I totally agree with you on this.
I shoot many indoors handheld. After selling my M9 due to its less than great high ISO capabilities, first thought about getting the M240, but I didn’t go for it as I wanted a camera that can autofocus this time, and have an EVF (rangefinder has too many limitations for me). Also I was frustrated with the M lenses because it cannot get too close to the subject.
Then considered the T, but because its APS-C, my wide angle choice is limited (looking for a range of 15mm-24mm) and ofcourse no built in EVF. So I am currently using my Leica lenses on the Sony a7rII. After unwillingly using that camera, I feel sensor stabilization is a must for future Leica cameras. Especially with the slow wide angle lenses out there. For sensors today, ISO1600 is as far as I would like to go on any Leica.
The Q gave me hope Leica could produce the dream camera I am searching with small autofocus fast primes. And then the SL arrived with their DSLR form (don’t understand why it needs to have that look for an EVF camera) and huge lens and all hope was lost.
With the T, Q, and SL, why do they have to be all front heavy when lens are mounted? Why can’t they make that Q lens interchangeable (the TL 35 summilux is even larger)?
My last hope it the new rumored TL. I love the interface of the T, the heft of it (where the Q is lacking) where you can customize the menu and apply functions to the dials, the touch to focus (and release), the size of the Q, its build in EVF (although SL one would be great). Yes, and the internal storage. So to summarize, a built in EVF, full size 36 megapixel image stabilized sensor (so I can use my wide angle M lens) TL should do it. With 36 megapixels, the past T lens would still have decent enough pixels to not become obsolete.
Perhaps I am dreaming too much. Time to move on to other offerings such as Fuji?