Leica M10 or SL?

jsrockit said:
Raid, the whole time I have been on this site, you've been a Leica M user and not someone who changes equipment a lot. I would be curious to hear why you are considering the SL instead of another M.
Click to expand...

I like to try new things out. I am curious. In the end, I may stay traditional and stick with RF based M.
 
After the M9 fiasco I'll never buy another Leica. Just way too terribly over priced compared to what's available. However, getting that off my chest, I still like my M9. Since the choice is yours, go with the M10. There's half a dozen other cameras with the same specs, better customer follow up service, far less expensive, and fantastic lenses to even consider a SL IMHO.
 
There are few digital cameras with a rangefinder. Yes, there are several modern options available these days, but they do not have a RF.
 
giganova said:
If you only want to use standard lenses, them the M10 is the obvious choice. But if you need to reach further or have a need to tap into the ever-growing range of L-mount lenses, the SL is the obvious choice. Its all about the lenses, baby! ;)
Click to expand...

I prefer using the tiny M lenses or tiny Zeiss lenses with adapter for M.
 
Rob-F said:
It's fun to spend some time agonizing over which new toy to get. But I think you really want an M10. I know I do. It's just a matter of time.
Click to expand...

You are most likely right, Rob. The M10 looks so good, and the reviews by users are excellent. If you love using Leica cameras, then the M10 shines.
 
I think if I owned a raft of old SLR lenses but in particular 'R' lenses, would opt for the SL. The EVF is the best in breed. Nothing comes close.

Have to agree that M lenses look a bit odd on the SL but it's the image that matters and nothing to complain on that account.
 
I don’t own any R lenses. The SL has an amazing viewfinder. I would never have been interested a bit in the SL had I not seen and held an SL in my hands.
 
As some others have alluded to, I think a major decision point is how one views and focuses the subject. EFV or OVF. Reid Reviews is frequently critical of EVFs for inability to display the full range of tones in a scene making it hard to assess. While I think the SL is overall rather similar to a dSLR, there is still that same difference with the viewfinder.
I often use a Pentax K1, probably about the same size as the SL, and also the even larger Leica S2, with a history of favoring the Pentax 67, so the size/weight isn't really an issue for me, but it sure can be for others.
So the SL has many SLR advantages, while IMO suffers even with its top-quality EFV. Still, I like my Leica Q, so there y'are! ;)
 
M10 all day long!

I have about a dozen M lenses and using them on an SL will work seamlessly with the Leica L to M adapter (almost); focusing accurately in daylight situations requires you to first stop the lens down.
 
raid said:
There are few digital cameras with a rangefinder. Yes, there are several modern options available these days, but they do not have a RF.
Click to expand...

I have also come to this conclusion.

If you want RF on a digital body, then your only option is to shoot Leica M.

I also find shooting manual-focus lenses on current digital bodies to be crude as you can't rely solely on focus peaking so you need to magnify to verify focus.

For certain photography this is acceptable (I use it on landscape and for stills quite a bit) but for everyday capture or street I find that the brief checking focus/magnify time takes you out of the moment.

so my choice between the M10 or SL is obviously the M10.
 
I had and loved using the SL. Superb SL zooms, perfect match to my R lenses too. For me, not quite so ergonomic with M lenses, but still superb performance. But when I retired, I found myself not using it so much and carrying the M-D more. So I sold it.

But still needed something TTL to do macro, copy, and tabletop work. Or long lens views. So I bought a CL. The CL suits me better for most things I do than the SL now, to the point that I stopped using the M-D.

Then Hasselblad announced the 907x and CFV50c II back in a Special Edition. So I sold the M-D and the WATE to help fun that and the XCD 21 lens. And use the CL as my standard light camera. All of my R lenses will perform well on the 907x/CFV50c II as well, particularly cropped to a 39mPixel square format.

Were I to buy another digital Leica, I'd buy an M10-D now. But I'm content with the CL, which is also a superb match to all my M and R lenses.

G
 
The digital Hasselblad back and matching camera are quite costly. Good for you.
Is the M10D:
Key Features:

No LCD for an analog experience
Hard switch for quick access to Wi-Fi
Built-in Exposure Compensation dial on rear
Integrated fold-out thumb rest
Compatible with Visoflex EVF for Live View Capture
Works perfectly with Leica FOTOS app
Same design/specs as M10-P
Quiet Shutter
Body covering made from genuine leather
Available in Black Chrome finish
 
BillBlackwell said:
M10 all day long!

I have about a dozen M lenses and using them on an SL will work seamlessly with the Leica L to M adapter (almost); focusing accurately in daylight situations requires you to first stop the lens down.
Click to expand...

My thoughts go to keeping things simple for me. The SL (or M240) would open the door for me to use many different lenses that now cannot be used with my M8 or M9, but do I really want to complicate things for myself when things are now very basic and straightforward with a few M lenses on my older M8 and M9?

If I had to use one camera only, I can see myself with the M10 or the SL. Both cameras seem to work well with the smaller M lenses. The M10 would be a natural continuation in my M cameras used so far.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Anything what is not M is not Leica, including anything from Leica without M.

But with SL you will still maintain your special status at forums and in front of those who still thinks what Leica is something special. And with SL you could have much more exotic lenses to buy for extra price and post pictures of the same at the forum. :)

I know how many older photogs have no choice but EVF, where are better choices for it now instead of SL.
Click to expand...

I have been fortunate not to need any glasses for weakening eye sight. I do not need an EVF. I am/was debating with myself if getting a "modern" camera such as the SL would be fun for me to do or not.
 
Out to Lunch said:
I'm afraid of the complex SL menu and focus peaking and so, I'd go for an M10.
Click to expand...

The SL can be set to require a minimal set of buttons for effective use, Peter. It can accept M lenses well with the Leica adapter too. It just cannot get smaller or lighter and it does not have Ff focusing.
 
Raid, I just suggest you a different point of view: keep the M9 as "main" natural camera and if you want beside it a "modern" camera try the CL (personally I'm more intrigued by the idea behind the TL2 but this is just me )

This will keep your kit when traveling small and light, with the adapter you can use the M lenses and get the benefit to make them "longer", 1,5 x.

And you can have a wide on the M and a medium tele on the APS camera without need to change lenses.

I never tried the CL because I'm afraid to like it too much and I do not need another camera...but the idea seems me interesting.

Just a suggestion...

robert
 
Hi Robert,


I have used M 4/3 cameras side by side with M9 camera, and I do not like the 1.5X crop anymore. I used to accept it, but I want to use my M lenses at their focal lengths and not as short tele lenses. I will give it all more thought. Would you replace your M10 with a CL?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom