After eight months of using the SL, going back to an M seems impossible

[Steve McGarrett]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It could be and will be better and you will be happy it does  . The sensor is under a great deal stress of multiple tasks that it is asked to do. Metering, focusing, adjusting automatically to subject brightness, pre focusing, image preview, etc.

A rangefinder just does what it does transmitting mechanically one instruction. The shutter curtain just does that one thing, timing the shutter. And so on.

 

But as you say it's already happened at a satisfactory level to please you and to a large part myself. I just wait.

 

Everything could be and will be better in time. I've just said that to me it's already, as it is now, more accurate at focusing and framing than a rangefinder. A fortiori, it will be wonderful when they'll do it even better...

 

The reason why they ask the sensor to do so many things is that, when you are on the focal plane, there are no problems with accuracy, alignment, focus shift, framing, you get exposure WYSIWYG directly in the finder, and so on.

 

Rangefinder does only one thing? Sure, but sometimes does it wrong, or in a less accurate way.

The shutter curtain? Yes, one thing only, but with more noise, more vibrations (look at the Sony A9, sports shooting at 20fps, 1/32.000s with no blackout and no moving parts)

 

Your dad's mechanical alarm clock did just one thing, to wake up you in the morning. Is it better at that thing than your mobile phone, who works as an alarm clock but is capable of dozens of other tasks, just because it did just one thing?

 

And yes, tomorrow's mobile phones will be even better - but the ones of today are already better than your dad's clock at waking you up

Edited June 4, 2018 by Steve McGarrett

[Advertisement]

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

[LD_50]

I have been doing wildlife and landscape (and not too badly, I think) with M cameras since 1974/1988. Of course I made sidesteps to other systems on the way, but I cannot say that I found it an impossibility, quite the opposite, it was a special style of shooting. Even if I used an R for my long lenses, I always took an M for the landscape shots. Otherwise: Visoflex 3

I was specifically referring to the rangefinder part of the M as not really contributing to sports, wildlife, and landscape in a positive way. It can be done though I believe SLR and EVF cameras to be superior in these applications. I do like the rangefinder for quickly manually focusing lenses in street and more “general” shooting situations. I am better at quickly achieving focus with the MP than the SL with my M lenses in these situations.

[tom0511]

Everything could be and will be better in time. I've just said that to me it's already, as it is now, more accurate at focusing and framing than a rangefinder. A fortiori, it will be wonderful when they'll do it even better...

 

The reason why they ask the sensor to do so many things is that, when you are on the focal plane, there are no problems with accuracy, alignment, focus shift, framing, you get exposure WYSIWYG directly in the finder, and so on.

 

Rangefinder does only one thing? Sure, but sometimes does it wrong, or in a less accurate way.

The shutter curtain? Yes, one thing only, but with more noise, more vibrations (look at the Sony A9, sports shooting at 20fps, 1/32.000s with no blackout and no moving parts)

 

Your dad's mechanical alarm clock did just one thing, to wake up you in the morning. Is it better at that thing than your mobile phone, who works as an alarm clock but is capable of dozens of other tasks, just because it did just one thing?

 

And yes, tomorrow's mobile phones will be even better - but the ones of today are already better than your dad's clock at waking you up

 

A mechanical alarmclock can be adjusted with jut one wheel, and it doesnt need electric power, and it doesnt produce electric radiation next to my head, you dont need rare earths to produce it, and it doesnt invite me to check mail at night. And it looks much better than an iphone. So IMO an alarmclock is better FOR ME. Except when I travel and want to reduce luggage. 

[Steve McGarrett]

A mechanical alarmclock can be adjusted with jut one wheel, and it doesnt need electric power, and it doesnt produce electric radiation next to my head, you dont need rare earths to produce it, and it doesnt invite me to check mail at night. And it looks much better than an iphone. So IMO an alarmclock is better FOR ME. Except when I travel and want to reduce luggage. 

 

I like to tune and pull up each week the weights of a big grandfather clock at home. I don't think it's better than a modern one, but I just love the thing - and its chimes

[ramarren]

• I have both SL and M-D.
• I use both. 
• Neither is better than the other: They're simply different approaches and workflow for me, with different strengths and weaknesses. 
• The SL is more versatile, the M-D is smaller and lighter.

Of late, I've come to use the M-D much more than the SL ... both my life and my photography have changed in radical ways in the past year and a half. Most of that I want/need now is better provided by the M-D, to the point that the few niche things I use the SL for might no longer be enough to warrant keeping it and its lenses around for, given their monetary value. I will likely sell the SL kit, and a couple of the no longer needed R lenses, keep the M-D, and see if the upcoming CM body would suit what I do with the SL now (mostly macro, copy work, and the rare, more extreme tele work with R lenses that the EVF is useful for). If not, a CL body would do those things just fine for me with the same R lenses.

 

There's nothing either "good" or "bad" about this, to me. Equipment and tools are things to have for a purpose: I have very little emotional attachment to most of it. When my purposes changes, I reorganize what equipment I own to seek the best advantages in achieving them.

[roofus]

When I first got my SL I had an MP 240, which I almost kept because I really did love rangefinder shooting and have had M’s on and off for 20 years. But I did sell it to fund a lens purchase and have been using the SL exclusively since then with M glass.

 

Yesterday I went to B&H and checked out the 16-35 on the SL, they have a demo but none to buy yet. Because I have been using nothing but M lenses on the SL, I found the 16 to 35 comically large and completely alien. As much as I would love to get the image quality of one of the autofocus native SL lenses on the SL body, the process of using M glass and the EVF Is just so wonderful and compact. As much as I would like to get the best out of the SL, I just can’t get past the size of the glass.

 

And then I picked up an M 10 with a 35 Summicron mounted. It felt so tiny compared to the SL, a bit toylike. I forgot what rangefinder focusing was like, it felt strange not getting the instant gratification of the exposure and depth of field through the EVF. I know this is going to piss some people off, but I really feel like you pay more for the M and get a lot less then the SL. I understand the appeal of less is more, the minimal design and simplicity of use. But I find the SL to be even simpler and satisfyingly minimal too.

 

I’ve seen more than a few comments with people saying they wish there was an M with an EVF integrated, that that would be the ultimate M. I think for those people, They should just buy an SL and use M glass on it. Sure the body is a little bit bigger, but the whole SL shooting experience with M glass just feels....evolved.

 

Anyway I really wanted to love the M, thought it might be fun to have a second body, but for me, I think the SL with M glass has really retired my desire for a rangefinder.

 

Has anybody else out there tried to go back to an M and found themselves spoiled by the SL?

 

I am in the same situation as you! The M cameras were wonderful but no auto-focus, no zoom, crappy battery life , , , sorry but I have moved on to the SL

[rpittal]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

after using my SL for several months, I also did not use my MP240 much so I traded it in for a Q. That is a great combo. I still have and extensively use my M246 though (retired the EVF as spoiled by the EVF on the SL and Q, and enjoy the bare RF experience).

[Guest VVJ]

A review of the Leica SL (and Leica) unlike any other in 4 parts:

 

Leica SL Three Years After Launch, Part 1: First Frame (5 mins):

What Makes a Leica a Leica? The Leica SL Review Three Years After Launch, Part 2 (19 mins):

Amazing Adventures of Leica (Leica SL Review, Part 3)(23 mins):

Leica SL is a Heartbreaker (Final Episode of Our Four Part Review)(37 mins):

[bags27]

4 minutes from the end of the last of these videos is what everyone seems to be praying for on June 14.

[bags27]

Since he winds his way through the history of Leica--politically as well as photographically--he might have also mentioned the extraordinary actions by the Leitz family and the company to save Jews before and even during the Holocaust. 

 

reported constantly; perhaps most fully here:

https://www.ft.com/content/ee05b91e-b0f6-11db-b901-0000779e2340

 

and the great risks in the book Elsie's War, by Frank Dabba Smith and Elsie Kuhn-Leitz; with Henri Cartier-Bresson

 

[jmahto]

Don't have SL. Never held it. Don't have desire to shoot with it. But I have M240 (along with Sony APS-C mirrorless and old Canikon DSLR + film cameras... all being used as of this date). This is my background.

 

What I find strange is that people claim SL is most versatile, do it all camera. Yes, it is more versatile compared to M but it is nowhere compared to Canikon's sorted DSLR bodies when it comes to being jack of all trades (almost).

 

Right now I am shooting timelapse of Giant Amaryllis blooming in my backyard and my 11 years old Canon (40D) is outside faithfully shooting every hour for last one week. Great battery life and simple intervelometer makes it possible. Try that with M or any other mirrorless. I would love to see SL do that. Can it?

 

As some wise men said in this thread. These are just tools... with own strengths and weakness.

Edited June 6, 2018 by jmahto

[Jeff S]

Since he winds his way through the history of Leica--politically as well as photographically--he might have also mentioned the extraordinary actions by the Leitz family and the company to save Jews before and even during the Holocaust.

 

reported constantly; perhaps most fully here:

https://www.ft.com/content/ee05b91e-b0f6-11db-b901-0000779e2340

 

and the great risks in the book Elsie's War, by Frank Dabba Smith and Elsie Kuhn-Leitz; with Henri Cartier-Bresson

He covers this well known story in the third video, roughly 12-13 minutes in.

 

Jeff

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Don't have SL. Never held it. Don't have desire to shoot with it. But I have M240 (along with Sony APS-C mirrorless and old Canikon DSLR + film cameras... all being used as of this date). This is my background.

 

What I find strange is that people claim SL is most versatile, do it all camera. Yes, it is more versatile compared to M but it is nowhere compared to Canikon's sorted DSLR bodies when it comes to being jack of all trades (almost).

 

Right now I am shooting timelapse of Giant Amaryllis blooming in my backyard and my 11 years old Canon (40D) is outside faithfully shooting every hour for last one week. Great battery life and simple intervelometer makes it possible. Try that with M or any other mirrorless. I would love to see SL do that. Can it?

 

As some wise men said in this thread. These are just tools... with own strengths and weakness.

 

I'm going to be a smart arse here....

 

Last year I was told at a wedding we couldn't shoot during the ceremony because the priest didn't want the sound of a shutter clacking. I demonstrated the silent shutter to the priest and was allowed to shoot with my SL's in silent mode. Priest was happy. Bride was very very happy. Try that with any DSLR. I'd love to see a Canikon do that. Can it?

 

See what I did there?

 

Versatility means different things to different people.

 

Can any of the Canikons show a live histogram?. Exposure preview in the viewfinder? Artificial horizon in the viewfinder? Settable 30 minute exposure without an accessory? Image review in the viewfinder? DoF scale in the LCD display? Hyper focal focus point display with any native lens at any aperture? Silent shutter?

 

Of course I can make a list like that about the SL as well.

 

Personally I'll never buy a DSLR again. Mirrorless makes things much easier *for me*. And the set up and usability of the SL is far better than any Canikon *for me*. Personally the versatility of the SL is what I want. I have no real interest in such a time lapse and if I did I'd have no issues replacing a battery once a day.

 

Versatility comes in many shapes and forms. The Canikons are versatile. So are the SL's. Neither does it all.

 

Gordon

[lct]

Do you include Sony in your "Canikon" description?

[jmahto]

I'm going to be a smart arse here....

 

Last year I was told at a wedding we couldn't shoot during the ceremony because the priest didn't want the sound of a shutter clacking. I demonstrated the silent shutter to the priest and was allowed to shoot with my SL's in silent mode. Priest was happy. Bride was very very happy. Try that with any DSLR. I'd love to see a Canikon do that. Can it?

 

See what I did there?

 

Versatility means different things to different people.

 

Can any of the Canikons show a live histogram?. Exposure preview in the viewfinder? Artificial horizon in the viewfinder? Settable 30 minute exposure without an accessory? Image review in the viewfinder? DoF scale in the LCD display? Hyper focal focus point display with any native lens at any aperture? Silent shutter?

 

Of course I can make a list like that about the SL as well.

 

Personally I'll never buy a DSLR again. Mirrorless makes things much easier *for me*. And the set up and usability of the SL is far better than any Canikon *for me*. Personally the versatility of the SL is what I want. I have no real interest in such a time lapse and if I did I'd have no issues replacing a battery once a day.

 

Versatility comes in many shapes and forms. The Canikons are versatile. So are the SL's. Neither does it all.

 

Gordon

...Well Smart Arse , I will tone down my statement "nowhere compared to Canikon's sorted DSLR bodies..." and will also point to my last sentence > "These are just tools... with own strengths and weakness."

 

(BTW: I read that Canon 5DIII onwards does have silent shutter.)

Edited June 6, 2018 by jmahto

[jmahto]

Do you include Sony in your "Canikon" description?

If you are referring to my post then no. With all the advantages of mirrorless (I haven't bought a DSLR in more than a decade), they (Sony) have well known negatives. Going back to my intervellometer pet peeve, it beats me why can't Sony/SL/CL provide a simple input to connect a $10 external intervellometer! A good industrial design should have enough input/output ports.

(Note: M is an exception which doesn't claim to be verstaile and I am fine with it)

[Boojay]

Well, I only watched part 4 - I enjoyed watching Mr Hugh Brownstone very much, new experience for me, I kinda hope he does have a look at the CL.

Edited June 6, 2018 by Boojay

[ramarren]

... What I find strange is that people claim SL is most versatile, do it all camera. ...

 

 

 

I didn't say that the SL was the "most versatile, do it all camera" either. I said it was more versatile than my Leica M-D, which it assuredly is. It is versatile on the same level as a pro grade DSLR, with some advantages and disadvantages as well. 

 

I've managed as many as 1100 exposures with the SL on a single battery charge and without the battery grip and its second battery. That's way WAY more than I normally ever need. 

 

I don't know whether I could do the same week-long intervalometer thing with the SL, mostly because I've never tried or been interested in doing such a thing. I'm pretty sure I could do it with the M-D, though, by fitting a sufficient capacity card—1 per hour for two weeks is only 336 exposures, that's less than a 16G card can hold—sticking an intervalometer on with a standard release actuator on it, then letting it go ahead and do the work. The only funky bit is that I'd have to set the intervalometer to make two exposures every hour ... the first to wake up the camera, the second to make the actual exposure. Not that I've ever done that or wanted to either...

 

I'll likely never own another DSLR. I still have my Olympus E-1, which is without a doubt the nicest DSLR body I've ever used, albeit ancient and underperforming on pixel count, speed, and AF speed these many long years since it was manufactured. I've had several others since and sold them all already. I don't really need DSLRs for my photography any more, and even the SL is way overkill for what I need or want now. 

 

Life goes on.

 

G

Edited June 6, 2018 by ramarren

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[trickness]

With all my love for the SL, I still have hesitancy buying any native lenses for it, while I plot my next M lens purchase (to use exclusively on the SL). I sold my Nikon DSLR rig to get a 240 3 years ago, returning to Leica, largely because I hated the bulk of the camera. I sold the 240 to help pay for the SL, and brought my M glass with me to the system. Still I know I'm not getting the best out of the SL without using native lenses.

 

Anyone else having this conflict? I just can't see going "big" again despite the fact that the SL is the ideal camera for me in pretty much every other way. I LOVE this camera with M lenses.

[jmahto]

With all my love for the SL, I still have hesitancy buying any native lenses for it, while I plot my next M lens purchase (to use exclusively on the SL). I sold my Nikon DSLR rig to get a 240 3 years ago, returning to Leica, largely because I hated the bulk of the camera. I sold the 240 to help pay for the SL, and brought my M glass with me to the system. Still I know I'm not getting the best out of the SL without using native lenses.

 

Anyone else having this conflict? I just can't see going "big" again despite the fact that the SL is the ideal camera for me in pretty much every other way. I LOVE this camera with M lenses.

Highlight mine... Isn't it true that M lenses still perform better on M than on SL? I remember previous 28 Cron ASPH doing better on M240 than SL while the latest 28 Cron ASPH is equally good on SL (based on what I read). I do understand that the technical difference may not matter in one's photography.