Would you buy an M10 or an SL? Why?

[otto.f]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Fedro said:

Hi Otto indeed, and I am almost there in terms of moving on 

I am mostly using M and the X1d at this point: 90 out of 100 when I walk out for a causal walk, I carry M as I have done for the past 25 years, and when I go on a photo purpose (like landscape) I carry X1D. I use the SL mostly for portraits and longer lenses

Some of the X1D lenses are also somewhat heavy but ergonomics make it easier to handle and carry and for the penalty you get MF quality

I will handle the SL2 and see what it feels like in the hand, if great I will get it, otherwise I won't. I am no longer 100% sure it is worth the pain of weight/cost for the marginal improvement on an already very good set up (both M and X1D are great for portraits anyways) so if I dont buy it, I will sell my remaining lenses probably to finance the new M10M

Sorry, with ‘you’ I meant OP: Raid Amin

[Advertisement]

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

[otto.f]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

 I also don't buy the "M lenses are best on an M camera" concept - some M lenses are better on the SL than an M (28 Summilux and 50 Noctilux in particular), but neither are bad.  The SL is optimised for M lenses.

Can’t agree more, I see this as a myth which has not been put to test either, as far as I know. From own experience I can only say that images from M’s on SL are completely natural. The same counts for the statement ‘Leica analogue lenses are not made for digital’ : a truism with a very strange suggestion. Older lenses are relatively the best on my Monochrom1 for instance.

[Tailwagger]

12 hours ago, otto.f said:

Can’t agree more, I see this as a myth which has not been put to test either, as far as I know. 

According to Jono in his review of the original SL, Sean Reid was going to test M lenses on the SL. As I'm not a subscriber, I can't say what the results were. Perhaps others here are and can comment. Jono's words were "Results have been excellent, and compare well with those from My Leica M240."  That statement, to me, seems a little subdued and certainly does suggest that the lenses perform better on an SL.  After doing a brief search, (see here), I found another Jono statement...  "The cover glass is slightly thicker than the M240, and the performance of the 'problem' M lenses (28 'cron etc) is slightly less good than it is on the M - but a great deal better than it is on the Sony A7 cameras which have a much thicker cover glass, normal micro-lenses and no vignetting correction."  We also know that with the M10, the microlensing was improved further over the 240. Whether or not the differences are something to be concerned about are one thing, but calling it a myth goes too far the other way, IMO.

[dkmoore]

3 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

According to Jono in his review of the original SL, Sean Reid was going to test M lenses on the SL. As I'm not a subscriber, I can't say what the results were. Perhaps others here are and can comment. Jono's words were "Results have been excellent, and compare well with those from My Leica M240."  That statement, to me, seems a little subdued and certainly does suggest that the lenses perform better on an SL.  After doing a brief search, (see here), I found another Jono statement...  "The cover glass is slightly thicker than the M240, and the performance of the 'problem' M lenses (28 'cron etc) is slightly less good than it is on the M - but a great deal better than it is on the Sony A7 cameras which have a much thicker cover glass, normal micro-lenses and no vignetting correction."  We also know that with the M10, the microlensing was improved further over the 240. Whether or not the differences are something to be concerned about are one thing, but calling it a myth goes too far the other way, IMO.

I am a Reid subscriber and the performance was very close between M and SL with Leica lenses but the edge typically went to the M. That said, Sean Reid's test style is using test charts and in studio testing so I suspect in "real world" performance they are indecipherable. I recommend subscribing as there is TONS of great info if you are a gear nerd like me.

*one caveat - he regularly tests the mid-sized Leica lenses though (crons), Zeiss, and Voigtlander lenses as opposed to the larger siblings. 

I've been a subscriber for probably 4 years and enjoy/recommend the site.

[otto.f]

Sounds all like pixel peeping to me.

[IkarusJohn]

3 hours ago, dkmoore said:

I am a Reid subscriber and the performance was very close between M and SL with Leica lenses but the edge typically went to the M. That said, Sean Reid's test style is using test charts and in studio testing so I suspect in "real world" performance they are indecipherable. I recommend subscribing as there is TONS of great info if you are a gear nerd like me.

*one caveat - he regularly tests the mid-sized Leica lenses though (crons), Zeiss, and Voigtlander lenses as opposed to the larger siblings. 

I've been a subscriber for probably 4 years and enjoy/recommend the site.

Sean’s reviews come across as thorough and all the rest, but it’s largely pixel-peeping to my mind.  Perhaps I’m being harsh.

I resubscribed to read his X1D review, and found it marginal.  He’s only reviewed one XCD lens, the 45mm, and I’m not particularly interested in that.  He also seems to spend a lot of time reviewing Leica cameras with Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses, which I have no intention of buying.  A quick scan of his index, and he has reviewed 15 M lenses (in total), 3 SL lenses and one XCD lens - I don’t find this particularly helpful, I’m afraid.  

I accept that He can’t test everything, but when testing a Leica camera, I would prefer a test with Leica lenses - if I lived in Vermont, I’d lend him mine.

[PeterGA]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Reid has a lot of "BS baffles brains" going on - and is a long term spruiker of anything Zeiss - which is funny because he can't even focus them properly on his Nikons. Lost me completely when I read his review on the SL and all the 'problems' he had with the 24-90 - which no one else could replicate of course. Still if he makes some people happy nd more comfortable wit their equipment purchases - no harm no foul to add to comedy factor.

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, PeterGA said:

Reid has a lot of "BS baffles brains" going on - and is a long term spruiker of anything Zeiss - which is funny because he can't even focus them properly on his Nikons. Lost me completely when I read his review on the SL and all the 'problems' he had with the 24-90 - which no one else could replicate of course. Still if he makes some people happy nd more comfortable wit their equipment purchases - no harm no foul to add to comedy factor.

I think this is a very unfair assessment of a conscientious and fair reviewer. There is absolutely no justification for your bash.

I stopped my subscription because, like John, I found not sufficient matter of interest, but I never had cause to criticise the quality of his reviews.

[Jon Warwick]

4 hours ago, PeterGA said:

Reid has a lot of "BS baffles brains" going on - and is a long term spruiker of anything Zeiss - which is funny because he can't even focus them properly on his Nikons. Lost me completely when I read his review on the SL and all the 'problems' he had with the 24-90 - which no one else could replicate of course. Still if he makes some people happy nd more comfortable wit their equipment purchases - no harm no foul to add to comedy factor.

Looking through Reid Reviews, I'm struggling to find this discussion that you mention on the 24-90. He's done full reviews on the 50mm, 75mm and 90mm. Are we thinking about the same reviewer?

[Viv]

I would buy neither.

[mmradman]

26 minutes ago, Jon Warwick said:

Looking through Reid Reviews, I'm struggling to find this discussion that you mention on the 24-90. He's done full reviews on the 50mm, 75mm and 90mm. Are we thinking about the same reviewer?

Probably thinking of Digi Lloyd (Lloyd Chambers) who seem to find fault with almost any camera or lens and report instantly before figuring out how to use it correctly.

[jaapv]

25 minutes ago, mmradman said:

Probably thinking of Digi Lloyd (Lloyd Chambers) who seem to find fault with almost any camera or lens and report instantly before figuring out how to use it correctly.

Ah! - there is an explanation Lloyd slammed the original Monochrom because he found focus shift using a red filter 🧐. He made a big deal of "investigating further". Never saw the followup - he probably looked through a photography primer in the library for once.

[PeterGA]

My apologies to Mr Reid !! I was thinking of Llyod when I commented.

Pete

[dkmoore]

 

14 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Sean’s reviews come across as thorough and all the rest, but it’s largely pixel-peeping to my mind.  Perhaps I’m being harsh.

I resubscribed to read his X1D review, and found it marginal.  He’s only reviewed one XCD lens, the 45mm, and I’m not particularly interested in that.  He also seems to spend a lot of time reviewing Leica cameras with Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses, which I have no intention of buying.  A quick scan of his index, and he has reviewed 15 M lenses (in total), 3 SL lenses and one XCD lens - I don’t find this particularly helpful, I’m afraid.  

I accept that He can’t test everything, but when testing a Leica camera, I would prefer a test with Leica lenses - if I lived in Vermont, I’d lend him mine.

Valid point on two fronts for me:

1. I am not at all a pixel peeper but strangely I do appreciate the studio test and reviews from S. Reid (pixel peeping). I find the technical reviews interesting even though I care far more about the real world renderings.

2. For how long he has been reviewing I am surprised (now that you point it out) that their aren't more reviews up but I think he also spends a lot of time photographing judging by his articles.

Since I probably only peruse his site once every 3-6 months or so I can always find something interesting to read when bored. I have a similar habit with Luminous Landscapes. I don't frequent the site often but can always find something interesting to read. 

 

Back on topic: I am still an M user first and foremost. I can't see myself moving solely over to the SL2. I may buy one at some point just for the heck of it.

Edited November 2, 2019 by dkmoore

[PeterGA]

I'm having an internal debate about the actual 'relevance' of 35mm format to my shooting these days. I find myself preferring the CL or Fuji X systems for walk around and a GFX100 for studio/landscape - like you I may buy an SL2 at some stage 'just for the heck of it' or not...

[jcatral14]

On 10/25/2019 at 2:13 AM, W124 said:

I don't have the SL but using a A7sII beside the M10 because of the AF!

I'm not able to get my playing or running kids in focus with the rangefinder. 

For all other I take the M10.

What do you miss on your A7s2 that the SL has? I'm in the same situation, I am thinking of getting an SL but more because of the EVF and how much easier it is to focus.

[W124]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb jcatral14:

What do you miss on your A7s2 that the SL has? I'm in the same situation, I am thinking of getting an SL but more because of the EVF and how much easier it is to focus.

I miss an adapter which can use the ROM data in the R lenses, so hopefully the SL2 has IBIS and can use these data.

[jcatral14]

5 hours ago, W124 said:

I miss an adapter which can use the ROM data in the R lenses, so hopefully the SL2 has IBIS and can use these data.

When the SL2 comes out, I am sure the SL used prices will come down and I should be able to buy one at a great price.

 

Best,

 

jay

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[otto.f]

7 hours ago, jcatral14 said:

When the SL2 comes out, I am sure the SL used prices will come down and I should be able to buy one at a great price.

 

Best,

 

jay

Not from me then. If they come down even further I’d rather keep it. Look at all these members here that are still or again enthusiastic about the M8 or .2

[meerec]

17 minutes ago, otto.f said:

Not from me then. If they come down even further I’d rather keep it. Look at all these members here that are still or again enthusiastic about the M8 or .2

+1