M10 & SL2 owners: When do you decide to use the SL2 over the M?

[yggdra.omega]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I originally bought the SL2 to add IBIS and higher resolution to my M lenses, but I have found over the past 7 months I have used my SL2 with M lenses probably 3 or 4 times for my photo walks. I sold my only SL lens, a SL50 lux, a few months ago as it was just too heavy and cumbersome for my tastes, and I haven't picked up another SL lens since.

I'm currently waiting for the opportunity to purchase an M10-R to go alongside my M10-P, and I'm trying to figure out if I will regret selling the SL2 body, and under what situations I might want to bring the SL2 out in the future and if I want to purchase another SL lens instead of another M lens.

I recognize this is a question of whether I prefer autofocus/manual, EVF/OVF, etc., but I'm just curious as to your feedback as to what situations or settings you would bring a mirrorless camera vs the M.

[lohthx1r]

I have an M10 and I seldom use it after I acquire SL2. The very reason is the SL2 superb EVF. It is much more practical for my use case in wide variety of situation, e.g low-light and no vertical line. I also own the visoflex on the M10 but the EVF quality is sub-par and it is too slow to take a picture with live view. Also my eyes is not getting any better for a rangefinder M10.

[T25UFO]

Interesting question.  I made the change to SL (not 2) a couple years ago but went back to the M after trying the M10.  Looking back, some of my best photos were taken with the SL 50 Summilux but I didn’t enjoy using it.  Maybe I should have persevered.

Eventually sold the whole kit and am now a happy user of an M10-D and M10-Mono. Sometimes I get frustrated missing precise focus with my 50mm Summilux M at f1.4 but the fault is mine and not the camera.  I also have a Q2 for auto focus and higher resolution.

The Q2 has opened up a different approach to photography - cropping has replaced the ubiquitous zoom lens.  In fact, a combination of Q2 for colour and M10-Mono for B&W is pretty effective.  A 35mm Summilux on the Mono becomes a 35-70 zoom with no loss of detail.

I don’t find M and SL either interchangeable or even comparable.  They both take photos and that’s it.

[Jeff S]

M lenses (28/35/50) stay on my M10 and M Monochrom.  My SL2 is for native SL lenses (24-90, 90-280 and 75, the latter because I don’t like M 75 frame lines).  Different tools and different experiences for different situations.  Complementary, which is precisely why I added the SL2 to my existing M kit.  
 

Jeff

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Like Jeff, I consider them to be complementary. The SL is when I need the speed the system offers. The M is for the enjoyment of the photographic process.

Unless it's for a client, does it matter if we're getting 10 perfectly sharp and exposed shots per second? For me, shooting is as much about the process as the results. If you like the M then that's the right camera.

Gordon

[scroy]

I use the SL2 when I absolutely need the best resolution, need to crop, and in bad weather.  The M10 for enjoyment and exploration.  But they are very complementary and completely different shooting experiences.

[Jon Warwick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, scroy said:

I use the SL2 when I absolutely need the best resolution, need to crop, and in bad weather.  The M10 for enjoyment and exploration.  But they are very complementary and completely different shooting experiences.

That is a nice summary that I can also relate to in terms of M vs SL2 being complementary. 

IMHO, though, after playing with some sample DNGs on the internet taken with the new M10R, I am happier to stick with the SL2 given I think its image quality is higher despite the now similar resolution ....to my eyes at least, the rendering from the SL2 with the SL Summicron primes seems more precise, with less smearing and more feeling of depth from microcontrast .....a bit like going up a format size in film. I think it’s confirmed to me that the M range is wonderful in terms of size / use, but the physics of a larger SL lens do seem to benefit the final image quality, especially with the peerless SL Summicrons.

[tom0511]

I use the SL2 much more these days.

Overall I like the M10 when I have more time available (vacation for example) and if I plan to shoot in the 21-50mm focal length range and it s not about action/ moving subjects.

For anything longer I prefer the SL2 and AF.

So for me it is SL2:

+ much more flexible focal length range

+ faster and more precis to focus focal length > 75mm, better for anything moving (like my kids, dog, etc.)

+ easier to nail exposure in contrasty light, M is tricky and often needs 2 or 3 shots

M10:

+analog feeling

+ nice simplicity

+ compact

 

SL2 takes M lenses, but M not SL-lenses

 

[chris_tribble]

I have similar feelings to Tom0511.  Whether I can afford to be seduced by the M10r is another question, but for now I'm more than happy with 2 M10 bodies for documentary / walk-about work and the SL2 for when I need the flexibility of zoom, AF, macro, or longer / wider lenses.

[Sjz]

On 7/16/2020 at 2:55 PM, yggdra.omega said:

I originally bought the SL2 to add IBIS and higher resolution to my M lenses, but I have found over the past 7 months I have used my SL2 with M lenses probably 3 or 4 times for my photo walks. I sold my only SL lens, a SL50 lux, a few months ago as it was just too heavy and cumbersome for my tastes, and I haven't picked up another SL lens since.

I'm currently waiting for the opportunity to purchase an M10-R to go alongside my M10-P, and I'm trying to figure out if I will regret selling the SL2 body, and under what situations I might want to bring the SL2 out in the future and if I want to purchase another SL lens instead of another M lens.

I recognize this is a question of whether I prefer autofocus/manual, EVF/OVF, etc., but I'm just curious as to your feedback as to what situations or settings you would bring a mirrorless camera vs the M.

Hi,

I am new to M photography with a M10M.  
 

So far I have kept the two systems separate, M lens on M, L lens on SL2.  

I use the SL for longer range, for zero doubts about focusing closer up and precise framing of shots (‘Lux 28 m hides a significant ‘chunk’ of the image).

i use the M10M for the sheer pleasure it gives when I get everything right and for the subtle / rich / timeless Monochrom image it can produce.  I am still in the foothills of the learning curves, slightly higher for the SL2.  I will take my time and hopefully will improve over time.

i really enjoy both experiences and get excited when I pick either of them up.  I do wonder why keep a M10-P if you have the M10-R, I would have thought that overlap was quite large and the SL2 offers something different.  
 

Nice decision to make, good luck.

[SeanJ]

I work with an M10 and an SL (from now on with recently acquired SL2). I use the M10 with a 21 Elmarit or 28 Summilux, the SL for video and stills with 24-90 and 75 lux.

Sometimes I also use the 28 lux on the SL.

My usual setup for shooting just stills is 21 or 28 on the M10 and 75 on the Sl2. Dream combo for me after more than 30 years working as a photographer.

[andyturk]

I have an M10-P and the first generation SL, with the SL-50mm f/1.4. The SL is my "controlled shoot" camera for portraits when I'm using studio flash. I've never shot with the SL casually on the street because it's so darn huge (especially with that lens).

The M10 is what I shoot with most often with either a 28mm or 50mm.

[Tailwagger]

I use the SL2 up until the point that realize I've become lazy and lethargic enough to confess my sins, seek divine guidance and do penance for my crimes.  To atone, I spend a few days or weeks shooting with the monastic M. Eventually all the caked on grime and filthy residue of AF, IBIS, Karbe's ruthless optical perfection is washed away. I emerge refreshed and naked... so naturally, I jump right back into the SL2 orgy to have some fun and renew my acquaintance with the ways of the unclean .

They are such utterly different shooting experiences and whose native optics render in such incredibly different ways, I'm not sure, outside of the parameters you mentioned, the need or AF, IBIS, etc, that there is anything to say. I've shot both for landscape, portrait, concerts and theater, street and protest... either can do the job or fail, though in different ways on occasion as well.  I suppose even though they are such opposites, they share one similarity... price of entry excluded... they both favor someone thirty years younger than myself.  The M, while kind to my shoulder and back, convinces me that I am nearly blind, while the SL grants me the reflexes of a younger man, but at the price of what little of my spinal column is still intact. 

[Alistairm]

“M10 & SL2 owners: When do you decide to use the SL2 over the M?”

Every time getting the shot properly focused and exposed is more important than the experience of enjoying an M.

I love my M bodies, but my “hit rate” is definitely higher with the SL2 (including with MF lenses). Having been a skeptic, I’m a complete convert to IBIS. And I love how M lenses perform with an EVF. 

Today I went to an extended family event (rugby game followed by a family function ) with the SL2, 28M Elmarit and 135M Telyt. Not really too much bigger than an M10, and while my M10 would have been great, the SL2 with those lenses, for that “once every decade with those people in one place” event, was as easy choice. 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Alistairm

[Jared]

On 7/16/2020 at 6:55 AM, yggdra.omega said:

I originally bought the SL2 to add IBIS and higher resolution to my M lenses, but I have found over the past 7 months I have used my SL2 with M lenses probably 3 or 4 times for my photo walks. I sold my only SL lens, a SL50 lux, a few months ago as it was just too heavy and cumbersome for my tastes, and I haven't picked up another SL lens since.

I'm currently waiting for the opportunity to purchase an M10-R to go alongside my M10-P, and I'm trying to figure out if I will regret selling the SL2 body, and under what situations I might want to bring the SL2 out in the future and if I want to purchase another SL lens instead of another M lens.

I recognize this is a question of whether I prefer autofocus/manual, EVF/OVF, etc., but I'm just curious as to your feedback as to what situations or settings you would bring a mirrorless camera vs the M.

It totally depends on the type of photography you do.  For example, for static subjects requiring focal lengths between 28mm and 50mm the M10 is a truly wonderful camera.  For those who are content to zone focus at those same focal lengths, again the M10 is a great match even for more dynamic subjects. Simple controls, excellent lens quality, and very compact.  The problem with the M10 in my view (and I shot with one for a couple years) is if you want to go outside those limits.  Want to go wider than 28mm for landscape?  Certainly the lenses are available, but you’ll either need the very mediocre Visoflex or an imprecise external finder.  Imprecise is not the friend of good wide angle images where a half inch of difference can make or break a given composition.  Want greater than 50mm?  I know some are able to reliably focus up to 90mm, but I was always hit-or-miss at 75mm or above.  OK, not terrible at 75mm but I was pretty poor at 90mm unless I was really patient.  Again, you can use the Visoflex, but let’s just say it doesn’t inspire.  Any fast moving action?  Even toddlers let alone athletics?  Not such a great camera.

So I think it depends on what you are shooting and at what focal lengths.  There are plenty of people out there happy to just shoot at 35mm or 50mm and they will never want to move away from the M cameras they know and love.  More power to them.  I prefer to have the option of AF, weather sealing, a good EVF, image stabilization, and all the other modern features you get with an SL2.  I would miss mine horribly if I tried to go back to an M10.  

[sillbeers15]

The SL2 with AF lenses offer 16-280mm coverage and is weathersealed with the SL2 offering longer Long exposure duration. The SL lenses can easily accept filters with the 3 zooms having same filter diameter. The SL2 can also track focus on moving subjects well. Only downside is weight & bulk.

The M10R still has limited application when it comes to photography by subject.

While it is nice and compact ( not with summilux 21, 24 & Noctiluxs), the odd filter size and type makes adding filters a pain which otherwise I see it fun to use for landscape application and travel.

[budjames]

I own the SL2, an M10 and M10 converted to an M10P. I use them all, but I already am on the waiting list with the Leica SoHo store to trade my M10 for the new M10R.

I love the M10 shooting experience and image quality, however, the SL2 and native zooms are awesome when I need flexibility, a longer reach and weather sealing. I have the M to SL adapter to shoot my M primes on the SL2, but I much prefer the M10 for prime shooting.

It's great to have choices.

Regards,
Bud James

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