Switching from Canon DSLR to Leica M (M-E 240)?

[leicaalex]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone,

I found a similar thread that is about 2 years older - but I don‘t know if anybody still reads those old threads especially when they grow endlessly.

I would need some feedback on my foolish and probably expensive idea to switch over to a Leica M system (the new M-E Typ 240 or an M10 - the latter possibly used when the M11 comes out).

I‘ve used Canon SLRs as anthusiast / amateur / prosumer / hobbyist. I like photography and started out to document travel for which I ultimately bought a Canon 6D, a decent lens collection including a few L lenses. When the kids were born I still used the 6D, but increasingly less so. It was becoming too big and heavy to carry. I got interested in the Fujis, bought a used XT1 and some of the smaller primes and it became a joy to use. I was thinking of switching to Fuji entirely, but made a mistake: I took pictures with the 6D and the Fuji at my daughter‘s birthday. I can‘t say I don‘t like the pictures from the Fuji but I preferred the Canon pictures overall. It‘s not the image quality, it‘s rather the ominous “full frame look“. I‘m talking about the RAW files unedited and no JPEGs.

I was then looking for the EOS R but I‘m not really sold on it. It‘s not about video or dual card slots. It‘s just that when I look at the lenses: I won‘t save any space and or weight at all. I doubt I would take it anywhere. The RP is smaller but it‘s the same with lenses.

I‘ve tried Leica film bodies. It took a while to get used to it but it‘s great. I love the tiny size of the lenses. I‘ve got a Summicron 50 pre ASPH V3 and a Summilux 35 pre ASPH. Also I love the pictures. The problem with the film is: it‘s just a hobby and not as flexible as digital. For shots that count, I rely on digital especially for flash use. 

Over Christmas I was thinking of radically reducing and streamlining my gear. 

The big advantage of getting rid of my Canon gear would be I could easily pack a film M and a digital M in a Hadley small bag and add some additional accessories such as another lens, flash or filter. 

For the Leica option I would ultimately buy one more wide angle prime (most likely 21mm and an additional finder). I‘ve got a screwmount Elmar 90 that could do for some tele shots. Maybe I‘ll go for a 135mm . I do know about the problems focussing with a rangefinder but I think that with the help of a 1.4 viewfinder magnifier and focus peaking on digital it should be possible to pull in on some landscapes while traveling. 

I do like using Lee 100 graduated ND filters on an SLR but again, to me, it looks like you can manage with live view or an EVF on a digital M - side effect: I could also downsize in terms of size and weight to a Seven5 system. 

Biggest disadvantage I would lose autofocus and high ISO Performance but I believe I have learned zone focussing and most Christmas pictures indoors with were at ISO 3200 or 6400 when shot without flash and a 1.4 Canon lens stopped down slightly to see where I was going.

Before I jump the Canon ship entirely - am I missing out on something? 

[biswasg]

19 minutes ago, leicaalex said:

I would need some feedback on my foolish and probably expensive idea to switch over to a Leica M system (the new M-E Typ 240 or an M10 - the latter possibly used when the M11 comes out).

The big advantage of getting rid of my Canon gear would be I could easily pack a film M and a digital M in a Hadley small bag and add some additional accessories such as another lens, flash or filter. 

Before I jump the Canon ship entirely - am I missing out on something? 

 

Autofocus!

Hello Alex, As I have gone through a somewhat similar situation, sharing my thoughts here. Like you, I too am an amateur photo enthusiast and have been using Canon SLR and DSLRs for the last 40 years. Presently, I have the Canon 1Dx. Some 7-8years ago, I bought a second hand M8 and have since been wedded to the Leica digital M and currently own the M10. It is an exceptional system and the quality of images are excellent for candid, landscapes and stationary portraits. The Canon was exclusively for wildlife photography with tele lenses. However, since my twin grandkids became toddlers this year, the M fell short in rapid focusing, rather I fell short in rapid manual focusing the now rapidly mobile grand kids and I had to fall back on my Canon gear. I am now contemplating on getting the SL2 mainly for its autofocus and Leica SL lenses. 

[jaeger]

Leica M is fun to shoot and addictive to shoot, IMO.  M gives you rewards that I don't know how to put them in words...   I hated it so much I wanted to sell them all but eventually I kept them.   Afterall, I think everything is different shooting M vs Canon.  Coming from a Canon, it's probably best to keep both for a year or two before complete switch.  M has many limitations.  Your whole world has slowing down with M...  For example, the EVF takes about 1 second per shot.  Aftermarket accessory is very limited too.  Ah forget tele or zoom lenses (some members here will jump me saying that), but I still say keep below 75mm.  I only use M for travel and causal shootings.  For work, studio work is fine too because it's somewhat compatible with studio strobes made for Nikon. 

Zone focusing is easy even in Canon, what makes you think Leica is better?

 

[otto.f]

2 hours ago, leicaalex said:

am I missing out on something?

That depends on the subjects you mostly choose. In my view - I never had AF - the domains where you need AF are quite clear and circumscript: sports and safari. I never needed it for my children in any case. Don’t forget that manual focusing with the M is complemented by moving your head in the same direction of the subject if it moves. For finetuning this is faster than using the focus ring or knob. 
In your case, I wouldn’t step over cold turkey from DSLR to rangefinder. Unless there is no other financial possibility I would keep my DSLR at least for a while. Perhaps you don’t need a film M directly, digital gives you a better learning process by immediate feedback.

Edited December 31, 2019 by otto.f

[leicaalex]

Thanks everyone! I appreciate the feedback and the warnings.

Yes, of course, autofocus is the question that I‘ve been thinking about. Will I miss it?

For landscapes? No. For people photography especially kids? I don‘t think so. Let me explain: when I used the XT1 last year I discovered that Fuji provided eye af via a firmware update and it did work in continuous mode. It wasn‘t too fast and missed but the keeper rate of shooting my kids at open apertures was excellent. With the 6D you had to focus and recompose. All the AF points are organized in the centre if the viewfinder. The most accurate point to use was the one in the very centre. I did try zone focussing and tried hyperfocal distances but reading that tiny scale window on EF lenses is just a pain. RF lenses don‘t have any markings for depth of field on their lenses. When the EOS R came out and it had no eye AF in continuous autocus mode (named Servo AF) I was totally taken aback. The lenses also look huge.

I do have a film Canon with proper depth of field markings and using those it is no pain to zone focus and capture my kids running even indoors - provided there is enough light and the film is fast enough (which is not always the case; I don‘t like pushing film too much and I do like shooting colour - not always great in tungsten light). 

The M-E (240) tops out at ISO 6400 - the 6D is usable up until ISO 12800 - at least in my opinion and for my purposes. The idea is: if you can shoot a digital camera at around ISO 3200 it should be enough to get usable images. The M-E (240) could just tick the boxes. 

Yet, I‘m still not too sure if it‘s the right decision. When contemplating a possible switch to Fuji I was skeptical because everyone was talking about the advantages. And I was right. 

When I look at my film photos taken on the film M I don‘t have a similar feeling. It is fun. I like to carry the film M.

Though I don‘t really know if I‘m more relaxed about the M because I know I just use it for fun. 

[lct]

I would not count on clean 6400 iso if you choose an M240. 3200 iso will be the limit provided you don't underexpose too much. As for manual focus with kids there is a learning curve so my advice would be to keep an AF body for a couple of months and see what happens.

[ravinj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Don't underestimate the convenience of L zoom lenses or the responsiveness of the 6D. If you don't use zoom lenses and your most used focal lengths are at 50mm or below, go for a used M240 if initial spend is a concern. Prices for used M240s are already down a lot and if it doesn't work out, you can sell with minimal loss. I would do that rather than going to M10 first.

I had the 6D and loved it - some of my favorite shots so far are with the 6D + 100-400II. Nailing shot after shot with perfect exposure, great colors and accurate AF is what impressed me here. Not to mention the mind-boggling optical stabilization - getting sharp results hand-held at 400mm and 1/30 is no joke and freedom from tripod allowed a lot of flexibility.

I agree with comment on ISO above. IMHO even ISO 3200 on M240 is very optimistic. I stick to ISO 1600 as the max. OTOH, unless you need faster shutter speeds to freeze subjects, handholding below the traditional 1/f "rule" is very much possible with the M. I can get solid results at 35mm and 1/24. 

And yes, shooting with the M is a lot of fun.

Edited January 1, 2020 by ravinj

[Ko.Fe.]

If you used RF before it doesn’t matter. I started with RF, then growing as photog with Canon DSLRs and then got RF.

But I see plenty of threads “how to enjoy M”. Reading them shows same thing; people are not able to use RF or not willing to learn how to use it.

My Canons are technologically superior to any Leica M,  but Leicas gets most of the use

[Frase]

I had a 6d a good few years ago as a third body for work and as you say all the focus points are very central, using back button focus can speed up the 6d a bit as its quicker to focus then shift. I still have my M9 that I use when not at work its great for weekends and holidays and with that I've always used a DSLR was a Df now a d810 which I think is great and so much better value than anything from Leica. But its so easy just to carry around an M body and thats why I would always hold onto my M9 and my M4. If you want a bit of a change why not try a Canon 5dmk3 which can be had quite cheap and they are quite a big jump from the 6d you could pair that with a 40mm pancake.

Good luck.

[Richardgb]

If you get an M and then start adding lenses etc the weight will start adding up to a dSLR with a zoom and lose the convenience of a zoom. You'll be changing lenses more, so expect to clean the sensor more often.

The M is fine within its range of lenses, say 28-75mm. Accessory viewfinders for wider lenses give an approximation to the scene and you'll have to switch to the main viewfinder to use the rangefinder. An EVF occupies the accessory shoe, so you can't use flash at the same time; focusing with the EVF gets greatest accuracy with the lens wide open.

As an economic consideration, you might also think of how any M will be, say, 5 years from now. Mechanically fine but by then the sensor technology will have moved on (it's already about 6 years old). It's the mechanics which in large part determine the cost, but the electronics which determine the longevity. (This has been aired in other parts of the Forum).

[MaticB]

Four years ago I switch from Nikon (D4, 11 prime lenses from 16mm to 300mm, all wide aperture). I never regret, though. By some switch I finally finished with just 2 lenses Summiluxes 50 and 28.  Forget about zoom lens, tele lens, autofocus, high ISO (hand-held photography is easy with Ms)... anyway, what you get is emotional photos, and not some icy, sharp, uninspiring plastic shots. 

Matic

[jaeger]

1 hour ago, MaticB said:

Four years ago I switch from Nikon (D4, 11 prime lenses from 16mm to 300mm, all wide aperture). I never regret, though. By some switch I finally finished with just 2 lenses Summiluxes 50 and 28.  Forget about zoom lens, tele lens, autofocus, high ISO (hand-held photography is easy with Ms)... anyway, what you get is emotional photos, and not some icy, sharp, uninspiring plastic shots. 

Matic

Did all the Nikon gears enough to fund your Leica?  lol

I can't live with M only, some models and event-works are moving too fast for rangefinder.  Concert and party works are too dark that I need high ISO to help.  I don't do sports "yet" but it's even more demanding for speed.  Are you shooting for leisure only?

[MaticB]

Leisure only! 😊