I shoot Sony since many years, happy enough with that for my regular photography, mix of family and people photography, travel and cityscapes, occasional landscape
I used to shoot Leica M6 TTL back when, later M10 but gave up. Rangefinder is a bit slow and hit/miss for me these days.
I miss the Leica files and experience, but I want it with control this time, i.e. manual focus. I decide the exposure triangle and where the focus lands, thus not a Q of some sort (been there, done that). I decided to pick up a 35'lux again. I thought about putting on Nikon Zf for now, but with the TTartisan adapter no longer in production, it is less than optimal.
I tried it on a SL2 today at a local store - heavy and dense package, but I really love the big and bright EVF, and the weight if fine in hand, it is more that it is a heavy combo to keep in a shoulder-bag.
A SL2 is around 2 grand, a M10R or M11 is five thousand plus, so I'd thought I would start using on a SL and enjoy slowing things down.
What's the feedback from users here? Any active SL + M glass users? What do you like/dislike about it?
I use more M mount glass on my SL2-S (now S1R II, future SL3-P) than L mount glass.
M 24/2.8 Elmarit
M 35/2 Summicron ASPH v.1
VM 50/1.5 II Vintage
M 75/2.4
M 135/3.4 APO
I used to have the VM 75/1.5 Vintage that I like a lot, but its focus shift on the M bugged me. I traded it out before getting my SL2-S. Had I still had them at the same time, I'm quite certain I would have kept the VM 75/1.5.
My M glass splits time on either an M or an SL ... if when I feel the need for one vs. the other.
That said, an SL2 is an excellent place to use the M's (imo). The newer SL3's have faster AF, but with M glass, that doesn't make a hill of beans (MP diff's notwithstanding, etc.). MP count sits between the M10R and M11 (splittin' hairs a bit), and has the IBIS / EVF for focus shift, etc. in the event you have glass prone to that (thinking ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar-C, etc.)
I think the decision tree for "which camera for M mount lenses" goes something like this:
Do I need the thin sensor glass of the SL series cause I intend to shoot wide angle (or lenses with floating elements) M mount glass that needs it? If yes then you likely need the SL series if no then....
Do I want to use magnification or focus peaking to manual focus or do I want manual focus aids like Canon/Nikon? If magnification and focus peaking are fine then you can choose Sony/Nikon/Canon based on resolution/price/weight/aesthetics. If you want manual focus aids then you can choose Nikon/Canon based on resolution/price/weight/aesthetics.
selahsean wrote:
I think the decision tree for "which camera for M mount lenses" goes something like this:
Do I need the thin sensor glass of the SL series cause I intend to shoot wide angle (or lenses with floating elements) M mount glass that needs it? If yes then you likely need the SL series if no then....
Do I want to use magnification or focus peaking to manual focus or do I want manual focus aids like Canon/Nikon? If magnification and focus peaking are fine then you can choose Sony/Nikon/Canon based on resolution/price/weight/aesthetics. If you want manual focus aids then you can choose Nikon/Canon based on resolution/price/weight/aesthetics....Show more →
I was very open to trying out a Nikon Zf, but I don't feel like tinkering with editing exit data, etc. Ideally I want all that automated, which meant the TTartisan adapter - no joy - or go with a Leica SL.
I've shot Leica M glass on a Sony, and I don't really care for the experience. From what I understand, Canon RF mount isn't optimal due to sensor glass thickness, image corner degradation, etc. So Leica or Nikon seem to be the option at this time.
patotts wrote:
I was very open to trying out a Nikon Zf, but I don't feel like tinkering with editing exit data, etc. Ideally I want all that automated, which meant the TTartisan adapter - no joy - or go with a Leica SL.
I've shot Leica M glass on a Sony, and I don't really care for the experience. From what I understand, Canon RF mount isn't optimal due to sensor glass thickness, image corner degradation, etc. So Leica or Nikon seem to be the option at this time.
Like you I tried M glass on Sony and didn't love it now I shoot the Zf with multiple adapters (including the TTartisan) but I don't worry about exif data all that much. I generally like the experience (except for the Nikon menus) but the weight is much heavier than it should be. I like the manual focus aids as I find that experience much better than focus peaking/magnifying. Have tried the SL series multiple times but between the weight and the manual focus experience it has not clicked for me. From a purely shooting experience standpoint there's really not much difference shooting M on Sony vs SL other than the SL is definitely going to be heavier and maybe differences in EVF quality.
I'm not a fan of peak or magnifying either. The Nikon subject detection green box is a great for when shooting especially people, and I so wish Leica, Sony and others utilized some version of it.
It is not easy weighing the convenience of Nikon manual focusing aids against the EVF + sensor of the SL2. In photography, it is always a compromise and about prioritization, sadly enough. Leica combo is big and heavy, Nikon Zf has poor ergs and requires tinkering for exif data. Pick your poison.
As this is a side-camera along my Sony gear, I don't feel like spending $6-$9K on a Leica body, ergo my choice is either the Leica SL2 or the Nikon Zf really at this point.
If all you have is the lux 35, you’re not hugely invested in M lenses and may want to consider the Zf with native Z mount Voigtlander lenses. You get the benefit of full manual control, awesome focus aid, and automatic EXIF. The Voigtlander lenses yield similar image rendering as Leica M’s, have great build quality, and a nice physical feel. They are also relatively compact, though they are bigger than M lenses.
If you are set on M-lenses, you also have the option of the Shoten M-to-Z adapter, which you can program to recognize up to 10 M-lenses and it will record the lens info in EXIF. It also has a close-focus helicoid letting you focus much closer with your M-lenses. It’s a bit clunky to setup, but once you do, fairly easy to pick your lens profile in camera to shoot (though not as easy as the Leica adapter on the SL, which will read the lens 6-bit code and automatically adjust.) Also, the Shoten setup with the Zf will not guess the aperture stop used, but I see this as “hit or miss” on the Leica anyway and thus less useful.
I acc.uired a SL2 recently. I have been using the M11 exclusively for two years before that.
The SL2 has changed dramatically which lens I prefer to shoot with.
Focus with AF using the SL Apo 35, 50 Lux, and 75 Apo is so much better than it was with the original SL.eye detect etc.
However, focussing manually with M glass is so simple with the bright viewfinder, and, if need be, magnification.
The real surprise is that other lenses work better too IMO, such as Zeiss ZE adapted lens, which transmit exposure data to LR, and the Contax Yashica Zeiss lenses which do not communicate, but have other advantages, have been on a shelf just waiting to be used. All of the above focus beautifully on the EVF, so that you can really enjoy these options.
These were all tested before on a Panasonic S1 R body, but the results seemed less perfect in my opinion at the time. I should revisit this.
The SL2 also has IBIS which my SL and M11 do not have. This gives you a great advantage in some situations over shooting M glass on even the M11.
Bottom line is that for me this is the perfect bridge camera, allowing the use of a wide variety of glass. I even have some S glass, such as the great 180 S, that focuses with AF perfectly on the SL2.
Having said all that, my preference this week are the Contax Yashica lenses, which, while being less perfect, create such marvellous images that they deserve to be on the SL2.
I shoot Sony since many years, happy enough with that for my regular photography, mix of family and people photography, travel and cityscapes, occasional landscape
I used to shoot Leica M6 TTL back when, later M10 but gave up. Rangefinder is a bit slow and hit/miss for me these days.
I miss the Leica files and experience, but I want it with control this time, i.e. manual focus. I decide the exposure triangle and where the focus lands, thus not a Q of some sort (been there, done that). I decided to pick up a 35'lux again. I thought about putting on Nikon Zf for now, but with the TTartisan adapter no longer in production, it is less than optimal.
I tried it on a SL2 today at a local store - heavy and dense package, but I really love the big and bright EVF, and the weight if fine in hand, it is more that it is a heavy combo to keep in a shoulder-bag.
A SL2 is around 2 grand, a M10R or M11 is five thousand plus, so I'd thought I would start using on a SL and enjoy slowing things down.
What's the feedback from users here? Any active SL + M glass users? What do you like/dislike about it? ...Show more →
I've had a lot of fun with this very capable and IMO comfortable SL2+M kit. IBIS + that renown SL EVF and everything else Leica does to make sure Leica M lenses perform optimally on their full frame mirrorless system, e.g., a Leica-thin sensor stack and specialized micro-lenses on the sensor. I use the Leica M-L adapter for full operational compatibility as well. Some good deals on this otherwise pricey adapter on the used market too.
Just for fun, a photo of the SL2 with Leica M-L adapter + 35 Lux/FLE. Added the 50 Lux ASPH for scale/size comparison:
In my experience, using the SL2 with M-mount glass is a much better experience than shooting any manual lens with a Sony. While every person is different, it is just a lot easier to manually focus with the SL2. The entire camera is easy to use with an uncomplicated interface too.
One of the really nice things is that if you set the SL2 to monochrome, the images that can come from it are really fantastic and in my experience, often need minimal to no editing. The tonality on the monochrome images from that camera is very pleasing. Colors are fantastic as well.
The SL2 is a really nice camera for adapting lenses in general.
LBJ2 wrote:
I've had a lot of fun with this very capable and IMO comfortable SL2+M kit. IBIS + that renown SL EVF and everything else Leica does to make sure Leica M lenses perform optimally on their full frame mirrorless system, e.g., a Leica-thin sensor stack and specialized micro-lenses on the sensor. I use the Leica M-L adapter for full operational compatibility as well. Some good deals on this otherwise pricey adapter on the used market too.
Just for fun, a photo of the SL2 with Leica M-L adapter + 35 Lux/FLE. Added the 50 Lux ASPH for scale/size comparison:
That is exactly the combo I would be starting off with
Doug Ball wrote:
I acc.uired a SL2 recently. I have been using the M11 exclusively for two years before that.
The SL2 has changed dramatically which lens I prefer to shoot with.
Focus with AF using the SL Apo 35, 50 Lux, and 75 Apo is so much better than it was with the original SL.eye detect etc.
However, focussing manually with M glass is so simple with the bright viewfinder, and, if need be, magnification.
The real surprise is that other lenses work better too IMO, such as Zeiss ZE adapted lens, which transmit exposure data to LR, and the Contax Yashica Zeiss lenses which do not communicate, but have other advantages, have been on a shelf just waiting to be used. All of the above focus beautifully on the EVF, so that you can really enjoy these options.
These were all tested before on a Panasonic S1 R body, but the results seemed less perfect in my opinion at the time. I should revisit this.
The SL2 also has IBIS which my SL and M11 do not have. This gives you a great advantage in some situations over shooting M glass on even the M11.
Bottom line is that for me this is the perfect bridge camera, allowing the use of a wide variety of glass. I even have some S glass, such as the great 180 S, that focuses with AF perfectly on the SL2.
Having said all that, my preference this week are the Contax Yashica lenses, which, while being less perfect, create such marvellous images that they deserve to be on the SL2....Show more →
Thanks for chiming in, Doug. Your experience mirrors my initial assessment and perhaps biased expectations :-)
I was just reviewing files that I shot back when on a Leica Q2 and Q2M, I really like the output from that sensor and I've found the DNGs easy to get where I want them to be, according my taste and preferences.
I don't have any Zeiss or Contax lenses, but that is promising to hear. Actually, in general, I'm not really a collector or hoarder of a lot of [camera] gear, so a SL2 and my old favorite 35'lux will be a good and solid beginning.
rji2goleez wrote:
Not to derail this thread but if only using M glass, but I'm curious when do you feel the need to use the SL2 vs M and vice versa?
It can be for a variety of diff reasons. For instance, I only want to carry one body, and I want AF for tele, then I carry my M lenses in the normal / wider range, to mount up my M's on the L
I don't want to carry my AF Zoom, size / weight, but I want IBIS or EVF ... I mount up my M's on the L
I want to use pixel shift to produce a larger file ... I mount up my M's on the L
I mucked around and have a dead battery on my M ... I mount up my M's on the L
I want to have dual cards ... M's on the L
As to the other way, when I want the RF experience, a lighter carry, a smaller footprint bag, going to a venue (although that has become a joke in uber-imposed restrictions) that doesn't allow "professional" cameras / lenses. I want to look like a YT hipster ... ooops, wrong thread. . I just enjoy the tactile shutter release. I want more MP (M10R vs. SL2-S), or I want to use my M246 (monochrome).
I suppose there are some others, but you get the gist.
Some days I want to drive the truck, other days the roadster ... not always a rationale reason, other than "I just feel like it." What can I say, I like 'em both.
RustyBug wrote:
Some days I want to drive the truck, other days the roadster ... not always a rationale reason, other than "I just feel like it." What can I say, I like 'em both.
As far as M-mount lens compatibility with sensor stack thickness, here's how it ranks, starting with the best option:
1. Leica M body
2. Mirrorless body modified to the thinner Leica sensor stack (like Kolari)
3. Leica SL
4. Nikon Z
5. All other stock mirrorless cameras
If you want an EVF, the Leica M with a Visoflex is solid, and of course there's the new EV1. But if you want to stay within the Leica ecosystem, the SL2 is an awesome option, especially at today's used prices.
Also, the gap from SL to Nikon Z is quite noticeable, while the gap from Leica M to SL is much smaller.
I am curious if focus confirmation and focus guides work with these adaptors on Canon RF body and Leica m lenses. Have asked many places but never got an answer.
Thank you
johnvanr wrote:
R8 with Shoten adapter is a possibility as well. Or any other Canon RF camera.
. I just enjoy the tactile shutter release. I want more MP (M10R vs. SL2-S), or I want to use my M246 (monochrome).