Trading in an M10 for an SL2?

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, bags27 said:

By my rough calculations, including batteries, an M10 plus EVF is less than 5 ounces lighter than an SL2. When I have held them both simultaneously, I sensed that the SL2 is heavier, but not appreciatively so: both felt significantly heavier than my CL and Q, to the point of being "different interpretations" of the Leica "idea." 

The problem is not the body, but the humongous glass. Just look at the SL version of the 50mm Summilux

[bags27]

45 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

The problem is not the body, but the humongous glass. Just look at the SL version of the 50mm Summilux

right, but L autofocus glass is a choice, not a requirement. According to Sean Reid's newest (and Jono), the SL2 is maybe not quite as great with M glass as the camera it's designed for, but it's pretty close. 

[Mr.Q]

On 12/7/2019 at 7:01 AM, Tailwagger said:

When I first picked up the SL2 with native glass, I did wonder if I wasn't making a mistake buying one. I wasn't.  The body, isn't that heavy. In fact, the M with the RRS grip and EVF attached, its 1.8 pounds, the SL2 body is 2 pounds, so under 100g. In the end, the difference for me has not been noticeable. The big difference is in the weight of the glass, not the body.

My question is, why would you spoil the M10 with a EVF and RRS grip? The M10 is perfectly capable without those superfluous 'accessories' and much smaller/lighter without them too.

[bags27]

14 minutes ago, Mr.Q said:

My question is, why would you spoil the M10 with a EVF and RRS grip? The M10 is perfectly capable without those superfluous 'accessories' and much smaller/lighter without them too.

If they're superfluous, why does Leica produce them? After all, Leica's aesthetic posture is towards minimalism. 

[Jeff S]

15 minutes ago, bags27 said:

If they're superfluous, why does Leica produce them? After all, Leica's aesthetic posture is towards minimalism. 

Well, before the electronic version, they produced this...

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/File:VisoIII.jpg

RF for me.

Just because they make it, doesn’t mean it’s minimalist..

https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Technical-Equipment/Film-Advance/Leicavit-M

Jeff

Edited December 8, 2019 by Jeff S

[Mr.Q]

9 minutes ago, bags27 said:

If they're superfluous, why does Leica produce them? After all, Leica's aesthetic posture is towards minimalism. 

For one, Leica doesn't make the RRS plate. Second, he lists those accesorries as if they're a prerequisite to shoot with a M10. They're superfluous to many M users.

If he's trying to match the M10's grip and viewfinder experience to the SL, then he also needs to add the optional battery grip and an OVF to the hotshoe of the SL to match the battery life and optical viewfinder experience of the M10. Then compare the weight and size.

 

[bags27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

True about the RRS, but this is still begging the question. If someone believes the best way to focus the M accurately is with the EVF and the best way to hold the camera is with the grip, it's entirely his business. For him--and he was only speaking for himself--these optimized his use of the M. Tailwagger wrote: "In the end, the difference for me has not been noticeable." This thread is about personal decisions comparing/owning/using the two cameras, and he's explaining his own decision. No need to impose someone else's values.

[otto.f]

. 

Edited December 8, 2019 by otto.f

[Simone_DF]

18 hours ago, bags27 said:

right, but L autofocus glass is a choice, not a requirement. According to Sean Reid's newest (and Jono), the SL2 is maybe not quite as great with M glass as the camera it's designed for, but it's pretty close. 

Sure, but then why buy the SL? If all I want to use is adapted glass, other brands have lighter cameras and one of them seems to be working very well with M glass, while the other offers good results with non-wides and even autofocus for M lenses. 

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, Mr.Q said:

My question is, why would you spoil the M10 with a EVF and RRS grip? The M10 is perfectly capable without those superfluous 'accessories' and much smaller/lighter without them too.

Because many of us are not really invested in the rangefinder experience and buy M cameras only for the glass 🙂 

[james.liam]

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

Sure, but then why buy the SL? If all I want to use is adapted glass, other brands have lighter cameras and one of them seems to be working very well with M glass, while the other offers good results with non-wides and even autofocus for M lenses. 

Which one works well with M glass? The Nikon Z7?

[bags27]

7 minutes ago, james.liam said:

Which one works well with M glass? The Nikon Z7?

Sean Reid has done extensively testing and in his most recent report (on the Panny S1R) acknowledges that the Nikon Z probably has the thinnest glass of any non-Leica. He is a very careful writer, but it's easy to read between the lines: unless you have the sensor artificially thinned, such as by Kolari, for M lenses (especially at 50 mm and smaller) the SL2 is certainly the best non-M body alternative.

[Tailwagger]

4 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

My question is, why would you spoil the M10 with a EVF and RRS grip? The M10 is perfectly capable without those superfluous 'accessories' and much smaller/lighter without them too.

Because I could give a damn about spoiling your view on how an M10 has to be used.  I make images in my own way, and frankly, could care less about any conventional wisdom as to how an M10 should be used. If you don't use filters, do long exposures, are satisfied with sloppy framing,  never worry about slipping on a wet rock with a $7500 camera in your hand, shoot down to a 1/3" hand held or... gasp... transgress by putting an M on a tripod, all well and good. I do. And BTW, so do a lot of others given Leica has a supplied an EVF and RRS a grip for the M for over half a dozen years now.

[lucerne]

1 hour ago, Tailwagger said:

Because I could give a damn about spoiling your view on how an M10 has to be used.  I make images in my own way, and frankly, could care less about any conventional wisdom as to how an M10 should be used. If you don't use filters, do long exposures, are satisfied with sloppy framing,  never worry about slipping on a wet rock with a $7500 camera in your hand, shoot down to a 1/3" hand held or... gasp... transgress by putting an M on a tripod, all well and good. I do. And BTW, so do a lot of others given Leica has a supplied an EVF and RRS a grip for the M for over half a dozen years now.

Tailwagger

with respect, in order to understand the points you have made, I have read your post a few times and I feel that I might be in agreement with you.  However, two comments aren’t clear.  You say that “you could give a damn.....”. but maybe you mean that you couldn’t give a damn about how others use the kit.  That would also make sense but is that how you feel.    Additionally, you say “could care less about conventional wisdom..”   Might this be clearer if stated as “couldn’t care less about conventional wisdom...”.    If I’m right, Substituting both my suggestions might make your feelings clearer and I for one would agree with you.  
 

 

[bags27]

10 minutes ago, lucerne said:

Tailwagger

with respect, in order to understand the points you have made, I have read your post a few times and I feel that I might be in agreement with you.  However, two comments aren’t clear.  You say that “you could give a damn.....”. but maybe you mean that you couldn’t give a damn about how others use the kit.  That would also make sense but is that how you feel.    Additionally, you say “could care less about conventional wisdom..”   Might this be clearer if stated as “couldn’t care less about conventional wisdom...”.    If I’m right, Substituting both my suggestions might make your feelings clearer and I for one would agree with you.  
 

 

https://literarydevices.net/litotes/

Tailwagger is just too literate for the rest of us. 😀

[lucerne]

9 minutes ago, bags27 said:

https://literarydevices.net/litotes/

Tailwagger is just too literate for the rest of us. 😀

Maybe, 

so do we read his comments as positively “doesn’t give a damn“ ! and “couldn’t care less“.  ? That’s fine by me.

thanks.

Edited December 8, 2019 by lucerne

[bags27]

2 minutes ago, lucerne said:

Maybe, 

so do we read his comments as positively “doesn’t give a damn“ ! and “couldn’t care less“.  ? That’s fine by me.

thanks.

absolutely. Maybe it's just the way we New England colonists talk on this side of the pond....

[otto.f]

1 hour ago, lucerne said:

Tailwagger

with respect, in order to understand the points you have made, I have read your post a few times and I feel that I might be in agreement with you.  However, two comments aren’t clear.  You say that “you could give a damn.....”. but maybe you mean that you couldn’t give a damn about how others use the kit.  That would also make sense but is that how you feel.    Additionally, you say “could care less about conventional wisdom..”   Might this be clearer if stated as “couldn’t care less about conventional wisdom...”.    If I’m right, Substituting both my suggestions might make your feelings clearer and I for one would agree with you.  
 

 

Unless these are two Freudian slips indeed. I mean, why would you ever still be attached to a brand like Leica M if you could not care less about the conventional ways of photography. Don’t try to fool me

Edited December 8, 2019 by otto.f

[Einst_Stein]

On 12/5/2019 at 8:20 AM, sunil said:

Is anyone on this forum considering selling or trading in their M10 for an SL2? The thought has crossed my mind because my 60 year old eyes aren't what they used to be. However, every time I handle my M-10P, I banish the thought. I used to have an SL but found it too heavy, especially with the 24-90 tacked on. Just curious if anyone else has had this momentary lapse of reason. Yes, Pink Floyd all the way.

I traded M9 for SL and I can't be happier for the decision. 

No, SL/SL2 does not imply SL lenses.  SL + M lenses is not much different from M + EVF  M lenses.  In fact I feel SL is better than M + EVF.   SL2 should be even better. But you do lose the OVF range finder. Keep this in mind. 

When you are ready  for SL lenses, we can talk more about it. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Mr.Q]

7 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

Because I could give a damn about spoiling your view on how an M10 has to be used.  I make images in my own way, and frankly, could care less about any conventional wisdom as to how an M10 should be used. If you don't use filters, do long exposures, are satisfied with sloppy framing,  never worry about slipping on a wet rock with a $7500 camera in your hand, shoot down to a 1/3" hand held or... gasp... transgress by putting an M on a tripod, all well and good. I do. And BTW, so do a lot of others given Leica has a supplied an EVF and RRS a grip for the M for over half a dozen years now.

Fair enough but to elaborate on your point earlier regarding the weight of M10 vs SL2.
M10 - 660g
SL2 with M-Adaptor L -  981g
Difference - 321g
That's the minimum weight difference to take advantage of the lightweight M lenses. Nearly 50% which is massive.
We don't want people to be confused that those 2 cameras are anywhere close in real-world weight or size.