SL vs M (if you could only keep one)

[hansvons]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My only stills camera I shoot with is a SL2-S with the brilliant 24-90. Colour is one of its kind, so is its lowlight capabilities. The lens is the best stills zoom I‘ve ever worked with (tons of dimensionality), and the AF with people and face recognition improved to a professionally level with firmware 2.0. 

Only a SL3-S in the future would make me reconsider this camera.

[Torpille]

vor 19 Stunden schrieb Mdol:

If only one, I would keep the SL and the M 😂. SL for professional work, M for the pleasure it gives to me.

That the point !

the M10 is unique in term of joy of shooting. 
the SL is the camera which gives you the best images with very little effort especially with the 24-90mm which’s incredible. 

[Advertisement]

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

[chasdfg]

I suppose if you have to do paid shoots (or want to do paid shoots and have grown accustomed to the SL + 24-90 option), then keeping an L-mount body key and doesn't leave you much room to consider the M10, unless you're ok to use an M for your shoots instead. The SL system is a great platform for adapting M glass, using great native L mount lenses, DSLR glass (Leica R, Nikon etc) and also S glass. I used an SL/2 as my colour camera for much of 2020, but I only shoot with M glass and there were times i didn't bring my camera out with me because of the heft. That was quite telling and prompted me to sell my SL (and later, SL2 when i wanted to give that camera a go). For M lenses, the best option is an M body - not really for lens performance because the SL gets you close, but the portability. I wouldn't give up the M for any other camera because it just works well for me and my detour to try the SL, SL2 and Sigma FP just reinforced this.

If you can do shoots with an M and forgo the 24-90, then i think an M10 is a great choice and would consolidate your paid shoots with your shooting as a hobby (that said, so does the SL...). Presuming you do not do this work professionally, do you do enough shoots to justify keeping the SL + 24-90 when the M glass is used for pleasure? 

Alternatively, you could sell the SL and 24-90 and pick up an entire Nikon or Sony kit + M10, but you'd be forgoing the 24-90 magic. I did consider a Nikon Z for AF and a 2nd body for M glass -> not the same as the SL in terms of performance with M glass and minimalist layout though it's lighter and has IBIS and apparently decent M-lens compatibility (though you mentioned you'd like to own only 1 body). Or you could rent for paid shoots. There are quite a lot of options.

[Stuart Richardson]

Have you tried the Panasonic S1R or S1? They are brilliant cameras with fantastic sensors that are native mount for your 24-90mm. They do even better video and while they do not have the Leica philosophy of handling, they are rather good on that front compared to the other alternatives. In my opinion, they are by far the best alternative to the SL cameras if you want to maintain a similar method of working for a lower cost. The downside is that they do not do as well with the M lenses, so if you want to continue to use them, then you have no practical choice other than the SL series. The M is a fundamentallly different kind of camera, so it is hard to say keep it or get rid of it without knowing how you photograph. I typically used mine most for travel and candids, neither of which I have done much recently for obvious reasons, so I sold it to a friend. Maybe if the M11 comes back and it is sufficiently tempted I will get another, but these days the SL2 does a better job for me...

Edited August 10, 2021 by Stuart Richardson

[pgk]

I still prefer my M9s over any other camera that I have tried. I recently bought an SL as a relatively cheap option to use my M lenses on and also to use adapted lenses on. If I had to make the choice I would retain the M cameras over any others I have tried, SL included. But it all depends on your pov and actual needs. For some (quite a lot of) work, Ms are simply not the right tool so another camera is needed. I also have Sony bodies and the same focal length lenses (fixed primes) as my Leica M lenses, as well as macro lenses. I invariably use the M Leicas if I can though.

[Simone_DF]

If I could choose, I'd keep a M sized SL

[lucy63]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been camera-less for a year or so and recently bought an SL2s and 35 SL. In the past I used Leica M's but I thought I needed AF this time. Now in hindsight I wish I'd bought an M10/50 Lux, but I have the SL2s which comes a close second. I also just got the 24-70 SL to replace my now redundant 35 SL..I figured if I have a heavy camera I might as well put a more useful lens on it. I hope the SL2s grows on me, that it becomes a useful tool to grab shots with, but I've definitely got my sights on an M10 or M11 for the future.

[augustwest100]

I often have these questions, having bounced between various M systems and Sony systems for years. 

FWIW posting this in the SL forum may indicate a slight SL bias. I posted similar questions, but in the M forum, because I secretly (not so secretly) wanted to have M users remind me how unique it is to shoot with an M.

For me, I have lately been shooting the M10M for personal projects and for street work, but grab the SL2S when I need macro or telephoto more intensely or don’t want to think about focus, such as in a rainforest or an event, or where weight does not matter, such as when I may only need an hour or two to shoot. In my first attempt to go with only one camera, I ditched my M10 to rely solely on a Sony A9, and regretted it, not because of any shortcomings of the A9 (other than menu system) but because using the M always included learning new things about photography, metering light, finding focus, framing. I think if I had to choose one, I would probably try the M system this time around because I am more comfortable with and aware of its limitations.

But if my livelihood depended on it, I would go for the SL system and pick up a cheap manual film camera for those time  I miss the M. And I would miss you, M!

 

 

[trickness]

As stated above, if this isn’t for professional work, it’s really an emotional choice - which camera do you connect with? That’s the one to get/keep.

I sold my 240 to get an SL and used only M glass on it, until I got the SL2 and got some of the superb SL glass. It’s amazing with native glass, and using M glass on it feels familiar coming from an M.

I definitely want to get an M again, because it’s unique and has an emotional appeal. But I find it way easier to get to what I want creatively with the SL, using either SL or M glass. It’s a very well thought out, modern, versatile camera. The M is a beautiful anachronism.

[ravinj]

After selling the M10 and moving to the SL2/SL Summicrons, I got back to my senses and was able to get hold of a M10-P. Holding it after a year was a revelation in the sense of "what the heck was I thinking getting those big heavy cameras and lenses". I don't think I need to answer which one would I keep.

[meerec]

5 hours ago, trickness said:

The M is a beautiful anachronism.

Totally 🙃💯 

[tom0511]

Am 8.8.2021 um 00:08 schrieb FlashGordonPhotography:

I'd be disappointed not to have an M system but not having my SL2 would be much, much more inconvenient. So I'd definitely keep the SL2 first.

...

Gordon

Same here,

the M is a special experience, but the SL system with its zooms, primes, tele, short distance, AF, advanced exposure metering is my hobby-"work horse".

It can do it all. For 21-75mm the M is fun to use and I like the simplicity. But M only would be too limiting for my needs.

[FrankA]

I really appreciate the M10-R and enjoyed it immensely.  Also, the M8,9,10 etc.  However, for a few more ounces and a few more mm’s, the SL2 and M lenses is wonderful.  IBIS and I get to use the 90-280.  If/when I get the eyes repaired I will probably get an M but for now it’s a great set up. 

[otto.f]

On 8/7/2021 at 2:55 PM, northernlights said:

Just want to hear from leica users who keep only 1 body if there have been conflicting thoughts - the itch of going back to the M but worry about flexibility. 

I can only speak for myself, although I’m pretty convinced about this: I swapped my SL and M9 for an M10R (after serious testing and comparing with the M10P). The M10R is for me the ideal all-in-one camera and I do not miss my SL at all. On the contrary, I’m glad that I’m released from that bulk. I use R lenses with the greatest ease on the M10R, even with liveview from the screen, handheld. I often save myself the time to mount the Visoflex2 and it works out fine in much more  situations than I expected. But: I’m not a wedding photographer or whatever would justify an SL more than an M.
 I have owned the M10 too, but it’s nothing compared to the M10R, not only the silent shitter, but foremost the image quality, the colors, the dynamic range, the subtle tonal values especially in the highlights. This camera is about genuine resolution, not about microcontrast enhancing the idea of sharpness and thus images are much more natural than in previous digital M’s. I think it would be throwing money away to choose for an M10 at this moment, just because it’s cheaper now. 
 

Edited August 13, 2021 by otto.f

[mike3996]

Here's some consideration from the opposite side. I shoot an M and want to get an SL or SL2-S on the side to complement the rangefinder with a great TTL (through-the-lens) camera.

I shoot M240 and love the RF experience. But I want to explore the other side as well, where live view quality is put on a pronounced pedestal. M10 series and the upcoming M11 will enhance the live view no doubt, but money remains a question.

Trading in the M240 to an M10 costs approximately similar money than just buying an SL typ 601 on the side. Trading my M240 for an M10R or the upcoming M11, I might as well buy the SL2-S brand new with the required budget. And I seriously doubt any M camera -- due to size constraints -- can best any SL camera in live view experience.

(To many people M10 makes obvious sense and this question would be a nonbrainer. But I grew up on M240 and love almost everything on it, and don't mind the rest too much. I like the fat battery life and the color science works for me really well. If by some miracle I wouldn't prefer M10 colors to my M240 colors, then it would definitely eat a little bit of enjoyment. So I am most happy to keep my M240 as my sole rangefinder.)

I am currently getting my TTL fix with a Nikon Df but I am not satisfied with Nikon colors or the camera operation for the most part. Then I was absurdly also thinking about adding Pentax K1 to the mix. At this point I question if I should just scratch the SL itch I've had since 2016 or so. They're only 2000 € or so used.

Truthfully I am also giving heavy consideration to Panasonic S1 as a companion to my M240. I will have my M so thick cover glass is not going to be a huge problem at least in the beginning. But then again, SL is a dead gorgeous tool, SL2-S likewise. There are some minor annoying leicaisms in the SL2S but think of the synergy of shooting Leica and Leica.

I have collected a good collection of Nikon lenses from the 70s and 80s but I feel I get the best out of them only when I mount them on my Leica and use the clumsy live view of the M240.

[Tailwagger]

I own both the 10-R and SL2 (among others). As they are completely different briefs it depends on what you shoot and how, but for me, it's 100% the M over all the other systems I own.  It's portable, the range of native glass is completely unmatched as is its simplicity of operation. While it might never come to the rescue with EyeAF or IBIS, it never, ever, ever interferes or gets in the way.  Any miss falls to me, but all the makes do as well.

The SL will never be an AF-enabled M, and frankly if for no other reason than the mass of the system, IMO, it's a mistake to think of it as such. Yes, there is a similar range of available primes (taking Sigma and Pano in to account), but the reality is that where one can easily carry an M with a fist full of fast primes, that isn't a realistic option with the SL.  From a practical, use in the field POV, its best paired with zooms which completely alters both the thought process as well as the shooting experience. 

The SL is a great camera, but it is in no way the only game in this particular town. Depending on one's areas for best compromise, one could reasonably choose any of the FF or MF alternatives and be justifiably pleased with the decision.  But the M is unique, both in terms its operation as well the breadth of its rendering.  It may require a more deliberate approach, but assuming one is more concerned with the quality rather than quantity of shots and is prepared to rely on forethought rather than technology to achieve them, there is nothing else that comes close AFAIC.

[IkarusJohn]

On 8/9/2021 at 12:19 AM, northernlights said:

I can only afford to keep one camera body. 

I have bought and sold, and changed my kit as needs arise.  It seems to me the logical choice for you, at the moment, is to stick with the SL, bu to keep your lenses.  Everything needs to justify its existence, and when you need money for something else, then when the finances improve, there will be other gear available.

I do no professional work - never sold an image in over 50 years of photography.  I have an SL and the 24-90 (9I had more L mount lenses, but sold them) and I have been able to keep my M system.  The SL is a perfect universal mount, and single lens travel camera.  But, for pure pleasure, the constraints of the M system (manual focus, primes, and limited range) just seems to produce better results … for me …

[jrp]

I have wanted to love the M9 and m240– I had them to reduce the bulk that I carry— but I use glasses and struggled to focus and frame.

The SL and now the SL2 produced great pictures with less effort at the expense of bulk, if I don’t use my M lenses, which are certainly compact, but don’t produce the clean images that native SL glass does.  

[lucy63]

6 hours ago, mike3996 said:

Here's some consideration from the opposite side. I shoot an M and want to get an SL or SL2-S on the side to complement the rangefinder with a great TTL (through-the-lens) camera.

I shoot M240 and love the RF experience. But I want to explore the other side as well, where live view quality is put on a pronounced pedestal. M10 series and the upcoming M11 will enhance the live view no doubt, but money remains a question.

Trading in the M240 to an M10 costs approximately similar money than just buying an SL typ 601 on the side. Trading my M240 for an M10R or the upcoming M11, I might as well buy the SL2-S brand new with the required budget. And I seriously doubt any M camera -- due to size constraints -- can best any SL camera in live view experience.

(To many people M10 makes obvious sense and this question would be a nonbrainer. But I grew up on M240 and love almost everything on it, and don't mind the rest too much. I like the fat battery life and the color science works for me really well. If by some miracle I wouldn't prefer M10 colors to my M240 colors, then it would definitely eat a little bit of enjoyment. So I am most happy to keep my M240 as my sole rangefinder.)

I am currently getting my TTL fix with a Nikon Df but I am not satisfied with Nikon colors or the camera operation for the most part. Then I was absurdly also thinking about adding Pentax K1 to the mix. At this point I question if I should just scratch the SL itch I've had since 2016 or so. They're only 2000 € or so used.

Truthfully I am also giving heavy consideration to Panasonic S1 as a companion to my M240. I will have my M so thick cover glass is not going to be a huge problem at least in the beginning. But then again, SL is a dead gorgeous tool, SL2-S likewise. There are some minor annoying leicaisms in the SL2S but think of the synergy of shooting Leica and Leica.

I have collected a good collection of Nikon lenses from the 70s and 80s but I feel I get the best out of them only when I mount them on my Leica and use the clumsy live view of the M240.

I'm selling my SL2s, 35 SL, 24-70 SL, They're just a few weeks old and perfect. I'm in the UK

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[mucius]

Both SL2 cameras are available with the Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-70mm f/2.8 ASPH. lens. Does anyone know this lens? I've seen some reviews that are not that good, some claiming that it is actually a Sigma lens. It's an attractive option as 24-90 is more than twice the cost, upward of $5,000. I am a new user trying to transition to Leica. Any insight would be appreciated, thank you.