Switching from M10 to SL2-S? But what about Leica-look?

[wolan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

I bought a Leica M10 some time ago and while I really like the files (color rendering, crispness of the pictures etc..) I find the camera having too much limitations.

The Leica SL2-S seems on paper the natural switch, as I get all the things I am missing in the M10.

However, in my case picture quality, including the so called Leica-look has priority over everything else. 

So, I guess the 1 M dollar question is: do I get pictures with the same look as with the M10 (you can assume using the same M lenses)?

Any experience? Anybody can share some tests (maybe done with previous versions of the SL)?

Thank you.

 

[Jeff S]

I use an SL2, an M10 and an M9 Monochrom.  The M lenses stay on the M bodies, and native SL lenses go with the SL2.  Different tools, each with a different shooting experience, but all fully capable of robust and malleable files to create prints of many different ‘looks’, as intended by me, not by Leica.  Viewers don’t know or care what gear (or paper or ink or other materials) was used in the process. 
 

Jeff

 

[Advertisement]

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

[LD_50]

M lenses will look about the same on SL2-S except in the corners on some wider lenses. 
 

There are a lot of images available where you can compare the results to see if it’s what you’re looking for. I doubt you can see the difference without testing and 100% viewing. 

[geotrupede]

SL2S is a great camera, video is the selling point for me and of course native lenses wit autofocus and other gadgets. 

Using M is possible and results are pretty much identical to the Ms I have (I do not have an M10, but compared to M9, MM and M8 there are not obvious issues, results look better on the SL2S, apart Monochrom of course...). 

Wide lenses look good, 28f2, 21f3.4 and Voigtlander 15 4.5 all seem ok. 

I would not consider this model  for pure photography without video, as I only use M lenses. The M focusing system is faster with M lenses. It is good on the SL2S as you can zoom in and fine tune, VERY PRECISELY, but the speed of rangefinder is unmatched. 

My suggestion is not to swap, take your time and study the differences. M10 is really nice, small, practical and what it does it does well. 

SL first series feels more luxurious than the SL2S but SL2S has a monster video setup and ISO and can power up via USB C which is really practical... Some cost saving went into the body design, which is a shame but not an essential element.

G

 

 

 

 

[frame-it]

4 hours ago, wolan said:

picture quality, including the so called Leica-look has priority over everything else. 

What IS the Leica Look?

 

[meerec]

54 minutes ago, frame-it said:

What IS the Leica Look?

It’s something no one can explain, it’s on emotional level. 🧐🤔😬

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, meerec said:

It’s something no one can explain, it’s on emotional level. 🧐🤔😬

sounds like a RED Pill deal..

[Exodies]

The Leica look is that which, when you factor out variations in developing/editing, printing/scanning, bit depth, colour space, compression, display lighting, one’s own oafish insensitivity- stands out like a needle in a haystack.

[hillavoider]

Tooth Fairy 

Santa Claus

Leica Look 

😂

[graeme_clarke]

13 hours ago, LD_50 said:

M lenses will look about the same on SL2-S except in the corners on some wider lenses. 
 

There are a lot of images available where you can compare the results to see if it’s what you’re looking for. I doubt you can see the difference without testing and 100% viewing. 

I usually use a 24-90 or 90-280 on my SL2-S but went out a couple of weeks ago when it snowed here with a WATE. This is a jpeg made from an untouched DNG at 16mm. It's about 1/2 stop underexposed and there are converging verticals, but I don't see any darkening of the corners.  Graeme

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!

[Steven]

16 hours ago, wolan said:

do I get pictures with the same look as with the M10 (you can assume using the same M lenses)?

You get better. 

[Steven]

16 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I use an SL2, an M10 and an M9 Monochrom.  The M lenses stay on the M bodies, and native SL lenses go with the SL2.  Different tools, each with a different shooting experience, but all fully capable of robust and malleable files to create prints of many different ‘looks’, as intended by me, not by Leica.  Viewers don’t know or care what gear (or paper or ink or other materials) was used in the process. 
 

Jeff

 

You're like the grinch Jeff ! But you're probably right at the end of the day. 

[Steven]

13 hours ago, geotrupede said:

but the speed of rangefinder is unmatched.

I focus 10 times faster and 10 times better on the SL2S than on my M10P. It's when I want to slow down and miss half my shots (and compositions) that I pick up my M10. 

[Steven]

11 hours ago, frame-it said:

What IS the Leica Look?

 

Don't! Please don't 🤣🤫🤫

[Steven]

2 hours ago, hillavoider said:

Tooth Fairy 

Santa Claus

Leica Look 

😂

I always knew that tooth fairy was real. Thanks for confirming it. 

[Photoworks]

1 hour ago, graeme_clarke said:

I usually use a 24-90 or 90-280 on my SL2-S but went out a couple of weeks ago when it snowed here with a WATE. This is a jpeg made from an untouched DNG at 16mm. It's about 1/2 stop underexposed and there are converging verticals, but I don't see any darkening of the corners.  Graeme

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!

the camera corrects all that for you when you use the Leica M to L adapter.

[wolan]

33 minutes ago, Steven said:

You get better. 

Thanks, that looks promising.

I like the colours of my M10 files, especially the blues, the greens and the oranges. The Nikon raw files require a fairly amount of post-processing to have the greens and the blues where I want. 

Cheers.

[Tailwagger]

22 hours ago, wolan said:

I find the camera having too much limitations.

All camera's have limitations. It be good to know just what has been bothering you, what sort of shooting you do and what lenses you do it with.

A couple of points, regardless. First, Leica has gone to great pains to design a specific sensor stack for the M. Why? The M mount was never envisioned for lenses that projected onto anything other than film.  Sensors impose a layer(s) of glass where originally there was none.  As was alluded to above, some designs, mostly wides, can be problematic due to diffraction as the angle of incidence to the plane of focus for some lenses can be quite steep into the corners. When the light rays hit this cover glass at an acute angle, they bend, much like the image of a stick when stuck in a pond.  They therefore miss the spot they were originally designed to hit. To counter the physics involved, Leica has introduced both microlensing and the thinnest possible cover glass for the M sensor. For what ever reason the SLs have not been as fully optimized as the Ms.  In my personal stable, I have found that on the SL2, where the WATE works pretty well, the SEM 21mm is poor. Likewise, 'lux 75mm, no issues, but the ZD 35mm is plain awful. Both offending lenses have been, of course, stellar on the 240, M10 and now the 10-R. 

As with most things, it's not quite as cut and dried as that though, hence some of the confusion on this topic. Most  shots are not taken with everything in the plane of focus. Thus any smearing effects in the corners can go unnoticed or are of no consequence as they simply appear as OoF areas. You might never notice any ill effects unless you did a side by side comparison or took a gig documenting brick walls around the world. Smearing can also be less pronounced at near distances as when lens is extended the angles are less acute. When at infinity, however, the lens moves closer to the plane of focus which can result in more visible diffraction effects. So if you're the type that zone focuses to shoot street from just a few feet away, you might be entirely happy with what ever lens you mount to an SL.  If you do studio work, find the 020 too much of a compromise, favor longer focal lengths and shallow DoF, an SL might serve you better than an M.  But if you're a landscape photographer who likes to shoot wide vistas, you could wind up disappointed. 

Another issue to consider is that focusing accurately, particularly if one forgets to open the lens, can lead to unintended misses  As good as the EVFs are, they not glass, especially if you feel the need to digitally zoom. When stopped down, particularly with a wide, what you thought was correctly dialed up per the EVF, can actually be way off. This, BTW, isn't a problem exclusive to the SLs, it's equally problematic when using the M with the 020.  The difference, however, is that with the M you can focus far more accurately with a 28mm lens at f11 via the OVF and avoid having to open and close the aperture as a part of your focusing routine with the EVF. And of course, all EVFs can get washed out or noisy depending on circumstances, at which point nailing focusing can again be challenging.

If your intent is to shoot only manual focus M lenses going forward, everything about the M is optimized for this purpose.  The SL is a very different sort of camera which admittedly grants you IBIS and a stop or two and most importantly access to state of the art L-glass. But it comes at a cost of bulk, lack of any optical finder and universal access to M optics without worry. Personally, I added the SL2 to gain access to AF and the excellent L lenses.  I have the M-adapter, but the only M lens I shoot with any frequency on the SL2 is the 135 APO and even then the main reason is so that I don't have to lug around the massive, but equally impressive and far faster, 135 ART.  Personally, I'm squarely in the M on M camp as when I spend this much cash on glass, I want all the performance I paid for in whatever circumstances I find myself shooting under. 

Best of luck whatever you decide. 

 

 

 

 

 

[bags27]

Sean Reid just extensively tested the M 35 Cron APO on both the SL2-S and the M10R. I couldn't tell a difference at the corners, but the photos are small and Reid has set up his site so that you can't download and expand an image. Tailwagger has convinced me personally that there is noticeable smearing at the corners with the 21 SEM on the SL2 compared with the M10. Both Reid and Jono Slack originally seemed more enthusiastic about how the SL2 played with wide M glass, but recently, they seem to be just a touch more circumspect. But obviously they still like it on the SL body, as Reid just tested it with one.

The interesting thing about the SL2-S is that you can already find them for sale barely used on Fred Miranda. It took a long time to see that with the SL2, but the used market for the 2-S is already being established. This tells me something, though not sure exactly what. 😀

 

 

Edited March 8, 2021 by bags27

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Fedro]

2 hours ago, bags27 said:

This tells me something, though not sure exactly what. 😀

 

 

what is it? spill the beans, c'mon ..

Edited March 8, 2021 by Fedro