Jump to content

Complementary camera to the M10?


startover

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, startover said:

That's helpful, thank you.  Good point about thinking through the health and ownership of the brand.  A few things I got addicted to with my Leica (and my iPhone!) are simplicity and size.  So a compact system which is easy to use will be a deciding factor.  I don't have AF needs ... in fact, if there is a good MF capability, that would be my preference.  What I would miss in the new setup is seeing the dials for exposure control on the camera or the lens.  I will look into the G9.  And also investigate the Sony and Nikon setups mentioned by others, that would allow using my existing M lenses. As of now, there seems to be no perfect answer. 

The manual and MF experience is better on Panasonic than Olympus IME and I own plenty of both. PanaLeica lenses have aperture rings, and Panasonic has more MF focus aids (e.g. pinpoint). I also dig using B&W image preview with focus peaking to really make it pop.

Leica M lenses adapt fine to MFT BTW, you're just dealing with a 2x multiple on focal length and DoF (e.g. a 21/3.5 is a 42/7) so it ramps up quickly.

Edited by astrostl
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, startover said:

Thank you.  I have been eyeing the Fujis.  Love the compatibility in the experience with the Leica, especially the dials for shutter speed and aperture.   A few follow-up questions: 1) what did you mean by "rangefinder-like EFT" 2) thoughts on IQ compromise with APS-C versus full frame? 3) how is the manual focusing experience when you use an M lens on the XT4? 4) what zoom lenses do you have now ... are you happy with them? 5) is the XT4 due for an updated model soon?  

  • The Fiji has good manual focusing tools like a digital split image, digital microprism and peak highlights. Not a rangefinder, but good enough.
  • Of course, a APS-C is not a crop sensor and not a full frame but it's good enough for most situations. 
  • Some great features:
    • Compact camera with lots of user programmable features
    • Easy to use menu
    • High frame rate 20-30 fps
    • Excellent JPEGs out of the camera
    • Good video
  • Fuji sells an M-mount adapter and there are settings to program the focal lengths in the camera so that EXIF shows the information.

Note that I have not bought one, but did have the chance to use one for a few months. The loaner came with a 35mm lens but it was not a zoom. Autofocus was very good.

I am not familiar with Fuji roadmap but like all camera manufacturers, new models will come every year.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rramesh said:
  • The Fiji has good manual focusing tools like a digital split image, digital microprism and peak highlights. Not a rangefinder, but good enough.
  • Of course, a APS-C is not a crop sensor and not a full frame but it's good enough for most situations. 
  • Some great features:
    • Compact camera with lots of user programmable features
    • Easy to use menu
    • High frame rate 20-30 fps
    • Excellent JPEGs out of the camera
    • Good video
  • Fuji sells an M-mount adapter and there are settings to program the focal lengths in the camera so that EXIF shows the information.

Note that I have not bought one, but did have the chance to use one for a few months. The loaner came with a 35mm lens but it was not a zoom. Autofocus was very good.

I am not familiar with Fuji roadmap but like all camera manufacturers, new models will come every year.

Thank you, that is very helpful.  The split image assist is definitely a big plus.  And the ability to have the lens information be added to the EXIF data when using the Fuji adapter.  The only downside is the effective focal length and field of view changing as a result of the crop ... for example, I really like the look of the images from my 28 Elmarit, but that would seem like a 40mm lens on the X-series.

Edited by startover
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, startover said:

The only downside is the effective focal length and field of view changing as a result of the crop ... for example, I really like the look of the images from my 28 Elmarit, but that would seem like a 40mm lens on the X-series.

Agreed, but you do have more options with Leica fixed focal length lenses, using them on an APS-C camera. Kind of like how some users used a Leica M8 with a full-frame M.

On my Leica M10-P i have 15 through 90

On a Fuji I get the equivalent of ~21 through 135

And you don't have to worry about the view as it has an EVF, so you see clearly what you are capturing, unlike a rangefinder with frame lines.

You did mention 'complementary' and not 'same' in your original post.

 

Edited by rramesh
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rramesh said:

Agreed, but you do have more options with Leica fixed focal length lenses, using them on an APS-C camera. Kind of like how some users used a Leica M8 with a full-frame M.

On my Leica M10-P i have 15 through 90

On a Fuji I get the equivalent of ~21 through 135

And you don't have to worry about the view as it has an EVF, so you see clearly what you are capturing, unlike a rangefinder with frame lines.

You did mention 'complementary' and not 'same' in your original post.

 

Good advice, thank you.  It makes the choice of a full-frame mirrorless versus the APS-C version from Fuji a real one.  I shall venture out to the camera next week to check out some of what you and a few others referenced!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In regards to video, unless you are taking cinematic footage with manual focus lenses, you need reliable video AF which Sony and Canon provides in spades.  Nikon and Fuji are good but a bit inconsistent.  As for lenses, Sony is the most mature system by far.  They have their own lineup of FE lenses, plus a plethora of great 3rd party lenses from Zeiss, Sigma, Voigtlander, Tamron, Tokina, Samyang, etc etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick update.  I tried a number of cameras at the local store drawing from everyone's advice.  The Fujis, Nikons and Sonys.  I wasn't pleased with the manual focusing experience on any of them, even with native lenses--focus peaking with magnification, split image, etc.  Then I decided to get the Sony a7C ... compact and full-frame.  Spent a couple of hours at home figuring out the best configuration for me.  After spending another hour or two taking pictures, both with the 28-60 kit lens and a 28 Elmarit, I was convinced that I am not keen to learn or adjust.  I would blame myself not the camera.  One thing I felt is that if you look at pictures as being a combination of the subject, the picture taker and the gear, I saw very little of myself in the pictures I took with the Sony ... it was mostly the gear doing its thing.  Even with manual exposure and focusing, I didn't feel I was in control.  Maybe the experience was too "digital" for me.  Net-net, I am not ready for complementing my M10 and MP with a non-Leica camera simply for zoom and video.  I hope to revisit this issue with a better solution in the future.  Thanks everyone.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, startover said:

A quick update.  I tried a number of cameras at the local store drawing from everyone's advice.  The Fujis, Nikons and Sonys.  I wasn't pleased with the manual focusing experience on any of them, even with native lenses--focus peaking with magnification, split image, etc.  Then I decided to get the Sony a7C ... compact and full-frame.  Spent a couple of hours at home figuring out the best configuration for me.  After spending another hour or two taking pictures, both with the 28-60 kit lens and a 28 Elmarit, I was convinced that I am not keen to learn or adjust.  I would blame myself not the camera.  One thing I felt is that if you look at pictures as being a combination of the subject, the picture taker and the gear, I saw very little of myself in the pictures I took with the Sony ... it was mostly the gear doing its thing.  Even with manual exposure and focusing, I didn't feel I was in control.  Maybe the experience was too "digital" for me.  Net-net, I am not ready for complementing my M10 and MP with a non-Leica camera simply for zoom and video.  I hope to revisit this issue with a better solution in the future.  Thanks everyone.

Maybe the most rational thought process I’ve seen around gear. Great that you tried it and made the correct decision for yourself!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, startover said:

The Fujis, Nikons and Sonys.

FWIW I still wouldn't rule out Micro Four Thirds here! Recalling now, I did make one video comparing manual focus on the Olympus E-M1 and Panasonic G85 and another highlighting PIP options on the G85. Without handling the two, I think these do a decent job of showing what's on offer (and particularly where Panasonic simply offers more MF features such as the way it handles PIP windowing and monochrome live view with color peaking). These videos are now five years old, but it looks like little has changed.

Edited by astrostl
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, startover said:

A quick update.  I tried a number of cameras at the local store drawing from everyone's advice.  The Fujis, Nikons and Sonys.  I wasn't pleased with the manual focusing experience on any of them, even with native lenses--focus peaking with magnification, split image, etc.  Then I decided to get the Sony a7C ... compact and full-frame.  Spent a couple of hours at home figuring out the best configuration for me.  After spending another hour or two taking pictures, both with the 28-60 kit lens and a 28 Elmarit, I was convinced that I am not keen to learn or adjust.  I would blame myself not the camera.  One thing I felt is that if you look at pictures as being a combination of the subject, the picture taker and the gear, I saw very little of myself in the pictures I took with the Sony ... it was mostly the gear doing its thing.  Even with manual exposure and focusing, I didn't feel I was in control.  Maybe the experience was too "digital" for me.  Net-net, I am not ready for complementing my M10 and MP with a non-Leica camera simply for zoom and video.  I hope to revisit this issue with a better solution in the future.  Thanks everyone.

This is a very personal journey.

For myself, I came to Leica fron Nikon and Hasselblad (film), via brief excursions into digital.  The M9 was perfect, but like you I wanted a complement to it.  I went down the Sony rabbit hole too (twice), Nikon, then back to Leica.  I came to the same conclusion as you.  I then tried the Leica TL, but that wasn’t quite ready when it was released.

Now, I’m not sure what I would say to you.  I have the Hasselblad X1D II for the medium format itch - it’s the most ergonomic camera I’ve owned with a menu system as good if not better than the Leica system.  But it doesn’t take M lenses.  Not sure if it does video, but the zoom is apparently very good.

For a small Leica alternative, I have a TL2 (vastly superior to the original), with a good wide zoom (11-23 is 16-35 equivalent field of view) and acceptable video.  I can put a 28 Summaron (42mm fov) or pre-asph 35 Summilux (52mm fov) on it and have a pocketable camera.  Image quality is very good and menus are also good - it is “leica like”.

For a single lens, do everything I need, and M lens capable camera, I have an SL with the 24-90 zoom.  It’s a great camera, but large and heavy compared to the M system, but not other systems.  Leica is really the only one which does small quality with the M.

So, perhaps revisit the SL2 options - they really are very good …

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

Now, I’m not sure what I would say to you.  I have the Hasselblad X1D II for the medium format itch - it’s the most ergonomic camera I’ve owned with a menu system as good if not better than the Leica system.  But it doesn’t take M lenses.  Not sure if it does video, but the zoom is apparently very good.

Waah, that is the camera I have been quite heretically lusting for. The only thing holding me back is that my M9 is working and that I have heard Hasselbald leaf shutter lenses bad in a way can require factory maintenance "often".

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, maitoparta said:

Waah, that is the camera I have been quite heretically lusting for. The only thing holding me back is that my M9 is working and that I have heard Hasselbald leaf shutter lenses bad in a way can require factory maintenance "often".

Not so far.

There were issues with some of the early lenses.  I have the 21/4 (fantastic, but very wide and heavy), 45P (compact, walk around 35mm equivalent), 80/1.8 (really a Noct 0.95 equivalent - fabulous, but also heavy) and the 135 with 1.7 converter (112mm and 180mm equivalent - nice in the hand).  Before you embark on this route, you do need to understand that it is a medium format system, despite the size of the camera.  Yes, you can walk around with the 45P, and you an do situation photography, but it really is a medium format system.  This means that everything is bigger (21mm does not mean 21mm in 135 format terms - it’s more like 16mm); apertures also aren’t the same - f/4 is more like f/2.8, and f/1.8 is closer to f/1 in reality.  Also, leaf shutters are great, but the whole shutter operation is slower - leaf shutter open for focus and framing, then the shutter has to close, then fire, then open again.  That all takes time, as people complaining about liveview delay show.  You could use the electronic shutter, if you want to live with rolling shutter …

The 50MP sensor is seriously good (probably why it is in so many cameras), and I like the leaf shutters (despite the 1/2000 speed limit).  I do use the Himatt filters - if you go that route, don’t get the smaller ones - you need the larger ones.

Downsides?  I’m sure the AF could be faster and more accurate.  With both my AF cameras (the SL and the X1D II), I use the back button then manual focus.  Focus peaking really doesn’t work in any iteration, unless you’re well stopped down, but auto magnification is very good.  This makes the X1D contemplative.

I took my X1D II, with the 135, converter and a couple of other lenses, to my niece’s wedding - the AF was a complete nightmare; but the few good results I got were better than anything the paid photographer produced.

Worth a thought …
John

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, astrostl said:

FWIW I still wouldn't rule out Micro Four Thirds here! Recalling now, I did make one video comparing manual focus on the Olympus E-M1 and Panasonic G85 and another highlighting PIP options on the G85. Without handling the two, I think these do a decent job of showing what's on offer (and particularly where Panasonic simply offers more MF features such as the way it handles PIP windowing and monochrome live view with color peaking). These videos are now five years old, but it looks like little has changed.

Thanks ... at this point I have hit "pause".  Btw, your videos seems private--I cannot view them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

This is a very personal journey.

For myself, I came to Leica fron Nikon and Hasselblad (film), via brief excursions into digital.  The M9 was perfect, but like you I wanted a complement to it.  I went down the Sony rabbit hole too (twice), Nikon, then back to Leica.  I came to the same conclusion as you.  I then tried the Leica TL, but that wasn’t quite ready when it was released.

Now, I’m not sure what I would say to you.  I have the Hasselblad X1D II for the medium format itch - it’s the most ergonomic camera I’ve owned with a menu system as good if not better than the Leica system.  But it doesn’t take M lenses.  Not sure if it does video, but the zoom is apparently very good.

For a small Leica alternative, I have a TL2 (vastly superior to the original), with a good wide zoom (11-23 is 16-35 equivalent field of view) and acceptable video.  I can put a 28 Summaron (42mm fov) or pre-asph 35 Summilux (52mm fov) on it and have a pocketable camera.  Image quality is very good and menus are also good - it is “leica like”.

For a single lens, do everything I need, and M lens capable camera, I have an SL with the 24-90 zoom.  It’s a great camera, but large and heavy compared to the M system, but not other systems.  Leica is really the only one which does small quality with the M.

So, perhaps revisit the SL2 options - they really are very good …

Thank you for the detailed note.  I will look into the TL2 ... maybe when a TL3 arrives.  The X1D II is a superb camera ... wish the lenses weren't so expensive.  Yes, the SL2 seems very large indeed.  I am afraid I will have to pause my search and make the most of the M systems I have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, startover said:

A quick update.  I tried a number of cameras at the local store drawing from everyone's advice.  The Fujis, Nikons and Sonys.  I wasn't pleased with the manual focusing experience on any of them, even with native lenses--focus peaking with magnification, split image, etc.  Then I decided to get the Sony a7C ... compact and full-frame.  Spent a couple of hours at home figuring out the best configuration for me.  After spending another hour or two taking pictures, both with the 28-60 kit lens and a 28 Elmarit, I was convinced that I am not keen to learn or adjust.  I would blame myself not the camera.  One thing I felt is that if you look at pictures as being a combination of the subject, the picture taker and the gear, I saw very little of myself in the pictures I took with the Sony ... it was mostly the gear doing its thing.  Even with manual exposure and focusing, I didn't feel I was in control.  Maybe the experience was too "digital" for me.  Net-net, I am not ready for complementing my M10 and MP with a non-Leica camera simply for zoom and video.  I hope to revisit this issue with a better solution in the future.  Thanks everyone.

But how is this different compared to the smartphone you've been using so far?

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Not so far.

There were issues with some of the early lenses.  I have the 21/4 (fantastic, but very wide and heavy), 45P (compact, walk around 35mm equivalent), 80/1.8 (really a Noct 0.95 equivalent - fabulous, but also heavy) and the 135 with 1.7 converter (112mm and 180mm equivalent - nice in the hand).  Before you embark on this route, you do need to understand that it is a medium format system, despite the size of the camera.  Yes, you can walk around with the 45P, and you an do situation photography, but it really is a medium format system.  This means that everything is bigger (21mm does not mean 21mm in 135 format terms - it’s more like 16mm); apertures also aren’t the same - f/4 is more like f/2.8, and f/1.8 is closer to f/1 in reality.  Also, leaf shutters are great, but the whole shutter operation is slower - leaf shutter open for focus and framing, then the shutter has to close, then fire, then open again.  That all takes time, as people complaining about liveview delay show.  You could use the electronic shutter, if you want to live with rolling shutter …

The 50MP sensor is seriously good (probably why it is in so many cameras), and I like the leaf shutters (despite the 1/2000 speed limit).  I do use the Himatt filters - if you go that route, don’t get the smaller ones - you need the larger ones.

Downsides?  I’m sure the AF could be faster and more accurate.  With both my AF cameras (the SL and the X1D II), I use the back button then manual focus.  Focus peaking really doesn’t work in any iteration, unless you’re well stopped down, but auto magnification is very good.  This makes the X1D contemplative.

I took my X1D II, with the 135, converter and a couple of other lenses, to my niece’s wedding - the AF was a complete nightmare; but the few good results I got were better than anything the paid photographer produced.

Worth a thought …
John

Thanks of this. I want that X1D II because of "medium format look", the falloff of sharpness, I do a lot of portraits and like the look. I feel the camera is an artistic tool, a little bit more tricky to use but that the results would be worth it. Would have to use one for some time to really get an idea how it works for me, before daring to buy one. Also that SL2-S is an intriguing system, feeling like a Ferrari when compared to X1D II Rolls Royce. So damn hard can be to find the right tools :D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an X1D II and 907X. Hasselblad X is sloooooooow: slow to boot, slow to AF, long blackout. I leave it in MF mode and use back button focus, but mostly just manually focus. Lovely images, but I wouldn't suggest it for much beyond very slow or controlled settings like landscape, product, and studio portrait.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...