p.7 #1 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
We’re now six pages in and it’s still clear that the M can be challenging to use in some circumstances. That to me is enough to conclude it is limited as a travel camera, which is what this is about. If you have no need to shoot outside of its preferably use cases, yes, it’s a great small travel camera, but that’s mostly because you are already limiting yourself in what you desire to shoot.
Now, that’s fine. But it doesn’t objectively make it a great travel camera in general.
As for modern cameras taking away the focus on photography, whereas the Leica doesn’t. I get that the tactile experience is satisfying, but there’s also a case to be made that when the camera deals with AF and exposure, the photographer can more effectively deal with composition.
p.7 #2 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
I'm just catching up on this thread. My takeaway is the same old line, "Different strokes for different photographers." I shoot Leica M, Hasselblad and Sony. While I have specific use cases where I enjoy each system, I have no problem traveling with any of them in any situation. However, when traveling to cities here or around the world, I almost always travel with my Leica M bodies and lenses. Much of my travel photography is slow but when I need to act fast, zone focusing is my best friend and my Leica M becomes a point and shoot. In fact, it can be faster than my Sony A1 II. I don't need to think, I just raise the camera and click. This works for me and, as I am getting older, a small lightweight kit becomes paramount to being able to walk all day with gear in hand.
We have all kinds of factors to consider and each of us places a premium on certain aspects whether it be AF, IBIS, weather sealing, lightweight, etc. We each have our reasons. I get the OP and the frustrations of the M system for travel. I get frustrations on other systems and their limitations. We each bond with a system for our own reasons.
This thread is useful to me, hearing all of our experiences and preferences and maybe gives me some things to try in the future. For the past several years though, I won't hesitate to bring my M kit when I travel.
p.7 #3 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
old-gregg wrote:
I shoot with my film M regularly along with the Sony and Nikon mirrorless. Their numerous buttons, autofocus modes, drive modes, tracking modes, exposure modes, aspect ratios, shutter types, screen brightness settings, energy saving modes, auto-ISO sub-settings, zooms, and I can go on and on... represent a noticeably bigger overhead that gets in the way of spotting and capturing a good image. Somehow, managing all this automation takes **more** of my brain cycles that simply controlling focus, aperture and shutter manually.
Amen.
It's not about slowing down, but being in the moment for me. I never have to dive into settings when using the M.
old-gregg wrote:
I am convinced that most people will become better photographers if they were forced to shoot with just one body, one focal length, permanent ISO, with manual shutter, aperture, and focus. After a year, their portfolio will blossom and they will finally be rewarded with something they can proudly hang in their living room without a risk of divorce.
I would always comment on how the Q2 felt like I was cheating.
p.7 #4 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
johnvanr wrote:
We’re now six pages in and it’s still clear that the M can be challenging to use in some circumstances. That to me is enough to conclude it is limited as a travel camera, which is what this is about.
Smartphones are perhaps the only truly unlimited travel cameras.
p.7 #5 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
SrMi wrote:
Smartphones are perhaps the only truly unlimited travel cameras.
Oh, no. Not for me anyway. I just did a long trip and took the new(ish) Leitzphone with me. Arguably the best camera phone available and the shortcomings were vast. No standard lens focal lengths without cropping was the big one for me. Even with the grip handing and accessing functions was less than ideal. It’s the best phone camera I’ve used but still so limited. It convinced me that a phone camera doesn’t matter to me because I’ll always have a *real* camera with me any way.
Ultimately a nice companion to a Q3-43 or a M with one lens but not a solution in itself.
p.7 #6 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
I would totally agree with your statement if any manufacturer can provide a camera system with equal of smaller form factor and similar image quality. There is none to my knowledge. So Leica M or other camera systems are all with its own limitations, no one is objectively better than others, just trade off and let the user decide which fits their needs. Even AF is a trade off, you can have a big AF lens and let camera turn it for you, or a small manual lens and focus with range finder or zone focusing. I have both and cannot say which one is objectively superior than the other.
johnvanr wrote:
We’re now six pages in and it’s still clear that the M can be challenging to use in some circumstances. That to me is enough to conclude it is limited as a travel camera, which is what this is about. If you have no need to shoot outside of its preferably use cases, yes, it’s a great small travel camera, but that’s mostly because you are already limiting yourself in what you desire to shoot.
Now, that’s fine. But it doesn’t objectively make it a great travel camera in general.
As for modern cameras taking away the focus on photography, whereas the Leica doesn’t. I get that the tactile experience is satisfying, but there’s also a case to be made that when the camera deals with AF and exposure, the photographer can more effectively deal with composition. ...Show more →
p.7 #7 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
johnvanr wrote:
We’re now six pages in and it’s still clear that the M can be challenging to use in some circumstances. That to me is enough to conclude it is limited as a travel camera, which is what this is about. If you have no need to shoot outside of its preferably use cases, yes, it’s a great small travel camera, but that’s mostly because you are already limiting yourself in what you desire to shoot.
Now, that’s fine. But it doesn’t objectively make it a great travel camera in general.
As for modern cameras taking away the focus on photography, whereas the Leica doesn’t. I get that the tactile experience is satisfying, but there’s also a case to be made that when the camera deals with AF and exposure, the photographer can more effectively deal with composition. ...Show more →
There's definitely no perfect solution for everyone. The people who can do all their travel photography with one camera and one lens, I envy. Especially if it's something compact like an M11 and 35mm lens. The closest I've come in recent travels is my MP and a 50mm lens, but film takes up a lot of luggage space and I still bring my Q2 half the time because autofocus and weather sealing are nice to have.
p.7 #8 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
They can certainly do so, making an 'EV-1' would be child's play for Sony, for example. We can say that with authority simply because they (in particular Sony, still a relative newcomer and premier innovator) are clearly avoiding doing so.
In 2013 Sony made a camera with 36mp that weighed within 20 grams of an EV-1, then followed it up with the 485g RX1 (lens included). The main M camera at that time was the M240, it weighed 680 grams..so small and light' is easy for Sony, they were ahead of that game 13 years ago.
M cameras as travel options can work, but only within rather tight guardrails, and inside narrow contexts. It's why you see these restricted styles of photography in Leica threads. We then have, and not trying to offend here but to describe reality, what might be called 'dilettante travel photography' - people who just want a few snaps for memories.
So these are philosophically very different uses to more robust and focused travel work, where you need to match your equipment tightly to the needs of the enterprise. I carry three bodies and six lenses most trips, and I don't think I am alone in doing so. I use it all, all the time. It's light thanks to Sony and M lenses, goes carry on.
Again, I don't know what the OP has in mind so the advice is general. Every time you sell-to-buy, it wastes time for photography, and threatens to become a major pastime and often to displace actual photography. I want to help people minimize that cul-de-sac in their travel work.
p.7 #9 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
tigerlo wrote:
I would totally agree with your statement if any manufacturer can provide a camera system with equal of smaller form factor and similar image quality. There is none to my knowledge. So Leica M or other camera systems are all with its own limitations, no one is objectively better than others, just trade off and let the user decide which fits their needs. Even AF is a trade off, you can have a big AF lens and let camera turn it for you, or a small manual lens and focus with range finder or zone focusing. I have both and cannot say which one is objectively superior than the other.
p.7 #10 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
johnvanr wrote:
I’d say any 60-mp Sony, including the A7Cr, can deliver the same image quality in a small package.
I agree. I've seen prints from pictures shot with micro43, APS-C, FF from 12 to 60 mpix and MF 100 Mpix.
At 100% on the screen, the difference is obvious. Except for that, impossible to see IRL especially after post-processing.
But the Internet is obsessed with this. And surprinsingly, comparisons once printed are very rare.
P.S: have a look at the MF thread and tell me if you see a difference even when it comes to rendering.
p.7 #11 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
Sony cameras produce significantly worse results with M lenses than Leica cameras. In fact, today the Leica M is the only digital camera for maximum image quality with thousands of manual lenses from the 20th century. And the Leica M11 is simply a new camera; you won't lose any quality if you use other M cameras, from the M9 to the M10. Sometimes, these older cameras even shoot better than the M11. So, Sony cameras are excellent for their job, but among rangefinder cameras, the Leica M is the only one available.
p.7 #12 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
That wasn’t the question. Yes, the M better matches the Leica M lenses. But the question was about matching IQ. Any 60 mp sensor will match it, unless you truly believe those M lenses offer superior IQ to other lenses.
p.7 #13 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
Rangefinder is not for everyone...not as a skill thing, but it's because the learning curve is steep in the sense that you can probably get the basics done, but to use it efficiently takes a _lot_ of patience and practice... It took me years to get accustomed to it...so much so that even with my eyesight having astigmatism i can still focus on an RF with the Voigtlander f1.0 (when i had it, but i traded it in to fund GAS) at close range wide open with little to no issues, perfectly in focus.
Nothing against using EVF cameras with Leica lenses...it works, but it's not quite the same experience (even with the Leica SL cameras). Hence, my disdain towards the EV-1.
Voigtlander f1.0
The prices are absolutely batshit, tho. Calm down with those prices, Leica.
Some Leica purchases are largely driven by bias and nostalgia, like, I purchased the 50 M APO (used...because i already sold both my kidneys) and it makes no sense for a lot of people but I have strong affection towards it anyway... am i yearning for the 35 M APO? you bet i am... do i really need my heart? i mean, it's cold, dark and dead inside anyway.. might fetch a pretty penny in the black market.
p.7 #14 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
I've been reading through this thread while on a family vacation on a cruise ship. Coincidentally, this is my first vacation with my new-to-me Leica M10-P. While I did bring a Nikon Z6iii, that was really only used for snorkeling and a swimming with pigs excursion due to having an Outex underwater case to put it in. The M10-P was my most used camera and the one I just roamed around with. I brought along an 11mm, 28mm, 35mm and 50mm lenses with a Godox IT32 flash and all that fit into a Wotancraft 3.5l bag (which tucked into a backpack for airline travel). It was fantastic. For the type of shooting I was doing, either camera could have done it, but I enjoyed the actual act of photography better with the Leica. Using the framelines to see the scene, only caring about aperture, shutter speed and ISO, having no extraneous buttons all over the body. It just offers a different experience. I won't say it is better, because in most sane ways, it absolutely isn't, but I did enjoy it more. Some won't. In my experience of traveling to numerous countries for varying reasons, take the kit that fits your intentions. When I went to Costa Rica, I knew I'd be going into the rainforest looking for some wildlife, so the Nikon kit came with a 180-600mm lens. On a laid back trip like this, the Leica was my perfect choice for most of my shooting. Some more images and thoughts on my website.
p.7 #15 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
randomphotoguy wrote:
I've been reading through this thread while on a family vacation on a cruise ship. Coincidentally, this is my first vacation with my new-to-me Leica M10-P. While I did bring a Nikon Z6iii, that was really only used for snorkeling and a swimming with pigs excursion due to having an Outex underwater case to put it in. The M10-P was my most used camera and the one I just roamed around with. I brought along an 11mm, 28mm, 35mm and 50mm lenses with a Godox IT32 flash and all that fit into a Wotancraft 3.5l bag (which tucked into a backpack for airline travel). It was fantastic. For the type of shooting I was doing, either camera could have done it, but I enjoyed the actual act of photography better with the Leica. Using the framelines to see the scene, only caring about aperture, shutter speed and ISO, having no extraneous buttons all over the body. It just offers a different experience. I won't say it is better, because in most sane ways, it absolutely isn't, but I did enjoy it more. Some won't. In my experience of traveling to numerous countries for varying reasons, take the kit that fits your intentions. When I went to Costa Rica, I knew I'd be going into the rainforest looking for some wildlife, so the Nikon kit came with a 180-600mm lens. On a laid back trip like this, the Leica was my perfect choice for most of my shooting. Some more images and thoughts on my website.
p.7 #16 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
johnvanr wrote:
Sorry…swimming with pigs?
i thought it was a typo but a quick google of "a swimming with pigs excursion due to having an Outex underwater" shows that yea it's a thing, apparently.
p.7 #17 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
johnvanr wrote:
That wasn’t the question. Yes, the M better matches the Leica M lenses. But the question was about matching IQ. Any 60 mp sensor will match it, unless you truly believe those M lenses offer superior IQ to other lenses.
agree, any 60MP camera (Sony cameras) can surpass the M11 with comparable lenses, and if you're willing to take GM lenses? can surpass with ease. i would go as far as even with the M APO lenses (at least with the 50 and 75 APO that i have) the M11 will not be better...this is coming from an absolute Leica fanboy.
is the M objectively the best travel camera? nope, not by a long shot. it will be punishing for anyone who is not accustomed to RF. even for anyone who's been using Leica RF for years (and in my case, centuries ) will need to be deliberate about taking it for travel camera, and I would guarantee it's not the first choice even for casual travel if they have multiple systems (which is likely)
but, man, it's kind of liberating to use in a way i couldn't really describe in words.
p.7 #18 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
One day we’ll all wake up and realise that IQ isn’t an issue any more. Mostly they’re all good enough, even the often derided m43. I’ve made saleable prints from pretty much any format. Most camera companies know that. It’s why we’ve shifted to sensor speed as our differentiator. And even there it’s now a pretty close race between all of them. Even Leica is on board. Most of us are far better off ignoring the sensor and worrying about lens selection. But again, every brand has some spectacular lenses to choose from.
All that’s left is handling, UI, menus, body design and size/weight. Sure you can get as good files from an A7CR but if you get enjoyment from a RF then the Sony isn’t as good. And vice versa. If the A7CR makes better files it’s not the sensor or the glass. It’ll be because the Sony has IBIS and EFCS.
I’m far more interested in pressuring Leica to add EFCS to their cameras including the M over any IQ arguments. I’m pushing for pre-capture and EFCS on the SL3-P. These things expand the shooting envelope of a camera far more than a few MP and would make a meaningful difference to IQ.
The M is a great great travel camera. But not for wildlife or field sports. But it’s not the files that are an issue. IQ is a given nowadays.
p.7 #19 · Leica M11-P as a Travel Camera: A Love–Hate Experience
johnvanr wrote:
That wasn’t the question. Yes, the M better matches the Leica M lenses. But the question was about matching IQ. Any 60 mp sensor will match it, unless you truly believe those M lenses offer superior IQ to other lenses.
my vintage M lenses - yes absolutely I believe that.
... pretty lame, imo.
