Yet another camera dilemma

[Jackalope]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So I've now trod the path taken by a lot of people on here: I moved away from my (to me) excessively technological mirrorless system and purchased a Q2 several years ago. After a lot of hesitation, I just purchased an M10 (the hesitation was related to eyesight / focusing; but using the rangefinder has been a pure joy).

The last remnants of my old system are a Fuji XH-2 and three zooms (10-150). I use this system for car travel when I want to have longer focal lengths, etc.

Until today I intended to keep both the M10 and the Q2 and scrounge together money for M lenses as I went. But it occurs to me that I could sell the Q2 and the entire Fuji system and purchase a used SL2, meaning that I would still have an autofocus camera and could eventually add some longer focal lengths.

Does this make sense? I'm particularly interested in people's experience using M-Mount lenses on the SL2.

Very grateful for any help.

[Al Brown]

See the Q, keep the Fuji, invest in M glass.

[Advertisement]

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

[LeicaR10]

Jackalope,  Your idea makes sense getting a mint SL2 and mounting M lenses.  Keeping your M10 is a very good idea.  I owned all three versions of the M10 before going to the M11.  I chose to go back to the M10-R solely for portability and reliability.  Its a great camera and most reliable M camera I ever owned.  I presently use the SL2 and SL2-S with M lenses.  Both the cameras and Leica M lenses work superbly with the SL system.  Presently, I use the M10 when I am going to hike very challenging terrain and need a reliable, light-weight system for my landscape photographs.  I use the SL2 and M lenses for easy hiking.  I used the superb SL lenses, but found the compact M lenses work just as well and I never use auto focus anyways.  Hope this helps and others will most certainly chime in with their ideas too.  r/ Mark

Edited January 7 by LeicaR10

[GFW2-SCUSA]

My most used camera is an M10 for which I have several nice lenses. I also have the SL2 with a couple of zoom lenses. And I have the CL. I don't find I use the SL2 much at all. It is just heavy and clunky. When I do use it most of the time I have an M lens on it and they work very well. I use the lovely CL a lot with M lenses and others. I am a huge fan of the CL for its size, simplicity, build quality and my M lenses are wonderful on it. I have never used a Q - I just have never seen the point in a fixed lens Leica. So, I would get rid of the Fuji and the Q and find a first rate used CL to use with the M lens or get the SL2 and know your M lenses will be wonderful on it though no autofocus, of course. 

I don't think you can go wrong with M lenses. 

[GFONG]

As you said, the using of rangefinder is a joy. The SL2 is a mirrorless camera which is similar to Sony, Canon and Nikon. All the brand I mentioned has the adapter for you to use M lens. IMO no point of getting the SL2. If you want to sell you Fuji, may consider to buy Sony A7R5. It is high resolution, superb auto focus and able to adapt M lens.

Go back to your situation, I will sell the Q2 to fund the M lens.

[kivis]

Have had them all and many other Leica's. Boiled it down to using the M10 and 'Cron 50mm 95% of the time.

[jakontil]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I will prefer to have the liberty of M lenses instead… i found myself not using much of the Q and other mirrorless.. the pleasure of using M, cant be replicated even with an SL in my case

[newtoleica]

For me the SL cameras are just too big…. 

[Le Chef]

I currently have a CL + lenses and a Q3 that replaced a Q2. I contemplated replacing the CL kit with a Fuji setup but the UI and menus are so messy and overly complicated like a diner’s 20 page menu that I looked at an SL but it’s like carrying a sumo wrestler around your neck, so the CL stays. Another option is to add an M10 (plain or R) with a 50mm ‘cron lens, and keep it simple.

[WvE]

I have been happily shooting with the M10-P for years now but a few months ago I added a SL2-s for video and low-light photography. I almost bought the Nikon Zf but after holding the SL2-s, I went for the latter (I got a good deal with the lightweight SL 50mm ASPH). For me, the SL2-s is a wonderful camera, superbly built, and with a clear menu. The M lenses work fine but it's also a joy to have AF once and a while. I also "feel" that the SL lenses are more optimized for the SL cameras for IQ, but that's just an unfounded opinion.  

[o2mpx]

@Jackalope, have similar equipment and thoughts you mentioned. The Q2 mainly is used for casual day trips here and there. Since you didn’t mention what type of photography being done, my thought process below was based on travel landscapes being 90% of what’s being shot:

The M10-R plus prime lenses have gotten less and less use since shooting environment may not allow moving around to get the best positioning(added WATE and MATE a while back). As most shots are f8-11, and age affects eyesight and hand steadiness, camera shake is a challenge. Have been using visoflex as most shots are wider than 21mm, which actually diminished the range finder experience.

Had a SL2 setup for ibis and autofocus but dislike the weight and bulk. Sold the SL2 in anticipation of the SL3 and picked up a S1r in the interim to use with the SL zooms and pleasantly surprised about its usability(and doubtful if SL3 will be added when available). Do plan to try the S1r with M lenses in an upcoming trip. 

Have X-H2 with 3 wide/mid/tele zooms and find setup the lightest carry and with ibis, autofocus etc, the most versatile and usable(menus are terrible).

Have a great deal of nostalgia for the M kit, and will keep it forever regardless of usage frequency. The challenge is given the heritage of the M, reportage, street photography etc, perhaps for travel landscapes(particularly the tele end for compression), not surprising it might not yield the best fit. Given that, likely the X-H2 might be used more.