Is an M10/11 what I am looking for?

[CapuchinSwing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As I begin writing this, I can already tell it's going to be a bit lengthy. But having lurked for a while, I suspect that a lot of folks will either relate to my situation or at least have a perspective on my situation.

For some context, I started taking pictures on a Kodak Pocket Instamatic in the late '70s when I was 10, but didn't start taking photography seriously until around 2000. For about 20 years, I've been an enthusiast and my main kit for most of that was Canon. Film for a while, then various crop sensor bodies, and finally a 5D Mark IV. I owned some great Canon glass over the years, both primes and zooms.

The origins of this post actually can be traced back 10 years, to 2012. I don't remember the circumstances, but I became aware of mirrorless cameras and Fujifilm's new X100 (the original) that summer. It had gotten heaps of praise for the quality of its APS-C sensor, its retro-styling, and its small form factor. I couldn't resist, so I bought one shortly after learning about it. Once I began using it, it was love at first click.

Compared with any of my Canon DSLR systems, with their complicated menus, "plasticky" look and feel, and bulkiness, the original X100 was a revelation. I used it for 3 years and upgraded to the X100T in 2015. It was a brilliant companion. I actually loved being "limited" to the 35mm (equivalent) lens. I learned how to set its manual focusing system for hyperfocal distances when doing street photography. In short, I found the X100 series to be the most enjoyable, inspirational, and plain old fun cameras I've ever used. I actually look back fondly on that first summer with the X100. It really was that much fun.

I was almost equally enthralled with Fujifilm's X-T series. Again, small form factor, retro styling, etc. I currently have the X-T4, but use it mostly for video.

Despite all the Fuji love that was engendered in me, I continued to see my Canon system as my workhorse. For 10 years, I was a very serious "soccer Dad" photographer. The results were regularly pretty stunning and it was lots of fun. But when my boy's soccer days ended, I no longer needed a high-performance body and various super zooms. Even though I could get beautiful results with the Canon 5DMIV and the 24-70 f/2.8L, it was never fun...or inspirational. Part of Fujifilm's appeal for me is that in life, aesthetics are important to me. And let's face it, DSLRs and their mirrorless offspring beasts are really designed for performance, not their appearance (I'm sure some might love the look of the Canon R5, and that's fine, but it's not my vibe.)

So, here's where I'm at now. Last summer, I had a photography existential crisis. I was simply not enjoying it. Having built my Canon kit around my nearly year-round soccer photography, it sat bloated and mostly unused. I sold everything. All the Canon stuff I'd owned for years, my X100T, and more.

I am looking for the camera system that will inspire me the way the X100 did, but with some other requirements:

• Full frame sensor
• Small, compact size 
• Gorgeous to look at and hold
• Great glass available; ability to swap lenses
• Something for travel, street, family, everyday

Like probably everyone on this forum, I believe that Leica M cameras (35mm or digital) are the most beautifully minimalistic cameras I've ever seen or held. Obviously, Fujifilm knows that many people who'd love to have a Leica don't have the means for one, and the X series is great for many people. 

Here's where the plot thickens. Full-disclosure, last summer I actually bought and returned an M10-R and a (non-APO) Summicron 35mm f/2. I didn't keep it for very long and made sure to return it in perfect condition.

Because this is a sizable chunk of change, I wanted  to really make sure that I was making the right decision, especially since I was new to the whole rangefinder shooting experience.

I used it in a variety of settings, both indoors and out, and I was focussing most of my subjects with the split-image method. Focussing in bright conditions was OK, just slower than things would normally be with an AF lens. But I found that it was noticeably harder for me to focus in dim lighting, as it's harder to see sharply when you're over 50 (if not sooner). As for results, the photos I took were generally well-focused, and everything about the IQ was beautiful. It felt great in my hand and was a great combo of weight and size.

Using the camera for about a week, I guess I became skeptical that I would be able to make the thing "sing" the way so many others have. Vision-wise, my eyesight is probably fairly typical for someone my age (55). I do wear reading glasses, but the diopter makes that irrelevant.

• For anyone else who started using an M10/11 without prior RF experience, did I give up too soon?
• Should I have used zone or hyperfocal focussing in dimmer light?
• Had I hung in for a month, would dim-light focussing seem easier? Are there tips?
• Would the new Visoflex 2 make a big difference for me in low light?

With the M11 now selling for the same price as the M10-R, I am tempted to give it another try. Should I just buy another, give it more indefinite "field test", and if it doesn't pan out again, just sell it, and look at any potential loss as a "rental" cost?

Regarding the SL2,000 yes you can use M-lenses and has a gorgeous EVF, but it is a different animal and I am looking for something dead simple like the M.

If anyone one can help me, I'd love any feedback and thanks for much for taking the time to read through my drivel.

Best,

Bill

[Marc B-C]

I went a similar route to you but swap Canon for Nikon. I had a Leica M6 for a while but the manual focus was becoming an issue.
If you were happy with the fixed lens of the Fuji x100, why not look at the Leica Q2?

I did and it has more than reinvigorated my interest in using a camera. Great build quality, wonderful to use and outsanding photographs from a camera that is both fully manual and fully auto as and when needed. Whilst the lens is 28mm, it can be digitally set to 35mm (to 50mm or 75mm). 28mm is perfect for me, however.

[Robert Blanko]

Looks like you will end up in an on-off relationship with Leica M… 😉

If the M10R did not convince you, I would not try a second time.

Maybe a Q2 would suit 95% of your needs much better - of course no swapping of lenses possible,  but cropping helps a lot to compensate this to a large extent.

[Jeff S]

Some bond with the RF experience; some don’t. I did immediately, decades ago, and have continually made sure that my vision is corrected as best as possible for the RF, which for me is core to the M. Currently I wear glasses to correct for distance and astigmatism, and add at the same time a +.5 diopter to help my aging eyes. To determine if a diopter would help, I took my M to a local optician and experimented with some free trial diopters to optimize focusing (the focus patch is set at a virtual distance of 2m).  But the effort has been well worth it to me because I already know that I love working with the M system (btw including the M10-R)…a no-brainer for me. But YMMV.

Incidentally, I use the SL2, with SL zooms, to serve complementary photo needs.  The M can’t do it all, for me. 
 

Jeff

[evikne]

21 hours ago, CapuchinSwing said:

For anyone else who started using an M10/11 without prior RF experience, did I give up too soon?

Maybe you did. 

I was originally a Canon user too, with a wide range of L primes. I bought my first Leica in 2016 (a used M9) out of curiosity. It was never meant to replace my DSLR system, and it was not love at first sight. After some weeks I put it out for sale again. But after some more weeks nobody had purchased it, so I removed the ad and gave it another try. Gradually and imperceptibly I fell more and more in love with this camera, and when the M10 was announced early in 2017, I pre-ordered it almost immediately. The better ISO capability, slimmer body etc. made me want this as my only camera, and I started to sell all my DSLR equipment.

Now I've become a full-time Leica user. My eyesight is not the best either, but that has never stopped me from using the rangefinder. Not even when using fast lenses and with moving subjects. But if you plan to make extensive use of zone focusing, external EVF or other aids, I would still not recommend an M10/11. Because then you move away from the core of this camera and there will be many other cheaper and better solutions.

[charlesphoto99]

I'm 58 and wear glasses, but have also been using Leica rangefinders (and Mamiya) since 1992. Like I said elsewhere, it's a matter of practice - LOTS of practice focusing and recomposing, until one can do so in microseconds. Takes years. I gave some advice recently to a friend who is also pro and just picked up his first M for fun after a career of Nikon DSLR shooting. He was struggling with it, getting the focus 'just right' and my piece of advice was to get looser. To me the M is about being loose - in other words, unlike a DSLR where one pretty much sees exactly what they're going to get, with the M one needs to allow for surprises. That doesn't mean zone focusing (I hate that advice as it's about as lazy as using Program mode) but rather being ok with just shooting and letting what happens happen. Probably 50% of what I shoot with my M I'm not even looking through the viewfinder. Think more in terms of light and feel and play rather than absolute clarity or perfection. Otherwise better to use an slr/evf dedicated camera imo. 

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!

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Find the spark, then rent or try the m again, but also the q. The latter might be just for you…

[jpreisch]

I've had and have a lot of Leica's, but never a full frame. Except for an M4 which I no longer use, because I hate to wait to process film and then digitize it...sorry, it's just me.  I went for a Canon EOS R6, I thought I liked the flippy screen and big pixels.  After 4 months I've use the flippy screen about 5 times, and the camera about 250 images.  I am selling it for a used M10.  Your results may vary vary

Jim

[la1402]

If you are not sure and whant to try something, I suggest to buy a used M10 and 1-2 used lenses. Easier to avoid camera shake, less money at risk.

I am in that process now. Photographing since the mid 80s, I have a pretty complete Nikon Z system that i generally like a lot, but I am tired to lug it around and try see how simplification goes with a used M10-P, 28 Summicron v2 and 50mm Summicron v5. 90mm may be added for a small travel set. I am not sure yet wether the the level of inspiration is enough to overcome the oddities and complexities of the M system (for a 55+ person with weak eyesight), but I am willing to go through a learning period to really experience it. From a pure technical point of view, my Z6ii with the super nice Z lenses delivers sharper images (modern lens design, AF, IBIS) much easier, has muchmuchmuch better white balance and proper exposure, less noise and much less severe HIghlight clipping. But then there are a few pics, especially with the Summicron 28, that I enjoy a lot. I like the above idea of trying to use it in a more playful mode, less with the ambition of perfection - those moments also gave me my best results.

But its already clear for me that the M10P can not be my only camera. 

[CapuchinSwing]

Thank you to all of the thoughtful replies. A heterogeneous collection of perspectives, and that's what I was hoping for. It's really hard to fully communicate on a forum post all of the complexities of one's unique situation.

Creative pursuits have been "my thing" since I was a kid, and photography has been a major one for 20+ years. There are a million reasons why people can temporarily feel uninspired. I don't feel the need to give a complete psychological profile of myself, but suffice it to say that a "rough patch" doesn't necessarily mean one should just give up. I've had those moments in other areas and have always come out the other side. But I appreciate the sentiment, Goposer, so thanks.

I am probably going to rent an M system and give it another shot. I wasn't in the best head space last summer and almost felt like I was forcing things. A fresh attempt might give me the answers I need and at least I'll know I tried. Thanks again all. 🙏

[a.noctilux]

Hello Bill,

Side move ...

I know more than one young people who discovered film and bought "expensive" Leica film M, after using digital for years.

Maybe film photography (with Leica or not ) can be what you are waiting for (something with more personal investment).

[CapuchinSwing]

2 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

Maybe film photography (with Leica or not ) can be what you are waiting for (something with more personal investment).

Thanks, Arnaud. Although I shot countless roles of film back in the day, I'm afraid that ship has sailed. Don't get me wrong, I loved trying new emulsions and learning how they represented what I saw. But I think it made more sense when Tri-X/T-Max was $2 a roll, or even Velvia at $5. It's silly expensive now and just about every local lab in my area has long since closed, and am not interested in mailing stuff out.

I enjoy the control and immediacy that the digital PP experience gives me, but I really never had an interest in doing film developing on my own. Ironic, because there's an actual dark room in my home that was used by a professional photographer who lived there in the 1930s.

Edited May 16, 2022 by CapuchinSwing
thanks

[tom0511]

Am 13.5.2022 um 19:49 schrieb CapuchinSwing:

As I begin writing this, I can already tell it's going to be a bit lengthy. But having lurked for a while, I suspect that a lot of folks will either relate to my situation or at least have a perspective on my situation.

For some context, I started taking pictures on a Kodak Pocket Instamatic in the late '70s when I was 10, but didn't start taking photography seriously until around 2000. For about 20 years, I've been an enthusiast and my main kit for most of that was Canon. Film for a while, then various crop sensor bodies, and finally a 5D Mark IV. I owned some great Canon glass over the years, both primes and zooms.

The origins of this post actually can be traced back 10 years, to 2012. I don't remember the circumstances, but I became aware of mirrorless cameras and Fujifilm's new X100 (the original) that summer. It had gotten heaps of praise for the quality of its APS-C sensor, its retro-styling, and its small form factor. I couldn't resist, so I bought one shortly after learning about it. Once I began using it, it was love at first click.

Compared with any of my Canon DSLR systems, with their complicated menus, "plasticky" look and feel, and bulkiness, the original X100 was a revelation. I used it for 3 years and upgraded to the X100T in 2015. It was a brilliant companion. I actually loved being "limited" to the 35mm (equivalent) lens. I learned how to set its manual focusing system for hyperfocal distances when doing street photography. In short, I found the X100 series to be the most enjoyable, inspirational, and plain old fun cameras I've ever used. I actually look back fondly on that first summer with the X100. It really was that much fun.

I was almost equally enthralled with Fujifilm's X-T series. Again, small form factor, retro styling, etc. I currently have the X-T4, but use it mostly for video.

Despite all the Fuji love that was engendered in me, I continued to see my Canon system as my workhorse. For 10 years, I was a very serious "soccer Dad" photographer. The results were regularly pretty stunning and it was lots of fun. But when my boy's soccer days ended, I no longer needed a high-performance body and various super zooms. Even though I could get beautiful results with the Canon 5DMIV and the 24-70 f/2.8L, it was never fun...or inspirational. Part of Fujifilm's appeal for me is that in life, aesthetics are important to me. And let's face it, DSLRs and their mirrorless offspring beasts are really designed for performance, not their appearance (I'm sure some might love the look of the Canon R5, and that's fine, but it's not my vibe.)

So, here's where I'm at now. Last summer, I had a photography existential crisis. I was simply not enjoying it. Having built my Canon kit around my nearly year-round soccer photography, it sat bloated and mostly unused. I sold everything. All the Canon stuff I'd owned for years, my X100T, and more.

I am looking for the camera system that will inspire me the way the X100 did, but with some other requirements:

• Full frame sensor
• Small, compact size 
• Gorgeous to look at and hold
• Great glass available; ability to swap lenses
• Something for travel, street, family, everyday

Like probably everyone on this forum, I believe that Leica M cameras (35mm or digital) are the most beautifully minimalistic cameras I've ever seen or held. Obviously, Fujifilm knows that many people who'd love to have a Leica don't have the means for one, and the X series is great for many people. 

Here's where the plot thickens. Full-disclosure, last summer I actually bought and returned an M10-R and a (non-APO) Summicron 35mm f/2. I didn't keep it for very long and made sure to return it in perfect condition.

Because this is a sizable chunk of change, I wanted  to really make sure that I was making the right decision, especially since I was new to the whole rangefinder shooting experience.

I used it in a variety of settings, both indoors and out, and I was focussing most of my subjects with the split-image method. Focussing in bright conditions was OK, just slower than things would normally be with an AF lens. But I found that it was noticeably harder for me to focus in dim lighting, as it's harder to see sharply when you're over 50 (if not sooner). As for results, the photos I took were generally well-focused, and everything about the IQ was beautiful. It felt great in my hand and was a great combo of weight and size.

Using the camera for about a week, I guess I became skeptical that I would be able to make the thing "sing" the way so many others have. Vision-wise, my eyesight is probably fairly typical for someone my age (55). I do wear reading glasses, but the diopter makes that irrelevant.

• For anyone else who started using an M10/11 without prior RF experience, did I give up too soon?
• Should I have used zone or hyperfocal focussing in dimmer light?
• Had I hung in for a month, would dim-light focussing seem easier? Are there tips?
• Would the new Visoflex 2 make a big difference for me in low light?

With the M11 now selling for the same price as the M10-R, I am tempted to give it another try. Should I just buy another, give it more indefinite "field test", and if it doesn't pan out again, just sell it, and look at any potential loss as a "rental" cost?

Regarding the SL2,000 yes you can use M-lenses and has a gorgeous EVF, but it is a different animal and I am looking for something dead simple like the M.

If anyone one can help me, I'd love any feedback and thanks for much for taking the time to read through my drivel.

Best,

Bill

Did you sell it mainly because of focusing problems?

Maybe a Q2 could be the way for you.

If you JUST use Leica M, I think its important to accept that one is a little bit slower in focusing. On the other side there is nothing else which gives me that simple feel of taking the image myself, controlling focus, f-stop and exposure. I had a Q2 once and allmost found it too simple to take images.

If you are undecided, why not buy a used M, use it for some months and see how you get along.

But something must have been, that you sold it again last year?

 

[a.noctilux]

15 minutes ago, CapuchinSwing said:

but I really never had an interest in doing film developing on my own

Exactly what I said to myself when I adopted Kodachrome for decades.

Then came the digital "photography" for me, nice move, but something was not there.

About ten years ago, I discovered film with b&w AND Rondinax simplicity, I was (still am) hooked.

I'm happy using Kodachrome for so long (neglicting b&w),

now some Kodachrome slides converted to b&w please me more ...

 

 

[SrMi]

On 5/14/2022 at 10:52 AM, Al Brown said:

I have consulted my crystal ball but it showed nothing. My tarot cards however strongly suggest the answer is not to buy the Leica M again.

"Last summer, I had a photography existential crisis. I was simply not enjoying it."
My educated guess is (based upon numerous similar testimonies here) that a Leica M will NOT get you out of that crisis. It is neither magical nor motivational. Plus you already had it and that did not cut it either.

You need to find that inner spark first. Then the right camera will find you.
 

I disagree. A Leica M is both magical and motivational. Try picking it up after 6 months of not using it😄.

[Viv]

Everyone has different needs and desires, as far as cameras are concerned.

The rangefinder process does not appeal to everyone, but is wonderful for some.

My first rangefinder camera was a Zeiss Ikon ZM, which I loved, for its wonderful viewfinder, shutter sound and pleasingly tactile film wind mechanism. And great results with slide film.

When film became too much hassle, I switched to a Leica M9. I disliked that camera because of its inconsistent white balance and electronic glitches.

Having spent the years since shooting with a Leica CL, Leica Q2 and Fuji XT-3 (all good cameras and all of which I still use) I am awaiting delivery (tomorrow) of a Leica M11. This purchase came after much thought, including a long and hard look at the Pixii.

It's kind of a leap of faith. Time will tell whether my decision is correct.

I will keep ye posted.

[colonel]

Essentially you have to have a desire to take pictures, before anything else. Secondarily, you need to have a category of pictures that is not fine to take on a smartphone. I take most of my general family and journal type pictures on my Samsung S21 Ultra. It has a super wide, wide (28), telephoto (3x) and long telephoto (10x) lens. The pictures are really excellent in good light.

So what do I use my M for ? My Ricoh GRiii ? My Sony FF ?

Well I don't have the Sony equipment any more. Brilliant though it us, I don't need it. It would be the camera of choice if I was a professional.

The GRiii for a pocket rocket. When I want to travel very light and be the most subtle.

What about the M ? Any serious travel, daytime wanderer and nighttime wanderer. I love street and context photography. It's my hobby.

I have up and down mojo times, when I don't feel like taking anything. Other very enthusiastic times.

Why the M. Because its small compact and beautiful. Because the photo process is simple and enjoyable. Because the results, with Leica, Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses I can't replicate with any other system. Because, and totally inexplicably, I get a higher percentage of keepers then with any other system.

Before M I didn't like MF. After M I don't really like AF. I find MF faster to use, and more accurate. E.g. when someone walks between  you and Subject briefly, my focus system doesn't go out. I use pre-focus alot, and its great to set infinity or hyper focal for long shots where focus isn't really needed at all, and I don't have to worry about the AF getting excited about something in the foreground. I love so much being able to line up focus and wait until the subject enters the scene, rather then keeping a button half pressed or having to continuously refocus and loose the moment.

RF focusing takes some time to get used to, but once you do, you find you can focus in single turn, rather then rocking back and forth. Look for that contrast pop!

The good news is that an M system is the cheapest system on the market. How so ? Buy second hand for a good price and sell at pretty much the same price. (Health warning: buying the latest leica M body new will be at a loss if sold. Bank on £750 a year for the first three years, and them settling down at 4k for a few years, 3k for  a long time, maybe never hitting 2k again due to inflation  😉 )

Personally, I think the M240 series is the best bang for buck. Totally reliable, available for 2.2-2.5k. Buy a used or new Voigtlander (latest series) or Zeiss, and really get to know the system.

If you have a bit more cash, a basic M10 is 3.5k and gives you slightly better ISO and highlights. If you are rich get the M11. I am sure it will serve you well for at least 20 years.

I think with RF, better to start off at the cheaper end. Keep it for a few months. If you still don't like it, sell out without much or any loss. If you do like it, continue, upgrade the body if you have the cash, or not, and start to get some more interesting lenses. But you do need at least a month or two to really understand the system.

One of the areas I like most about M are the sheer number and makes of lenses available. From a dreamy DJoptics, via sharp bargains with plastic rails TTartisans, through etherial voigtlanders, to razor APOs. Different coatings, different tints. It's great fun. If you like that sort of thing 😀 

Edited May 17, 2022 by colonel

[M11 for me]

For me the M was a great success from the beginning. Its my camera of choice. Now 2 things:

1) I still need the Canon R5 with lenses for fast things as sports or receptions etc. I would never be without.

2) All the rest ist the M (its about 50:50). And since there is the Visoflex 2 I realize that the M became a mirror less camera. Just without autofocus. The rest is gorgious.

As a consequence: I need 2 camera systems. First a fast one (fast AF) with long and fast lenses. Then a small light and beautiful one: The M I use with 21 or 28mm most of the time. The Visoflex is a must. Its the first step to the new M without rangefinder. I believe that this will come.

And finally: I just come home from France (Normandy). The new perspective control is fabulous. But together with Visoflex its much better. Plus the M11 with its 60Mpix you can crop in camera. So I have most time the 21mm on the camera and can crop (1.3x) to about 28mm angle of view. 

And second finally: Focussing with the Visoflex is a mess. I do that with the rangefinder and then I look through the Visoflex. I fully got used to that workflow.

[RexGig0]

On 5/13/2022 at 12:49 PM, CapuchinSwing said:

I am looking for the camera system that will inspire me the way the X100 did, but with some other requirements:

• Full frame sensor
• Small, compact size 
• Gorgeous to look at and hold
• Great glass available; ability to swap lenses
• Something for travel, street, family, everyday

Like probably everyone on this forum, I believe that Leica M cameras (35mm or digital) are the most beautifully minimalistic cameras I've ever seen or held. 

I used it in a variety of settings, both indoors and out, and I was focussing most of my subjects with the split-image method. Focussing in bright conditions was OK, just slower than things would normally be with an AF lens. But I found that it was noticeably harder for me to focus in dim lighting, as it's harder to see sharply when you're over 50 (if not sooner). As for results, the photos I took were generally well-focused, and everything about the IQ was beautiful. It felt great in my hand and was a great combo of weight and size.

Using the camera for about a week, I guess I became skeptical that I would be able to make the thing "sing" the way so many others have. Vision-wise, my eyesight is probably fairly typical for someone my age (55). I do wear reading glasses, but the diopter makes that irrelevant.

• For anyone else who started using an M10/11 without prior RF experience, did I give up too soon?
• Should I have used zone or hyperfocal focussing in dimmer light?
• Had I hung in for a month, would dim-light focussing seem easier? Are there tips?

I am looking for something dead simple like the M.

Best,

Bill

Well, I used Canon DSLRs for very serious purposes, from 2010 to 2018, and added some Nikon gear, too, largely because my wife is an avid` Nikon shooter. I added the Leica M system in 2018, at age 56. Some thoughts:

Why full “frame?” 24mm x 36mm is just one frame size, among many. There are larger digital frame sizes; so there is nothing “magic” about “full frame.” APS-C can work quite well, too.

For a smaller overall size, did you ever try using an SLR with a nicely compact 35mm f/2 or 28mm f/2.8 lens? An SLR can be an amazingly portable and minimalist package, if used with a compact lens. I am much less likely to fumble or drop my DSLRs. Thank goodness for camera straps!

Rangefinder focusing, in dim light, IS difficult, indeed. Zone/scale focusing is a solution. It is notably easier to do this with 21mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm lenses, than longer focal lengths. Zone/scale focusing beats AF for speed, because the shooter need not wait for the AF to lock onto the subject. The trick is learning to judge distance, and DOF.

Hyperfocal also works, especially with 28mm and wider.

One need not buy into the Leica M system to give zone/scale focusing, or the use of hyperfocal, another try. I was using zone/scale focusing, with some manual-focus Nikon lenses, on Canon and Nikon SLRs, for quite some time, before I added the Leica M system.

One week is not enough time to master rangefinder focusing, so, maybe you did give up, too soon.  I would think, however, that other aspects of M system shooting should have “clicked,” within a week.

There are times that I simply cannot find enough contrast, in a scene, for rangefinder focusing to work. (I do not claim to have truly mastered rangefinder focusing; I am uncertain.)

Again, these are just some thoughts. The questions can be seem as rhetorical; I am not expecting answers to be posted. (I pruned your narrative, considerably, to help me see the most relevant parts.)

 

 

 

Edited May 18, 2022 by RexGig0

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Mikep996]

It seems to me that you gave the Leica a suitable try and it didn't really do anything for you. IMO, it's not an acquired taste - you either like the manual focus/rangefinder or you don't.  For me it works better than autofocus which often seems to grab onto what I don't want it to focus on.  BUT obviously, that depends totally on your shooting style/what you primary subjects may be.

You gave it a shot!