This is with Firmware 3.0. The programmable seven (?) buttons make access to anything very fast. The EVF is quite a remarkable achievement and I find focusing very easy through it and it's aids. I've not tried the video feature but based on a video I watched with a pro using it (on the Leica site) for a shoot it too appears to be of very flexible and very high quality, (especially if you are a pro) when using an external storage device.

 

For three weeks now I've been using the SL with my eight (SL2 era) R lenses (21, 28, 35, 50, 50 1.4, 90, 135, 180mm). The body/lens balance is very good.

I've also used my M lenses on the SL. The flexibility of having both lens adapters (R to M & M to L) is the benefit for my with the two cameras and using the applicable adapter(s) as needed either stacked or separate (vs the one R to L lens adapter).

 

My conclusion is the SL is obviously a completely different type of device but equally as brilliant as the M10. The SL is a technically advanced and fast device and it is capable of using Leica Autofocus lenses. I'm using the SL with only manual focus lenses. However, the AutoFocus SL lenses available is expanding and now includes two zooms, a 50mm, 75mm, 90mm (and a 35 is rumored to be available soon) perhaps I will try AF one day.

 

After using the SL for two days in a row I grabbed the M10, turned it on and while looking through the viewfinder (not EVF) composing a photograph I thought to myself, "Wait a second. Where is the ....." 

 

I'm not suggesting the SL is better (or worse) than the M10.

I'm suggesting they are both truly great cameras.

 

Reminds my of my old film days when I carried and used the Leicaflex SL2 and a Leica M.

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

All the SL lenses are ginormas=really big.  Quality is outstanding.

 

50mm and longer should work fine.    < 50mm there will be edge and corner problems.  

 

RF lenses in general require special sensors because of short register distance.    This is why the M8 is a crop.  

 

Also the refresh rate in the EVF causes issues with moving subjects or panning.   

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...