I posted in the SL section asking for comments about the SL2, but now I'm wondering if the M is what I really want

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is a bit of a rambling post, started in the SL section asking for thoughts about moving to the SL platform from the Q and Nikon Z6.  As people replied, and I considered my hobbyist approach to photography as a retired senior with not so good eyesight, I thought that an auto-focus solution was going to be "Nirvana".  Turns out, the more that people replied, the more I remember the joy I had learning how to use a rangefinder M7/M7/M-A and how unique that experience is compared to pretty much anything else.

I welcome anyone's thoughts about why you prefer the M system versus the other Leica (or other brand) options, including medium format, and what makes the M platform something you keep coming back to, regardless of the "newest and greatest" cameras being offered for sale.

The following paragraph (copied from my SL post), summarizes how I'm now looking at the choice between not only different camera brands and formats, but the entire "zen" of photography.  I'd forgotten that as I was looking at my failing eyesight as a handicap instead of an opportunity to slow down and rekindle the joy of photography.  Any comments you have about the M as a creative tool is especially welcome, along with the frustrations and limitations of a purely manual camer, at least as auto-focus and high automation is concerned - thank you in advance, and feel free to read the SL post for more details!

I'm not sure what I really rekindled, but it did remind me of the first time I used a rangefinder camera.  The lack of certainty and anticipation of "did I frame that correctly?"; "is the rangefinder accurate or will I have parallax problems that created a missed shot?"; "can anyone really focus a Summilux on the fly?"; and all the other things associated with mechanical versus electronic settings.  There's no doubt that the electronic aids in modern cameras create a higher probability of getting the shot you want, but at what cost in terms of creating something special?  It also made me better appreciate the "shoot wide open" mantra of many Leica owners.  There is something to be said for cinematic photos with nearly unlimited depth of field, but there is also something to be said for the "dreamy" look of a narrowly focused subject and yards of bokeh.  (Think Ming Thein versus Thorsten Overgaard).  That's something I'd lost when shooting with more automation than was available with 35mm film cameras, which I started with over 50 years ago.  I don't intend to go back to film, but I do now wonder if a more "analog" shooting style may be what I'm looking for.  By that I mean returning to the basics of composition, exposure, setting the controls to capture the look I want, etc.

Edited December 27, 2021 by lencap

[abphoto]

Sounds to me like you really want a digital M. I would highly recommend an M 10, M 10 R or a M 10 mono. Heres a great pice on Leica and I would skip down to the manual focus part which is the next to the last section

https://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/

Edited December 27, 2021 by abphoto

[Advertisement]

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

[jakontil]

M with all its limitations are actually every feature that improves me and give me enjoyment, even its M lens render uniquely, namely a noct 1.2 for instance where its focus falloff quickly, sharp at the center, soft anywhere else

i feel attached to my M for some good years now,  my eyesight is not as good as the first time i used M, but the yin yang between me and my M is too strong i live by it everytime 

cant say enough

[a.noctilux]

@lencap

Try M-D (typ 262), to not bother on settings and/or try to see what's on LCD. With something like a good (or of your choice) 35mm to begin with.

 

[TomB_tx]

I've used M cameras (and others) for over 50 years, and even now with my long-retired eyes I find an M10 the easiest camera to focus quickly. I've been putting off cataract surgery, and still prefer an M rangefinder.

[stefanusj]

SL vs M is The Result vs The Process. That is my conclusion from using both for 5 -6 years.

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I very much appreciate the comments, thank you.  AB Photo thank you for the link.  I enjoyed reading that very much - I hadn’t seen another article that so clearly described the “Leica look”.  It clarified many thoughts about sharpness versus “mood” that I hadn’t realized.  It also helps me better understand why some lenses seemed to overly “etched” when I saw the prints.  Great info!

I also like the comment about Result versus Process.  I realize why I enjoyed the Hassie years ago, and the fully manual M-A without any meters or electronics.  Less between the photographer and subject - everything under artistic control.  

And I can certainly relate to cataracts (I’ve got them as well).  I think I sometimes get overly caught up in the technology of photography at the expense of the creativity.  You’ve all reminded me how messed up that perspective is!

Now I’m really reconsidering everything.  Thanks everyone!

Edited December 28, 2021 by lencap

[a.noctilux]

As M-A user myself, but film is less and less used by me, and by now,

when I fancy to use digital M, the M-D is as close ( comparing to M with LCD screen that I use also ) to film M use with digital direct files.

I was not convinced ( and I don't want to convince anyone ! ), untill I use this one "non-sense digital screenless".

Zen digital photography for me.

[Al Brown]

Your photos will not get any better. They will not be more cinematic, nor dreamy. You can do all that plus other things you described with the SL.
BUT
It will make tou think. Reinvent the process. Slow you down.
 

I have 4 digital systems including medium format that makes technically superior images compared to all others in my pro stash. Yet every time I see the slightest opportunity, I go for my M10-R. Aspiration is the driver of learning. This life is nothing short of a deepening flow of growth on the path to nirvana, zen and Leica M included.

[a.noctilux]

Just to add that thing as "results are important" as I previously defend for many years,

has no importance for me now.

 

With age, I learn to enjoy each day (I know that each day IS one less day to live) and each minutes; seconds,

so I more enjoy the path or act (each act) than trying to enjoy the results.

Why I prone zen photography, but not only photography to be honest, zen attitude IS my way of life.

[lencap]

Greetings!  I posted this in the SL section, and thought it was relevant to this post as well.  Your thoughts are welcome and invited:

Thanks again for the continuing comments.  I went to the local Leica dealer yesterday and he has a very nice (9 condition) used SL manufactured in late 2018 for sale.  Unfortunately his stock of L lenses is limited to used Sigma 35 DGDN (7+ condition), and Sigma 50 50 1.4 DG ART lenses (9+ condition).  

When comparing it to my Z6 combo I found that the "in hand feel" of the SL was generally "OK", but not exceptional.  The grip, especially the squared off lower portion, was a bit challenging, especially with the ART lens, which was very impressive, but also VERY large.  The dealer had no Leica Zooms as a comparison, but I assume the ART lens isn't far off the smaller Leica zoom in size/weight.

As I tried focus and other features the camera was again "OK", but not significantly better than the Z6.  Color was hard to tell on the LCD display, but it looked fine.  My honest reaction after trying it out was "It's a Leica, but is it really better than the Z6/Zoom combo?".  Not sure about the answer, but I didn't feel compelled to buy it on the spot.

The dealer has no stock of SL2 or SL2-S cameras for comparison.

I then asked about M bodies only to find he has none in stock - new/used doesn't matter.  He's got nothing to show.  He suggested with the M11 around the corner he may have some trade ins after release, but even if he does the price will be not very different from the original selling price for the newer models.  He did have a very nice Summilux 50MM used lens.  When I held it and played with it a bit, I again realized how much I've come to enjoy the distance markings on traditional lenses, along with the obviously smaller overall package.  

No decision yet, but I'm glad I was able to at least get a better idea of the SL and how it feels in hand, even though it's an older version with non-Leica glass.

[Jeff S]

Judging color on an LCD screen?  You missed an opportunity for more useful information if you didn’t bring an SD card, make some pics, and process them at home using your own workflow, which I hope includes making prints.  For screen display, a camera phone generally suffices.  
 

Another option is to rent, as Leica gear is readily available for you here in the US.  That will provide more time for a considered assessment.

Jeff

[stefanusj]

13 hours ago, lencap said:

Greetings!  I posted this in the SL section, and thought it was relevant to this post as well.  Your thoughts are welcome and invited:

Thanks again for the continuing comments.  I went to the local Leica dealer yesterday and he has a very nice (9 condition) used SL manufactured in late 2018 for sale.  Unfortunately his stock of L lenses is limited to used Sigma 35 DGDN (7+ condition), and Sigma 50 50 1.4 DG ART lenses (9+ condition).  

When comparing it to my Z6 combo I found that the "in hand feel" of the SL was generally "OK", but not exceptional.  The grip, especially the squared off lower portion, was a bit challenging, especially with the ART lens, which was very impressive, but also VERY large.  The dealer had no Leica Zooms as a comparison, but I assume the ART lens isn't far off the smaller Leica zoom in size/weight.

As I tried focus and other features the camera was again "OK", but not significantly better than the Z6.  Color was hard to tell on the LCD display, but it looked fine.  My honest reaction after trying it out was "It's a Leica, but is it really better than the Z6/Zoom combo?".  Not sure about the answer, but I didn't feel compelled to buy it on the spot.

The dealer has no stock of SL2 or SL2-S cameras for comparison.

I then asked about M bodies only to find he has none in stock - new/used doesn't matter.  He's got nothing to show.  He suggested with the M11 around the corner he may have some trade ins after release, but even if he does the price will be not very different from the original selling price for the newer models.  He did have a very nice Summilux 50MM used lens.  When I held it and played with it a bit, I again realized how much I've come to enjoy the distance markings on traditional lenses, along with the obviously smaller overall package.  

No decision yet, but I'm glad I was able to at least get a better idea of the SL and how it feels in hand, even though it's an older version with non-Leica glass.

from what i've heard, all M10 has been discontinued. M11 will be release in January. My advice: you have to decide SL or M first.

SL1 vs SL2 is the same for me... (i don't like SL2s more flat color). Any M digital (from M8 to M10R) is ok, just differentiate in high iso capabilities for me.

[lencap]

Greetings!

I appreciate everyone's help, and I've arrived at a decision that surprised me.

After visiting today with my local Leica dealer, who graciously let me try the new SL offerings, and other options (but sadly with no M options), I decided that I've not given my Leica Q a fair shot.  I was distracted by the 28mm framing, and used the camera less and less instead of learning how to properly frame and adapt myself to the different perspective versus my standard 50mm M lenses of the past.  The dealer showed me some tricks that I didn't appreciate earlier - apparently framing images without severe facial distortion is a skill that can be acquired.

I also realized that while the SL line is indeed large and heavier than the M line, there are things that it can do pretty well.  One of them is balancing heavier L mount glass if you learn the proper technique.  When he showed me how to do this the camera weight became an asset instead of a liability.  Still, it's a handful, so he added to the weight by tempting me with a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART lens.  That combo is pretty interesting, especially at the discounted price of used Leica gear for a nearly mint late 2018 SL (9 condition).

To top it off he gave me a fair trade in price for my Nikon D5500 two lens kit, which was sitting unused in a cabinet.  For now the decision to reacquire an M is on hold, but I'm open to adding it in the future.  He expects that the new M11 may prompt some trade-ins, and if so, he'll work with me if that what I want to do.

Overall, I now have a Titanium Q (version 1), an original SL with Sigma Art 50mm lens (the bokeh looked very nice on a high resolution full size monitor), and the Nikon Z6 with the kit lens (which will likely be sold/traded as I get more experience with the SL.

Is it the outcome I expected?  Yes, and no, but I didn't see much risk in making the transaction.  I wound up with the SL/Sigma combo after trade and tax for less than a quarter of the price of a M-10R without lens.  I can wait for the M11, see what comes available in trade, and try out the SL in the meantime.  The colors are wonderful and the EVF is even better than expected.  It's also a good platform for any type of Leica glass in the future, and seems to be near the bottom of the depreciation curve.  

Admittedly, the M is an entirely different camera, but I'm happy with the deal I made.  The image quality of the SL/Sigma is very satisfying, and the weight will be something I either embrace or not.  Time will tell, but if the idea is image quality I'm comfortable with the decision, as much as I'm surprised by it.  I realized weight is an issue, but there is something about Leica design and image quality that allows me to compromise without too much angst.

Edited December 30, 2021 by lencap

[trickness]

You can set up the SL like an M, easily make everything manual, easily adapt M glass and manual focus. You won’t have the smaller form factor, but you’ll have an EVF that previews the image you’ll take very effectively. And no matter how big the lens it won’t block the viewfinder on an SL.

The most uniquely analog aspect of an M is the rangefinder, composing a shot within the framelines, choosing what goes in the frame while seeing what’s outside. Which an EVF doesn’t do. Which is why I find it hilarious that some M photographers use the crappy Visoflex attachment almost exclusively. Why buy a rangefinder camera and then not use the rangefinder?

The SL can be every bit as “analog” (manual) as the digital M bodies, except for the rangefinder, so if shooting with a rangefinder appeals to you, buy an M. If you plan to use the Visoflex you’re just buying into an inferior EVF camera experience (not to say that you can’t take great photos this way) and (in my opinion) not using the M for its greatest strength.

And in real world shooting the SL is not some huge pig compared to the M - especially if the M has the Visoflex attached. I shoot with SL, Q, and M family bodies, the Q is the real baby of the bunch if you want a light camera system that is highly capable. And can also be setup/used in a very analog fashion.

(Btw I shoot the 75 Nocti on the SL2 and there’s no way it would work as well for me on an M body)

Edited January 1, 2022 by trickness

[IkarusJohn]

19 hours ago, trickness said:

… If you plan to use the Visoflex you’re just buying into an inferior EVF camera experience (not to say that you can’t take great photos this way) and (in my opinion) not using the M for its greatest strength…

 

I agree with all you say, but this statement.

I do use my M cameras for their fine lenses, the shooting experience and the OVF (in that order).  It’s not its greatest strength - its size, traditional form factor and its lenses are the greatest strengths, in my view.  The only M camera I have which will take the EVF is my M10-D, and it is vital if I want to use a lens longer than 75 or wider than 28 (which I have).  The EVF also enables me to use the more advanced metering and movable focal point.

The EVF does have its uses, but I will be looking at the new one when it surfaces.

Edit - I should have added that the OVF is not without its flaws.  It is precise, regardless of the focal length of the lens you’re using (great for fast wides), but there are some significant problems with the OVF:

(1) calibration - if your lens has focus shift or the lens or camera is out of calibration, it is deeply frustrating and the only way to get accurate focusing is with the OVF

(2) fixed focus patch - your only point of focus is in the centre of the frame, which means may photos tend to have the subject centre frame. You can focus and recompose, but that turns a nice and accurate focusing system into a bit of a lottery

(3) framing - the framing is at best, proximate

(4) metering - you have one choice of centre weighted metering off the shutter blades

This tends to make the M camera at its strength (particularly if you don’t like the EVF as an option) in the focal lengths 28-75, without the really fast or short focus lenses like the 75 Noctilux and the APO 35 Summicron.

Edited January 1, 2022 by IkarusJohn

[lencap]

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!

Thanks again for the additional posts.  

It's unseasonably warm where I live, temps in the mid 70s.  Took a walk in the park, "lugging" the newly acquired SL/Sigma combo.  I will admit that you can't ignore the weight, and the balance with the large Sigma lens is definitely front heavy.

On the other hand, the colors are wonderful!  Natural tones, not overly aggressive, and the image appears smooth and clean at first blush.  The F/1.4 "blur" is obvious and gives the look I want, while backing down to f/8 or so gives great depth and a near 3D perspective.   The controls are also very well done.  Things came to hand naturally, even without more than a cursory glance at the owner manual.

Given what I wanted, I'm pleased, but look forward to setting the camera to a user profile that suits my shooting style.  I clearly have to invest some time learning all of the nuances of the SL to fully harness its strengths, and minimize any weaknesses.  It should be interesting comparing the SL to the Q files in Lightroom - the sensors are nearly identical.  

The image isn't a photograph, it's a quick snapshot, but it gives an idea of the natural look of what the SL creates.  That image is very close to reality.  It is JPEG grab SOOC.

Edited January 1, 2022 by lencap

[trickness]

54 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I agree with all you say, but this statement.

I do use my M cameras for their fine lenses, the shooting experience and the OVF (in that order).  It’s not its greatest strength - its size, traditional form factor and its lenses are the greatest strengths, in my view.  The only M camera I have which will take the EVF is my M10-D, and it is vital if I want to use a lens longer than 75 or wider than 28 (which I have).  The EVF also enables me to use the more advanced metering and movable focal point.

The EVF does have its uses, but I will be looking at the new one when it surfaces.

Edit - I should have added that the OVF is not without its flaws.  It is precise, regardless of the focal length of the lens you’re using (great for fast wides), but there are some significant problems with the OVF:

(1) calibration - if your lens has focus shift or the lens or camera is out of calibration, it is deeply frustrating and the only way to get accurate focusing is with the OVF

(2) fixed focus patch - your only point of focus is in the centre of the frame, which means may photos tend to have the subject centre frame. You can focus and recompose, but that turns a nice and accurate focusing system into a bit of a lottery

(3) framing - the framing is at best, proximate

(4) metering - you have one choice of centre weighted metering off the shutter blades

This tends to make the M camera at its strength (particularly if you don’t like the EVF as an option) in the focal lengths 28-75, without the really fast or short focus lenses like the 75 Noctilux and the APO 35 Summicron.

Totally hear you and everyone is of course entitled to their opinion.

I think the rangefinder in the M enables you to compose entirely differently than on any other camera system, including those by Leica, which enables a unique method of working and picture taking. All the other features which attract you are of course wonderful and fantastic. But the M rangefinder is really what makes the camera unique. There are lots of other small form factor cameras including ones that can use M glass, but they don’t have a rangefinder. Being able to compose by looking within framelines and then still being able to see what is happening outside those framelines and make decisions about whether to include these elements in the composition or not is the unique identifying strength of the M body. And using an EVF attachment obliterates that strength - I personally don’t see any reason to use an M and not use it as a rangefinder. But we all have our tastes and preferences.

No matter what the new M11 EVF attachment can do, it is likely to be inferior to a native EVF such as is used in the SL2 or Q2. Call me a purist but I think it’s completely ridiculous to buy an M and not bother with the rangefinder and instead peep through that swimmy, low resolution limited view of the world that an M EVF attachment provides.

And of course it’s a lot harder to use the rangefinder focusing on practice, so maybe that’s why some folks don’t bother. 

Edited January 1, 2022 by trickness

[Guest]

The external VF 4  which i used on the olympus ep-5 pen had larger magnification and was just as clear as the built in EVF on the expensive olympus pen-F that replaced the EP-5 .

In my view the external  VF-4 EVF was clearly better than the Leica Q built in  EVF .

Point is an external EVF can compete and even better a built in EVF it seems to me.

So leica might just surprise people with blinkered vision with their new external EVF for the M11 .

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Fontan]

I love shooting with my M10. But, as I get older, I am finding out that focusing quickly as I used to is getting very difficult. So I bought myself a Visoflex, which I found to be helpful for my purpose. Now I am beginning to think that if I am having to use Visoflex, what is really the purpose of sticking with M? For me it was the lenses - although I rarely change my lenses these days. My Summicron 28/2 has been stuck on my M10 for over a month now. My 50 mm is a bit unorthodox in that it is a Pentax-L 43/1.9 (yes I know it's not quite 50). But the point is that if I were to switch to Q2 for example - then I am not sure if my life is going to change much. If I am to go along with EVF from this point on, as Steve 1959 says above that Q2 built in EVF seems to work much better than Visoflex, which has been finicky at best (I have experienced some weird pin connection issues). When I saw the Q2 Reporter - it really got me thinking. Should I sell my M10 and lenses so I can switch to Q2? I would never have entertained that few years ago. It never crossed my mind when I switched from M to M10. Things change as we get older. Life is short. It is better to adjust and move on??  My five cents.