I use two sets of cameras depending on the work. For light travel, where I require mobility, I use an M9-P and an M10-R (this one acquired at the beginning of this year from someone who switched to an M-11). In MF I carry a Leica S2 and a Fuji GFX 100. They are for different things, the Fuji for those images that either because the absence of the lens or the light I cannot do with the Leica. But regardless the IBIS, under the right conditions, the definition is better, and the color is much better with the Leica. When using MF I don’t need IBIS: can live with a tripod, and wouldn’t mind to switch the Fuji to a mirrorless S if the right circumstances come along. It is an issue that the Leica S lenses would not be adaptable to mirrorless, but I imagine that the next iteration of Leica’s MF will be a mirrorless camera. A natural pool of clients will be those already invested in the S system. I imagine they’ll do their best.
As much as I like Leica, I wouldn't buy into the S system anymore. There is no lens development going on and the last body was just a sensor bump. The worst part is that there are no adapters to use the lenses on mirrorless bodies, so over time S-lenses will become the most worthless Leica lenses in existence. A real shame because the image circle would probably fit a 44x33mm sensor. SL is the way to go for a modern Leica system.
How may lenses do you really need? Just the fact that Leica makes adapters for other manufacturers' lenses is pretty astonishing to me. Unless you are just looking to accumulate gear and make Leica more income, the set of lenses available for the S is pretty sufficient. And as far as development is concerned, the S does pretty much everything I need in a hand-held SLR with stellar quality--they can stop where they are, just keep supporting the cameras and lenses.
I use two sets of cameras depending on the work. For light travel, where I require mobility, I use an M9-P and an M10-R (this one acquired at the beginning of this year from someone who switched to an M-11). In MF I carry a Leica S2 and a Fuji GFX 100. They are for different things, the Fuji for those images that either because the absence of the lens or the light I cannot do with the Leica. But regardless the IBIS, under the right conditions, the definition is better, and the color is much better with the Leica. When using MF I don’t need IBIS: can live with a tripod, and wouldn’t mind to switch the Fuji to a mirrorless S if the right circumstances come along. It is an issue that the Leica S lenses would not be adaptable to mirrorless, but I imagine that the next iteration of Leica’s MF will be a mirrorless camera. A natural pool of clients will be those already invested in the S system. I imagine they’ll do their best.
As much as I like Leica, I wouldn't buy into the S system anymore. There is no lens development going on and the last body was just a sensor bump. The worst part is that there are no adapters to use the lenses on mirrorless bodies, so over time S-lenses will become the most worthless Leica lenses in existence. A real shame because the image circle would probably fit a 44x33mm sensor.
SL is the way to go for a modern Leica system.
How may lenses do you really need? Just the fact that Leica makes adapters for other manufacturers' lenses is pretty astonishing to me. Unless you are just looking to accumulate gear and make Leica more income, the set of lenses available for the S is pretty sufficient. And as far as development is concerned, the S does pretty much everything I need in a hand-held SLR with stellar quality--they can stop where they are, just keep supporting the cameras and lenses.