fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

       2       3       4       end
  

Now ditching the M11?

  
 
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · Now ditching the M11?


I've never made it a secret that I got into Leica M because of the small lenses combined with FF and not so much my love of a rangefinder. I do think rangefinder focusing works well when not using lenses wide open and the lenses lend themselves well to zone focusing, which I use quite a bit on the street.

This morning I tried my M lenses on my M11, my R5 and my Z6III. I found the colors largely the same on these cameras, with the Leica actually producing the least life-like colors (I said life like, I didn't say they didn't look good). In the past week, I also realized that my other FF, MFT and Q2 setups are more versatile in terms of combining zone focusing and auto focus. And I have a Fuji GFX100s if I really need high resolution for landscapes.

The M11 is touted as a small camera, but it's really not. It just misses the grip and the EVF bump of the Canon and Nikon bodies, but the real difference is in lens sizes and a bit of weight. And the MFT kit produces files that are plenty large for printing because for street and the like I don't need to crop much, if at all.

Now, a week ago, I was thinking of selling my Q2M and getting a Q2 or Q3. But now I've come to the conclusion that the Q2M has a particular role to play with its special sensor and high-ISO capabilities, whereas the role of the M11 can be filled by several of my other cameras. Ideally, Nikon releases a Z7III with the MF functions of the Zf and Z6III and the higher resolution, but I think I can live without that for now.

Another factor is the new Fuji X-E5, which is small, uses small lenses and offers 40MP. Previously there was no small camera that wasn't a Sony that offered that kind of resolution in a small package.

As always, the question: am I missing something?



Aug 29, 2025 at 05:07 AM
panos.v
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Now ditching the M11?


The only question is: Do you want the real rangefinder optical experience or not?

Not implying it is better or whatever. I say "real" because it is the only proper optical rangefinder (no the XPro/X100 one doesn't count).

Everything else is just specs on a sheet for a lot less money.



Aug 29, 2025 at 05:41 AM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · Now ditching the M11?


panos.v wrote:
The only question is: Do you want the rangefinder experience or not?

Everything else is just specs on a sheet for a lot less money.


I like zone focusing, but otherwise the means of focusing other than how well it works for me, doesn’t matter much.

So, AF for fast moving subjects over an area not covered by zone focusing and for shallow depth of field. Anything else for other cases. The issue is more about versatility. I cannot take every camera with me all the time, so I either pick a flexible setup catering to what I expect, or a specific setup for a purpose. I don’t see a role for that with the M11. Now, I’d keep it nonetheless if it didn’t tie up more than $6000 in a single piece of kit.



Aug 29, 2025 at 05:47 AM
panos.v
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Now ditching the M11?


johnvanr wrote:
I like zone focusing, but otherwise the means of focusing other than how well it works for me, doesn’t matter much.

So, AF for fast moving subjects over an area not covered by zone focusing and for shallow depth of field. Anything else for other cases. The issue is more about versatility. I cannot take every camera with me all the time, so I either pick a flexible setup catering to what I expect, or a specific setup for a purpose. I don’t see a role for that with the M11. Now, I’d keep it nonetheless if it didn’t tie up
...Show more

I think you're answering your own question there! A Leica is literally only valid as a tactile experience: optical finder, manual focus, small lenses. If that doesn't do much for you, the price of entry is very high to just let it sit in the corner.




Aug 29, 2025 at 05:57 AM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · Now ditching the M11?


johnvanr wrote:
I've never made it a secret that I got into Leica M because of the small lenses combined with FF and not so much my love of a rangefinder. I do think rangefinder focusing works well when not using lenses wide open and the lenses lend themselves well to zone focusing, which I use quite a bit on the street.

This morning I tried my M lenses on my M11, my R5 and my Z6III. I found the colors largely the same on these cameras, with the Leica actually producing the least life-like colors (I said life like, I didn't say
...Show more

I think the only thing you might be missing is that Leica is rumored to be making an EVF version of the M11 and it may be announced very soon. You might like that camera quite a bit more and it will likely work better with Leica M lenses than anything else available. It won't have AF, however.

Have you used the techArt pro AF adapter? You could also consider going with a Kolari thin modified Sony or Nikon and that adapter to allow you to use Leica M mount lenses with AF if you want and MF when you want. With Sony you could use a really small A7rC and with Nikon you could use the nicely designed ZF or with a Z7 III if Nikon ever makes that camera.

IMO, the primary reason to have a Leica M is because of the rangefinder. I really like the rangefinder for 28, 35, & 50mm lenses, but I find the system a lot less useful for longer or shorter focal lengths. I also agree that the M11 is really not a small camera. It is on the small side, but you can get much smaller camera either by using a smaller sensor or going with a Sony A7C series camera. The Leica M lenses are very small for FF lenses, but they also have compromises that come with that size. They tend to have strong vignetting. They tend to have short focus throws. And until recently they tended to have long MFDs. I think those compromises make sense on a Leica M camera, but I am less sure they make sense on other systems.

I sold my Leica M10 and the lenses I used on it about a year ago. I miss it at times and might get a Leica M again in the future, but I am happy with what I am currently using instead. For much of my shooting, I used Voigtlander lens on my Sony A7r V. It has a nice big EVF and the same sensor as the M11. I find I like shooting my 21 f/1.4 a lot more on this camera than on the Leica M. I also like shooting the Voigtlander 75 f/1.5 a lot better on this camera. In between with my Voigtlander 28 f/1.5 and 50 f/2 APO and 50 f/1.2 I prefer shooting with the Leica M, but not as much as I prefer the Sony for wider and longer. I am also looking forward to adding the Zeiss Otus 50mm within the next couple of years as I think I will really like using that lens on the Sony and I am hopeful that Cosina will make their new 28 APO Lanthar in Sony E mount and I can shoot that as well. So, although I miss the rangefinder I am not sure I won't overall be happier with the Sony.

On the size front, I am putting together a Fuji X mount kit that I think will both be smaller than an Leica M mount system and have lenses that I really like. I will be adding three of the Voigtlander X mount lenses and pairing those with the wonderfully small Sigma 10-18 f/2.8 ultra wide zoom. The compromise is obviously the smaller sensor, but I think the other compromises are all relatively minor and I save about 600g compared to my final Leica M kit and I plan to use the XT-5 with that kit for the better EVF. I could save even more weight if I went with the X-E5 and as you say Fuji X can now provide 40 MP resolution which really isn't too bad.

So like you are considering I moved away from a Leica M camera. I can't say I have zero regrets, but those regrets are mainly about missing the rangefinder, which you don't like. I have also gained a number of things that I like about the switch. It sounds to me like you wouldn't miss much if you switched but if you did it would be the lenses, so I would encourage you to think about which lenses you would miss and if you could find a way to use them on one of your other systems or if you want to wait to switch to see if you like the EVF version of the M11, as you can be pretty sure you could use those lenses on that camera.



Edited on Aug 29, 2025 at 06:27 AM · View previous versions



Aug 29, 2025 at 06:16 AM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · Now ditching the M11?


panos.v wrote:
I think you're answering your own question there! A Leica is literally only valid as a tactile experience: optical finder, manual focus, small lenses. If that doesn't do much for you, the price of entry is very high to just let it sit in the corner.



That’s the thing. I do pick it up, only to realize that another setup allows for more leeway and/or easier focusing in certain circumstances. And my mind tells me that FF is really nice, but in street a smaller sensor can actually be more beneficial.



Aug 29, 2025 at 06:17 AM
pingflood
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · Now ditching the M11?


Out of curiosity, what are the M lenses you've tested? I put my Summicron-35 ASPH v1 on a Sigma fpL and I really didn't think it performed well on that body. My 75mm Ultron was much better. I've read that the Summicron is a particularly finicky lens on alt bodies though.

IMO if your lenses perform well enough on other bodies then yeah, there's little reason for the M11 unless you particularly love the Leica experience. People talk about how it's a small kit bla bla but the camera itself is as you've noted not tiny.



Aug 29, 2025 at 06:25 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · Now ditching the M11?


While not "smaller" than the M, the use of M lenses on my SL body (SL2-S in my case) splits the difference for me.

By that, I get the smallness of the M lenses. The tactile experience of the physical aperture, the zone / dof manual focusing (key point, here imo) and the proper (or much closer to) sensor stack for retaining the IQ of the M lenses (e.g. vs. adapted to Sony).

When I want AF, I drop on an L mount lens of choice (Leica / Panny / Siggy). Imo, if you have an affinity for M lenses ... but, not so much the M body rangefinder optical focusing, the L mount is worth a look, as part of your kit.

Depending on your perspective on VF or LCD only, there are also Panny / Siggy L mount bodies that might be considered, also. I don't recall the sensor stack / performance for all the diff Panny / Siggy options with M glass, but they are worth a look, particularly if your looking at zone focusing with the M glass vs. shallow DOF work. For sheer body size, the Panny S9 or Sigma FP-L are smaller package than the M11. If you still want an eye VF, the S5 / S1, etc. might be something to look at.

I think the first question, though ... is your choice of glass. By that, I mean if you want to use M glass (vs. other options), then the follow on question is do you want the BEST optical throughput for the M glass on an M body (sensor stack, etc.), or are your second tier options (SL / Panny) or third tier options (Nikon / Sony) what you want to mate your M glass to.

If your answer to the M glass question is "optional", then I might suggest looking at some of the Sigma Contemporary series for your platform of choice for diminutive + AF. Otherwise, your world of options is now expanded to the universe of different platforms.

M glass ...

M Body
SL Body
Panny / Siggy
Nikon
Sony

Glass Rules ... you can let that be your guide dog, to help noodle through your decisions.

HTH




Aug 29, 2025 at 07:19 AM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · Now ditching the M11?


johnvanr wrote:
I found the colors largely the same on these cameras, with the Leica actually producing the least life-like colors (I said life like, I didn't say they didn't look good).


My 2 Cents here: the last Leica M camera which provided more film-like vibrant colors in the DNG files was the M 240 series. Newer CMOS sensors in successor models increased the dynamic range and resolution (in M10-R and M11 models) with requiring more post-processing to get similar brilliance in colors as in earlier M camera models. This is one main reason why I keep my M-E 240 camera! RAW files from the M11 and a newer Sony-E-mount camera are likely very much alike.




Aug 29, 2025 at 08:13 AM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · Now ditching the M11?


pingflood wrote:
Out of curiosity, what are the M lenses you've tested? I put my Summicron-35 ASPH v1 on a Sigma fpL and I really didn't think it performed well on that body. My 75mm Ultron was much better. I've read that the Summicron is a particularly finicky lens on alt bodies though.

IMO if your lenses perform well enough on other bodies then yeah, there's little reason for the M11 unless you particularly love the Leica experience. People talk about how it's a small kit bla bla but the camera itself is as you've noted not tiny.


Zeiss 21/2.8, 25/2.8, 35/2, 50 Sonnar. VL 50/1.5, 50/2 APO, 75/1.5. Contax G45. Leica 28 Elmarit.

I have a few more, but no intention to keep those, so didn’t test them.



Aug 29, 2025 at 08:23 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

pmeheut
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · Now ditching the M11?


johnvanr wrote:
As always, the question: am I missing something?

Yes: a M is about the rangefinder and having both a very small package, focusing manually where you want and composing your image in your head and not using the viewfinder.

As far as I'm concerned, the M is obsolete and I get excellent pictures from my micro43 bodies. But as soon as I use a M, I see different pictures, my mindset changes and one of the best I shot recently was with a M5.

So if you do not feel that way, buy a Fuji: they are excellent camera, great lenses, very versatile, not that big...
But for people like me, the M is something else entirely.



Aug 29, 2025 at 08:47 AM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · Now ditching the M11?


RustyBug wrote:
While not "smaller" than the M, the use of M lenses on my SL body (SL2-S in my case) splits the difference for me.

By that, I get the smallness of the M lenses. The tactile experience of the physical aperture, the zone / dof manual focusing (key point, here imo) and the proper (or much closer to) sensor stack for retaining the IQ of the M lenses (e.g. vs. adapted to Sony).

When I want AF, I drop on an L mount lens of choice (Leica / Panny / Siggy). Imo, if you have an affinity for M lenses ...
...Show more

I do think the SL line is too large and overpriced for what it is compared to the competition. I also think Panasonic FF cameras are larger than I like them to be.

My experience with using the M lenses with the R5 or Z6III isn't bad. I find the rendering more than acceptable at the apertures I use them and if I'd go to a wider aperture, the edges don't matter that much. My experience is different with the R6II, which I did find to not render M lenses well at all.

Also, I do want lenses with the DoF scale on them so I can continue to use zone focusing.



Aug 29, 2025 at 08:55 AM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · Now ditching the M11?


Steve Spencer wrote:
I think the only thing you might be missing is that Leica is rumored to be making an EVF version of the M11 and it may be announced very soon. You might like that camera quite a bit more and it will likely work better with Leica M lenses than anything else available. It won't have AF, however.

Have you used the techArt pro AF adapter? You could also consider going with a Kolari thin modified Sony or Nikon and that adapter to allow you to use Leica M mount lenses with AF if you want and MF when you
...Show more

I have the Visoflex for my M11 but don't enjoy using that. Plus, it makes the camera as large as any other FF camera. I do think Nikon did a good job, but it's still only usable for things that don't really move. I do have the TechArt adapter and like it, but you need good light to use it reliably.

I find it ironic that if I pick up an OM-1 with one of the manual clutch lenses, I have a can-do everything-I-want kit that is hard to replicate in a FF setup, other than a Q series Leica.



Aug 29, 2025 at 09:02 AM
wolfloid
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · Now ditching the M11?


second tier options (SL / Panny) or third tier options (Nikon / Sony) what you want to mate your M glass to.

This is new to me - I thought the Panasonic sensor thickness was clearly thicker than the Leica SL, and also thicker than the Nikon. This is the first I’ve seen anyone praise Panasonic as a body for M lenses. Is it true?



Aug 29, 2025 at 09:12 AM
randomphotoguy
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · Now ditching the M11?


My two cents. I owned a Leica M10 for a year and loved it. Then when I wanted some new glass for my Nikon Zf (70-200mm f/2.8 and 180-600mm), I sold the M10 to fund that. My thought was that with the Zf, I could just adapt M mount lenses and be happy. And I was for a bit.
Eventually though, I missed having a true rangefinder. The Zf is technically superior in every way; IBIS, better sensor and able to use AF lenses. It just was not the same experience looking through an EVF.
So I ended up buying a Pixii A2572+ digital rangefinder and while it has its quirks, it has given me the love of shooting a rangefinder again. To me, I enjoy both the action of photography with a rangefinder and the result. So I'm blessed that I can have my Z's for certain types of situations and a true rangefinder for when I want to slow down, carry something small and have that experience while still being able to get great images.
If you aren't sure why you are using a Leica M verses a traditional mirrorless, then it's probably not for you.



Aug 29, 2025 at 09:42 AM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · Now ditching the M11?


johnvanr wrote:
I have the Visoflex for my M11 but don't enjoy using that. Plus, it makes the camera as large as any other FF camera. I do think Nikon did a good job, but it's still only usable for things that don't really move. I do have the TechArt adapter and like it, but you need good light to use it reliably.

I find it ironic that if I pick up an OM-1 with one of the manual clutch lenses, I have a can-do everything-I-want kit that is hard to replicate in a FF setup, other than a Q series Leica.
...Show more

We will see, but I don't think the M11 with the Visoflex will be anything like the M11 with the built-in EVF the so called M11V. If that is all the M11V turns out to be then I think it will be a failed opportunity for Leica. I expect at a minimum of at least the EVF for the Q series which is a huge upgrade over the Visoflex. You still wouldn't have AF, however.
I think you should really consider a Kolari modified Sony A7Cr, but check out the EVF, which isn't that great, IMO, and see if you can live with it. Then you can have the TechArt adapter for AF in good light, and the TTArtisans adapter for almost all your other M mount glass for MF. You have a small camera, a great sensor that is tuned to your glass, and great glass that you really like. Your AF is weak and mostly needs good light, but you have great manual focus.

If that doesn't work, and you want a camera smaller than a Leica M and AF, then you got two choices. 1) go with the Sony A7Cr or CII and small Sony AF lenses. There are a lot of pretty good ones, none are all that Leica M like but many of them of them are quite decent. I like in particular the Sigma i-series lenses and the small Sony G series lenses. All of them have at least decent manual focus. 2) go with a smaller sensor. I am partial to Fuji X mount if you go that way for the higher resolution sensor and a rather nice set of primes. This of course has the compromise of the smaller sensor with less maximum dynamic range, and less ability to crop.



Aug 29, 2025 at 10:02 AM
OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · Now ditching the M11?


johnvanr wrote:
This morning I tried my M lenses on my M11, my R5 and my Z6III. I found the colors largely the same on these cameras, with the Leica actually producing the least life-like colors (I said life like, I didn't say they didn't look good). In the past week, I also realized that my other FF, MFT and Q2 setups are more versatile in terms of combining zone focusing and auto focus. And I have a Fuji GFX100s if I really need high resolution for landscapes.



John,
I think I'd be paralyzed by the selection of cameras on your shelf, and never be able to get into a groove where I know which camera to take and when. While I don't have an M11, I still have an M (typ 240), but this camera gets used when I'm doing one of two things... walking through a city or town where I know people will be interacting in the space, or on the trail when I'm carrying a lens to photograph wildlife in my hand.

My other kit is a deep Nikon bag anchored by a Z9/Z8 combo with 4 lenses that span 17mm to 400mm, the latter of which is the 400mm f2.8TC. While not light, the Nikon kit is my 98% shooter and I know exactly when to use what.

As such, it might be good for you to ditch the M11 if you don't like the rangefinder experience... you've got other gear that can do everything better... but focus with a rangefinder manually.

bruce



Aug 29, 2025 at 10:06 AM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · Now ditching the M11?


Steve Spencer wrote:
We will see, but I don't think the M11 with the Visoflex will be anything like the M11 with the built-in EVF the so called M11V. If that is all the M11V turns out to be then I think it will be a failed opportunity for Leica. I expect at a minimum of at least the EVF for the Q series which is a huge upgrade over the Visoflex. You still wouldn't have AF, however.
I think you should really consider a Kolari modified Sony A7Cr, but check out the EVF, which isn't that great, IMO, and see if
...Show more

Rationally, the Sony route is the answer. But since it’s Zeiss glass I like, I could then also ditch the M lenses and opt for Loxia glass.

The problem is that I’ve owned Sony three times (including a Kolari-modded camera I bought from Fred) and I just never liked the experience and always missed my other gear. I currently have a lot of gear, but I like it all. So, I don’t think I should go back to Sony.



Aug 29, 2025 at 10:32 AM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · Now ditching the M11?


OwlsEyes wrote:
John,
I think I'd be paralyzed by the selection of cameras on your shelf, and never be able to get into a groove where I know which camera to take and when. While I don't have an M11, I still have an M (typ 240), but this camera gets used when I'm doing one of two things... walking through a city or town where I know people will be interacting in the space, or on the trail when I'm carrying a lens to photograph wildlife in my hand.

My other kit is a deep Nikon bag anchored by a Z9/Z8 combo
...Show more

I will still have redundant gear, but overall there will be more clarity.



Aug 29, 2025 at 10:34 AM
olegkin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · Now ditching the M11?


If I was in your place and can afford to keep it (from financial standpoint), I would keep it even if I don't use it often.


Aug 29, 2025 at 11:20 AM
       2       3       4       end






FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

       2       3       4       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account