Seeking Advice from Leica M- / Fuji X-pro users

I am a current X-pro 3 user and am interested in buying a second body and a 28mm equivalent lens.

I now narrow it down to 2 options:

1. X-pro3 Dura Black or Silver and the upcoming 18/1.4. With this I will keep my operation setup and PP workflow. No challenge and no excitement in term of getting new gears but this is the most practical choice. I know I will be happy still.

2. A used Leica M10 + VM Ultron 28/2 or 7 Artisans 28/1.4 to start with. The price of the Summilux 28/1.4 is just a bit too much for what I want to spend. I probably will add couple other highly recommended third party lenses in the first year, such as the Voigtlander 21mm 1.4 and 40mm/1.2 Nokton, if I am happy using the M10. Honestly, I am excited about this route but does this make sense?

I understand there is a price premium to enter the Leica world. I am okay with that as long as I make sure I won't go too crazy buying multiple Summilux lenses. I believe lux 35/1.4 is the only Leica M lens I will eventually buy (to replace the VM 40/1.2 down the road).

A little background... My first camera was the Germany Praktica my dad gave me a few decades ago. So I am no stranger to full manual operation, on-OVF split screen focus, zone focus and some other old tricks/rules although I have been so spoiled by the modern camera technology for sure. LOL So, I kinda know what I am getting (back) into if I choose this route.

But before I make the decision, I want to hear from you guys, who have already done it.

1. What made you decided to shoot Leica M ( M8,M9,M,M10 etc.)/M mount and X-pro3/XF mount at the same time?

2. Have you thought about selling the Fuji and go full Leica?

3. Or did you do the opposite, sold Leica after you tried, and then solely committed to Fuji since? What was not right there?

4. Do you find that shooting X-pro3 ( or the older Fuji X-pro bodies) in full manual mode with OVF and the clutch lenses provides a close enough experience as shooting the M system?

5. Is alignment adjustment a common issue with Leica's M cameras? How often do you need to adjust your Leica M body focus system?

6. Will you get the Silver Chrome or Black M10 Body?

Thanks for sharing your advice in advance.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/183079213@N06/

I already shared some thoughts here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64719227

In addition, I'd like to mention that from your post, it isn't really clear why you'd like to buy an M, or even a second body. It's not something you have to answer to me, but to yourself. NB - There's nothing wrong with simply wanting to play with another system

If you want to try out the M before buying, get a used M240 or M262, or rent an M for a week or so.

Although I've shot several rangefinder camera brands, digital and film, I've never used the X-Pro series, although I'd like to. So I will only address a couple of your questions.

Acquiring any Leica, especially the M, the question is more subjective than technical. Broadly other cameras will produce equivalent results for far less money. With the M, the attraction is the process, look, and feel of the cameras. The only way to tell if an M suits you is to use one.

Renting makes clinical sense but the M is so different that I think you need longer than the typical rental period to appreciate its strengths, which are unique, and then figure out if those compensate for the weaknesses. Over decades I've rented and borrowed Ms for short periods and found it wasn't enough to reach a conclusion, so I bought an M.

I've had the M a year and a half and find myself using it more and more; long-term ownership has been much better than rental for me in terms of appreciating the unique strengths. To anyone seriously considering an M, my advice is buy one and try it for at least a year. If you buy a used digital body it will lose 5-10% in value per year, Lecia lenses will lose somewhat less. Strong resale makes test-via-own the best option in my view.

As far as body, prefer black because when I shot pro many years ago the top pros always had black. Not a rational reason but the heart wants what it wants. I don't like any M with a red dot. The M series heyday for working pros extended through the M5, none of those had the dot. I think that dot distracts from the design's elegance, and elegance is part of the allure.

Great post Tom!

I own a Leica M10-P, with a Leica 28mm F2.8 Elmarit, Zeiss ZM 28mm F2.8 and 7 Artisans 28mm F1.4.

I'm primarily a 28mm shooter. I am also primarily an urban street photographer, for whom quick zone focusing is a critical part of my photography.

I also own a X100V + the wide angle conversion lens, a Ricoh GR3 and an old FujiFilm X-M1. I don't have the 18mm lens for this, instead I have the 16mm F2.8

So your questions:

1. What made you decided to shoot Leica M ( M8,M9,M,M10 etc.)/M mount and X-pro3/XF mount at the same time?

The M10-P is larger and heavier than the Fuji options. Also the M10-P realistically is an OVF only system. I own the Fuji and Ricoh because not only are they smaller, I also often shoot with the LCD, either as a waist-level finder style, or just to freely compose my shots without having to have the camera at my eye.

At the same time, the M10-P is the far superior manual focus experience, and better suited for zone focusing. The Fuji functionality for zone focusing purposes are adequate but I wouldn't say they're good. The GRIII is as good from a zone focus standpoint, but different, than the M10-P/Leica M system.

2. Have you thought about selling the Fuji and go full Leica?

I've had thoughts both ways, but they're different systems for different purposes. If I am on vacation and only want one camera, the X100V+WCL comes with me. If I am headed outside for urban, zone-focused based street photography, the Ricoh or Leica come out.

4. Do you find that shooting X-pro3 ( or the older Fuji X-pro bodies) in full manual mode with OVF and the clutch lenses provides a close enough experience as shooting the M system?

No, the clutch lenses do not replicate the M system at all. The distance scale is different. On an M system, you know that if you point the focus tab straight down, you are focused to a distance of 1.2-1.5 meters. You know if the focus tab is at ~4 o'clock, you are at infinity. You shoot an M-system enough, you develop the muscle memory to change your zone focus distance without looking at the lens or camera.

You cannot do this with the clutch manual focus lenses from Fuji. Even looking at the distance scale on the manual clutch focus is slow. The obvious benefit of the Fuji though, is that you have a minimum focus distance closer than the usual 0.7 meters.

I have my Ricoh set so I can switch between the custom 1 and 2 settings on the dial to change my zone focus zone for ~0.7 - 2.0 meters and 2.0-5.0 meters. Usually I'm on the second setting, but I can easily turn the dial instantly to focus closer when someone walks right in front of me. This is the same as when, on my Leica, I'm usually zone focused at 2 or 3 meters, and I just quickly turn the focus tab straight down to 1.2 meters do the same thing.

5. Is alignment adjustment a common issue with Leica's M cameras? How often do you need to adjust your Leica M body focus system?

Yes, alignment is an issue but with a modern M camera like the M10, I wouldn't worry about it getting out of alignment too often. My M10-P is very slightly misaligned vertically, but not enough to bother me to send it in for a precise alignment.

6. Will you get the Silver Chrome or Black M10 Body?

My M10-P is black. My X100V is silver. They both look great.

On your post, as you are aware, the VM28mm F2.0 and 7 Artisans F1.4 are very different in size. The 7 Artisans is huge (but wonderful, I love its output). The M10+7 artisans is very heavy and you should consider carefully if you want this.

jjcha said:

The M10-P is larger and heavier than the Fuji options.

Click to expand...

Actually, it's smaller (not much ) than OP's X-Pro3, but the more generous use of metal makes the M10 heavier.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#836,702

Most lenses I use on my M are also smaller than the Fuji-equivalents.

So here's my two penn'worth as an ex Fuji owner (incl XP1 and XP2 plus X-H1) and current M owner (M240 for the past 18 months).

After double running for quite some time, I sold my Fuji gear - the XP camera is as big (but much lighter) or even bulkier than the M, and high quality APSC AF lenses are larger than M glass.

I'm not sure the differences in image quality between a good APSC sensor with good lenses (like Fuji offers) and the FF sensor are that marked unless you're a narrow depth of field addict - which is not the obvious way to shoot an M. So purely in terms of IQ I think there's too much of an overlap between the two systems to justify running both.

Personally I prefer the tactile and more deliberate way of working with the M, and I much prefer the viewfinder over the XP - which was a technical marvel but in the end I didn't love it; the fact that the viewfinder in the XP3 doesn't magnify like previous models is a retrograde step in my opinion too. I'm not a run and gun photographer so manual focussing is no problem at all - and when you use zone focus actually the whole experience is a breeze. I think more when I use the M, and I get better images as a result.

What I've landed on is an M system with various Zeiss and VM lenses (incl the 28/2, which I think is excellent by the way), supplemented by a micro 43 system which offers me something the M can't - compactness, speedy AF, and excellent but relatively small telephoto lenses. I think the two complement each other rather well, as there is quite a differentiation between them.

Now if I had to settle on one system from now on that would be tough - the m43 is much more versatile but I think I'd keep the M gear - the process of using it is much more immersive and used within its limitations, I love the images I get from it.

PS in terms of colour, I chose the silver body, which looks great, but replaced the red dot with a black one to just tone things down a little. I'm not a fan of new cameras brassing quickly, and black Leicas do that; I think the silver is harder wearing.

--
http://thephotographersblock.wordpress.com
http://jonschick.smugmug.com/

I've used both. It is about APS-C versus 35mm full frame. Compare the best examples of both that you can find, at the focal length and aperture that matters to you. Do you care about the difference? (I did.)

You could also choose a Leica SL. Its price on the used market has collapsed since the SL2 came out. Use a generic M-to-L mount adapter. No rangefinder alignment problems.

Would you consider 25mm? Zeiss made an M-mount lens at that focal length, and also 28mm.

I use an M240 with one lens, an older 35mm Summicron and and XP3 with like 6 lenses. Two similar but totally different tools. It's a nice marriage.

nonicks said:

1. What made you decided to shoot Leica M ( M8,M9,M,M10 etc.)/M mount and X-pro3/XF mount at the same time?

Click to expand...

I decided to get an M after about 9 months with the Leica Q. A lot of it had to do with being locked down and the M is an amazing teaching tool. I kept my Fuji XH1 and 90/2 because it's a wonderful portrait lens I can rely on if I need AF (and with three kids, I do).

nonicks said:

2. Have you thought about selling the Fuji and go full Leica?

Click to expand...

No, I only like using 35mm and 50mm on the M so the Fuji is there for all my other wants and needs.

nonicks said:

3. Or did you do the opposite, sold Leica after you tried, and then solely committed to Fuji since? What was not right there?

4. Do you find that shooting X-pro3 ( or the older Fuji X-pro bodies) in full manual mode with OVF and the clutch lenses provides a close enough experience as shooting the M system?

Click to expand...

I'm selling my X-H1 and have ordered an X-PRO3 because I can't get enough of the rangefinder style body.

nonicks said:

5. Is alignment adjustment a common issue with Leica's M cameras? How often do you need to adjust your Leica M body focus system?

Click to expand...

This is a question I'd be curious to know the answer to as well.

nonicks said:

6. Will you get the Silver Chrome or Black M10 Body?

Click to expand...

I first bought a silver M240, but realized what I really wanted is the M-D and that's what I have now.

nonicks said:

Thanks for sharing your advice in advance.

Click to expand...

You're welcome. Look forward to hearing what you decide.

Tom Joad said:

Although I've shot several rangefinder camera brands, digital and film, I've never used the X-Pro series, although I'd like to. So I will only address a couple of your questions.

Acquiring any Leica, especially the M, the question is more subjective than technical. Broadly other cameras will produce equivalent results for far less money. With the M, the attraction is the process, look, and feel of the cameras. The only way to tell if an M suits you is to use one.

Click to expand...

Agree x100!

Tom Joad said:

Renting makes clinical sense but the M is so different that I think you need longer than the typical rental period to appreciate its strengths, which are unique, and then figure out if those compensate for the weaknesses. Over decades I've rented and borrowed Ms for short periods and found it wasn't enough to reach a conclusion, so I bought an M.

I've had the M a year and a half and find myself using it more and more; long-term ownership has been much better than rental for me in terms of appreciating the unique strengths. To anyone seriously considering an M, my advice is buy one and try it for at least a year. If you buy a used digital body it will lose 5-10% in value per year, Lecia lenses will lose somewhat less. Strong resale makes test-via-own the best option in my view.

Click to expand...

Very well said! Rental is not a good choice to me either. I totally agree that it requires much longer time for new users to learn and appreciate the entire Leica RF process.

Tom Joad said:

As far as body, prefer black because when I shot pro many years ago the top pros always had black. Not a rational reason but the heart wants what it wants. I don't like any M with a red dot. The M series heyday for working pros extended through the M5, none of those had the dot. I think that dot distracts from the design's elegance, and elegance is part of the allure.

Click to expand...

I agree. I thought about the M-10P as well. But the updates are just too minor to justify the 1000-1500 extra dollars.

Thank you for your sharing. I really like your advice!

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/183079213@N06/

jjcha said:

I own a Leica M10-P, with a Leica 28mm F2.8 Elmarit, Zeiss ZM 28mm F2.8 and 7 Artisans 28mm F1.4.

I'm primarily a 28mm shooter. I am also primarily an urban street photographer, for whom quick zone focusing is a critical part of my photography.

I also own a X100V + the wide angle conversion lens, a Ricoh GR3 and an old FujiFilm X-M1. I don't have the 18mm lens for this, instead I have the 16mm F2.8

So your questions:

1. What made you decided to shoot Leica M ( M8,M9,M,M10 etc.)/M mount and X-pro3/XF mount at the same time?

The M10-P is larger and heavier than the Fuji options. Also the M10-P realistically is an OVF only system. I own the Fuji and Ricoh because not only are they smaller, I also often shoot with the LCD, either as a waist-level finder style, or just to freely compose my shots without having to have the camera at my eye.

Click to expand...

Very good point!

jjcha said:

At the same time, the M10-P is the far superior manual focus experience, and better suited for zone focusing. The Fuji functionality for zone focusing purposes are adequate but I wouldn't say they're good. The GRIII is as good from a zone focus standpoint, but different, than the M10-P/Leica M system.

Click to expand...

Point taken.

jjcha said:

Do you find that shooting X-pro3 ( or the older Fuji X-pro bodies) in full manual mode with OVF and the clutch lenses provides a close enough experience as shooting the M system?

No, the clutch lenses do not replicate the M system at all. The distance scale is different. On an M system, you know that if you point the focus tab straight down, you are focused to a distance of 1.2-1.5 meters. You know if the focus tab is at ~4 o'clock, you are at infinity. You shoot an M-system enough, you develop the muscle memory to change your zone focus distance without looking at the lens or camera

You cannot do this with the clutch manual focus lenses from Fuji. Even looking at the distance scale on the manual clutch focus is slow. The obvious benefit of the Fuji though, is that you have a minimum focus distance closer than the usual 0.7 meters.

Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel.

jjcha said:

I have my Ricoh set so I can switch between the custom 1 and 2 settings on the dial to change my zone focus zone for ~0.7 - 2.0 meters and 2.0-5.0 meters. Usually I'm on the second setting, but I can easily turn the dial instantly to focus closer when someone walks right in front of me.

This is the same as when, on my Leica, I'm usually zone focused at 2 or 3 meters, and I just quickly turn the focus tab straight down to 1.2 meters do the same thing.

Click to expand...

Yup. Fuji's implementation is less ideal for quick change of the zone indeed..

jjcha said:

5. Is alignment adjustment a common issue with Leica's M cameras? How often do you need to adjust your Leica M body focus system?

Yes, alignment is an issue but with a modern M camera like the M10, I wouldn't worry about it getting out of alignment too often. My M10-P is very slightly misaligned vertically, but not enough to bother me to send it in for a precise alignment.

6. Will you get the Silver Chrome or Black M10 Body?

My M10-P is black. My X100V is silver. They both look great.

Click to expand...

Yeah. it's hard to decide because they are both good looking!

jjcha said:

On your post, as you are aware, the VM28mm F2.0 and 7 Artisans F1.4 are very different in size. The 7 Artisans is huge (but wonderful, I love its output). The M10+7 artisans is very heavy and you should consider carefully if you want this.

Click to expand...

Yeah. I saw the output from the 7Artisan and I really like it. The weight of the combo should not be too bad. It still 220g lighter than my XH1+16-55/2.8 which I sold.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts!

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/183079213@N06/

I to also have aan Olympus 4/3 system and 5d3 cannon and until recently an x100F which I used extensively.

My canon I keep but use little. The Olympus 4/3 is surprisingly good, easy , photo friendly output with little edit, brilliant control layout, certainly not for playing with depth of field and form factor doesn't inspire so I am back looking to add an x100v, x-pro 3, Q2, M10 variant. I know I want a rangefinder style and I haven't had a Leica since the M8. I generally take landscapes, places, people, travel.

The X100v whilst good in many respects has gone backwards in ergonomics, its a little bigger, it gets warm and its touch screen is really poor. For some reason it feels a bit more brick like than the F so whilst I have nearly gone back down that route I keep stopping myself from buying one.

The X-pro 3 isn't heavy by Leica standards but after using X100's for a long time just seems bigger than it needs to be but is ergonomically better. It looks a great camera and the inward screen I think is a positive. Its probably overtaken the x100v and is high on my list.

It is however the Q2 that I have been close to buying many times over the last few weeks. Whilst not the same perspective as a separate lens, the crop to 35 and 50 is clearly useable and in a rangefinder who really uses lenses outside this?. Manual focus is meant to be good, nice simple layout and I prefer 28mm and 50mm rather than 35mm - comes from having had a couple of Ricoh GR's maybe?

Then there is the eternal appeal of the M. So given that, (crop limitations taken into account), why buy an M10 variant over a Q2? Heavier, stiff ISO adjustment, costly glass but not necessarily better.

Q2, highly rated fast lens, weather sealed, built in diopter, No OVF option, but excellent evf, effective manual focus and zone focus and an excellent macro option. Stabilisation, autofocus there if you want it. Still high quality German built. same menu structure and simple interface.

In bare terms the Q2 ticks so many boxes and almost seems good value next to the M. Does a Q2 just make you buy an M later or have some people bought Q's and found they don't use their M's that much anymore?

My question is - why the M?

I think a lot has to do how you will like focusing pure rangefinder. It is a very special experience. Many love it. Many others don't. I wanted to love it, but with weak eyes and astighmatism found that I did not like it, as much as loved handling the body. You also need to keep in mind that this is a platform that only works well from 28 to 50mm. Focussing a Summilux wide open needs a lot of practice and even then many shots will be out of focus. The optional EVF is not good. The bodies are heavy.

This platform has a lot of charm if you enjoy the experience of being limited and slow. Leica calls it "Das Wesentliche". Some just feel limited. It is a very personal and more emotional choice than anything else. It will not take better pictures and you will not become a better artist. You may enjoy taking photographs more. Maybe.

I think this can only be experienced over a longer time than just a typical renting period. If I were decide to give it a go again, I would look at a used M10 with an used 35mm Summilux or a 50mm Summicron. If you decide you don't like it, these will be easy to sell with minimal loss.

Having said that, a Q2 is a much easier and robust camera to take pictures with...

nonicks said:

I am a current X-pro 3 user and am interested in buying a second body and a 28mm equivalent lens.

I now narrow it down to 2 options:

1. X-pro3 Dura Black or Silver and the upcoming 18/1.4. With this I will keep my operation setup and PP workflow. No challenge and no excitement in term of getting new gears but this is the most practical choice. I know I will be happy still.

2. A used Leica M10 + VM Ultron 28/2 or 7 Artisans 28/1.4 to start with. The price of the Summilux 28/1.4 is just a bit too much for what I want to spend. I probably will add couple other highly recommended third party lenses in the first year, such as the Voigtlander 21mm 1.4 and 40mm/1.2 Nokton, if I am happy using the M10. Honestly, I am excited about this route but does this make sense?

I understand there is a price premium to enter the Leica world. I am okay with that as long as I make sure I won't go too crazy buying multiple Summilux lenses. I believe lux 35/1.4 is the only Leica M lens I will eventually buy (to replace the VM 40/1.2 down the road).

A little background... My first camera was the Germany Praktica my dad gave me a few decades ago. So I am no stranger to full manual operation, on-OVF split screen focus, zone focus and some other old tricks/rules although I have been so spoiled by the modern camera technology for sure. LOL So, I kinda know what I am getting (back) into if I choose this route.

But before I make the decision, I want to hear from you guys, who have already done it.

1. What made you decided to shoot Leica M ( M8,M9,M,M10 etc.)/M mount and X-pro3/XF mount at the same time?

Click to expand...

I purchased the Leica Q for an informal reportage assignment last year. My experience shooting with the Leica Q led me to be bitten by the Leica bug. Apparently, the Q was the gateway to all things Leica. After extensive research, I ended up purchasing the Leica M Type 240 and the Summilux 50 f/1.4 APSH lens.

nonicks said:

2. Have you thought about selling the Fuji and go full Leica?

Click to expand...

I left Fujifilm a long time ago. I had the X-Pro1 and 2, all X100 series, the X-T1 and X-T2. The only X-series camera I have is the X70.

nonicks said:

3. Or did you do the opposite, sold Leica after you tried, and then solely committed to Fuji since? What was not right there?

4. Do you find that shooting X-pro3 ( or the older Fuji X-pro bodies) in full manual mode with OVF and the clutch lenses provides a close enough experience as shooting the M system?

Click to expand...

Absolutely not. The Leica rangefinder experience cannot be replicated by Fujifilm, no matter how many innovative features they pack into the X-Pro camera.

nonicks said:

5. Is alignment adjustment a common issue with Leica's M cameras? How often do you need to adjust your Leica M body focus system?

Click to expand...

Not that I know of.

nonicks said:

6. Will you get the Silver Chrome or Black M10 Body?

Thanks for sharing your advice in advance.

Click to expand...

The Leica M enabled me to be more into the process of shooting to capture images than simply mashing away. There is a lot more thinking and timing involved, but also more rewarding when I open up DNG files in Lightroom and see how the camera can render beautiful colors and tonality.

Good luck with your decision.

Tim C.

nonicks said:

But before I make the decision, I want to hear from you guys, who have already done it.

1. What made you decided to shoot Leica M ( M8,M9,M,M10 etc.)/M mount and X-pro3/XF mount at the same time?

2. Have you thought about selling the Fuji and go full Leica?

3. Or did you do the opposite, sold Leica after you tried, and then solely committed to Fuji since? What was not right there?

4. Do you find that shooting X-pro3 ( or the older Fuji X-pro bodies) in full manual mode with OVF and the clutch lenses provides a close enough experience as shooting the M system?

5. Is alignment adjustment a common issue with Leica's M cameras? How often do you need to adjust your Leica M body focus system?

6. Will you get the Silver Chrome or Black M10 Body?

Thanks for sharing your advice in advance.

Click to expand...

1) I once shot x-pro 1 and Leica M at same time. However I decided the systems are too close together and sold the Fuji system and kept Leica. I prefered the Leica colors, and I prefered the haptics and UI of the Leica M. Advantage of the Fuji would be the EVF, you can use zooms and longer focal lengths with AF.

2) yes, see my answer 1). But I also own additional AF camera (Leica and Fuji).

3. no, I did not

5. I now mainly use NOT the fastest option M lenses, expect the 35/1.4 - some lenses work fine, but I also have had M lenses which went for calibration several times and still have small issues. Specially longer focal lengths (75/90/135) are critival in my experiences.

6. most difficult question. I came from black M6, to black M9, to silver M240, to silver M10, to black M10r - IMO silver looks a bit more classic M3-like, and the black draws maybe a little less attention and looks more discrete. Buy what you like better.

Are you unhappy with you Fuji kit? because according to your gear list, you have two bodies and about half a dozen lenses, some of which are among Fuji's best primes. If you want a 28mm lens, get a Fuji 18mm f2. It's 27mm which is close enough and I can say after owning two of them, that they are much better that the screaming naysayers claim.

I was a hardcore Fuji user for a number of years, I started with an XA1, then an XE1, XE2, XT2, and an X-Pro2, plus four different X100 models and a bunch of different lenses. For the past few years I've been using a Leica M9 kit only. But before I switched to digital, I was using fully manual film cameras for more than 55 years, so the transition to the M9 was easy for me. I would suggest that unless you have a lot of experience with manual cameras that you take your two clutch lenses, put them into manual only and use them with the OVF on your X-pro3 without peaking or magnification and any other focus aids for awhile. Because you won't have any of that stuff with the M10 unless you are going to shoot with the LCD in Live View.

I would get a leica lens over a leica body with a non leica lens. In fact, I would argue to keep the fuji body and get a 21mm leica lens, either the $3300 Leica Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH Lens or the $8600 Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 ASPH.

21mm gives you a 33mm field of view on the Fuji. You retain the Fuji workflow, familiarity, focus peaking for manual focus, but with the manual aspect of the leica glass, plus its optical properties, plus its resale ability. Sure no full frame, but unless you need real wide, this should suffice.

Nothing against leica bodies.... but to use a non leica glass on a leica body? I can't understand as to why? Use a sony, nikon or canon mirrorless body. While leica bodies are unique in their compact full frame ability, the digital file is on par with what's on the market for a fraction of the price. The experience? yes, I personally believe its worth it. its a tactile thing and its simplicity is something many photographers just get, even if they can't justify. I just can't if I'm using a non leica lens on that body.

I use a 50mm summilux on canon eos M5, fuji xt2, xt3 and a canon R!!!! That lens will outlast any camera body and its then $3600 price tag is paying off.

Below is an OOC shot on the fuji x-t3, but with a leica 50mm summilux, circular polarizer for the deep sky and car colors, classic chrome film sim for the contrast, hilight roll off and deep color. Nothing like a leica experience with a fuji body!!!!

If you are not going to use Leica M glass, don't waste money on Leica M camera.

VfxByArt said:

Nothing against leica bodies.... but to use a non leica glass on a leica body? I can't understand as to why?

Click to expand...

That question can easily be turned around: Why not? There are many excellent lenses in LM or LTM mount made by various manufacturers, and these also give the full rangefinder experience.

The M are very nice cameras with great UI, so why limit yourself regarding to lenses?