At a crossroads with my SL2-S

[JoshuaR]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Apologies for the long post.

So, I've had an SL2-S for about a year now. It's meant to be a complement to my main setup—an M10-R with 21, 28, 35, 50, and 90mm lenses. I'm a very happy M photographer, but I wanted to try an SL camera for a few reasons: weather-sealing, wide and long lenses, autofocus.

One thing to say up front is that the SL2-S is a great camera. The colors, handling, EVF, etc., are all wonderful. I've made many beautiful images with mine. It is also very reasonably priced right now, used.

But I have not been able to really enjoy the camera during my time with it. The fundamental issue is that it is too big and heavy. I have two small kids, age seven and two. My personal photography often involves dashing around. For work, I'm a journalist, and I often take photographs during my reporting. But the SL2-S is just too big and intrusive for me in that role; I prefer an M with a very tiny lens.

As for lenses: On the autofocus side, I've tried the Leica 24-70, Pana 20-60, and various Sigma I-series primes. These are all excellent lenses, but I really do prefer the look of the images I get out of my 'classic'-styled M lenses (e.g., New Steel Rim) with an adapter. (I haven't yet tried the Leica 24-90 or any of the APO primes.) With M lenses, however, I'm slower with the SL2-S than I am with the rangefinder. (This has been a  surprise to me.)

There are two circumstances during which the SL2-S has really come into its own for me. (1) Telephoto photography with my 135mm Tele-Elmar (of my son's theatre performance, for example), and (2) messing around in really bad weather, or on the water / in the pool. But I do that stuff very rarely—just a few times a year. The bottom line is that, for the bulk of the photography I do—fast, candid, mobile, M lenses, 50mm or wider—the SL2-S is not more useful than my M10-R.

I've been asking myself questions like, "What if I tried it with a 28-70? Or a 35 APO SL?" But I'm starting to think that this would be a waste of money—the bottom line is that I like my cameras small!

Options on the table:

• Sell my SL2-S, M-L adapter, and extra battery. Try out a different 'rough and ready' camera that's much smaller—maybe an OM Systems OM-3. I could imagine that serving well in my journalism work.
• Sell the setup plus my 50 Lux ASPH (a lens I rarely use, because I have and prefer the 50 f/1.2 reissue) and buy a Q2 as the 'rough and ready' camera. (I've owned a Q2 before and got a lot of value out of it.)
• Or sell it and get an M4! 
• Or sell it, depend only on the M10-R and use the proceeds to upgrade my Voigtlander 21 f/3.5 to a 21 SEM.
• Or jJust keep it, use it rarely, and don't overthink it. Maybe I'll need telephoto more and more often as my kids get older?

It's a hard camera to sell, because it's so obviously well-made and functional . . . . But it just doesn't seem to be working for me right now.

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

If I'm shooting in a hurry, and I want both wide and long and standard, I can't think of an alternative (in Leica Land) to a SLx and AF zoom like 24-90. Anything else is too slow (changing lenses).
Putting M lenses on a SL is alien territory to me, but I guess it takes all sorts.........😉. I can well understand that focusing M lenses on the SL is slower than on the M - it is for me as well.
I use my SL system for what might loosely be described as events: predictable timetable, defined location, no need to walk a great distance. I don't have a problem with bulk or weight for such use. I'm often there with both 24-90 and 90-280, but can usually put one of them down in the bag while I'm shooting with the other. I use the SL with a hand strap, which makes holding it in one hand less of a strain.
I realise that your usage as a journalist, perhaps getting quickly between unpredictable incidents/moments, may require lighter kit or greater tolerance of weight.

[Chris W]

For me my SL2-S is means to an end - a good quality autofocus camera. I don't love it, although the images I get from it are very nice.

I use it with my M lenses, some vintage Asahi Takumar and also a couple of Sigma primes.

Looking at your gear inventory I don't think you need anything. You have an M10 R and a selection of excellent lenses. So unless you need to free up finances I wouldn't sell the SL2-S. 

Why go to different system like the OM3? 

Edited August 22 by Chris W

[LocalHero1953]

I have tried MFT with the Olympus OMD EM5-ii, and was dissatisfied. Good though it and the lenses were, and jewel-like in the hand, the IQ was noticeably worse than the CL or M240 I had then. Images from the CL and M240 could be put side by side, but not with the OM. The OM-3 may be better, of course, but I felt it was a limitation of MFT.

[Eoin]

I carry an M in my bag daily, it’s the Camera I pick instinctively. The SL has its place but I find the Q2 very convenient.

[lencap]

I feel your pain, and had similar thoughts.  Since you have several M lenses and the M to L adapter I wonder if giving them more use might be the solution?  If using the EVF to focus doesn't work for you, try setting the M lens to hyperfocal distance to get maximum depth of field.  From there you can determine if manually focusing your M lenses can work as you gain more experience in real world shooting.  

For me I had loved everything about the SL 601/SL2-S that I owned, but in the end the weight/bulk caused it to stay home more than I expected.  The lighter weight Q3 43 won me over.  I'm a 50mm shooter, and the 43 is close enough, while the macro feature allows me to get shots that I couldn't before.  The APO lens is stunning.  The manual focusing on the camera isn't a M replacement, but it's still fun to use while still giving me autofocus and video options.  When shooting wide (not something I do often) my iPhone 14 Pro is always in my pocket, and for family situations is easy to share with everyone.

[BWColor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shoot with an M11M, M6, M-A, M3 and my solution to small autofocus with great/small/somewhat slow lenses.  I use the Sony A7CR & small Sigma and Sony G lenses and a series of small, but heavy Loxia lenses.  Sigma 17mm, 90mm .. Sony 24GM (not small) & 40mm G.  Downside is the Sony Menu and the yesterday EVF, but everything is small..except the GM and it is small for what it is.  Also, the manual focus Zeiss Loxia are top tier manual focus lenses.  Of course, the Sony autofocus is on a next level compared to Leica.

[JoshuaR]

Thanks for these thoughts -- they're all helpful.

I think the size / weight issue has emerged as really determinative. The bottom line is that, even though it's an excellent camera on its own terms, it's just too big to be a fun secondary camera for me. @LocalHero1953, I definitely know what you mean about photographing events with a zoom, but as a non-pro, I'm happy to work with my M10-R and 28mm Summicron for situations like that. In my journalism work, I'm mostly photographing the person I'm profiling and their environment—so smaller is better, and the 'artistic' vibe of an M is often the right fit.

I've been trying to zoom out a bit, thinking less about performance and more about purpose. The M system is my main system, but over the years I've had various secondary cameras alongside it. Q2, Fuji X-mount, now the SL2-S. And if I look back, I now think the only one that really made me happy was the Leica CL. It was small, fun, fast, and  tiny. I loved the little 18mm (28mm-e) pancake lens, and if I put a 50mm or 90mm M lens on it it became a genuine telephoto option. I enjoyed the image quality. I could hand it to my wife to use, even my small son. The only thing I didn't like was that I was a little worried about getting it wet.

I also really liked having a film M alongside my digital M. Because the film M served as a backup for the digital one, and also as a path to a totally different kind of image. And, also, I often took my film M into 'rough' situations where I didn't want to worry about electronics getting messed up. On a big hiking trip, say, it was nice to just throw a beat-up M2 into my bag with some film and leave the batteries, charger, etc., at home. If my M2 got dust or sea spray on it I wasn't too worried. 

The Q2 was definitely cool, too, but I never really connected with the very modern rendering of the lens (even though I used it as my only camera for more than two years). I actually preferred the pictures from the little 18mm on the CL. And Fuji X-mount just didn't do it for me, from an image quality perspective, after working with Leica.

In my first post, I mentioned telephoto pictures . . . . One thing that got me thinking about letting go of the SL2-S was comparing the photos I took of my son's recital this year (with SL2-S and 135mm T-E) with the ones I took last year (with M10-R and 90mm Summarit). The SL2-S pictures were definitely better—but not that much better. And I only make photos like that once or twice a year.

I guess I'm leaning more and more in the direction of trading my SL2-S for an M2 or M4-P. Or maybe going back to the CL, of all things.

[laowai_]

Here's what Google AI (Gemini 2.5 flash) has to say about that:

"It's clear you've given a lot of consideration to your photographic needs and preferences, and your current gear isn't quite aligning with them. Your analysis of the SL2-S's strengths and weaknesses for your specific use cases is spot-on. You've identified a fundamental mismatch between the camera's size and your primary shooting style.

Given your analysis, it seems highly unlikely that a different SL lens, even a great one like the 35mm APO, will solve the core issue of the camera's size and weight. You've already established that you prefer a smaller camera for your daily life and work. Continuing to invest in the SL system would be a bet against your own deeply held preferences.

Let's break down your options:

1. Sell the SL2-S setup and try a different 'rough and ready' camera (e.g., OM Systems OM-3).

• Pros: This directly addresses your need for a smaller, weather-sealed camera. An OM Systems camera would be significantly lighter and less conspicuous than the SL2-S. It would give you a rugged, autofocus option for journalism and "dashing around" with the kids. This could be a good "complementary" camera in a way the SL2-S hasn't been. The cost would likely be a wash or even a profit.

• Cons: You'd be starting a new system with new lenses, which can be an investment of time and money. The aesthetic of the images would be different from what you're used to with Leica. It might not feel as "special" as your current setup.

2. Sell the SL2-S setup plus the 50 Lux ASPH and buy a Q2.

• Pros: This seems like a very strong option, given your prior positive experience with the Q2. The Q2 is a fantastic "rough and ready" camera. It's weather-sealed, has a fixed lens (which can be liberating), and offers the classic Leica color science you love. The 28mm lens is a great focal length for both journalism and family photography. It's a single, compact, and high-quality solution. The proceeds from selling the SL2-S and the 50 Lux ASPH should cover a good portion of the Q2's cost, if not all of it.

• Cons: You lose the ability to use different focal lengths on a second body. While the Q2 has crop modes, they are not a replacement for a true telephoto. If you really need a long lens for those rare telephoto situations (like a theater performance), the Q2 won't do it.

3. Sell the SL2-S setup and get an M4.

• Pros: You get a pure, mechanical, and beautiful film camera. This would be a completely different experience—more deliberate, less about speed and more about the craft. It's an M body, which you clearly love. It would be a great way to use your existing lenses.

• Cons: This doesn't solve your core need for a "rough and ready" camera with weather-sealing and autofocus. In fact, it's the opposite. An M4 is not the camera you want to be "messing around in really bad weather" with. This option seems to move you further away from your stated goals.

4. Sell it and upgrade the 21 f/3.5 to a 21 SEM.

• Pros: This is a minimalist and focused approach. You're acknowledging that the M10-R is your primary camera and doubling down on making that system as good as it can be. You love the M system, so this is a safe bet.

• Cons: You're back to having no weather-sealed, autofocus, or telephoto option. You've simply improved your main setup while abandoning the goal of having a complementary camera for specific situations.

5. Just keep it.

• Pros: You've already sunk the cost. You can still use it for the few things it's great at. You're not making a decision you might regret later.

• Cons: You're holding onto an expensive and heavy piece of gear that you don't enjoy using for the vast majority of your photography. The "use it rarely" part means it will likely sit on a shelf. The idea of needing it more as your kids get older is a possibility, but you could also just rent a camera for those specific events if they're so rare.

 

Recommendation

Based on your needs, the Q2 option (#2) seems to be the most logical and satisfying path. It directly addresses the shortcomings of the SL2-S while providing a solution that aligns with your love for the Leica aesthetic and quality.

• Size/Weight: It's small, light, and compact, perfect for your "dashing around" style.

• Weather Sealing: It's a purpose-built "rough and ready" camera that you can take out in bad weather.

• Autofocus: It has fast, reliable autofocus, a major advantage for your journalism and candid family photography.

• Look: It's a Leica with a Summilux lens. You'll get the look you love.

• Financials: Selling the SL2-S and the unused 50 Lux ASPH should make this a very manageable (or even free) upgrade.

You would be trading the ability to use interchangeable lenses on a second body for the simplicity and convenience of a single, perfect-for-you camera. Given your analysis that you mostly use 50mm or wider on the M system anyway, the fixed 28mm lens of the Q2 is a great match.

The Q2 would be the perfect complement to your M10-R. The M for slow, deliberate, manual focus shooting with your prime collection, and the Q2 for fast, candid, and weather-sealed work. This setup gives you the best of both worlds without the burden of a camera system that doesn't fit your life."

[Stuart Richardson]

8 hours ago, JoshuaR said:

In my first post, I mentioned telephoto pictures . . . . One thing that got me thinking about letting go of the SL2-S was comparing the photos I took of my son's recital this year (with SL2-S and 135mm T-E) with the ones I took last year (with M10-R and 90mm Summarit). The SL2-S pictures were definitely better—but not that much better. And I only make photos like that once or twice a year.

 

I don't really see where the film M is a replacement for an SL2-S...not that I am against them. But I don't really see what problem you are trying to solve by doing that. 

Regarding the 135mm Tele-Elmar, you could get the EVF for the M10. It is not fantastic by modern standards, but it is very useful for making it easier to frame and accurately focus telephoto lenses on the M cameras. It would also allow you to use longer lenses with an adapter, such as R lenses. That can go a long way towards making the M cameras more versatile for telephoto and macro. 

[JoshuaR]

46 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I don't really see where the film M is a replacement for an SL2-S...not that I am against them. But I don't really see what problem you are trying to solve by doing that. 

Very true! I think a big factor in this decision is my realization that I don’t actually need the SL2-S. So replacing it isn’t an issue, necessarily. And another realization is that the main variable I want to maximize is fun.

You are absolutely right about the Visoflex. But an odd circumstance I have is that my M10-R is broken: neither the screen nor the EVF work anymore. I actually really like my M10-R-D and so haven’t gotten it fixed.

I guess I’m slowly converging on the idea that I should just be all-M, all the time and embrace the limitations, because I enjoy using the system so much more than the alternatives.

[Stuart Richardson]

I would get the M10R fixed and get the visoflex. Then just turn off auto review. It is probably not good to wait forever for repairs on a digital M, even if the M10R is not that old yet…it is discontinued and the years fly by quickly. 

[Luke_Miller]

A couple of thoughts on points in the OP's first post.  I am much faster rangefinder focusing with an M than I am manually focusing with an M lens  on my SL bodies.  A big part of it is I try to be precise with the SL and it slows me down, while with the rangefinder I will be quick (and less precise) and let DOF do its thing. I bought into the SL system to gain access to the Leica L mount glass.  Weight and autofocus performance were not primary considerations. As an event shooter zoom lenses are my bread and butter.  The 24-90 and 90-280 are my most used lenses.  For zooms they are amazing and the APO primes even more so.  I would argue that anyone who has not experiencesd these lenses has not really experienced the SL cameras.

All that said, if one does not enjoy using the camera it it the wrong camera.  When working events I don't notice the weight of my gear.  For travel and walking around it is usually an M, or Q2.

[jaapv]

On 8/23/2025 at 9:39 AM, laowai_ said:

Here's what Google AI (Gemini 2.5 flash) has to say about that:

"It's clear you've given a lot of consideration to your photographic needs and preferences, and your current gear isn't quite aligning with them. Your analysis of the SL2-S's strengths and weaknesses for your specific use cases is spot-on. You've identified a fundamental mismatch between the camera's size and your primary shooting style.

Given your analysis, it seems highly unlikely that a different SL lens, even a great one like the 35mm APO, will solve the core issue of the camera's size and weight. You've already established that you prefer a smaller camera for your daily life and work. Continuing to invest in the SL system would be a bet against your own deeply held preferences.

Let's break down your options:

1. Sell the SL2-S setup and try a different 'rough and ready' camera (e.g., OM Systems OM-3).

• Pros: This directly addresses your need for a smaller, weather-sealed camera. An OM Systems camera would be significantly lighter and less conspicuous than the SL2-S. It would give you a rugged, autofocus option for journalism and "dashing around" with the kids. This could be a good "complementary" camera in a way the SL2-S hasn't been. The cost would likely be a wash or even a profit.

• Cons: You'd be starting a new system with new lenses, which can be an investment of time and money. The aesthetic of the images would be different from what you're used to with Leica. It might not feel as "special" as your current setup.

2. Sell the SL2-S setup plus the 50 Lux ASPH and buy a Q2.

• Pros: This seems like a very strong option, given your prior positive experience with the Q2. The Q2 is a fantastic "rough and ready" camera. It's weather-sealed, has a fixed lens (which can be liberating), and offers the classic Leica color science you love. The 28mm lens is a great focal length for both journalism and family photography. It's a single, compact, and high-quality solution. The proceeds from selling the SL2-S and the 50 Lux ASPH should cover a good portion of the Q2's cost, if not all of it.

• Cons: You lose the ability to use different focal lengths on a second body. While the Q2 has crop modes, they are not a replacement for a true telephoto. If you really need a long lens for those rare telephoto situations (like a theater performance), the Q2 won't do it.

3. Sell the SL2-S setup and get an M4.

• Pros: You get a pure, mechanical, and beautiful film camera. This would be a completely different experience—more deliberate, less about speed and more about the craft. It's an M body, which you clearly love. It would be a great way to use your existing lenses.

• Cons: This doesn't solve your core need for a "rough and ready" camera with weather-sealing and autofocus. In fact, it's the opposite. An M4 is not the camera you want to be "messing around in really bad weather" with. This option seems to move you further away from your stated goals.

4. Sell it and upgrade the 21 f/3.5 to a 21 SEM.

• Pros: This is a minimalist and focused approach. You're acknowledging that the M10-R is your primary camera and doubling down on making that system as good as it can be. You love the M system, so this is a safe bet.

• Cons: You're back to having no weather-sealed, autofocus, or telephoto option. You've simply improved your main setup while abandoning the goal of having a complementary camera for specific situations.

5. Just keep it.

• Pros: You've already sunk the cost. You can still use it for the few things it's great at. You're not making a decision you might regret later.

• Cons: You're holding onto an expensive and heavy piece of gear that you don't enjoy using for the vast majority of your photography. The "use it rarely" part means it will likely sit on a shelf. The idea of needing it more as your kids get older is a possibility, but you could also just rent a camera for those specific events if they're so rare.

 

Recommendation

Based on your needs, the Q2 option (#2) seems to be the most logical and satisfying path. It directly addresses the shortcomings of the SL2-S while providing a solution that aligns with your love for the Leica aesthetic and quality.

• Size/Weight: It's small, light, and compact, perfect for your "dashing around" style.

• Weather Sealing: It's a purpose-built "rough and ready" camera that you can take out in bad weather.

• Autofocus: It has fast, reliable autofocus, a major advantage for your journalism and candid family photography.

• Look: It's a Leica with a Summilux lens. You'll get the look you love.

• Financials: Selling the SL2-S and the unused 50 Lux ASPH should make this a very manageable (or even free) upgrade.

You would be trading the ability to use interchangeable lenses on a second body for the simplicity and convenience of a single, perfect-for-you camera. Given your analysis that you mostly use 50mm or wider on the M system anyway, the fixed 28mm lens of the Q2 is a great match.

The Q2 would be the perfect complement to your M10-R. The M for slow, deliberate, manual focus shooting with your prime collection, and the Q2 for fast, candid, and weather-sealed work. This setup gives you the best of both worlds without the burden of a camera system that doesn't fit your life."

Why would AI have anything of value to say about a personal problem? Are we really ready willing to let us lead by the nose by a robot? 

[laowai_]

57 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Why would AI have anything of value to say about a personal problem? Are we really ready willing to let us lead by the nose by a robot? 

It’s one out of many tools that can aid in discovering blind spots and making rational decisions. 

[jaapv]

It is just a data gathering tool which compiles the content of the Internet, which we all know is bollocks for a significant part, and contributes nothing reliable to an opinion-forming discussion. 

[hansvons]

On 8/22/2025 at 1:32 PM, JoshuaR said:

One thing to say up front is that the SL2-S is a great camera. The colors, handling, EVF, etc., are all wonderful. I've made many beautiful images with mine. It is also very reasonably priced right now, used.

But I have not been able to really enjoy the camera during my time with it. The fundamental issue is that it is too big and heavy.

Agreed. I don’t enjoy the SL2-S as much a my M6 or M4P. But it‘s the best workhorse for my fashion shoots in conjunction with the brilliant/second-to-none 35mm APO at f/2.4. It‘s heft as well as it‘s quick-enough AF is what I need for those shoots. Plus, the colours I‘m getting, especially the skin tones, are better than the competition—at least too my eyes (and the clients love them too). But It’s too heavy for the occasional family gathering, travels, anything that isn’t driven by demanding clients but joy and opportunity. 
 

On 8/22/2025 at 1:32 PM, JoshuaR said:

I have two small kids, age seven and two. My personal photography often involves dashing around. For work, I'm a journalist, and I often take photographs during my reporting. But the SL2-S is just too big and intrusive for me in that role; I prefer an M with a very tiny lens.

 

My kids are grown up now but I‘m in your shoes regarding journalist work. For that, I either use the SL2-S and the APO 35mm or I use the SL2-S with a 35mm Summicron M (still on the hefty side) or I use my M6 and Tri-X (my reporting allows for arty imagery). I‘m still contemplating the Q43 for those tasks. But to justify this expense I need a project that pays for it. I‘m not there yet at the moment. 
 

[JoshuaR]

Well, after reading the helpful replies in this thread—thank you!—and meditating over the weekend, I think I'm going to keep the SL2-S for now, in the spirit of “Why not? You never know!”

Today I went out with my family to the park and brought, of all cameras, my Pentax 67ii, with a 35mm-FOV lens and two rolls of Fuji Pro400H. That camera is absurdly heavy—it makes an SL camera feel svelte in comparison—and it's a pain to use and especially to load. But I've always loved the images, and I've kept it and kept using it. My son and I biked several miles while I wore the camera cross-body on a strap. So, that put the weight and bulk of the SL2-S into perspective a bit. If I keep a Pentax 67ii around, why not an SL2-S?

Maybe I'll invest a little more money in trying to find a great lens for it. The lens I have mounted on it 80% of the time is the Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 Color-Heliar. I use that lens for portraits and enjoy the results. Maybe there's another 75mm lens I might like even more . . . . 

Maybe I just needed to vent a little bit about the camera. In any case, thanks for your advice, it was helpful!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Archiver]

On 8/22/2025 at 9:32 PM, JoshuaR said:

Apologies for the long post.

So, I've had an SL2-S for about a year now. It's meant to be a complement to my main setup—an M10-R with 21, 28, 35, 50, and 90mm lenses. I'm a very happy M photographer, but I wanted to try an SL camera for a few reasons: weather-sealing, wide and long lenses, autofocus.

One thing to say up front is that the SL2-S is a great camera. The colors, handling, EVF, etc., are all wonderful. I've made many beautiful images with mine. It is also very reasonably priced right now, used.

But I have not been able to really enjoy the camera during my time with it. The fundamental issue is that it is too big and heavy. I have two small kids, age seven and two. My personal photography often involves dashing around. For work, I'm a journalist, and I often take photographs during my reporting. But the SL2-S is just too big and intrusive for me in that role; I prefer an M with a very tiny lens.

As for lenses: On the autofocus side, I've tried the Leica 24-70, Pana 20-60, and various Sigma I-series primes. These are all excellent lenses, but I really do prefer the look of the images I get out of my 'classic'-styled M lenses (e.g., New Steel Rim) with an adapter. (I haven't yet tried the Leica 24-90 or any of the APO primes.) With M lenses, however, I'm slower with the SL2-S than I am with the rangefinder. (This has been a  surprise to me.)

The Leica 24-90 and APO primes have a very clean, transparent look with biting sharpness and smooth bokeh. This may or may not suit your tastes as you like the look from your Classic Leica M lenses. They are also very large and heavy, at odds with your preference for lighter kit.

The M lenses that I like the best on my SL2S are the Zeiss Distagon 35mm f1.4, Summicron M 50, and the Summarit 75mm f2.5. The Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.4 MC and f1.2 v1 are okay but not optimal on the SL2S, and lenses wider than 35mm are hit and miss, even the Leica Elmarit 28mm ASPH doesn't perform like it does on a M body.

Focusing: RF focusing is still faster for me than SL2S manual focus, but not that much. I've developed the muscle memory of toggling the punched in view when bringing the camera to my eye, so I can dial in focus without wondering whether it is accurate. The Summicron 35mm ASPH (non-APO) focuses quite fast, and is usually easier than M lenses. Same with the Panasonic 50mm f1.8. But I prefer the rendering of the Distagon 35 and Summicron 50, so I use those in circumstances where speed of focus is not critical.

I also like using many legacy SLR lenses from Minolta, Pentax and Yashica for their handling, rendering and close focus compared with M lenses.

After 15 years with the M9 as my high quality documentation and travel camera, I've moved to the SL2S for the greater dynamic range, weather proofing, autofocus, ability to use M lenses, and the production quality video files. I, too, found it heavy and honestly kind of physically clunky compared with the M9, but I've been getting used to it. I'm about to do my first overnight interstate trip with the SL2S, so we shall see how it pans out. Back in the day, I used to travel with a Canon DSLR, so this is kind of a step backward in terms of weight and size!

On 8/22/2025 at 9:32 PM, JoshuaR said:

Sell my SL2-S, M-L adapter, and extra battery. Try out a different 'rough and ready' camera that's much smaller—maybe an OM Systems OM-3. I could imagine that serving well in my journalism work.

You may or may not find the difference in image quality to be an issue, depending on what you are used to, and what you will accept. I use m43 cameras like the Panasonic G9 and GX85 for everyday shooting and some sports, and the image quality is great on its own, but not as great when compared with files from the M9 or SL2S. They are, however, a pleasure to use because they are small and light, even the G9. They are far lower cost and reasonably easy to replace. As for photojournalism, British photographer Edmond Terakopian swears by the G9, although it's often complementary to his Panasonic S cameras like the S1, S1R, Leica M10 and Sigma fp.

On 8/22/2025 at 9:32 PM, JoshuaR said:

• Sell the setup plus my 50 Lux ASPH (a lens I rarely use, because I have and prefer the 50 f/1.2 reissue) and buy a Q2 as the 'rough and ready' camera. (I've owned a Q2 before and got a lot of value out of it.)

Only you can answer whether the Q2 would advantageously replace the SL2S and 50 Lux. You'd be able to carry it much more easily, but can you live with 28mm and cropping?

On 8/22/2025 at 9:32 PM, JoshuaR said:

• Or sell it and get an M4! 

How much do you really shoot film, and would the M4 do the same kind of duties as the SL2S? Or are you looking for fun excuse to get a M4?

On 8/22/2025 at 9:32 PM, JoshuaR said:

• Or sell it, depend only on the M10-R and use the proceeds to upgrade my Voigtlander 21 f/3.5 to a 21 SEM.
• Or jJust keep it, use it rarely, and don't overthink it. Maybe I'll need telephoto more and more often as my kids get older?

It's a hard camera to sell, because it's so obviously well-made and functional . . . . But it just doesn't seem to be working for me right now.

If it isn't working for you after a year, I'd think more carefully about the Q2, but that's me and my preferences. 

[DenverSteve]

After reading your post it seems as if you have analyzed the situation and have answered your own question.  I concur with laowai_ . If the lens of the Q2 or Q3 doesn't work for your needs, maybe a Q3 43 would be the ticket.  My advice is to not buy anything prior to trying it.  You can rent one prior to purchase.  If a Q doesn't work I would suggest looking at the CL as they are available used and (to me) fit in where the M doesn't.  I can't see how a M4 would help your situation at all.