Time to Move from M10P to Q?

[mdt2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Everyone, 

As I get older, now in my 60s, focusing my M10P is getting more and more challenging as far as consistency. It's just getting harder for me, I guess. I am considering selling my M10P or trading it in on a Q3. I'm looking for feedback from those who might have made this same move, and what are your thoughts? Regrets?

 

Edited Friday at 07:35 PM by mdt2

[M11 for me]

I have an M11 and a Q3. In many cased the Q3 might be the better choice or else the 28mm lens is a perfekt match. Then the Q has a makro mode, that is very versatile. 

If you are interested to see what images you can get from Q, see either the respective thread with the images of the Q here in the forum or look at my Q2/Q3 album that is 2 years old: At that time it was a very conscius decision to leave my M (plus a few lenses) at home and go only with two Q cameras, the Q2 and the Q3.  

https://www.alexuehlinger.com/Ireland-May-2023

Do you miss something? If that is the kind of images you shoot as well, then you will miss nothing. And you have auto focus and image stabilisation.

[steve edmunds]

i own the Q2 and the M262 , if your eyes are finding the M difficult it makes sense to get a Q3 or any Q but there is something special and unique about the M series that no other camera can replicate in my view.

 

[LocalHero1953]

I didn't switch directly. I went from just the M240 to CL+SL and now Q3 43 + SL2-S (with a few stops along the way).

I would say it depends on what you use your M11P for. If you just use it for a limited range of focal lengths, as I did (28+75 were my normal lenses then - now it would be 35+75), then one of the Q3 siblings should suit. If you want wider or longer, then you might find yourself frustrated at what you miss. Frankly I like having a carry-anywhere camera with the focal length limitations of the Q (I had a Q2 before the Q3 43): I am comfortable with digital cropping from 43 to ~90. I positively revel in all the features a M cannot offer: image stabilisation, practically silent shutter, choices of manual and auto focus, aperture and shutter speed, weather proofing, WYSIWYG viewfinder, macro (well, very close focus), flip screen, opportunistic video. 

If you are the sort of photographer that wants to be able to photograph anything and everything and needs a bag full of lenses, then forget it. If you have a developed style and range of subjects that the Q FLs suit, then you will only gain from the switch.

Edit. I am in my early 70s, but have good eyesight, and I'm very happy using a rangefinder in film Ms. Rangefinder-aversion does not play a part in my comments.

Edited yesterday at 07:38 AM by LocalHero1953

[Chris W]

Yes, it really depends if you are happy to shoot 28mm or 43mm (before the crop factor). I had an original Q and absolutely loved the images out of it, but didn't enjoy shooting 28mm. 

If it's just a question of eyesight, you could buy something from the SL series. Even manually focussing your M lenses you get focus peaking and zooming in.

[LocalHero1953]

I find myself much slower and less confident when manually focussing on an EVF compared to a rangefinder (including with focus aids), and I'd expect weakening eyesight to affect both methods equally. From the posts on this forum others find the opposite though. It also depends on how quickly you want to focus: I mainly shoot people, so faster is better AFAIC.

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you primarily use 28-35mm, the Q3 will suit you well. Or if you are 43-60mm or so, the Q3 43 will be great. But as the others said, the further you need to crop, the less fun it is to use a Q. If only because the view become so small. The other main options are to get an SL series. The SL2 series is still inexpensive and very very capable. Another focus aid that you might consider is the EVF for the M cameras. It is not very modern, but it is still very effective. It probably will take longer, so if most of your photography is of moving subjects, then it is not super helpful. But for certain kinds of photography (landscape, architecture), it can make an M camera just as precise to use as any other mirrorless camera. Finally, if you want an M like experience with autofocus, depending on your tastes you may find it more easily from another company, depending on what it is that you like best about the M. The Fuji X cameras are compact and discreet and have AF. While the Hasselblad X series is elegant and ergonomic with beautiful image quality (and also AF). 

Edited yesterday at 08:45 AM by Stuart Richardson

[costa43]

If the experience of using the M is no longer that satisfying or enjoyable then it makes sense to switch imo as the M is mainly about that experience. I have owned the Q3 and sold it mainly as I was not 100% satisfied with the 28mm. I’m very tempted by the 43mm though as a do it all camera. It just ticks so many boxes. @LocalHero1953 sums up the benefits really well.

If the rumours are accurate, there is an EVF M around the corner (Oct 23rd) It won’t have AF but it may be worth holding out to see if that model offers a little more assistance in focusing before making a final decision. 

Edited yesterday at 09:02 AM by costa43

[mdt2]

Thank you all for your thoughtful responses. It is a tough decision considering my current love-hate relationship with my M. I certainly do not want to make a rash decision. My current system was purchased over 5 or 6 years, so I don't want to make a switch without carefully considering what I am getting into, especially when I think about the expense I would incur if I want to go back to an M system. Thanks again! 

[ajmarton1]

I am also in my 60s and gave up my M10 and M10M for a Q3 and now a Q3 43.  I have no regrets and have never looked back.  My hit ratio has increased dramatically as I primarily shot street.  And the Q system is so light and compact making it a wonderful travel companion.  

[masjah]

I have an SL2 plus a Leica R-L adapter and a comprehensive selection of legacy R lenses. I also had an M240 + EVF (which was my first "digital R solution", but later, after getting the SL2, used solely in original rangefinder mode with a Summarit 35/2.4). The lack of autofocus with the R lenses was never a problem, since my subjects are virtually all static, and for static subjects the SL2 is very easy to focus. I loved the M for when I wanted something lighter than the sheer heft of the SL2 + adapter + R lenses.

In my case the problem was not eyesight, but a worsening tremor, making image stabilisation essential. I therefore swapped the M240 for a Q3 (28). Cropping to 35 or 50 still gives very good results, and the viewfinder displays the full 28mm image, with the cropped framelines, in that respect giving a similar experience to an M. I chose the 28 rather than the 43 for shooting architecture. The Leica perspective control facility is wonderful. The choice between the two Q cameras is, as previously said, contingent on your style of photography, but I'm sure you would get on with a Q3.

 

 

[JNK100]

I sold my M9 a while ago and moved to Fuji for a while before getting a Q3 which is a wonderful camera. I use it mainly at 28-35 and up to 50mm occasionally.

I missed the interaction I had with my M so bought an M11 with a 50mm 'Lux fle2.

This also gives me better dof-control.

If able, I would get a Q but don't sell your M quite yet as you may will miss it.

Edited 16 hours ago by JNK100

[mdt2]

3 hours ago, ajmarton1 said:

I am also in my 60s and gave up my M10 and M10M for a Q3 and now a Q3 43.  I have no regrets and have never looked back.  My hit ratio has increased dramatically as I primarily shot street.  And the Q system is so light and compact making it a wonderful travel companion.  

 

3 hours ago, ajmarton1 said:

I am also in my 60s and gave up my M10 and M10M for a Q3 and now a Q3 43.  I have no regrets and have never looked back.  My hit ratio has increased dramatically as I primarily shot street.  And the Q system is so light and compact making it a wonderful travel companion.  

@ajmarton1 Are you happy with the Q's image quality as compared to your M10? The Q's overall speed and responsiveness? Thanks!

Edited 15 hours ago by mdt2

[Jskywalker]

I also went from M240 to a Q2 due to failing eyesight and also the M240 is too heavy to bring around. No turning back. Am now considering a Q3 43 instead.

[keithlaban.co.uk]

15 hours ago, masjah said:

In my case the problem was not eyesight, but a worsening tremor, making image stabilisation essential. 

 

 

Ditto.  In my case eyesight and increasingly shaky hands meant that the M was no longer an option.

Edited 3 hours ago by keithlaban.co.uk

[Chris W]

16 hours ago, ajmarton1 said:

I am also in my 60s and gave up my M10 and M10M for a Q3 and now a Q3 43.  

That's the only issue for me, you have to have two Q cameras to get close to my favourite focal lengths, 35 or 50mm.

[Chris W]

12 hours ago, mdt2 said:

 

@ajmarton1 Are you happy with the Q's image quality as compared to your M10? The Q's overall speed and responsiveness? Thanks!

All the Q's have fantastic image quality, easily equal to an M10. I have gorgeous images from my original Q (Q1).

[keithlaban.co.uk]

32 minutes ago, Chris W said:

That's the only issue for me, you have to have two Q cameras to get close to my favourite focal lengths, 35 or 50mm.

I chose the 43 as it was slap bang in the middle of my two favourite focal lengths. I'll risk the usual DOF arguments and say it also allows me to isolate subjects from the backgrounds with ease.

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!