Minimising equipment - M10 buying advice

[sanadsaad]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys. I want your advice. Having gone through Nikon and Fuji, I sold all my kit and ended up buying an S1R with a 24-90 and a Leica M240 with a 50mm summicron (type 4) and a 35mm Zeiss Biogon 2.8. I wanted to use both and see what I settle with. I found myself shooting more and more with the M over the last year or so. I thought I would use the S1R more but I find myself picking it up less and less.The problem I'm facing is the weight of the kit. I am thinking of selling the S1R, 24-90 and M240 and pick up an M10-P or R. The other option would be to sell the heavy 24-90 and pick up a 35mm summicron SL instead. It's lighter, maybe I will use the S1R more if I use a lighter lens? Id appreciate your thoughts. 

 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[LBJ2]

If I may, after a year of good M experience, seems to me that might be your kit. If you can get your hands on a well priced used M10-P, that might help with the financial transition from of your S1R kit. Consider a gently used Visoflex 020 for times when you might miss the S1R EVF. 

[Jeff S]

Completely different tools and experiences, especially if you’ve been using the RF and not the accessory EVF.  I have an SL2 with 24-90, 90-280 and SL 75.  The prime is smaller, lighter and better balanced,, but I’ll never confuse the SL system with my M10 or M Monochrom.  Only you can figure that out for yourself.  
 

Jeff

[Guest BlackBarn]

13 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

but I’ll never confuse the SL system with my M10 or M Monochrom

I certainly agree with this. I have the 10m and use the SL for colour and the EVF but enjoy the differences in the two cameras immensely. It’s possible that  it isn’t weight but you are simply enjoying the M experience over the S1R. There is only around 200grms  or so weight difference between my two cameras but they almost seem the same due to the balance of the SL  (which even feels ‘right’ with the nocti on ) vs the compactness of the 10. For sure stick on any of the Zooms and you have a totally different feel. It might be useful before committing either way that you do a little maths with weight  and the lenses you see yourself owning.....regardless you have great choices available.
 

 

[chasdfg]

I've sold my L-mount AF lenses, but if i were to own any, I'd just pick up the SL-Summicrons and build a kit. I'm perfectly happy to shoot primes and the 35mm and 50mm Summicrons are superb, though they aren't exactly light (one lens is the weight of the M240 alone). If you want a zoom for travel, you can always pick up the lightweight zooms from Panasonic (16-35mm, 20-60mm come to mind). 

However the issue I see here is not 24-90mm vs 35mm Summicron-SL, but rather S1R vs M240. I personally own an M10Mono and SL. The SL has its place because it shoots colour and has an EVF. In other words, it offers a different shooting experience. If I wanted to shoot in colour, the SL would be my go-to camera. As you would know with the S1R, using a high quality EVF in the SL is quite a welcome change, but it's no rangefinder (and I do prefer rangefinder shooting). If I wanted to pick up a camera without bulk, i'd also grab the M10M. Long story short, there is differentiation within my kit and my life is less difficult deciding between the cameras.

I think resolution sets the S1R and M240 apart, though the pull factor of such resolution advantage of the S1R does not seem very strong in your case. I agree weight shouldn't be a major issue, though the size of the camera might be. You might have to go through the scenarios to see where the S1R is your go-to. If these scenarios are few and far between, then rather than choose between 2 capable cameras you might as well streamline your kit unless you're ok with having the S1R around for the odd day you decide to bring it out.

If you are to streamline your kit to 1 M camera,  rather than adding an M10-P, an M10-R might be the best camera in that you get an upgrade over the M240 in almost every respect except battery life and don't lose the S1R's resolution. Unless you don't need/want the resolution. Alternatively, keep using the M240 and add more lenses, since you already have the M240.

One more point to consider - if you're wondering if the bulk of the S1R and 24-90 is an issue, maybe you can consider purchasing an M to L adapter for the S1R and pop the 35mm or 50mm to shoot on it. This would give you a lighter kit and allow you to decide if the 24-90 is a factor and if you enjoy the resolution of the S1R. There are some more inexpensive options than the Leica L-M adapter, for example a Gabale adapter which also has a helicoid or the adapters by 7-Artisans. For under $100 it might be worth a try. This said, be aware the S1R does not play as well with M lenses than the M240 does.

Edited July 22, 2020 by chasdfg

[Tailwagger]

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

but I’ll never confuse the SL system with my M10 or M Monochrom.

Funny thing that. I had been using the SL2 for many months to the exclusion of the M.  Yesterday, after I attached the EVF to try it out on the 10R, I thought there was some sort of firmware bug. Every time I pressed LV, it the EVF remained blank. Nothing, nada. Pulled it off, reseated it, still nothing. Screwed around and all of a sudden it worked. excpet it didn't as it was LV but just showing me the last image I had taken. Took me longer than Id care to admit to figure out that the my M muscle memory had gone soft, as I was pressing the play button instead of LV. Rather odd that on the SL Play is the top button, Func in the middle,  whereas the on the M play is the middle, LV on the top. Doh! Somewhat defeats advantage of the new 3 button on the SL. 

As for the OPs thought to buy the SL-35 to reduce the tonnage, if weight reduction is the single most important thing, I doubt that will be a very satisfying decision. The SL-35 is by no means a small or light lens.  The Sigma 45mm perhaps, but outside of that and the Lumix 16-35, the penalty is that the L-system lens designers so far seem singularly unconcerned about size and mass. I weighed my gear with the SL2 and my 5 lenses in two bags and it all came in at 17 pounds.  For the first half hour lugging it around I feel like a pistolero, but after that I just feel like I was shot in the back by one.

My three lens system in a single bag weighs 10 pounds (SL-35, 75 and 16-35mm Lumix). The M10 with similar kit (21 SEM, 50 and 75mm 'lux) is about half that and fits in a bag one third the size. It's really the Ms greatest advantage, which coupled to the 41Mpx sensor means that if AF isn't a necessity, and ignoring the rather distinct difference in tonality, the M winds up being a far more flexible system.  If you prefer the handling and weight of the M, but feel the need for more acuity, the 10-R is worth looking into. The new sensor is, for me, a revelation in an M for lenses old and new.  

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

32 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Funny thing that. I had been using the SL2 for many months to the exclusion of the M.  Yesterday, after I attached the EVF to try it out on the 10R, I thought there was some sort of firmware bug. Every time I pressed LV, it the EVF remained blank. Nothing, nada. Pulled it off, reseated it, still nothing. Screwed around and all of a sudden it worked. excpet it didn't as it was LV but just showing me the last image I had taken. Took me longer than Id care to admit to figure out that the my M muscle memory had gone soft, as I was pressing the play button instead of LV. Rather odd that on the SL Play is the top button, Func in the middle,  whereas the on the M play is the middle, LV on the top. Doh! Somewhat defeats advantage of the new 3 button on the SL. 

As for the OPs thought to buy the SL-35 to reduce the tonnage, if weight reduction is the single most important thing, I doubt that will be a very satisfying decision. The SL-35 is by no means a small or light lens.  The Sigma 45mm perhaps, but outside of that and the Lumix 16-35, the penalty is that the L-system lens designers so far seem singularly unconcerned about size and mass. I weighed my gear with the SL2 and my 5 lenses in two bags and it all came in at 17 pounds.  For the first half hour lugging it around I feel like a pistolero, but after that I just feel like I was shot in the back by one.

My three lens system in a single bag weighs 10 pounds (SL-35, 75 and 16-35mm Lumix). The M10 with similar kit (21 SEM, 50 and 75mm 'lux) is about half that and fits in a bag one third the size. It's really the Ms greatest advantage, which coupled to the 41Mpx sensor means that if AF isn't a necessity, and ignoring the rather distinct difference in tonality, the M winds up being a far more flexible system.  If you prefer the handling and weight of the M, but feel the need for more acuity, the 10-R is worth looking into. The new sensor is, for me, a revelation in an M for lenses old and new.  

Just to be clear, when I wrote that I’d never confuse the two systems, I didn’t mean that they were similar (in button controls or any other aspect); rather that they are apples and oranges and not worth comparing.  Different tools and experiences altogether.  But, yes, the button difference you discovered is indeed odd given Leica’s supposed attempt to better standardize. I never noticed as I stick to RF.

Jeff

Edited July 22, 2020 by Jeff S

[Tailwagger]

9 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Just to be clear, when I wrote that I’d never confuse the two systems, I didn’t mean that they were similar (in button controls or any other aspect); rather that they are apples and oranges and not worth comparing.  Different tools and experiences altogether.  But, yes, the button difference you discovered is indeed odd given Leica’s supposed attempt to better standardize. I never noticed as I stick to RF.

Jeff

Of course; I totally agree, it's why I own both. This little discovery just bugged me as in my case I use the RRS/EVF on the M, naked SL2. The basic feel is similar enough when one's focused on shooting that my ever weakening brain can confuse the two.  Relying on the SL2 for so long had retrained me that Play was top.  So much so that I would have sworn in a court of law that LV was the center button on the previous M10. As I sold my copy (and the 240 as well) with the purchase of the 10-R, I found myself so confused by this that it took looking at pictures of the original M10 to snap me out of it.

Given the SL2 adopted, over the objections of many, the 3 button system, I am sadly forced to blame that camera's design rather than hurl a stone at the M.  My disappointment lies in not being able to lay blame for this annoyance at the feet of the almighty 10-R.  Given my gushing over it elsewhere,  I'm feeling the pressure to regain some of my now lost LUF street cred by getting really angry about something. 😉

Edited July 22, 2020 by Tailwagger

[ahl]

You have an interesting dilemma :

The S1R is for autofocusing and a great viewfinder.

The M240 for the size, weight and easy focusing with M lenses at least at the wider end of the lens range.

The 24-90 gives great results but is enormous.

May I suggest the following:

Sell the 24-90 which will always be too big and heavy.

Buy a Sigma 45mm 2.8 L lens it is relatively cheap and is much the same size as an M lens and also handles much the same. Definitely keep the S1R as it will give similar results to an SL2 although the haptics will be different. The Sigma lens is auto or manual focus, is auto or manual aperture ring. I would also buy a Leica M/L adapter S/H if you can find one to give you use of the M lenses on an L body. You will then find there is really not that much difference in size between the S1R and the M 240. The S1R will give you much more versatility in the long run. The Panasonic 24-100 is a great lens at the price point and quite light considering the quality of the results; if you need a all purpose lens.

This will give you some breathing space : you may find the S1R becomes quite delightful with M lenses. After a while using both you may well decide to keep both camera formats.

You will hanker for a M10 replacement for your M240 : if finances allow after selling the 24-90 I would look to trade your M 240 for an M10P mint secondhand as some may come on the market if people upgrade to the M10R. Your M 240 will lose value rapidly so best to get that sold sooner rather than later and the new rangefinder and shutter of the M10P are absolutely delicious.

For all general use the bigger sensor of the M10R is not really that attractive . On the other hand if the prices of an M10P and M10R are quite close you might as well buy the latest model.

I have found that with Leica it is best to slow down and really think alternatives through: i have acted rashly in the past and always regretted it in the end.

Good luck.

[sanadsaad]

Thank you all for your advice! I'll go with a step-wise approach. I'll start with a Leica adapter to adapt M lenses to the S1R. I'll carry it around with me and see the weight/performance/ease of use/results. I sometimes do street/indoor portraiture and when I need to use flash, I use the Godox system with the X-Pro trigger for Panasonic. For occasional portraiture, what would be the flash system for the M? Can I use a wireless trigger (non-TTL) to trigger the Godox? If that's the case, I would feel much happier selling everything and going with an M10-P/R to solve almost all my needs. 

[T25UFO]

On 7/22/2020 at 3:09 AM, Tailwagger said:

Funny thing that. I had been using the SL2 for many months to the exclusion of the M.  Yesterday, after I attached the EVF to try it out on the 10R, I thought there was some sort of firmware bug. Every time I pressed LV, it the EVF remained blank. Nothing, nada. Pulled it off, reseated it, still nothing. Screwed around and all of a sudden it worked. excpet it didn't as it was LV but just showing me the last image I had taken. Took me longer than Id care to admit to figure out that the my M muscle memory had gone soft, as I was pressing the play button instead of LV. Rather odd that on the SL Play is the top button, Func in the middle,  whereas the on the M play is the middle, LV on the top. Doh! Somewhat defeats advantage of the new 3 button on the SL. 

As for the OPs thought to buy the SL-35 to reduce the tonnage, if weight reduction is the single most important thing, I doubt that will be a very satisfying decision. The SL-35 is by no means a small or light lens.  The Sigma 45mm perhaps, but outside of that and the Lumix 16-35, the penalty is that the L-system lens designers so far seem singularly unconcerned about size and mass. I weighed my gear with the SL2 and my 5 lenses in two bags and it all came in at 17 pounds.  For the first half hour lugging it around I feel like a pistolero, but after that I just feel like I was shot in the back by one.

My three lens system in a single bag weighs 10 pounds (SL-35, 75 and 16-35mm Lumix). The M10 with similar kit (21 SEM, 50 and 75mm 'lux) is about half that and fits in a bag one third the size. It's really the Ms greatest advantage, which coupled to the 41Mpx sensor means that if AF isn't a necessity, and ignoring the rather distinct difference in tonality, the M winds up being a far more flexible system.  If you prefer the handling and weight of the M, but feel the need for more acuity, the 10-R is worth looking into. The new sensor is, for me, a revelation in an M for lenses old and new.  

The M10-D doesn't have that problem 😀

Seriously, the button design is different because the buttons are different.  The SL doesn't need a LV button but the M does.  Perhaps the M sequence should have been Play, LV and Menu.  That would have been closer.

Changing the subject, you seem to really like the new M10-R.  I've been thinking about upgrading, but would have to sell the M10-D, which I really like.  Are the files from the R really that much better?

[Tailwagger]

47 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

The M10-D doesn't have that problem 😀

Seriously, the button design is different because the buttons are different.  The SL doesn't need a LV button but the M does.  Perhaps the M sequence should have been Play, LV and Menu.  That would have been closer.

Changing the subject, you seem to really like the new M10-R.  I've been thinking about upgrading, but would have to sell the M10-D, which I really like.  Are the files from the R really that much better?

Ahh... but Play is not different, nor Menu. So I'm afraid you're out voted 2 to 1. And likely there are some, say those moving from an M10-D, that would have preferred the LV button was called Func and assignable to something they actually use. 😀  

In terms of the upgrade, what can I say? They are different, yet the same. The step from an M10 to R is a little greater given the shutter and other additions from the P.  But I expect you're asking more about imaging. In some dimensions there is a very pronounced improvement in IQ. Others have mentioned that the look feels more MF than FF. I'd tend to agree and find that the results look more 3D to me. I also find the SooC tonality more to my taste, more subdued, subtle. Others will hate it, but thats what the vibrance and saturation sliders are for, I suppose. It's early days and I've yet to shoot under all the varied conditions I typically find myself in. Likely the change in metering calibration will take a bit of getting used to. We'll see if that makes it easier to balance the exposure in more difficult light. The only negative comp I might have so far is a vague sense that B&W results were more satisfying from the original. That said, the sample size is small. More familiarity hopefully will dispel that notion over time. 

So 'really much better?' Certainly at $7995 M10, $8795!!! for the M-10P vs $8395 here in the US, it hard to see why anyone contemplating a new M would prefer the previous models.  If the M10 was back at the $6300 I paid for it three+ years ago, it might be a tougher call for some.  For me, selling my well used M10 (and my M240) on, moving forward by pairing the 10R with the SL2 seems to be the right decision.  But for others, I can not say. With more pixels comes more responsibility. Some might completely reasonably be perfectly content where they are.  

 

[Jeff S]

11 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

The only negative comp I might have so far is a vague sense that B&W results were more satisfying from the original. 

 

 

In what way(s)?

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

1 minute ago, Jeff S said:

In what way(s)?

In a purely personal one. I'm not a fan of the ultra fidelity look in B&W photos. With the older lenses and B&W, not so much color given the more muted tones, I'm finding that the appearance is closer to 2020 than 1960 whereas with the M10 the look was a bit more aligned to the period. I suspect it will just require a bit more understanding and work in post to get what I want.

[Jeff S]

5 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

In a purely personal one. I'm not a fan of the ultra fidelity look in B&W photos. With the older lenses and B&W, not so much color given the more muted tones, I'm finding that the appearance is closer to 2020 than 1960 whereas with the M10 the look was a bit more aligned to the period. I suspect it will just require a bit more understanding and work in post to get what I want.

I get what you mean; almost medium format vs 35mm b/w film results. I’d be very disappointed, however, if I had the R and couldn’t eventually produce desired b/w conversions, as I frequently use my M10 for both b/w and color. That would be a deal breaker. But I suspect it’s more of a learning curve issue to get there.  If not, and If you don’t have one, you might also consider a nice original Monochrom to supplement the R. I do that with my M10. Higher ISOs and/or careful use of grain with the MM (or even M10) can sometimes yield even more ‘film-like” files. The Monochrom is an old platform, though. I haven’t tried the newer ones. 

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

7 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I get what you mean; almost medium format vs 35mm b/w film results. I’d be very disappointed, however, if I had the R and couldn’t eventually produce desired b/w conversions, as I frequently use my M10 for both b/w and color. That would be a deal breaker. But I suspect it’s more of a learning curve issue to get there.  If not, and If you don’t have one, you might also consider a nice original Monochrom to supplement the R. I do that with my M10. Higher ISOs and/or careful use of grain with the MM (or even M10) can sometimes yield even more ‘film-like” files. The Monochrom is an old platform, though. I haven’t tried the newer ones. 

Jeff

Indeed, I think about the original MM all the time. From a tonality perspective, when its in its element, I'd say that it makes the most beautiful images I've every seen. The thing that has stopped me so far, beyond the necessity to make filtering decisions in the field and sensor concerns, is that in general I'm an early morning shooter. The ISO and DR limitations of CCD are something I've struggled with in the past back when I was shooting with a 645D.

It's far too early to offer any opinion about the R, earlier lenses and B&W. All I can offer at this point is that in limited use, color or B&W, my 50mm 'lux BC is just brilliant on this camera. But where the 28mm (v3) and 90mm (Type 2) Elmarits have a wonderful, previously unnoticed, subtlety in the color rendering, but press B&W and these two seem to lose some of that magic. But then, I am forcing things on the back end rather than selecting for a proper B&W shot up front. It will be and interesting few next weeks as the miles start to accumulate. In the meantime, I look forward to the opinions and images of others.

 

[Jeff S]

15 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

The thing that has stopped me so far, beyond the necessity to make filtering decisions in the field and sensor concerns, is that in general I'm an early morning shooter. The ISO and DR limitations of CCD are something I've struggled with in the past back when I was shooting with a 645D.

 

 

Filters, yes. But I would only buy an MM with a new sensor with warranty.  Leica Miami has a silver one that just came back from service, with under 2k actuations and one year warranty. Somewhat pricier than typical, though. 

As for the Pentax, I think the ISO range only went to 1600, and practically maybe lower than that.  The MM does fine at 2500, and higher depending on preferences.  This old comparison demonstrates...

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/06/bw-iso-showdown-leica-m-monochrom-typ-246-vs-m-monochrom-m9-vs-m-typ-240/

In any event, I hope the R is the ticket for you.

Jeff

[sanadsaad]

Tried the SL2 and the M10-P at Leica store Manchester. The 50summicron on the SL2 was surprisingly comfortable. Even though the S1R is almost identical to the sl2 performance wise, I found myself preferring the SL2. After coming back from the Leica store, I checked how much I could sell my kit for and for the M240, S1R and 24-90, Mpb is offering me 5300. That gives me the option of either saving up a bit more and buying the M10-R or buying the SL2 and use it with my M lenses till I save up for a 35cron. I can continue to get my M fix from my M3 in the time being. I shouldn’t have tried the SL2. It has only added to the confusion. It is such a beautifully constructed camera. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[sanadsaad]

Went out with the S1R mounted with a Zeiss Biogon 35mm f2.8. After using the M for everyday shooting, it felt a bit clunky. I must say even though some of the files came out nice, I didn't really enjoy shooting with it in this way. A lot of times, I took a few more shots than I should have, I let the camera do the thinking, I relied on the EVF and tinkered with settings to get the exposure correct and I didn't really enjoy the TTL view. I think the SL2 might not change that for me. The M is where I'm headed. Ive attached the only semi-decent shot (I think) I got. I'll do a few more photowalks before I decide. Its a big decision to ditch a machine so good but it seems like it's not for me. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[sanadsaad]

Another trip to the Leica store presented a less traumatic option. I’m thinking of selling the S1R and it’s accessories which should get me enough to buy a decent Leica SL (with a little top up). I get my “M” fix with the 240 and I get to use the SL with my 24-90/M lenses to see how I feel about the SL camera line. Gives me time to play around with both systems. I really did enjoy the simplicity of the SL and with those second hand prices, it’s a tantalising option.