I sold my GFX100s for SL3, but now I want M11-P

[Derbyshire Man]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We’re all different of course but my take on this is M11P (typically 50mm summilux) and M11M (35mm summilux pre asph for cities and portrait, 35mm FLE outside cities but also portrait). For rain and autofocus I got rid of my Q2M and have a Fuji X100VI. The other fujis and canon never leave the house!

[Advertisement]

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

[sometimesmaybe]

12 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

I have an M11 and GFX100S, and am considering replacing the M11 for an M11M, and joining the "club" of medium format for color + Leica Monochrom for B&W. 

this is me exactly 100s for digital colour and m246 for bnw

[Kiwimac]

I’ve gone from GFX 100 (the original) to M11. 
 

I loved the results from the GFX and the colours. If I could find a simulation of Fuji for my DNG files that I liked I’d be delighted. 
 

However. Never again am I lugging big bags of heavy gear around the world. 
 

I might get another M body but that’ll do me I think. The SL system would not really deliver anything but the same image quality in a larger package and I’m certainly not carrying the behemoth lenses around for AF in the SL system. 

[Jon Warwick]

2 hours ago, Kiwimac said:

I’ve gone from GFX 100 (the original) to M11. 
 

I loved the results from the GFX and the colours. If I could find a simulation of Fuji for my DNG files that I liked I’d be delighted. 
 

However. Never again am I lugging big bags of heavy gear around the world. 
 

I might get another M body but that’ll do me I think. The SL system would not really deliver anything but the same image quality in a larger package and I’m certainly not carrying the behemoth lenses around for AF in the SL system. 

I’m toying with the idea of whether I keep my GFX100S, or M11. Even at large prints to (say) 45” wide, the difference in image quality is surprisingly small imho. The medium format is slightly cleaner / less noise, but the “bite” to the M11 images when using tier one lenses can be compelling. As you say, the big difference is size and weight of gear, and I agree that the SL system has the same image quality in a larger package as an M. I’ve closely taken the same image with SL3 and SL 35 APO to compare vs M11 and 35 APO Lanthar (and M APO Summicron) to make my conclusion.

re the simulation of Fuji, have you tried any of the 3rd party providers like RNI or Cobalt etc ?

Edited July 26, 2024 by Jon Warwick

[Kiwimac]

Yes, I have tried several. 
 

Somehow they never look quite as good as the Fuji versions: I think that sort of filmic colour science is something Leica could apply themselves to a bit more. 
 

I used to particularly enjoy the Acros simulation and shooting in the equivalent of X—Pan format. 

[KenLW]

27 minutes ago, Kiwimac said:

Yes, I have tried several. 
 

Somehow they never look quite as good as the Fuji versions: I think that sort of filmic colour science is something Leica could apply themselves to a bit more. 
 

I used to particularly enjoy the Acros simulation and shooting in the equivalent of X—Pan format. 

I heard many great things about Acros and tried it a few times with good results. With the GF55 1.7, I heard you could even get the medium format B&W film look. 
 

With that said, I primarily shot color photos and prefer the color science of Leica. 

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 7/21/2024 at 9:21 PM, KenLW said:

I feel justified in making another purchase. 

M11 is probably less of a waiting time, SL3 is still hard to get.

On 7/21/2024 at 9:21 PM, KenLW said:

I still need a camera with water and dust resistance.

For what? how much do you go out in the heavy rain?

 

On 7/21/2024 at 9:21 PM, KenLW said:

I want to use zoom lenses like the 28-200 for landscape or city walks.

Is the 28-200 lens so good that you need to buy a leica for that?

[KenLW]

On 7/30/2024 at 5:57 AM, Photoworks said:

M11 is probably less of a waiting time, SL3 is still hard to get.

On 7/21/2024 at 6:21 PM, KenLW said:

SL3 is in stock in authorized retailers such as Glazer's https://www.glazerscamera.com/products/leica-sl3

On 7/30/2024 at 5:57 AM, Photoworks said:

For what? how much do you go out in the heavy rain?

 

I assume you have used a M camera before? When traveling, it's almost inevitable to encounter at least some light rain. M cameras are not weather-sealed and should not be exposed to any rain, whether light or heavy. While some brave folks have tried using them in light rain without apparent issues, I have never attempted it and wouldn't recommend doing so. Additionally, I can definitely speak to the dust problems. Taking an M camera to places like White Sands National Park, even for just 1-2 hours, can easily result in dust on the sensor. While you might be able to blow the dust off, I am always wary of putting any M camera in such conditions.

On 7/30/2024 at 5:57 AM, Photoworks said:

Is the 28-200 lens so good that you need to buy a leica for that?

You are right! You would not buy Leica just for the 28-200. However, in the context of my question, only an SL body can use a 28-200mm type of lens because such lenses don't exist for M cameras or the GFX system. While 28-200mm lenses are available for Sony bodies, I don't like the color rendering and handling of Sony cameras, so the SL becomes the only choice by elimination. The 28-200mm (specifically the Lumix 28-200mm for the SL) may not have the best image quality, but it can be very useful for traveling, making it a valuable added bonus.

[Photoworks]

1 hour ago, KenLW said:

You are right! You would not buy Leica just for the 28-200. However, in the context of my question, only an SL body can use a 28-200mm type of lens because such lenses don't exist for M cameras or the GFX system. While 28-200mm lenses are available for Sony bodies, I don't like the color rendering and handling of Sony cameras, so the SL becomes the only choice by elimination. The 28-200mm (specifically the Lumix 28-200mm for the SL) may not have the best image quality, but it can be very useful for traveling, making it a valuable added bonus.

I used Sony A7r4 side by side with my SL2, once you bring the raw file in capture one you can get exactly the same colors. if you just shooting JPG you may have an argument on that.

[KenLW]

55 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

I used Sony A7r4 side by side with my SL2, once you bring the raw file in capture one you can get exactly the same colors. if you just shooting JPG you may have an argument on that.

I'm sorry! I found this very hard to believe because SL2 has a completely different sensor and color pipeline. I have tried SL2 extensively recently and my straight out of camera raw Sony A7RV color looks nothing like the ones from SL2 color in Lightroom. Are you talking about the fact that because Sony sensors are so good, you can often times make them look like any color with moderate amount of color grading? If you have this kind of color grading skills, I envy you! I want to improve my color grading skills as well!

Edited August 4, 2024 by KenLW

[Photoworks]

28 minutes ago, KenLW said:

I'm sorry! I found this very hard to believe because SL2 has a completely different sensor and color pipeline. I have tried SL2 extensively recently and my straight out of camera raw Sony A7RV color looks nothing like the ones from SL2 color in Lightroom. Are you talking about the fact that because Sony sensors are so good, you can often times make time look like any color with moderate amount of color grading? If you have a this kind of color grading skills, I envy you! I want to improve my color grading skills as well!

I have been doing this for years, but I did lot's of testing before and was able to take the images to the same.
The only advantage of the SL2 was that microlenses on the sensor are so much better for adapted lenses. the development that leica did to adapt the M lenses on the SL is just amazing, benefitting all the other lenses from canon and other brands.

Maybe your challenge comes from Lightroom. I use Capture One most of the time, they make camera-specific profiles that are very good.

[KenLW]

2 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

I have been doing this for years, but I did lot's of testing before and was able to take the images to the same.
The only advantage of the SL2 was that microlenses on the sensor are so much better for adapted lenses. the development that leica did to adapt the M lenses on the SL is just amazing, benefitting all the other lenses from canon and other brands.

Maybe your challenge comes from Lightroom. I use Capture One most of the time, they make camera-specific profiles that are very good.

I will try Capture One! Thanks for the tips!

[jaapv]

If you have some questions on camera profiles and presets in Lightroom This article may be of use. 

[jaapv]

Here is some more on the subject. 
https://www.slrlounge.com/photoshop-lightroom-tips-create-camera-raw-presets-lightroom-presets/

[frame-it]

10 hours ago, KenLW said:

only an SL body can use a 28-200mm type of lens because such lenses don't exist for M cameras or the GFX system.

????

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!

 

 

[jaapv]

There are adapters so you can use just about any manual SLR 70-200 lens with the EVF on a digital M from the M 240 onwards. Of course not lenses that are made for modern mirrorless cameras or lenses without aperture rings. Leica R lenses give fantastic results. 

[Photoworks]

He was asking for a lens that covers a wide zoom range, and that he can take out in the rain.

Fuji has lenses, but not a 28-200 range. Adapters are usually not safe in the rain. The SLR lenses are from a different era, and extreme zoom back then where terrible quality.

[Photoworks]

11 hours ago, jaapv said:

If you have some questions on camera profiles and presets in Lightroom This article may be of use. 

A preset is not the same as a profile. Camera Raw is just a different system and always need to massage it to look great from the start when you look at a raw file.
Years ago when I was shooting with the Canon 5D I was using Lightroom, the JPG looked great and the RAW files looked low contrast, colors were shifted...

The same file, imported into Capture One looked great from the start, very close the the camera JPG. Just needed minimal editing to recover something or adjust 1/2 stop exposure.

Capture One maintained the high-quality profiles for many of the cameras out there. and it is the only one that gives you the same color engine on the iPad or iPhone, unlike Lightroom mobile which has totally different look when you transfer to the desktop.

There are options to use profiles in Lightroom, Cobalt provides some, but it is a workaround.
The color checker can make profiles for cameras in Lightroom and Capture One, but you are making the colors look like a color-checker, sometimes totally shifted in blue and red. Plus you need to make a calibration for every lighting situation. To me only useful in the studio when shooting fashion and where some fabrics are coming out a different color from reality.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[frame-it]

28 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

He was asking for a lens that covers a wide zoom range, and that he can take out in the rain.

Fuji has lenses, but not a 28-200 range. Adapters are usually not safe in the rain. The SLR lenses are from a different era, and extreme zoom back then where terrible quality.

ah ok

[jaapv]

I find Colorchecker profiles indispensable to equalize the editing starting point between cameras. You can find them in the profile section of LR and mark them as favorites. I have never observed the problems you mentioned as Xrite uses standard Greta-Macbeth color chart. 
One can easily set a preset in the develop module as a default for the camera.