Camera or lens? (advice / opinions)

[Me Leica!]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently traded in a bunch of stuff I wasn't using and picked up a Leica M-D 262 (the one without the rear screen). I already had an M-mount compatible lens hanging around - a Voigtlander Nokton 50mm 1.5 - so right now that's on the body. 

Firstly, I'd forgotten how much fun it is shooting with a Leica. I've had a couple of M8s in the past and, flawed as they were, they were still a lot of fun to shoot. It's taking me a while to get out of "instant gratification" mode with the 262, but the absolute simplicity of it makes it a great camera to shoot with.

Here's my question, It's very much a first world "problem", so take it as such. I have one other camera which I haven't traded in yet, but I'm considering doing so because while it is significantly superior to the Leica in image quality, it's also slower to operate  and while using it is....satisfying, it's not the same as using the Leica. It's a Hasselblad X1D if you must know. Amazing for landscape stuff and slow shooting in general, but forget it for street or things you see and have to grab quickly, "decisive moment" stuff, etc. The main reward with the Hasselblad is seeing the files afterwards, whereas with the Leica it's the actual shooting. Oh, and the fastest prime for the Blad is a 1.9 , (which pans out to what, about 1.4 in full frame terms?) but it's majorly expensive.

If I trade in the camera alone, I'm pretty sure I'll get enough for it to put towards a serious Leica lens. I was thinking the Summilux 50 ASPH, as I've heard great things about it (mostly; the only real negative I hear is that there's quite a bit of sample variation, but  if you get a good one, they're outstanding, and they don't have focus shift).

However. If I trade in both the Hasselblad and the Leica,  I could well end up with enough for a used M10. I've done the math on the trade-in values, and it's definitely possible.

If it's relevant: I don't shoot video at all and I wouldn't use an EVF unless there was no other option (i.e. the rangefinder was way out of wack, etc). I'm not against EVFs per se (the Hasseiblad has one) but on a rangefinder? Last resort only.

So what I'm asking, I guess, is: how good is the Summilux 50 ASPH compared to the Voigtlander Nokton 50, and how good is the M10 compared to the M-D 262?

I know most people say "lenses are forever, cameras are until the next upgrade", but I'd like to hear some ideas from the folk here.

Thanks in advance.

 

Edited October 12, 2020 by Me Leica!

[adan]

M10 - or M10-R - or M10-D?

The practical imaging difference between the "stock" M10 and a 262 (both 24 Mpixels) is mostly limited to somewhat cleaner/usable medium-high ISOs (3200-10000). The other advances in the M10 don't really affect image quality directly - they are smaller size, larger viewfinder, modestly "better" rangefinder (precision and magnification) - and of course a screen on the back.

And the M10 - for my taste - produces slightly better color (more greens, slightly subdued red tendency). But that is a question of taste, thus not a subject for argument or persuasion (de gustibus non est disputandum).

As to the lenses, I can't comment down to the line-per-mm. The Voigtlander is generally rated to be a step up from the non-ASPH 50mm Summilux, but not quite as good as the Summilux ASPH.

But net/net, if you really pine for a Leica lens, and don't really use higher ISOs anyway, your best bet is probably to stick with the M-D 262, and step up to the Summilux ASPH. And then save up for an M10-R/M11/whatever, in the future.

(The newly-announced Voigtlander 50mm f/1.4 version II is probably what I would prefer most (if I used a 50mm), for its compactness, and the removal of the nasty cog-wheel focus ring.)

https://leicarumors.com/2020/10/05/the-new-voigtlander-nokton-vintage-line-50mm-f-1-5-aspherical-ii-vm-lens-for-leica-m-mount-will-start-shipping-on-october-22nd.aspx/

[Advertisement]

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

[poli]

After having moved from an M8 to the M-D 262 and after that to the M10-D. I can tell you, the fun of shooting with a Leica M is almost the same for all models. I do enjoy the thumbsup of the M10-D and the thinner body. But it's not a huge difference in user experience. And on top of that, the M-D has a better iso dial. If low light performance is important to you, then a step up to the M10 might be good. But with a Summilux you will be getting a very light sensitive lens. So, all in all I might vote for a new/different lens as well.

[Jeff S]

If I liked the X1D, and was having fun and good results using the M-D 262, I’d keep it all and carry on making pics until I determined a specific need, if any.  In the meantime I’d be looking at whether it’s worth upgrading my printer from a P800 to P900.

Jeff

 

[astrostl]

I'd personally much rather have an M10* (esp. M10-R) with a VM 50/1.5 than an M262 with a 50/1.4 Lux. But I might prefer keeping the X1D to a change at all.

Would also throw the https://www.47-degree.com/focus-shift/ttartisan-50mm-14-review into the mix as a budget Lux. Once I get mine I'll have both and can directly compare them.
 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I have all the cameras and lenses you have/are considering.

Personally I don't think the Summilux is worth the upgrade over the CV Nokton 1.5. The Summilux might be *slightly* better but not enough to justify the trade of an X1D for it. The M10, on the other hand I really think is a decent usability update on the M240 platform. The files are similar but the minute changes add up to what I think is the best digital M platform. If you can stretch to an M10R you'll likely cover much of the benefits of the X1D anyway.

Personally I wouldn't ever give up my X1D (maybe if Leica make a mirrorless S) but if you don't enjoy using it and it sits idle then a move to the M10 is definitely worth considering.

Gordon

[Me Leica!]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A good set of answers and plenty to consider. Thanks to everyone who posted.

[martinot]

9 hours ago, Me Leica! said:

I recently traded in a bunch of stuff I wasn't using and picked up a Leica M-D 262 (the one without the rear screen). I already had an M-mount compatible lens hanging around - a Voigtlander Nokton 50mm 1.5 - so right now that's on the body. 

Firstly, I'd forgotten how much fun it is shooting with a Leica. I've had a couple of M8s in the past and, flawed as they were, they were still a lot of fun to shoot. It's taking me a while to get out of "instant gratification" mode with the 262, but the absolute simplicity of it makes it a great camera to shoot with.

Here's my question, It's very much a first world "problem", so take it as such. I have one other camera which I haven't traded in yet, but I'm considering doing so because while it is significantly superior to the Leica in image quality, it's also slower to operate  and while using it is....satisfying, it's not the same as using the Leica. It's a Hasselblad X1D if you must know. Amazing for landscape stuff and slow shooting in general, but forget it for street or things you see and have to grab quickly, "decisive moment" stuff, etc. The main reward with the Hasselblad is seeing the files afterwards, whereas with the Leica it's the actual shooting. Oh, and the fastest prime for the Blad is a 1.9 , (which pans out to what, about 1.4 in full frame terms?) but it's majorly expensive.

If I trade in the camera alone, I'm pretty sure I'll get enough for it to put towards a serious Leica lens. I was thinking the Summilux 50 ASPH, as I've heard great things about it (mostly; the only real negative I hear is that there's quite a bit of sample variation, but  if you get a good one, they're outstanding, and they don't have focus shift).

However. If I trade in both the Hasselblad and the Leica,  I could well end up with enough for a used M10. I've done the math on the trade-in values, and it's definitely possible.

If it's relevant: I don't shoot video at all and I wouldn't use an EVF unless there was no other option (i.e. the rangefinder was way out of wack, etc). I'm not against EVFs per se (the Hasseiblad has one) but on a rangefinder? Last resort only.

So what I'm asking, I guess, is: how good is the Summilux 50 ASPH compared to the Voigtlander Nokton 50, and how good is the M10 compared to the M-D 262?

I know most people say "lenses are forever, cameras are until the next upgrade", but I'd like to hear some ideas from the folk here.

Thanks in advance.

If you want to save some money by skipping the 50 mm Summilux, but at the same time have som better quality or more fun optics than Voigtlander, I would suggest that you look att the following very different, but IMO great bang for the buck 50 mm M-lenses:

Leica M 50/2,4 Summarit (11680) - one of the absolutely best Leica 50 mm you can get. Sharp as hell and great colour rendering.

Zeiss Planar T*2,0/50 ZM - one of the absolutely best Zeiss 50 mm you can get. Sharp, great and nice warm colour 3D rendering.

Zeiss C Sonnar T* 50mm f/1,5 ZM - Lovely lens with a lot of charm. Unfortunately some focus shift, but a great fun classic lens with pleasant bokeh and rendering.

[Me Leica!]

4 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I have all the cameras and lenses you have/are considering.

Personally I don't think the Summilux is worth the upgrade over the CV Nokton 1.5. The Summilux might be *slightly* better but not enough to justify the trade of an X1D for it. The M10, on the other hand I really think is a decent usability update on the M240 platform. The files are similar but the minute changes add up to what I think is the best digital M platform. If you can stretch to an M10R you'll likely cover much of the benefits of the X1D anyway.

Personally I wouldn't ever give up my X1D (maybe if Leica make a mirrorless S) but if you don't enjoy using it and it sits idle then a move to the M10 is definitely worth considering.

Gordon

Thanks for the comment.

The reason I mentioned the Summilux in particular is that the one person whose word on cameras and lenses I tend to listen to - Ming Thein - spoke extremely highly of it. Word for word (this is from his website): "The good samples are incredibly good – this is a normal lens that has the feel of an 300/2.8 super tele. Bokeh and subject separation are incredible (thanks to a very fast transition between in and out of focus), as is sharpness." And he's not one for hyperbole.

(He also spoke highly of the Noctilux, but that's way out of my budget!)

[Ko.Fe.]

To me Leica stands for Life. It was captured by HCB, GW and others.  By primitive bw film cameras. With low ISO. And no AF. 

I have seen GW's prints from Canon 28 3.5 and 2.8 and Elmarit-M 28 2.8. Some difference in quality of negative, but it is irrelevant to the content. And it was never limited to  just so called "street".

I honestly think what content is something much more problematic to achieve than resolution, rendering and shallow DOF. 

And if landscapes would be my thing, I'll get classic Hasselblad or LF camera.

[easy_action]

I'm going the other way - returning to the md from an m10.

I had the md previously and was tempted by the slimmer body, better viewfinder etc. and told myself that I really did need a screen after all.

The reality was that I turned the screen off most of the time, really missed the quieter shutter sound of the md, and didn't notice the improved viewfinder at all.

Also, the battery life of the m10 was noticeably worse - I needed a second battery and was always fiddling around charging and rotating them.

And I much preferred the smooth contours of the md body - the screen of the m10 and four-way control on the back stick out a little.  I liked the ISO dial of the m10 but mostly just left it on Auto, so barely touched it.

Finally, the silver chrome of my m10 just couldn't compete with the gently brassing black paint finish of the md!

Personally, I'm not sure that f/1.4 lenses are the way to go on the md.  You have to be prepared to accept a lower hit rate of 'pin-sharp' images.  But I suppose it depends how skilled you are and what sort of aesthetic you are aiming for.

[lanetomlane]

Earlier this year I bought a Zeiss 35mm F1.4 and was so impressed with it that I later got the 50mm F2. I still have the 35 and 50mm Summicrons and while I don't intend to sell them, I do favour the Zeiss performance. I did have a Summilux which was stolen in Portugal, but replaced it with the Summicron. I couldn't comment on the 262 body as I've never had one but do love my M10 and M9M.

https://photographybytomlane.com

[FlashGordonPhotography]

21 hours ago, martinot said:

If you want to save some money by skipping the 50 mm Summilux, but at the same time have som better quality or more fun optics than Voigtlander, I would suggest that you look att the following very different, but IMO great bang for the buck 50 mm M-lenses:

Leica M 50/2,4 Summarit (11680) - one of the absolutely best Leica 50 mm you can get. Sharp as hell and great colour rendering.

Zeiss Planar T*2,0/50 ZM - one of the absolutely best Zeiss 50 mm you can get. Sharp, great and nice warm colour 3D rendering.

Zeiss C Sonnar T* 50mm f/1,5 ZM - Lovely lens with a lot of charm. Unfortunately some focus shift, but a great fun classic lens with pleasant bokeh and rendering.

None of these have objectively better optical performance than the latest Noktons. The Sonnar is interesting in that it takes it's flaws and uses them to its advantage by going against the ultra sharp modern CA free look.

Gordon