Any M10/-P/-R users tempted by the SL3?

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It’s a more compact camera now but the grip is less comfortable and due to the change of the button layout after the original SL there is no way to add a thumb rest which would have been great for heavier M lenses. I still have my M10-P, was never tempted by the M11, and always preferred the rendering of my M lenses on the M10-P over the SL2-S which I also own. 

[Knipsknecht]

Personally, I am absolutely not tempted at all. To me “Leica” means M-Mount (and maybe Leica Q). The SL3 is surely a nice DSLM, but there are many other nice DSLM for much less money and similar or even better specs. I like the philosophy of the L-Mount, but I would opt for a Lumix camera with Pana or Sigma lenses. 
While I can see to a certain degree some kind of a justification for the hefty price tag of a M11, I feel hard pressed to find such a justification in the SL3.

[Julia5]

not tempted at all. had the sl2 for two months and went back to an m. too heavy and though the apo lens was amazing it was all too big. and i am a monochrom photographer. 

[01af]

Definitely not.

[patrickcolpron]

For me Leica is just M at the moment, don't like the Q and for video the SL is not there yet. 

Had Leica made it with a fully articulated back LCD screen, I might have been tempted to test it for video. 

[KFo]

I'm an M10P shooter.  I've played with various SLs, not the SL3 yet, but every time I mess with one I get the same feelings: Nice monstrous camera, probably has incredible technical specifications, easy AF, and super duper zoom lenses available.  If something happened (I don't know what it would be) and I decided to go that direction, I'd probably look more seriously at the CaNikSon systems for the sake of price.

The SL is better, bigger, faster, than an M and it doesn't matter to me 😎.  It's a matter of contentment versus "happiness."  I am content.

Edited April 9, 2024 by KFo

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'll join the crowd.

The only reason I pay Leica prices for anything is the manual split-image focusing of the M system.

If everything Leica makes without that feature fell into the Königssee tomorrow and sank to the bottom forever, I wouldn't notice, and I wouldn't care. 🤪

[costa43]

I waited for the price of an sl2s to drop to something reasonable for this type of camera and picked one up alongside my m10r. Main reason was video and zoom lenses but I love using the M lenses on there too and that’s the reason I stayed with Leica as I figured the sl would be a better platform for them over Nikon or Panasonic. The sl3 no doubt is a nice camera but for 6k plus a few grand on lenses, I would be tempted to look at another brand if it was my primary setup and adapting lenses was not high on my list. 

[overexposed]

nope

[Ralf]

No way!

[Chaemono]

Brief, firm denials can be indicative of suppression. 

[rpsawin]

No.

[RexGig0]

I can foresee wanting to try an SL-series camera, eventually, if I want to use specific M lenses to shoot landscapes, with Live View being used for composition, or, to shoot video with M lenses. (Thus far, I have little desire to shoot video, but will not deny that this could change.) As for the SL3, itself, well, unless I become a “professional,” and can therefore write-down the expenses, my budget constrains me from buying an SL3, until I am able to buy one pre-owned, probably when the SL4 or SL5 is extant.

Additionally, I have ~46MP and 50MP DSLRs, which are aging well, and present formidable obstacles to my adding an SL-series camera. Our macro photography is far too important for us to dispense with our SLR/DSLR equipment. (My wife is a Texas Master Naturalist; we do much “citizen scientist” photography.)

I do not “hate” the SL system. It is simply not worth it, for me, to raid my retirement savings. Plus, I like using the rangefinder mechanism, and I like using the optical viewfinder to compose. And, an SL camera seems as if it would be a bit large to sling under a jacket or vest.

The two camera models I use most are the Leica M10, and the Nikon D5. An SL3 could not replace either camera. I also regularly use the M Type 246 Monochrom, and Nikon D850. An SL3 could not replace either of these. This places the SL3 in a tertiary role; a specialized tool. Even a professional photographer, who can write-down costs, might best rent/hire an expensive tertiary tool, rather than buying it. Or, buy a pre-owned sample of this tool, and then after the job, sell it, for almost as much as the price paid.

 

[adan]

3 hours ago, Chaemono said:

Brief, firm denials can be indicative of suppression. 

Maybe. But even Stefan Daniel himself acknowledge recently that "the SLs are tougher cameras to sell."

https://amateurphotographer.com/latest/photo-news/leica-sl3-interview/

[otto.f]

If an M shooter is tempted by the SL3 at all, it will be very rare if it would be a trading in his/her M collection for an SL equipment. If so, it would be a much broader decision than comparing lenses and bodies and would imply a step into a different domain of photography. It’s not either / or; the SL and the M line have their own right of existence.

[brickftl]

very simply, yuck.

If I wanted a big camera with big auto focus lenses, I certainly wouldn't get the SL3 who's auto focus isn't close to the precision of auto focus on my Sony A7RV (which I only keep to shoot dress rehearsal of Asheville professional ballet every year).

[Chaemono]

What if the colors at any given ISO and ‘push-ability’ of high ISO files were much better with M lenses on the SL3 than on the M10/-P/-R?

[otto.f]

That will never happen. At least if you mean that M lenses would be a significant cause of that. It seems you want to wrangle two different concepts into one. Nobody is asking for that. SL will always be a big chunk very well suited for studio, landscape, fashion, landscape, some wildlife and not the first choice for street.

Edited April 10, 2024 by otto.f

[Chaemono]

Denial is not just a river in Egypt.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Knipsknecht]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb Chaemono:

What if the colors at any given ISO and ‘push-ability’ of high ISO files were much better with M lenses on the SL3 than on the M10/-P/-R?

Still nope😉. The colors are to be adjusted in postprocessing (if at all!) and I had never the imprssion that the ISO capabilities of my M10-R are bad. And personally I think the (mostly) tiny M lenses look pretty ridiculous on the beefy SL bodies. The only exception for me would be the beefy Noctilux lenses which are in my opinion mostly too big for Leica M-mount cameras. 

For me the M-experience is an essential part of photographing with a Leica M-mount camera. The SL is so different that the act of taking photos is not comparable.

Edited April 10, 2024 by Knipsknecht