SL to M10-P

[RoyB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello All. 

Has anyone switched to the M10/M10-P from the SL? If so, what were your main reason/s? And after the switch, are you still confident of the decision? 

I have the M9-P, CL, and SL. Image quality cannot be faulted in any of them. However, I adore the small form factor of both the M9-P and CL. I will not hesitate to bring any of the two with me everyday. The SL is superb ergonomically, the focus magnification can be repositioned with M-lenses (unlocks full potential of f1.4 and wider aperture lenses), the viewfinder is perfect and the battery life is more than satisfactory. But it's a tank 🙂.  

I went to a nearby Leica store to investigate a swap for a used mint M10-P but they discouraged me for several reasons - i.e. SL build quality is top notch, still a great sensor, etc... and that the value I will get for the swap will not be in my favor by quite a distance (by now, we know each other well enough for trust purposes 😉 ). Especially with the current promotion for the SL that brings down the price a further 15% from the currently lower price. 

Appreciate the opinions and experience. 

 

[anrotil68]

I'm reflecting on whether to give away an M10 for an SL or stay with 2 M10 bodies with the pros and cons but with a sensor and a unique and superlative rendering. I am evaluating the purchase of R lenses for lenses over 90 mm and staying with the M world. SL suffers the ruthless competition of Japanese brands far ahead in technology at significantly lower prices ... in short .... reflections on reflections ...

[Advertisement]

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

[jakontil]

I moved to SL from m240 at that time, but i lost my passion and swop back to M10 when it was available early on

 

its just the habit having a smaller body in M that dragged me back, talking bout the sensor i dont think there’s much different between the two

 

and now im using the m10-D and couldnt be happier.. 

 

my second body is the Q 

[james.liam]

Funny, been considering the same thing. The SL’s EVF is superb for all my antediluvian  R lenses. But there’s that form factor.....already sold iff my M10 to go for an M10-P and am in the same quandary. 

[RoyB]

@anrotil68 for lenses 90mm and above, I believe the SL is the right tool. I have a Summarit 90mm and I will only use it on the CL or the SL because of the EVF. I'm convinced that the optical rangefinder is really optimal for 28-50mm, maybe 75mm with an optical magnifier. It is indeed the challenge of the SL for being another goldfish in a bowl full of goldfishes. Although it's the most beautiful of all the goldfishes in my opinion. 

@jakontil that small M10 body is the biggest selling point, still nothing quite like it. The more I use the M9-P, the more I think I could tolerate the shortcomings of the M10-P. Plus the nearly silent mechanical shutter. 

@james.liam from my short experience with bigger M-mount lenses - i.e. Voigtlander 50mm 1.2 and 35mm 1.2, the SL is a better camera for handling purposes. My intent for an M10-P is to use mainly my Summarit 35 and Lux 50 on. When I put my Voigtlander 35 1.2 on my M9-P, almost a quarter of the viewfinder is blocked! 

[anrotil68]

I agree that the rangefinder is fine up to the 50 mm focal length. Besides it is mandatory to use VISIOFLEX for my M10. I had the LEICA Q, but in my opinion higher M10 as yield. I don't know how it makes an M or R lens on the LEICA SL sensor. My need arises in doing a job with the same sensor and having the same post production. The white balance and color rendering is different between the M sensor and the SL sensor.This will always be the case also for commercial policy and the construction of optics.

[jakontil]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And for personal reason, my bonding with the M is strongest and i need it to keep my passion like having faith in the M despite its all shortcomings...it’s just i feel more satisfied

[RexGig0]

11 minutes ago, RoyB said:

@anrotil68 for lenses 90mm and above, I believe the SL is the right tool. I have a Summarit 90mm and I will only use it on the CL or the SL because of the EVF. I'm convinced that the optical rangefinder is really optimal for 28-50mm, maybe 75mm with an optical magnifier. It is indeed the challenge of the SL for being another goldfish in a bowl full of goldfishes. Although it's the most beautiful of all the goldfishes in my opinion. 

@jakontil that small M10 body is the biggest selling point, still nothing quite like it. The more I use the M9-P, the more I think I could tolerate the shortcomings of the M10-P. Plus the nearly silent mechanical shutter. 

@james.liam from my short experience with bigger M-mount lenses - i.e. Voigtlander 50mm 1.2 and 35mm 1.2, the SL is a better camera for handling purposes. My intent for an M10-P is to use mainly my Summarit 35 and Lux 50 on. When I put my Voigtlander 35 1.2 on my M9-P, almost a quarter of the viewfinder is blocked! 

I have struggled with the temptation to add an SL, especially with a Visoflex 020 being so expensive, and having its own issues. I am concerned about the Visoflex 020’s seemingly vulnerable plastic exterior, and its reported tendency to detach from the camera much too easily. It would be really nice to use the SL’s integral EVF with telephoto lenses. On the other hand, I have yet to acquire any Leica telephoto lenses, with Zeiss 85mm ZM being my only third-party tele lens, at this point in time. 

When I added a second M camera body, in the latter part of 2018, it was a like-new, pre-owned Monochrom 246. I have not yet bought an EVF for either the M10 or the M 246.

I have now been using rangefinder focusing for about a year. I am most successful with my Summilux 50mm. A Zeiss 85mm ZM requires much more care, but rangefinder focusing is attainable. I have tended to zone focus with my 3.5cm Summaron-M f/3.5, and recently added a 1,4/35mm Distagon ZM. Rangefinding with the Distagon ZM has been reasonably successful, but it confirmed that 50mm is my favored focal length for rangefinder focusing.

This discussion, which you started, has been helpful, this morning, in helping me clarify focus, no pun intended. I am thinking that it would be best, for me, in the future, to concentrate on  Leica M lenses, from 28mm up to and including 50mm, to use on Leica M cameras. I have other systems for wide-angle and telephoto shooting, so should, logically, use lenses made for those systems. (I do have a Zeiss 4,5/21mm Biogon C, which plays very nicely with my Monochrom, so I will keep it.)

[LBJ2]

Nice kit Roy. M9-P, CL, and SL. Small and compact w/ distinct RF and AF all the way to the big gun, the SL with all the modern digital features. If Leica had the longer lenses for the SL then I'd say you're set. Maybe Sigma will answer the L-Mount call for longer zooms, super primes in the not too distance future. Something to think about it longer lenses are of any interest.

IMO depends on your use case. To me the SL system heft and available lenses are a good fit for studio, landscape kit and hybrid video. But personally I prefer to work with more megapixels for these scenarios and although I've never held or used the SL, when I see the SL + 24-90 out on the street, I don't think I would ever choose the SL system for street or walk around myself. YMMV.

Either way, I think you are working with a good shop too. They gave you some practical advice rather than trying to cajole more money out of you. If you go with a swap there will be a financial penalty and current SL model discounting certainly doesn't help. 

Perhaps a weekend with the M10-P kit will help you decide ? I can't help much other than give an opinion because I am biased. I really, really like the M10 system and I use Sony mirrorless when I need supersonic camera and lens abilities for the job. But I am very curious to see what SL2 brings in general but not a fan of the big SL lenses like I am over M glass. 

 

[james.liam]

3 hours ago, LBJ2 said:

IMO depends on your use case. To me the SL system heft and available lenses are a good fit for studio, landscape kit and hybrid video. But personally I prefer to work with more megapixels for these scenarios and although I've never held or used the SL, when I see the SL + 24-90 out on the street, I don't think I would ever choose the SL system for street or walk around myself. YMMV.

There's the rub. About two or three year ago, I dropped by B&H and held the SL with a 24-90. It was heavy. It was beautiful. I was just about ready to buy a Sony A7II and the SL's EVF was such a revelation that I gave up on Sony on the spot. But I jettisoned behemoth DSLR rigs for a reason and can't see myself going back, no matter how wonderful that zoom or the primes are.

I recently picked up a mint (? unused) R8 on a lark and for a pittance to shoot Ektachrome with my collection of R lenses bought back in '09 and reversibly adapted for Nikon.

The R's belong on larger cameras. Summicron M's on M bodies are the perfect haptics match.

[skanga]

15 hours ago, RoyB said:

I went to a nearby Leica store to investigate a swap for a used mint M10-P ...

Hi Roy,

How much was the used mint M10-P?

Thanks

[RoyB]

@skanga it was at 15% price discount, used for a weekend with 350 shutter actuations. Amusingly, the owner was a pro photographer who was not happy with the M10-P for his pro work and exchanged it for an SL. And there I was, contemplating to do just the opposite. 🙂 

[Phil_P]

Appreciate the OP's dilemma.  I have had an expensive journey/learning curve over the past year getting to the position where I am now very happy with the Leica kit I have.  Having had an M7 quite some years ago, I bought an M9 to see if Leica was for me again... and yes it was!  I then decided to supplement it with the SL knowing I would probably only use manual M lenses on it. However I just couldn't get comfortable with the size of the body. After much indecision sold both and am now  extremely happy  with the form factor/performance of the  M10-P with a few M lenses and the CL with just the 18-56, primarily for travel with  the M mount to L converter. All this past weekend I was out and about with just the M10-P and 50 Summilux... the pure joy of going back to basics, the simplistic very tactile experience ... this was what I, personally, was after when choosing  Leica.

[taosantamonica]

i use both the SL(usually with the sl75 or R80lux and a m10p (usually with the 35fle) and sometimes the m9m with a 50noct/apo.  luv all three and wouldn't want to lose any of them. If only one i'd pick the SL cuz i have m's 28 to 75, sl50/75 and r80/100/180 all feeling good on the sl with some small M's to keep size down, the autofocus sl's, the r's AND for the evf. 

[RoyB]

@Phil_P it seems I’m in a similar journey as you. What I’m looking for is in the M10-P but the lack of experience and perceived drawbacks of the optical rangefinder (especially drifting and thus maintenance) is what’s holding me back. The EVF of the SL was the most compelling reason I chose it over the M10 previously. But after using it regularly, the weight and size is creating a dissatisfaction. Especially after using the M9 and learning the optical rangefinder’s advantages. 

@taosantamonica thanks for sharing your preference. 

[Phil_P]

After  giving up the SL and it's stunning EVF, I bought the Visoflex to go with the M10-P  at the same time but personally find the optical viewfinder of the M10 quite a bit easier to focus than with my previous M9  (used a +0.5 diopter on both) so most of the time the Visoflex stays in the bag.

[LBJ2]

9 hours ago, james.liam said:

There's the rub. About two or three year ago, I dropped by B&H and held the SL with a 24-90. It was heavy. It was beautiful. I was just about ready to buy a Sony A7II and the SL's EVF was such a revelation that I gave up on Sony on the spot. But I jettisoned behemoth DSLR rigs for a reason and can't see myself going back, no matter how wonderful that zoom or the primes are.

I recently picked up a mint (? unused) R8 on a lark and for a pittance to shoot Ektachrome with my collection of R lenses bought back in '09 and reversibly adapted for Nikon.

The R's belong on larger cameras. Summicron M's on M bodies are the perfect haptics match.

I would not have picked the A7II either. 

The SL is indeed a beautifully designed camera. And at the time, its EVF was the best in the business. IMO Leica went in the wrong direction when they decided on a really large and heavy SL system. A Full Frame system the size and weight of Medium Frame seem a bit bass-ackwards to me and not at all surprised they partnered with Sigma, also known for really large lenses ( albeit a very good business strategy I think). Let's see how well the new equally large, Panasonic S1r and Leica SL2 get along in the new alliance. I wonder how they will differentiate the two cameras other than price. I can't help thinking what if Leica had gone in a different direction and targeted something closer to the Q2 size for their SL line. 

[LBJ2]

27 minutes ago, Phil_P said:

After  giving up the SL and it's stunning EVF, I bought the Visoflex to go with the M10-P  at the same time but personally find the optical viewfinder of the M10 quite a bit easier to focus than with my previous M9  (used a +0.5 diopter on both) so most of the time the Visoflex stays in the bag.

I find the Visoflex a very pleasant surprise. I really like the idea as an external device and love the included GPS that works very well in my area and where I have traveled so far. But my time/practice with the M10's RF has paid off and I'm able to nail focus for many scenarios even at very wide apertures. If not, I flip over to Live View and dial in or just run with Zone Focus. Either way always nice to know I've got the Visoflex in my back pocket so-to-speak if and when I need it. 

[Big John]

Interesting thread as I am also considering swapping SL for M10P.  I have the SL and 24-90 but tend mostly to use ZM lenses.  I like the build quality and IQ of the SL but the large size and weight means I don’t take it out as often as I could.  Whatever SL2 brings along I cannot see the size and weight reducing materially.  And if it is a 47MP sensor then too big for me - took some test shots with a Q2 recently and they were 60+MB files (!). My photography is holidays, street, general use.  

 

I have just just been to a store in London to explore smaller package options and handled:

- Nikon Z6: my last film camera was an F5 and I have a couple of Nikon lenses, hence interest.  Thought it compact, lighter weight than expected, lower res but brighter EVF, nice grip. 

- Sales staff suggested I also handle the Panasonic S1: EVF is a step up on SL (seemed much brighter and crisper), build felt good...but it doesn’t address my size and weight concern. 

- M10P: funny trying the M after 2 of the latest wizzy tech cameras, made it feel very retro and basic. Form factor lovely and enjoyed handling. Have spend a couple of hours with an M at an Akademie event previously. 

I am left (like a lot of prospective M buyers) questioning things like RF focusing and durability. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[eujin]

I recently did exactly this switch. Had a 240-P, SL and Q. I only ever used the SL with M lenses (50 Lux, 75 Lux, 21 SEM, 35 Summarit, 135 Elmarit). Over time, almost 2 years, I realized that I never wanted to travel with the SL. So I traded it and the 240-P for an M10-P. I've always been happier with manual focusing a rangefinder, so I think that's what it really boils down to. I also decided against adding the visoflex EVF.