nightfly
Well-known
I love the results I get with my M9, but as my eyes are getting older, I would like autofocus. Is there anything that emulates the simplicity and colors of the M9 but has autofocus? I guess I'm thinking along the lines of a digital Contax G2.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Q is Leica with AF, EVF is where it should be and it even has framelines for 35, 50 crop modes.
Colors are still from Leica
Colors are still from Leica
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
First thing that comes to mind for me is the Fuji X100. It is the most Leica-like digital camera I know of. It's AF, great viewfinder with frameline, nice color with simulation for Velvia, Provia, Astia, and, in the latest model, Kodachrome. But focal length is limited to 35mm only (equivalent). It has both OVF and EVF. Good camera.
peterm1
Veteran
I think if you are prepared to stick to the basics pretty well any good modern mirrorless camera works well in terms of handling as a means of more or less emulating a Leica M camera (with or without AF depending on your preferences). What I mean by this is use whatever camera you choose together with a suitable high quality AF prime lens in aperture priority mode, single point of focus, single shot and centre weighted metering. Then leave the menu alone if you do not want complexity, and just shoot - using I should add, RAW if you do not mind a little post processing.
I often do this and in fact go further. I will often forego AF and instead use a classic Leica glass or something of equivalent quality and use focus peaking and manual focus assist (which enlarges the viewfinder image for critical focusing). I find that in general though my eyes are poor too I can cope quite well this way. though not quite so well with rapidly moving subjects as my eyes dictate the need for a few seconds to confirm when focus is achieved.
As to which camera body, it is hard to say as I think this depends so much on personal preferences. I mainly use M4/3 bodies as I do not mind their more tight cropping which emulates longer lenses for most of my work. Most people though, would probably prefer a Fujifilm APS sensor camera with interchangeable lenses (which has a sensor commensurate with the M8 not the M9) or if you want a full frame camera, one of the Sony A7 range of FF bodies that are going gang busters right now. In fact the cheapest of these - the A7 which was the first in the range and is still being marketed as an entry level camera might be a good option. Alternatively upgrade to the A7R11 and buy something like a Techart AF adapter for it. That AF adapter allows Leica M mount lenses to be mounted on Sony bodies and provides apparently very satisfactory AF performance on some Sony cameras. (I think the A711 or higher is needed for best performance.) If I were to start again and sell my M4/3 stuff I think it is what I might very well do but my inertia holds me back.
For another, perhaps easier alternative, if you like the 35mm (equivalent) focal length, (and do not mind a fixed lens) I would strongly suggest one of Fujifilm's cameras in the x100 range which with its metal body and high quality build and lens has probably one of the best Leica M like experiences I would think.
I often do this and in fact go further. I will often forego AF and instead use a classic Leica glass or something of equivalent quality and use focus peaking and manual focus assist (which enlarges the viewfinder image for critical focusing). I find that in general though my eyes are poor too I can cope quite well this way. though not quite so well with rapidly moving subjects as my eyes dictate the need for a few seconds to confirm when focus is achieved.
As to which camera body, it is hard to say as I think this depends so much on personal preferences. I mainly use M4/3 bodies as I do not mind their more tight cropping which emulates longer lenses for most of my work. Most people though, would probably prefer a Fujifilm APS sensor camera with interchangeable lenses (which has a sensor commensurate with the M8 not the M9) or if you want a full frame camera, one of the Sony A7 range of FF bodies that are going gang busters right now. In fact the cheapest of these - the A7 which was the first in the range and is still being marketed as an entry level camera might be a good option. Alternatively upgrade to the A7R11 and buy something like a Techart AF adapter for it. That AF adapter allows Leica M mount lenses to be mounted on Sony bodies and provides apparently very satisfactory AF performance on some Sony cameras. (I think the A711 or higher is needed for best performance.) If I were to start again and sell my M4/3 stuff I think it is what I might very well do but my inertia holds me back.
For another, perhaps easier alternative, if you like the 35mm (equivalent) focal length, (and do not mind a fixed lens) I would strongly suggest one of Fujifilm's cameras in the x100 range which with its metal body and high quality build and lens has probably one of the best Leica M like experiences I would think.
nightfly
Well-known
Good suggestions.
My reservation with something like the Sony is people tend to say it's very fiddly and that it's like shooting with a computer rather than a camera. Although I work in tech I'm sort of allergic to it in my camera choice. But results wise a Sony with a tech art adapter for Leica lenses might be close to what I'm after. Or just some of their better native glass. I have pretty basic lens needs.
The x100 is interesting. Lately I've been gravitating toward longer lenses, more like 50 than 35. I've got a Ricoh GR II which is nice but 28 doesn't always suit me.
I like to print big so smaller than full frame isn't a deal breaker but I'd like to stay with as much ability to print big as I can. The M9 files, although not the highest resolution seem to hold up well when printed large.
I actually own a Fuji GF 50r. I don't tend to grab it much but maybe just putting the new little 50mm 3.5 lens and a grip on it will make it more of a street camera. Plenty of pixels it's just a bit chunky for the way I like to shoot. I've contemplated selling it but maybe a smaller lens is all it needs.
My reservation with something like the Sony is people tend to say it's very fiddly and that it's like shooting with a computer rather than a camera. Although I work in tech I'm sort of allergic to it in my camera choice. But results wise a Sony with a tech art adapter for Leica lenses might be close to what I'm after. Or just some of their better native glass. I have pretty basic lens needs.
The x100 is interesting. Lately I've been gravitating toward longer lenses, more like 50 than 35. I've got a Ricoh GR II which is nice but 28 doesn't always suit me.
I like to print big so smaller than full frame isn't a deal breaker but I'd like to stay with as much ability to print big as I can. The M9 files, although not the highest resolution seem to hold up well when printed large.
I actually own a Fuji GF 50r. I don't tend to grab it much but maybe just putting the new little 50mm 3.5 lens and a grip on it will make it more of a street camera. Plenty of pixels it's just a bit chunky for the way I like to shoot. I've contemplated selling it but maybe a smaller lens is all it needs.
DHK
-
Any x pro and Fuji lenses.
dfdann
Member
Leica CL. Has pretty much replaced my M7 and M8 for the most part. Very easy to focus
manually with my M lenses in addition to high IQ from native TL autofocus lenses.
Cheers, Dan
manually with my M lenses in addition to high IQ from native TL autofocus lenses.
Cheers, Dan
ndnik
Established
Fuji X100 or x-pro, any generation. Leica Q or CL if EVF is OK with you. That's about it for rangefinder-style digital cameras.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Leica Q2 sounds awesome.
The camera that is most like the Contax G series is the Fujifilm X-Pro series and then the X100 series. I feel like the X-Pro was inspired by the G series and the X-T series from Fuji was inspired by the RTS. Other than that, you have to look at Leica Q and CL (which will obviously feel more like a Leica than the Fujis). Not much else out there if you like autofocus RF style bodies.
Anything from Sony is the antithesis of Leica.
Anything from Sony is the antithesis of Leica.
DHK
-
I tried the Sony a7ii with an ltm lens and Sony af lens. It worked well, but felt like a cold computer and I hate saying it but the shutter sounded unpleasant. Images were great but usage slowed down. Also it does way too much if you’re replacing a Leica.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Fuji X-Pro3. Half the price of a used M-9 and likely more reliable. Fuji lenses are excellent.
tbhv55
Well-known
The x100 with the TCL-x100 gives a 50mm (effective) focal length. I have owned the TCL for a couple of years, and it virtually 'lives' on my x100.
Some have said that it's overly large, but I actually prefer the appearance of the x100 with the TCL-x100 mounted. I should point out, though, that the TCL-x100 is large enough to block part of the lower right-hand-side of the optical finder. The view in the EVF is unaffected (obviously!).
Oddly, pictures of the combination don't (IMO) do it justice. For that reason, I suggest that you try (if you're interested) to view and handle these items for yourself, rather than relying merely upon pictures for making your judgement. HTH.
Didn´t notice this... yes, the 50mm supposedly focuses fast. You have a great option already.
Ste_S
Well-known
Olympus Pen F, Panasonic GX9 (also if you don't mind an evf)
peterm1
Veteran
The x100 with the TCL-x100 gives a 50mm (effective) focal length. I have owned the TCL for a couple of years, and it virtually 'lives' on my x100.
Some have said that it's overly large, but I actually prefer the appearance of the x100 with the TCL-x100 mounted. I should point out, though, that the TCL-x100 is large enough to block part of the lower right-hand-side of the optical finder. The view in the EVF is unaffected (obviously!).
Oddly, pictures of the combination don't (IMO) do it justice. For that reason, I suggest that you try (if you're interested) to view and handle these items for yourself, rather than relying merely upon pictures for making your judgement. HTH.
While I do not own an x100 I have contemplated buying one and if I did I would definitely get the TCL x100 lens as I prefer 50mm over 35mm for most of my work. (In fact I would prefer 75mm over 50mm). Like you I do not think that this supplementary lens is overly large and rather like how it looks on camera. I am a sucker for big lenses anyway - one of my favorite lenses for micro four thirds is the original 25mm Panasonic Leica Summilux for 1.4 AF for the original four thirds system mounted on the later camera with an AF adapter. It is huge on an M4/3 camera but makes beautiful images and has an equivalent FOV of a 50mm lens).
Yeh I think the TCL x100 looks fine. Though I think that with it mounted I would want a hand grip. Overall I think this makes a pretty good AF M9 substitute unless you want still longer lenses.
aizan
Veteran
GAS demands buying a Hasselblad X1Dii with the new 45mm pancake.
nightfly
Well-known
Would like to handle a XPro and see how it feels in hand. I think I'd probably get something like that over an X100 with that big ass lens adapter. If I were getting an X100 I'd likely just use the built in lens. Otherwise I'd get an interchangeable lens body as the adapter seem to negate the benefit of the built in lens for me.
At one point I bought an XE 2 which was nice and compact with the 28 equivalent but I found I fought the meter a lot. Ended up just using it on pure manual and then sold it as for what I was using it for, the Ricoh GR worked better for me.
I looked at the original X1-D before I bought my Fuji GF R. It's a much prettier camera but it has the same exact sensor and reviews from people who actually used one said it was slow and cumbersome to use. The latest revision might have changed that.
It seems like the options are getting the 50/3.5 for my GF R or trying to get my hands on a X-Pro to play with. Maybe checking out a X100 to see how I like the feel. Haptics mean a lot to me with a camera. Some I clicked wth and some I don't. The M9 is outstanding form me in this. Also I love the image quality. It's the most film like digital I've every seen and not much needs to be done to the out of camera images. The GF R images, are amazing but maybe a little too amazing for me.
Also considering a Contax G2 as I've been shooting more film lately and would like to try one.
Sounds like a trip to B&H is in order.
At one point I bought an XE 2 which was nice and compact with the 28 equivalent but I found I fought the meter a lot. Ended up just using it on pure manual and then sold it as for what I was using it for, the Ricoh GR worked better for me.
I looked at the original X1-D before I bought my Fuji GF R. It's a much prettier camera but it has the same exact sensor and reviews from people who actually used one said it was slow and cumbersome to use. The latest revision might have changed that.
It seems like the options are getting the 50/3.5 for my GF R or trying to get my hands on a X-Pro to play with. Maybe checking out a X100 to see how I like the feel. Haptics mean a lot to me with a camera. Some I clicked wth and some I don't. The M9 is outstanding form me in this. Also I love the image quality. It's the most film like digital I've every seen and not much needs to be done to the out of camera images. The GF R images, are amazing but maybe a little too amazing for me.
Also considering a Contax G2 as I've been shooting more film lately and would like to try one.
Sounds like a trip to B&H is in order.