Always good to have contrarian views.
I have my own that are contrary to yours. However, I am 90% sure I'll not be buying a Leica SL (I'd never say never
given that I DO have a lot of S glass).
I have never bought into the notion that a smaller camera is more stealthy than a bigger one. IMO, it has much more to do with "how" you shoot candid work verses "what" you use. The presence of the photographer is the constant … and people are bigger, more obvious, more predominate than what they have in their hand. The difference between a A7 and a Pro DSLR is nothing compared to how a person melds themselves into a situation. How you go about that, is what makes the difference.
I also believe that the difference between a rangefinder and a DSLR or Mirrorless camera is more about the photographer's shooting experience than the subject's experience. A rangefinder simply eliminates many distractions regarding what an image will look like, allowing the photographer to place more attention on what the image is about. IMO, it is easier to concentrate on content with a rangefinder than with any TTL camera. This doesn't mean it cannot be done with a DSLR, it is just fraught with more visual distractions, like the effect of focal length and DOF, which are nonexistent with a rangefinder.
What the SL brings to the party is a simple interface that is sorely lacking in most other competitive choices. IMO, Sony is the most egregious violator of simplicity and elegant workflow, and seems impervious to the concept of simplicity no matter how many whine about it. Years later, I still haven't warmed up to the Sonys for that reason (and a few others).
What I do not like about the SL are the image qualities I've seen so far. That is subject to change as the camera gets more use and more lenses come out for it … the S development was similar at first.
- Marc