Leica dilemma

[biswasg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am having a dilemma in choosing the alternate to my current M10. 

A little background- I am a non-professional serious amateur photographic enthusiast with varied interest shooting candid, street, travel and wildlife. For the last 40 years, I have used Canon equipment with the current camera being Canon EOS 1Dx. However, in the last 10 years have been using a digital M starting from M8 moving to my current M10, which is my go to camera and the Canon for special situations like wildlife and when I have to photograph my 18 month old twin grandkids. I had tried my hand at having a micro 4/3rd in the form of Olympus OM-D EM1.ii., but not convinced with the small sensor size. I still have the Olympus, but rarely use it.

However, I now struggle with manual rangefinder focusing on the M10, almost impossible to photograph my grandkids. I wish to now move to a autofocus Leica. The first obvious choice is the new SL2. Recognising the fact that the AF of SL2 will not be as good as the Canon 1Dx, am hoping it will be good enough to photograph toddlers, However, it cannot be my all the time carry camera because of size and weight, for which I am wondering if the CL could be one replacing the M10 and the Olympus OM-D EM1.ii. I would hate to let the M10 go, but that maybe the only way to finance a SL2 and CL. The fixed focal length Q2 is not my taste. The big Canon equipment can then be for only wildlife.

Does this approach make sense  or is the CL2 redundant?

Is a CL2 on the horizon, possibly with IBIS and better AF?

Apologies for the long post.

Gautam

Edited November 17, 2019 by biswasg

[ajmarton1]

I have a very similar photography background.  I have the M10P and a variety of film Leicas and lux lenses. I struggle at times with the M10 although my primary use of it for street photography is pretty solid.   I then have the Nikon D850 with zooms for wildlife.  I had the SL but sold it in anticipation of the SL2. But AF performance, size and weight remain a concern and I wanted to see it in the flesh.  I do need AF for action or challenging situations and also had the Q but sold it as well as I wanted more flexibility. I recently purchased the Nikon Z7 and I am very happy with it.  It is just the right size. But I still plan to check out the SL2. Andrew

[johnbuckley]

In 2016, I bought an SL to augment my M System. I have forsworn buying a Q, a CL or any other camera. I go back and forth between the two systems, occasionally traveling with both but usually choosing one over the other.

I can’t address the issues you may be having with focusing your M. So far, I think my M focusing is almost as fast and reliable as my SL with its autofocus. I can say, though, that between an SL and an M10, I feel like I have a modular system where I can choose the right camera and lens for the right situation. If it is possible for you to keep the M, and sell what you need to buy the SL2, you can use the M lenses with the SL, and have a helluva double system.

[Dr. G]

4 hours ago, Ian Brown said:

I have owned the SL, M10 and Q2 but all three came with their own challenges for me personally. 

SL

To do this camera justice you really need Leica AF lenses and for me the cost was prehibative. I used Coa on with the adaptor and some M lenses. 

Q2

Excellent as a weekend/vacation camera as I found the 28mm too restrictive, image quality top notch but it couldn't replace my versatile kit. 

M10

Again very nice camera, but it takes a lot of getting used to. The issue for me was the rangefinder focusing and of course the cost of lenses. I did try the evf but felt I was making too many compromises for the red dot. 

I now have the Sony a7r IV and some primes along with the 100-400, this is a versatile set up with stunning IQ. But it's no Leica. But I do have a CL to stop my lust fora red dot. 

I would think long and hard before you jump into the Leica world, they are sought after cameras and give you a great feel good factor and also make you a more considered approach, but the cost of glass needs to be taken into account. 

 

Good luck with your decision

I also have the a7r iv and am going to try the SL2.  With the Sony I pretty much use the Sigma 35 1.2 and the Zeiss Sony 50 1.4 ZA.  With the SL2 I am probably sticking with 50.  I have had the Lux-SL in the past and loved the images I was getting from it.  This time around the 50 APO Cron has been recommended by more than a few people.  I know I'm giving up some low light performance, but hopefully the IBIS and better sensor in the SL2 will help.

To the OP, I don't think you can go wrong with the SL2 and one of the native lenses to start.  If the EVF is as good as I've heard (apparently it's the same as in the a7r iv) you will be very happy.

[biswasg]

18 minutes ago, Dr. G said:

To the OP, I don't think you can go wrong with the SL2 and one of the native lenses to start.  If the EVF is as good as I've heard (apparently it's the same as in the a7r iv) you will be very happy.

Thanks to all the inputs, which have been very useful. I am quite sold on to the SL2 with its specs and the early reviews. And as soon as I am able to generate some funds by selling some of my current equipment (other than the M10) to offset the cost (at least partially), I will order the SL2. By that time the production version and additional reviews would be coming in and I can see one in flesh at the local dealer. 

Once I have an SL2 in hand, will decide whether to keep the M10 also or replace it with a smaller Leica CL-maybe wait till the newer version with a possible IBIS is launched. 

Now I am following another thread on the first SL lens to buy and which of my current M lenses (28 elmarit, 35 Cron, 50 Lux and 90 Cron) to keep?

Edited November 21, 2019 by biswasg

[sillbeers15]

Leica M10 has the latest digital hardware minus AF. I call it the ‘old world’ camera as it captures my ‘old ways of taking pictures’ , very satisfied to my soul but exhausting to capture good pictures as the world has moved on to AF. I like to describe it to driving a classic car. Newer cars are easier  to drive but classic cars are so full of character. So best is to keep both and toggle in between on different occasions.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would advise to get just the standard zoom on the SL2 plus an M adapter. And hang on to the M lenses-you’d regret selling them. 

[thighslapper]

1. The SL plus the appropriate AF lenses is heavy and from what you say I doubt you will tolerate carrying it about all the time with the 24-90 zoom if weight is an issue. 

2. The CL has good AF for static subjects, is very compact and portable, gives super images and both it and the lenses are in the affordable range. 

3. Not much is going to reliably catch toddlers and moving targets except a Sony. Leica has no AF lenses long enough for wildlife, although there are plenty of L mount adapted manual alternatives. 

So ...... you are either going to end up with several systems with little inter-compatibility, or you accept some compromised functionality and just stick with one brand.

I had the same problem and liquidated all my M gear except a few exotic lenses and went for CL + SL (now CL + S1R /SL2) and gradually accumulated TL and SL lenses. That gives me one big and heavy FF system and a light compact APS-C one with interchangeable lenses. With Panasonic in the game you have an affordable and reasonably light 70-200 with 1.4 and 2x teleconverters which will get you stabilised up to 400mm on an SL/SL2 and 600mm (no OIS ?) on the CL . More options are on the horizon. I'll live with having to machine gun photo toddlers to get a few in focus images for the sake of simplicity and compatibility.

Edited November 22, 2019 by thighslapper

[sillbeers15]

9 hours ago, jaapv said:

I would advise to get just the standard zoom on the SL2 plus an M adapter. And hang on to the M lenses-you’d regret selling them. 

I am happy to keep my M lenses to my M body.

Only using M lenses on SL/SL2 do not reveal the real potential of the SL/2. I do not mean just AF but profile correction on the SL native lenses’ optical excellence.

[mikelevitt]

On 11/17/2019 at 8:26 AM, biswasg said:

I am having a dilemma in choosing the alternate to my current M10. 

A little background- I am a non-professional serious amateur photographic enthusiast with varied interest shooting candid, street, travel and wildlife. For the last 40 years, I have used Canon equipment with the current camera being Canon EOS 1Dx. However, in the last 10 years have been using a digital M starting from M8 moving to my current M10, which is my go to camera and the Canon for special situations like wildlife and when I have to photograph my 18 month old twin grandkids. I had tried my hand at having a micro 4/3rd in the form of Olympus OM-D EM1.ii., but not convinced with the small sensor size. I still have the Olympus, but rarely use it.

However, I now struggle with manual rangefinder focusing on the M10, almost impossible to photograph my grandkids. I wish to now move to a autofocus Leica. The first obvious choice is the new SL2. Recognising the fact that the AF of SL2 will not be as good as the Canon 1Dx, am hoping it will be good enough to photograph toddlers, However, it cannot be my all the time carry camera because of size and weight, for which I am wondering if the CL could be one replacing the M10 and the Olympus OM-D EM1.ii. I would hate to let the M10 go, but that maybe the only way to finance a SL2 and CL. The fixed focal length Q2 is not my taste. The big Canon equipment can then be for only wildlife.

Does this approach make sense  or is the CL2 redundant?

Is a CL2 on the horizon, possibly with IBIS and better AF?

Apologies for the long post.

Gautam

I shoot Canon professionally, and Leica M for fun.  I also own the complete Olympus M 4/3 system and pretty much every one of their lenses.  I use that when I need something smaller, a tiny 600mm equivalent, or as a platform to shoot old Nikon glass.

I see that you've decided on the SL2.  I spent a day shooting the SL2 and loved it.  Best EVF I've shot and I have shot all of them.  But the SL2 isn't really much smaller than your 1DX and the Leica lenses are significantly heavier and slower than the equivalent Canons.  And if you add the vertical grip they are almost the same size.  You are going to end up with a kit that is just as big as your canon kit, and with much, much inferior AF.  

If you want a system that is tiny, easy to carry, has excellent, fast AF, a wide range of really excellent lenses, amazing IBIS and dust removal, and doesn't cost very much, I would highly recommend the Olympus.  I bought into that system for the size and portability, and have discovered the fact that it will shoot 60FPS, and the rest of the amazing things about it.  It's completely programmable and has a huge detailed menu, to the point you can pretty much have any button do anything.  The eye focus is amazing as well.  

It is NOT a Leica, but I think it would be great for fast moving kids, and definitely an inexpensive alternative compared to an SL2.  

[Jk1002]

I do not like it that much but when I need super fast autofocus i have  RX100 v6 in auto or scene mode and that works great. I can charge via usb micro and it doesnt take up much space next to my m in the bag.

I choose this over the CL because since I had already the M I felt the RX100 would provide better coverage where the M struggles. 

i am still lusting for a CL though ..

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, sillbeers15 said:

I am happy to keep my M lenses to my M body.

Only using M lenses on SL/SL2 do not reveal the real potential of the SL/2. I do not mean just AF but profile correction on the SL native lenses’ optical excellence.

I'm not advocating to sell the M10. I'm advising to make full use of the flexibility of the Leica system. The L mount is in the centre, allowing full use of L, M.TL, LTM and R lenses without loss of quality. What other manufacturer offers such compatibility?