Leica SL Survey - Your Opinion?

[LUF Admin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We had some days to discuss the Leica SL and to form an opinion.

To get an atmospheric picture here are two questions to you_
 
1. Can you imagine to buy a Leica SL (Type 601)?
 
And:
 
2. Who will buy the Leica SL over the next years?
 
Please vote above and share your voice below...

[wattsy]

 

 

and share your voice below...

 

Being a fan boy at heart I'd rather have an SL than the utilitarian (though functionally superb) Nikon D810 that I now use for most types of paid work. I don't particularly mind the price of the SL body (it is cheaper than the Monochrom I bought in 2012) but it would make no sense at all to buy one because a single, quite expensive, 24-90 lens is just too limiting for the (often rather boring) work I use this kind of camera for. If there was an adapter that enabled full use of Nikon AFS-G lenses then I'd more likely consider an SL but as it is, it is simply too impractical.

 

As for buying one for "personal work" type use, the SL doesn't tick many boxes for me (I prefer optical viewfinder, smaller camera, proper manual controls and film).

Edited October 23, 2015 by wattsy

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Mike Rawcs]

I will definitely try the camera when a demo becomes available, but the 24-90mm lens is way too big and heavy for me. If a smaller f2.8 prime had been launched along with the camera and zoom the camera size may have been perceived differently by many.

[Steve Ash]

In my opinion the voting options are not suitable to provide an "atmospheric picture". That is why I deferred this voting request.

 

The options for the first questions are not balanced and negative from the start. In the decision process there are three options for me:

 

1) I will buy one

2) I am interested to buy one but I have not decided yet

3) I am not interested and will not buy one

 

I do not see the sense of the second question as there will not be one group of customers. Further the different kind of potential buyers offered for selection is not complete.

 

Personally I think the system looks interesting to me as it seems to be at the cutting edge of current technology. Further I think the lenses of this system will be simply awesome. As I am a rangefinder addict the system is not for me as long as my eyesight is fine.

 

The only things which are disappointing to me is the design and the limited range of lenses available from start. Regarding the design we know Leica can do better.  

[Peter H]

I've tried to express my feelings about the SL in other threads but to summarise:

 

I expect the SL will be a very fine camera, but it isn't for me because the M does most things that I want a camera to do, probably far better than the SL will in personal terms.

 

For the relatively few occasions when I might wish for AF (incredibly few, actually) and a long lens, it seems extravagant to buy this camera when a used Nikon would do the job. I thought hard about the Q but resisted. This camera, because it offers little that isn't already available elsewhere, hasn't yet tempted me.

 

Also, while as a body alone the price may seem reasonable to people used to M and S-body prices, I think as a system it will be too expensive for many who, had it been possible to squeeze its capabilities into something appreciably smaller, would somehow have found the means. But even good hard cash can't break the laws of physics, so this camera's a miss, for me.

[edwardkaraa]

I'm almost sure I will buy the SL, provided the EVF is as good as claimed, which I will find out for myself as soon as a demo body is available where I live.

 

I have no interest in the announced zoom lenses, but the 50 lux and other future primes would be my main interest.

 

I'm also interested about its compatibility with M lenses. While I really like my M240 and would always own an M body, there are too many situations where the ORF is not usable. The external EVF of the M is not only outdated, its location makes it flimsy and awkward to use, so I much prefer a built in EVF such as in the SL.

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I suspect I will buy the SL, but not necessarily immediately. In the UK, the price looks proportionate to other Leicas.

Unlike many people here, I am less fazed by the single large AF lens on offer. I still find I prefer manual focus for a lot of things, and in AF I usually use back button focusing because, for my photography, I don't wan't the focus to change or move unexpectedly in complex environments. So I would be likely to buy the body only for use with my M lenses, and maybe add an AF lens at a later date.

 

Why would I buy it if I didn't use AF? Easier to focus in low light/contrast than a M (that is my experience with the OMD EM5ii anyway), easier macro focusing and for use with longer telephoto lenses. None of which are killer arguments for buying the SL, but when did any amateur leisure activity conform to financial logic?

 

IMO, the options for Q2 are a bit limited.

Edited October 23, 2015 by LocalHero1953

[Paul J]

• I think more professionals will consider it when the lenses and pixels are there.
• I'm not sure the rental houses, other than the Leica partnered ones, will jump in because of the expense and lack of users, this will take some leverage.
• It's not being immediately well received by the motion community because of the price and unfamiliarity. Most are saying they would just buy a Red Raven for that price. also the Canon 1Dx II is just around the corner with rumoured better cine specs.
• The system and design is excellent, but Leica have a hell of a lot of work to do. Goodluck to them

Edited October 23, 2015 by Paul J

[rodluvan]

lol, "professionals"? as if 

no number, worth mentioning, of "professionals" will buy this beyond the occasional kept 'artist' doing artistic nudes. end of story 

Edited October 23, 2015 by rodluvan

[biglou]

Not enough pixels is curiously not a proposed answer, this is one of my reasons not to be interested by this camera.

There are other reasons too...

[earleygallery]

I couldn't and wouldn't spend £8K on the SL and pack zoom.

 

That's not to say I couldn't find a use for one - I have a modest selection of M and R lenses - but I think I'd buy an M9 or M if I wanted to use the M lenses digitally and I'm happy to use my R lenses on Canon bodies.

 

If I had money to buy into a new system, it wouldn't be the SL either - the problem is the current range of 1 lens and the long wait until further lenses are going to become available. This will be the biggest obstacle for Leica to make the SL a success.

[EdwardM]

given the poll results SL is total disaster

[Peter Walker]

Now that Zeiss are making excellent lenses for the Sony A7Rii, with its 42 megapixel sensor and uncompressed raw images, it's difficult to justify spending triple the amount on the SL.  I'm waiting for more lenses and the next model.

[lct]

I was prepared to pre-order when i realized that it is impossible to trigger image magnification with the right thumb so far. Deal breaker for me so i will wait and see if Leica can provide some support to people like me if any.

[wentbackward]

It doesn't make me all gooey like the M8/M9 and then the M did, but I do still keep an SLR (A99) with two zoom lenses. That setup has a very specific place albeit not used nearly as much as my M. I think the SL also fits that place. I'm sure IQ is amazing, but it's a lot of money.

 

The one feature that is missing right now is the A99 has remarkable on sensor image stabilisation. I've shot 300mm lenses at 1/15 sec hand held and had useable images. Reading Irwin Putts analysis of image stabilisation, I concur with him and can say practically it's almost impossible to acheive a 21MB of real detail hand held (except at high shutter speeds), but image stabilisation can easily take you beyond. As I understand the SL does not have IS, I wouldn't be switching until that comes along. As this camera is all about ease of use, ultrasonic sensor cleaning is also a must.

[ECohen]

I use a Nikon D610 when I need that kind of camera  And M240 for everything else.............If the SL was 1/2 the weight and I had money to burn......I'd buy it....I love the simple german menu's

 

Am I missing something.... Is this camera intended to compete with the 2.25 market for pro's? If thats the case it his all the marks......I look forward to holding, one but I don't have the need for it .

 

If I were still shoot professionally .......I  still doubt I would spend the money for it 

[pfm624]

I am like so many waiting for an exact copy of the CL in form factor

with all the advantages of the digital age.  Actually, would love to see

it in both color and monochrome regardless of the whole raw conversion

conversation.  If that ever comes out, I will preorder it about five years in

advance.  Still hoping.

[Toon]

I shouldn't vent any ideas before having handled the actual device but: for that price and with that bulk & weight I am more interested in a medium format camera. Nevertheless.....

Edited October 23, 2015 by Toon

[Michael Hiles]

I certainly wont buy one - it does not supplant a small, light rangefinder camera. The M cameras and their fabulous viewfinders continue to be the optimum solution for my needs. The SL looks huge from my perspective - I've seen small fire logs.

 

I think that initially offering only one lens is a mistake - the various adapters don't mean much if you are not now a Leica user. Limits the probable interest of professionals, IMO.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[algrove]

When I first saw a front on photo, the Sony A7 series came to mind. Now that I have studied other photos comparing the body to DSLRs for example and seen the specs I will wait, but am inclined to not get one since as I age my eyes are getting much worse (the EVF could help here) and I find my muscle strength way less than 10 years ago. It is the later that convinces me for now that a 2 kilo Leica kit setup (body+lens) is not for me unless like someone else said somewhere I start pumping iron big time. Not likely.

 

I cannot justify getting one for the EVF only. Many expect the next M to have an improved EVF (I sure hope so) maybe along the Q or SL quality levels. I will wait for that answer since by the time a new M is announced the SL system will hardly be beyond still-born.

 

If I owned an S then I would get one because I feel its usefulness will be best used with S primes until such time as SL primes are out and more than one is released.  That said the timing of the direct S adapter will be key to sales to current S lens owners.