SL3

Can only give you my opinion. I have a M11 and had the M-EV1 but returned it. To me it breaks down to a few points: If you only have 1 camera, and don’t get on with the rangefinder experience the M-EV1 makes sense. If you have a rangefinder camera, but find that more often than not you’re reaching f

The 3 and the m11 will render nearly identically, it’s the same sensor, along with the Q3 series. This sensor is also found in Sony’s 60 megapixel offerings. If you like it on your M, you’ll love it on the SL3. I don’t buy into a sensor rendering something “more” or “less” better, it all has to do w

I have a SL2, I have not owned a M or Q, I do have some film gear, have shot film rangefinders, and I shot GFX prior. In my opinion, part of what makes a Rangefinder like the Leica M great is the restraint it gives you. This means being able to focus in on composition rather than getting lost in the

SL3 is my semi-main in that it’s the one I want to grab unless I need to shoot sports. It’s my favourite camera. Compared to the M though keep in mind it’s going to be much bigger and less discrete. But if you’re looking for Leica experience and interchangeable lenses, with AF - you won’t be disappo

I once was a Fuji shooter, starting with their X cameras for years. Then I moved to GFX with 2 bodies and 6 lenses (also for years). Now I am with Leica. The GFX 50R is still with me, along with the 110mm and the 45mm, but that's because I just still love that particular camera and those 2 lenses. H

Leica has really stepped up its autofocus with the SL3 line. Not quite to the level of other flagship mirrorless cameras but for working professionals who shoot Leica it’s a meaningful upgrade. However, if you’re not earning money from your gear, the sl2-s is almost at the bottom of its appreciation

You should check SL3 is mind blowing and so are their primes. AF is now better than Fuji and in pair with Nikon - besides sports though. For primes, that’s the way to go dude: you’re getting premium Sigma A and Leica glass. I’d be particularly interested in what you think about 135/1.4 and 200/2 Onl

No. I have both a SL3-S and the CL and regularly shoot on the CL. You get a 1.5X crop due to the APS-C, but I prefer to shoot the CL over the SL3-S for wildlife as the crop gives me the extra reach. I've never felt the CL lacking. The autofocus is pretty good, especially with bright lenses. I use a

I switched from Sony to Leica. I own quite a few but my newest one is the SL3s. Ask away. In terms of the body the sl3s is great. Menus are way cleaner. Not as frustrating. Stuff is where you’d expect it to be once you get acquainted. Autofocus is great honestly. I have the Leica 24-70 and the Sigma

α7rIV. SL2 files at 800 ISO make it tough. Shooting low light is a challenge. The design and ergonomic of it is only rivaled by SL3. Despite the poor low light performance, poor battery, and contrast detection autofocus challenges compared to α7rIV I enjoy holding and shooting SL2 more… The image qu