Would you buy an M10 or an SL? Why?

[willeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I believe that Sean was referring to all 40 Mp + cameras from various manufacturers, but he made it clear that he could not confirm the situation as regards the SL2 as he was bound to confidentiality. The most significant differences between the M series and the L series relate to physical characteristics and handling. Sean was adamant, though, that M lenses work best on M cameras which seems logical enough. I assume that this relates to the micro lens situation and also personal observation. It certainly confirms my own experience.

William

[jrp]

I had / have the M9 and M240, but once I had the SL, I saw no need to go the M10, even though the sensor may be slightly better than the SL's.  It may be because I wear glasses (ey glasses in American) and so don't find rangefinder focusing ideal, or it may be because I like precise framing, but I found the rangefinders a struggle and the SL a joy.  But these days the IBIS of the Panasonic cameras is a feature that extends the usability envelope one stage further, at the expense of not being able to read the M lens type for the photo metadata. The SL lenses are much heavier than the M lenses and they have electronic components, which means that they won't last like the manual Ms, but they are as close to perfection as you can get.

[Stuart Richardson]

Diffraction is a real concern in high resolution cameras, but I think perhaps it is not a huge concern unless you want to extract every last iota of resolution. As far as I understand it, diffraction is the same regardless of the sensor, it is more about the maximum potential resolution...so in a worst case scenario, you basically wind up even (though more MP can mean more tonality, while larger pixels can mean less noise). Either way, M and SL lenses are well positioned against diffraction, as they tend to reach their best IQ around 5.6, while on 47mp diffraction will not likely start to be bothersome until f/13 or so...

[budjames]

I own both the M10 and SL. I do love the EVF on the SL, however, my everyday travel camera is the M10 with a Summicron or Summilux 35mm mounted.

Regards,
Bud James

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography or on Instagram at www.instagram.com/budjamesphoto.

[SiggiGun]

Am 22.10.2019 um 19:34 schrieb Raid Amin:

Hi All,

 

I am looking for users based facts on why buying an SL may be a better choice than getting an M10 if you will mainly use M lenses. 

Hi

I have an M10 and SL. I use M lenses on the SL. I love booth cameras but the usage is very different. SL is pretty good for M Lenses opening f1.4 our less (Noctlux) and all tele lenses especialy Apo-Summicron 75, Summilux 75 and Apo-Telyt 135.  Note alson that the new SL2 is introduced next week. The SL is a good camera but, depending what your photographic target is It may be interessing to wait and see.

 

[Raid Amin]

The selling of SL2 cameras may result in a drop of SL market value. I need to be patient.

[sillbeers15]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No. Sold off my SL 3 months ago in anticipation of SL2 launch. Now I’m waiting for delivery of my SL2 on 21st Nov, just before Christmas 🎄.

[jaapv]

On 10/22/2019 at 7:34 PM, Raid Amin said:

Hi All,

 

I am looking for users based facts on why buying an SL may be a better choice than getting an M10 if you will mainly use M lenses. 

I would (and did) buy neither. I find the CL far more practical than the hugeous SL (not to mention the lenses), the image quality is exceedingly close, and it costs far less. My M needs are perfectly covered by the M9, MM1 and M6 Classic, so the M10 offers me no advantage.

[Raid Amin]

I have the M9 and M6 Classic but not an  MM1.

[Mr.Q]

In the past 4 years I've gone rounds with the M9-P, M10, M10-P, SL (twice), X1D and X1D II. Last year, I completely sold off my rangefinders because, as much as I love shooting with them, I realized that my keeper rate was significantly higher with an EVF. I had much better success at focusing, exposing and framing with the X1D.  Not to mention the superior IQ of medium format. I also repurchased the SL (the first time I made the mistake of buying the enormous SL lenses) to adapt a lot of the M lenses that I kept, but rarely take it out because the results I get from the Hassy are so much better.... I pre-ordered the SL2 to give Leica one last go, but if it doesn't work out I plan to sell off the rest of my M lenses as well.

[oudjunk]

I have owned the SL for 2 times.

Leica SL is my first full frame leica camera (I used APSC leica T before) in that time, I was really happy with the result and how easy to use of Leica SL.

The EVF is fantastic, the IQ is stunning, and the grip is easy to hold for me. But i just wanted to try the M camera because while i used Leica SL

most of my lenses were m lenses (only SL lens 50 f1.4) and I was happy with the m lens on my leica SL.

so i sold my SL to M10. 

in the first time that i used M10 i was quite unhappy with it. because i could focus only center that i was bored about my pictures. 

I decided to sell my M10 to SL again. Until i could find the way to shoot and focus and i decided to sell SL to M10   

I changed SL to M10 

and M10 to SL. and Now I'm using M10. 

IMO 

SL (Pros: Sharper, with high contrast, good rendering, stunning evf and grip  Con: people always look at my camera (Not discreet), Big size)

M10 (Pros: Discreet, small size, good rendering, feel warmer that make some picture look more dreamy than my SL Con: Hard to focus in low light, small but heavy, No GPS, No video, Not beautiful screen when compare with SL screen) 

 

However, both of these camera are good.   

[Raid Amin]

oudjunk: your posting above does not make it any easier for me to decide which camera to get, or even to listen to jaapv and get a CL!

I need to consider the cameras that I already own and to also think of where and when I would actually want to use my "new camera" given that one camera is larger and heavier (with EVF) while the second camera is smaller and uses a RF.

 

 

[otto.f]

You can also turn the question around: how many camera’s do I need to get paralyzed enough to not make any photo’s anymore. If you’re not at that point yet, you might know better what you’re missing. (Just rephrasing Jeff’s contributions here).

Edited October 31, 2019 by otto.f

[Jeff S]

17 minutes ago, Raid Amin said:

I need to consider the cameras that I already own and to also think of where and when I would actually want to use my "new camera" given that one camera is larger and heavier (with EVF) while the second camera is smaller and uses a RF.

 

 

Or, in other words, find your purpose(s), i.e., your goals/objectives for camera use. Bingo.

Jeff

[Fedro]

indeed variety induced paralysis is a possibility. I would stick with M if I was you, you have film, M9 which you could swap for an M10 or keep and add a monochrome. Doubt you will need more than this. SL is great, but you have to be prepared to bear the pain of its heft, + lenses to get the maximum out of it. The EVF is awesome, and I am sure the new one will be even better, if you want to use it with M lenses, but M lenses render better with M cameras. So unless you are prepared to pick up SL + one or some of the zooms, I would stick with M

Edited October 31, 2019 by Fedro

[otto.f]

7 minutes ago, Fedro said:

prepared to pick up SL

That’s what it’s all about and that is what the main evaluation is of all the people here that have had it or still have it. On the shelf. But maybe you’re one of the people, like me, that have to learn from experience

Edited October 31, 2019 by otto.f

[Tailwagger]

If you truly " will mainly use M lenses", there's no decision, you buy an SL as an M will never mount a piece of L-glass. Mainly implies to me, that you're on the cusp of wanting AF, have fallen in love with the new Summicrons or simply have reached a point where the added capabilities of a more modern camera outweigh the simplicity of an M.  For an M shooter, the SL is attractive as it reasonable accommodates the past and provides a bridge to the future. The M10, OTOH, represents an evolution of the breed, with the possibility of adding some of the advantages of mirrorless, while preserving the familiar.  If a motivating factor is focus accuracy,  a desire for more accurate framing or just wysiwyg from an exposure POV, either would suffice assuming you can come to terms with the M10's add-on EVF. 

As an M240 owner, I debated long and hard over adding an SL, but opted for the M10 as in the end.  From a final image standpoint and given all the $$$ invested in Summiluxes and the like, I detested the notion of attaching my glass to anything other than the best possible option. Three years later, I've softened as circumstance has changed. I now look to the SL(2) as the best body available for allowing me to leverage my current M-glass, while at the same time affording me access to several equally impressive optics.  More importantly it provides a gentler way to prepare for the day when I am no longer able to reliably focus an RF. If these and other such issues are not a concern, I'd buy the M10, but if they are, an SL is really the only option. 

[Fedro]

6 hours ago, otto.f said:

That’s what it’s all about and that is what the main evaluation is of all the people here that have had it or still have it. On the shelf. But maybe you’re one of the people, like me, that have to learn from experience

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

[vikasmg]

On 10/23/2019 at 1:34 AM, Raid Amin said:

Hi All,

 

I am looking for users based facts on why buying an SL may be a better choice than getting an M10 if you will mainly use M lenses. 

Notwithstanding doubters, the M10 is a real pleasure to use and the size and weight are much more user friendly for me.  If anything I could do with a M with the weight of a Leica CL.  Nonetheless, having used M lenses on a Leica SL, I have to say that I found using them with the SL ELV very easy, specially non-wide angle lenses at larger apertures.  

It looks like there is a slightly more compact (and lighter) SL on the way with a higher resolution sensor and a higher resolution EVF so it might be worth waiting for - though it could be a long wait.

However, as someone else has said in this thread, Sean Reid points out that the image quality with M lenses on a M10 is better than on an SL even if the difference is not vast and whether the higher resolution sensor improves this or make it worse is unknown.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[IkarusJohn]

Well, here's another point of view - I have had 6 M cameras, an SL, 2 TL (okay, a T & a TL2) and an X1D II.  I currently have, and use, an M-A, Monochrom, M10-D (8 M lenses), TL2 (2 TL lenses), X1D II (2 XCD lenses) and SWC; and a bit of an over commitment issue, but it's fun, isn't it?  I'm sure you appreciate that each has a different strength and different purpose.

I would say that, as you have an M8 & M9, image quality isn't really relevant, unless you're interested in pixel peeping.  Composition, exposure and accurate focus is more relevant to the quality of your images, and either an M10 or an SL will be superb.  You already understand the Leica paradigm, and each of these cameras is fantastic - image quality won't be an issue.  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.

The real question, to me, is which camera do you prefer?  The M10 is the best M digital to date, but it is an M.  The EVF is okay, but really the camera is nicer without.  The SL is fantastic with M lenses, and is weather sealed (the M lenses aren't).  But, it is a whole other ball game - video, highly electronic, none of the minimalistic manual nature that makes the M10 so special.  If you get an SL, then logic would suggest that you add a fabulous SL lens ... a 75 Summincron-SL or a 50 or 28 Summicron (when it's released).  They're special.

Or, you're happy with the M cameras and lenses (your images won't let you down) - sell the M8 & M9, and get an M10-P and hold out for the new Monochrom (it will be expensive and very special).  Neither M10 or SL is a bad choice, but if you get an SL only for your M lenses, I'm not sure what you're gaining without adding a couple of SL primes, or one of the very good zooms.

This is supposed to be fun ...

Edited November 1, 2019 by IkarusJohn