I had a look at your website. Two comments:
1. you may want to look at resizing the images, your landing page is 480MB!!! It took a good 30+ seconds to load and I'm on a 100mbps connection.
2. I don't understand what a rangefinder gives you over what you have, your work looks like it was all done from a tripod so anything medium format will be much better whatever Leica or anything else you buy...?
If you want something faster to shoot with then think of your lens choices. If you are looking at 28mm or longer then you can get a very nice Canon/Nikon AF SLR for peanuts with compact lenses (also costing peanuts) that will have no performance penalty really if you're shooting them at f/4 or f/8. If you want wider then a rangefinder makes sense as SLR super wides get big quickly and are never as good as a rangefinder superwide.
As for your cameras, I am a Leica user. I had a Contax G2, it arrived broken (sticky AF) and nobody could fix it. That kind of put me off. I had a Voigtlander R3A, a unique camera with a 1:1 finder. A bit dinky and unrefined next to a Leica but it is half the price!
The XPan would probably be the most appropriate for you given your work but I'd have to be really rich to throw 3-4k on an old electronic camera that cannot be repaired.
1.) I definitely agree about my website. The files are just wayyy to big. I'm working on it!
2.) You are absolutely right. All of my work has hitherto been shot with medium format and large format cameras on a tripod. The reason why I'd like a rangefinder is because I'd like to expand my practice and use a rangefinder for fast, handheld work - different work than currently seen on my website. A rangefinder's size appeals to me because I can carry the camera with a few lenses in a small bag and get away with photographing in more restricted areas, getting in, taking the shot, and getting out. I can't tell you how many times I almost got a shot with my large/medium format cameras on tripods only to have someone or a security guard threaten me or threaten to call the police. I had a horrible experience just a few weeks ago when someone ran up to me and threatened to smash my priceless Linhof Master Technica Classic because he thought I was photographing his house! I definitely would like to avoid that going forward. Also, as you've mentioned, I tend to shoot wide. 50mm to me is practically a telephoto lens! I seem to be most comfortable with and in between the 28mm to 45mm focal lengths, occasionally using a 20mm for my nicely featured Minolta Maxxum/Dynax 7. The Minolta Maxxum lenses are very good, but I'm not convinced that they're the best for wider angles. I noticed this since I digitally scan my negatives to fairly enormous sizes.
Anyway, that all said, cameras like the Contax G1/G2 also scare me a bit because of the many stories I've heard of them turning into unusable bricks and how all the LCD screens eventually bleed. In contrast, however, I've heard great things about the Minolta CLE, Konica Hexar RF, and Voigtlander Bessas.
I feel partial to the Minolta CLE and Voigtlander Bessa R4a (for wide angle shooting), in that order. I still like the idea of the Contax G1, particularly because I have a Sony a7R IV - that I almost exclusively use for scanning my negatives - and those apparently amazing Contax/Zeiss lenses can be adapted to said Sony a7R IV.
At the end of the day, and definitely tell me if my thinking is wrong or erronous, but I think I'd like a mostly mechanical rangefinder (even though the G1 would contradict this).
That all said, I think the winners for me are (in order):
1.) Minolta CLE - would only need the 28mm and 40mm lenses
2.) Voigtlander Bessa R4A - since I shoot almost exclusively wide angle/standard, this might be a winner for me with 25mm, 35mm, and 50mm lenses
3.) Contax G1 (Green Label) - would be happy to shoot with just the 28mm, 35mm, and 45mm.
-Of these 3 cameras, which ones do you guys think are the best?
-Would the Contax Zeiss lenses beat out the Voigtlander lenses or Minolta lenses or vice versa?