Returning to the M Body after High Hopes with the SL

[lx1713]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the APS-C frame size is getting an undeserved bad rap -- the best of the lenses are comparable to all but a few of the M lenses, and the sensors have been upgraded in the last year or two to the same dynamic range as the SL (but not quite as good as the M10).

 

Most definitely. I thought this to be one of the best decisions by Leica. Just need a trio of fast zooms to round it off for me.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Or even better, a couple of  really fast primes and a long OIS zoom. TL 45 Nocticron?

[chris_tribble]

Went for a morning stroll around Grasmere and Rydal Water this morning (English Lake District).  M10 + 28 summicron asph + 75 summarit f2.4.  These pack into a Thinktank Slim changer pouch (https://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/slim-changer). I wasn't intending to take picture postcard shots, but this one was irresistible.  With the SL I know I'd have had problems with infinity focus.  No such problem with the M. I'm sure I could get as good or better results with the SL and the 24-90 - but I wouldn't want to carry the damn thing around for 10 km.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

The SL is a a lovely thing as is the CL.  But for me, an M remains the best body for M lenses - and M lenses are what I'm wed to for the moment.  Not for all purposes and all jobs - but when I'm happy to forgo zoom, AF and IS then the M remains the most portable, fastest to use, best system I know.  If I want to do other kinds of work, I reach for other tools.

Edited March 24, 2018 by chris_tribble

[Einst_Stein]

I switched from M9 to SL, not that I liked SL better, but Leica did not offer M10 to trade up my damaged M9.

I had the choices of M240 or SL. I didn't like M240's EVF, and I wanted to get away for the OVF's inifinite misalignment problem, besides, atbthat time, trade up SL is quite cheaper than M240.

 

I thought I would miss the absolutely perfect Leica M system, the zero latency "real view" finder, its perfect size, and the user interface that does not require a PHD degree.

 

It turns out that the modern EVF on SL is so good that I have never thought about the OVF any more. The size with M lens is basically the same as M. The user interface? ... hmm. it does require a well educated degree but not PHD. 

 

The biggest problem of SL is its evil temptation to get a SL lens, at least the 24-90mm. Once getting a SL lens it becomes much larger than M. and guess what, the SL system will also wash you brain to think large is better, and it is absolutely the right size.  

 

Sorry, M, I feel really guilty. but I am staying with SL.

Edited March 24, 2018 by Einst_Stein

[chris_tribble]

Glad it works for you

[Guest VVJ]

Went for a morning stroll around Grasmere and Rydal Water this morning (English Lake District).  M10 + 28 summicron asph + 75 summarit f2.4.  These pack into a Thinktank Slim changer pouch (https://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/slim-changer). I wasn't intending to take picture postcard shots, but this one was irresistible.  With the SL I know I'd have had problems with infinity focus.  No such problem with the M. I'm sure I could get as good or better results with the SL and the 24-90 - but I wouldn't want to carry the damn thing around for 10 km.

 

001_L1009214.jpg

 

001_L1009214-2.jpg

 

The SL is a a lovely thing as is the CL.  But for me, an M remains the best body for M lenses - and M lenses are what I'm wed to for the moment.  Not for all purposes and all jobs - but when I'm happy to forgo zoom, AF and IS then the M remains the most portable, fastest to use, best system I know.  If I want to do other kinds of work, I reach for other tools.

 

I wouldn't want to carry the SL for 10KM either but these shots could easily have been obtained with the CL and native glass as well I feel.  BTW, I don't disagree on the fact that the M is the best camera to shoot M-glass.

Edited March 24, 2018 by JorisV

[mmradman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For displaying on computer/tablet even smart phone camera fitted with equivalent 28mm lens, like iPhone, would provide similar quality image.

 

28mm equivalent, iPhone 6s, Lake District.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited March 24, 2018 by mmradman

[thighslapper]

I wouldn't want to carry the SL for 10KM either but these shots could easily have been obtained with the CL and native glass as well I feel.  BTW, I don't disagree on the fact that the M is the best camera to shoot M-glass.

 

C'mon guys ....... are you all arthritic 90 year olds ???? The SL+24-90 is not that heavy ...... it depends entirely on how you carry it ........ if you are daft enough to dangle it round your neck then no wonder you are disenchanted. With a Peak Slide strap carried over the shoulder and chest it is hardly noticeable ..... and I carry it round behind my back so it never gets in the way....... just reach down, grab with the right hand and you are ready to shoot.  A wrist strap like the Herringbone provides wrist leverage so holding one handed is no problem. 

 

It is only a problem if you are not bothered to use some thought and effort into solving it.

 

90% of the time you have a one camera+lens solution. No extra bags or rummaging for lenses to change. 

 

The infinity 'issue' with M lenses can be solved by adding a 0.09mm shim inside the adapter ...... that brings sensor infinity aligned with the infinity stop on the lens (if the lens is correctly adjusted)....... although with magnification I fail to see how you can miss infinity when using the SL manually. 

 

One of the main reasons I gave up on the M rangefinders was because of the frequent issues of RF misalignment and lens maladjustment...... with the SL these issues are non existent. 

Edited March 24, 2018 by thighslapper

[satijntje]

C'mon guys ....... are you all arthritic 90 year olds ???? The SL+24-90 is not that heavy ...... it depends entirely on how you carry it ........ if you are daft enough to dangle it round your neck then no wonder you are disenchanted. With a Peak Slide strap carried over the shoulder and chest it is hardly noticeable ..... and I carry it round behind my back so it never gets in the way....... just reach down, grab with the right hand and you are ready to shoot.  A wrist strap like the Herringbone provides wrist leverage so holding one handed is no problem. 

 

 

 

Please show us a picture how you are carrying this.

An image says more then 1000 words

Thanks in advance

John

[chris_tribble]

I wouldn't want to carry the SL for 10KM either but these shots could easily have been obtained with the CL and native glass as well I feel.

My problem with the CL was that it wasn’t smaller than the M. With any of the zooms it’s a bigger package. And I also have to say that however good the glass, especially with the telephoto lenses, the lack of IS was a deal breaker.

 

For displaying on computer/tablet even smart phone camera fitted with equivalent 28mm lens, like iPhone, would provide similar quality image.

28mm equivalent, iPhone 6s, Lake District.

Yes. Of course. And you could blow it up to poster size or project it on the Arc de Triomphe. Not sure of it would make a print I’d want to exhibit though, and the iPhone wouldn’t have worked in contexts like these: https://flic.kr/s/aHskrnHZk5. The M10 Most positively does though...

 

But ladies and gentlemen, I’m not trying to diss either the SL or the CL. They’re both fine systems. I was responding to the OP who was explain why he’s gone back to using an M - and both agreeing with him and supporting. I’ve got a fine Canon system, and I can man up and cart it around the world when assignments require it. However, for most personal projects, and for a growing number of professional assignments, the M is the camera I turn to first.

Just my point of view (as they say)

Edited March 24, 2018 by chris_tribble

[Irakly Shanidze]

ბატონო ირაკლი, დიდი მადლობა. სწორია.  გეთანხმები. 

 

I was a photojournalist in the late 80s, but these days, photography is much more of a hobby/passion for me. I primarily shoot travel, landscapes and people.  How do you mean that the SL is overkill?  Sizewise?  It's actually cheaper than an M, and if you have to buy a viewfinder or EVF for wide lenses for the M, it's cheaper still.  

 

I'm switching today from a Nikon DSLR, but I shot manual focus for 15 years, so I'm not particularly afraid of the M.  My dad had rangefinders when I was growing up, as well as an assortment of other interesting and esoteric formats.

 

ყოველთვის გთხოვთ

 

It is an overkill in terms of its size, weight and additional capabilities that a travel/people still photographer does not need. Spending a day walking with an SL and a couple of lenses will make you think very fondly of an M kit sitting at home

 

For landscapes you do not really need an EVF, as the camera is mounted on a tripod, and you can do live view if necessary.

[Irakly Shanidze]

...But in the  street and travel department, now faces serious competition from the CL

 

CL is a lovely option, but I would not really consider an APS-C camera for something more serious than casual snapshots. I do not want to get into this never-ending discussion right now, but if you are interested in my well-substantiated point of view, here are two of my blog articles:

http://www.artphotoacademy.com/medium-format-why-on-earth/

http://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/

[IkarusJohn]

Never had a proble carrying the SL and a lens (usually the 24-90).

Edited March 25, 2018 by IkarusJohn

[Irakly Shanidze]

Never had a proble carrying the SL and a lens (usually the 24-90).

 

I thought that I had never had a problem carrying Contax N Digital with five lenses until I got M8

[scott kirkpatrick]

CL is a lovely option, but I would not really consider an APS-C camera for something more serious than casual snapshots. I do not want to get into this never-ending discussion right now, but if you are interested in my well-substantiated point of view, here are two of my blog articles:

http://www.artphotoacademy.com/medium-format-why-on-earth/

http://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/

Interesting links to your blog.  I enjoyed puzzling out the location of the camera and the mirror in picture #1 of article #2.  But there is no explicit mention of APS-C in either.  I think there have been major advances in the CL's sensor and some of its lenses that shrink the differences or even eliminate them.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Interesting links to your blog.  I enjoyed puzzling out the location of the camera and the mirror in picture #1 of article #2.  But there is no explicit mention of APS-C in either.  I think there have been major advances in the CL's sensor and some of its lenses that shrink the differences or even eliminate them.

 

The inference is straightforward. The smaller is the sensor, the more resolving power a lens needs for the same sensor resolution, the less possibility for good microcontrast, as simple as that. That's why a picture from a smaller sensor always looks less 3D than of the larger one, other things being equal. Just as a 35mm image does not have as much depth as a MF picture, APS-C photo is flatter than the 35mm and so on.

[panoreserve]

Please show us a picture how you are carrying this.

An image says more then 1000 words

Thanks in advance

John

 

No problem here - just go on Peak Designs website and you will see how great the "Slide" works. Combination with PD's "Clutch" (camera hand strap) is awesome too. Yesterday I carried the SL+24/90-combo for about 10 hours without any problems...

[Alistairm]

If you shoot mostly from 28mm to 75mm, prefer manual focus to the exclusion of autofocus, don’t need weather sealing, don’t need zooms, don’t need image stabilisation and are prepared to deal with the occasional sensor or lens calibration, then the M10 is awesome. I love mine. I love my M glass. I love shooting a rangefinder. I love how compact and simple the setup is.

 

But there is no denying that the SL is a more capable camera with better lenses and access to the M lenses too. Of course, it’s bigger than the M system. Much bigger with the SL lenses.

 

But really, they are so different I’m always bemused when I see people cross shopping them.

 

The M rangefinder experience can’t be replicated by the SL. But nor can the M get the shot as efficiently as the SL. As to IQ... for my money (and I have plenty invested in both systems), the SL lenses are better, and I expect this will become even clearer as senor resolution goes up. And, in any event, the M lenses work perfectly on the SL. The SL is very much a no compromise system, while the M10 is great at certain things.

Edited March 25, 2018 by Alistairm

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[otto.f]

The M is a walk around camera and the SL is an allround system, gives you thus much more value for money than the M240 or M10. The idea of making a through the lens camera out of an M has long been a tradition at Leica since the Visoflex i, but it remains a compromise. I changed my M10 for an SL because I own an M9 and an MM1 and am perfectly happy with them for where it’s been built for. The M10 is actually quite expensive compared to what an SL offers you in versatility.

But you, OP, are looking for a more contemplative style of photography, the M and the SL can both deliver that or not, that depends on you and your subject. There were times when the M wasn’t at all seen as contemplative but as photojournalism pur sang, fast, compact, unobtrusive, sturdy. Think of Frank Capa for instance, I wouldn’t call his work contemplative. You might contemplate more on landscapes with your SL on tripod for instance.

One of the most important differences however between SL and the M however is that the M is simple, quick and straightforward, where the SL has quite a menu which asks your attention. I think a camera should serve me instead of me serving the camera. I already found too much menu in the M240 and up, compared to the M9. I hardly ever experienced an M as standing between me and my subject

Edited March 25, 2018 by otto.f

[geopatriot]

In an ideal world, I would certainly buy both.  I have "drunk the Kool-Aid," and I can see that the SL glass is very special for certain types of shooting.  But, I'm much more interested in the options available for M lenses.  Earlier, I referred to the "system."  At the current point in my thought process, I am not really considering the SL as a system, but solely as a body for M primes.  

 

I read something that Thorsten von Overgaard wrote about autofocus taking something away from the photographer and it's been on my mind for a week or so.  Today, I visited a local botanical garden with my six year-old and turned off my Nikon AF and shot some photos with zone focusing -- something I haven't done in probably ten years, just because the AF has always been there for me and I don't like the throw of AF lenses.  But, it was actually liberating.  Without waiting for the AF motor to lock in, I was able to get shots that I otherwise would have missed.  I relieved my mind from one action (waiting) and then put my energies on composing and capturing a moment -- usually of my daughter's action.  I become one with the moment and not subservient to the camera.  It's like I locked this type of shooting out of my mind once I switched over to AF back in 2001 and I never again considered manual focusing.  And again, this liberation is the allure of moving to a M lenses (as the core of the system).  My main deliberation now is which body to use?  The SL seems like a slam dunk and I'm trying to figure out what I'm missing.  The inaccurate aperture in the viewfinder seems to be one drawback, but that seems about it.  Then again, the M doesn't even show the aperture in the viewfinder.