>>4052803Real answer since I love shitting on Leica when I can. Great IQ at a tiny size, and great tactile experience of shooting, but they're really only worthwhile for specific type of shooting, and awful otherwise.
If you love shooting with an OVF, manually focusing, and using primes from 28mm to 75mm, they're great. Your eyesight will really determine how well you can focus at f1.4 or faster, but f2 is pretty easy with most focal lengths.
You can use them outside of that, but it's a lot less practical. At certain point you're better off using the optional EVF, at which point a standard mirrorless makes a lot more sense. If the OVF is the main draw, I honestly find my X-Pro3 better in that regard.
Leica service & repair sucks, equally expensive and can often take 4-6 months.
It sucks not having a tilting screen for low angle / hip shots.
It sucks not having autofocus for just getting quick snaps, and shooting one handed without having to rely on zone focusing (or focusing by moving).
The M11 fixed it, but having to remove the baseplate for memory card & battery was obnoxious af.
Cost-wise they're expensive as fuck for cameras, but honestly not that bad compared to many other hobbies / expenses. That said, I have friends with cycling setups that cost more, friends with more invested in all kinds of different hobbies. I'm fortunate to have a lot of money (now), but I still live frugally. I've driven the same car for 12 years, that I bought used (and 5 years old) for $7k cash, when most of my friends drive newer +$30k vehicles. I know several "uncle bobs" with multiple a7's and a complete kit of f2.8 zooms and f1.4 primes that costs more in total than my Leica setup. It really comes down to priorities, and even then they're still a bad option thinking in terms of performance per dollar. You're absolutely paying more, for less, but you might "like it" more. Most people wouldn't though.
