fsprow Posted January 8, 2016 Share #1 Posted January 8, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Somewhat reluctantly I returned my new SL today. Having been an M user for a long time (first one was an M3 double stroke which I still have and use along with an M4 and M240) I thought it would replace my DSLR equipment. Not so. I used on successive days the SL with the available AF zoom and my Nikon D810 for similar photos -- portraits, indoor scenes, snow skiing, flash.... I concluded that the Nikon produced images (especially with the remarkable 50mm AF f/1.4 and the 28-70 f/2.8 AFS) quite comparable to the SL except the images in large enlargement (approx 20x30") showed substantially more fine detail than the SL, more like my Hasselblad. While this is not the most important variable, when coupled with the few AF lenses available for the SL and its somewhat irritating button arrangement, I kept the Nikon. My Leica love is undiminished. I will hope for a M240 replacement with the wonderful display of the SL. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2016 Posted January 8, 2016 Hi fsprow, Take a look here Took Back my SL. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Arif Posted January 8, 2016 Share #2 Posted January 8, 2016 Sorry it did not work out for you. I am happy with replacing all my Nikon equipment with the SL so now I can travel with the same Leica lens that I can use on both the SL and the MM. I am also waiting for the S adapter and then I can have the further flexibility to choose for my travel. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared Posted January 8, 2016 Share #3 Posted January 8, 2016 Perhaps the next iteration of the 'M' will be just what you are looking for. Which Nikkor 50mm 1.4 do you have? I have never been impressed with mine. I much prefer the 1.8 at most apertures, but mine is not the most current model. Sorry to hear the SL turned out not to be a match. It's funny that one of the things you pointed to as a problem with the SL--the button arrangement--is one of the things I like best about it. I find it quite elegant compared to the array of controls on the Nikons. To each his own, of course, and the sensor in the 810 certainly has a stellar reputation. - Jared Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsprow Posted January 8, 2016 Author Share #4 Posted January 8, 2016 It is the AFS-FX version. Interestingly, the first example I bought was quite "soft" and I returned for this one, which is outstanding. I think I just get a "fail" in the button department! Best, Frank Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted January 8, 2016 Share #5 Posted January 8, 2016 I hope you are happy with your decision. It's a personal choice, of course and each should choose what works for them. I am, however, not surprised that a camera with a 36MP Sony sensor might show more detail then one with a 24MP sensor. At the pixel peeping level I can't see any one arguing that a D810 or A7R2 would show more detail than an SL. Anyone printing regularly to 20x30 inches would be better off with a high MP count if all other things are comparable. Gordon 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared Posted January 9, 2016 Share #6 Posted January 9, 2016 It is the AFS-FX version. Interestingly, the first example I bought was quite "soft" and I returned for this one, which is outstanding. I think I just get a "fail" in the button department! Best, Frank That might explain it. Mine is the older AF-D version. Extremely low contrast at f/2 and below (though it's fine from f/2.8 onwards). I was never very happy with it--don't know why I even kept it. Good luck with your future 'M'! And with your D810 in the meanwhile. - Jared Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likaleica Posted January 9, 2016 Share #7 Posted January 9, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) I hope you are happy with your decision. It's a personal choice, of course and each should choose what works for them. I am, however, not surprised that a camera with a 36MP Sony sensor might show more detail then one with a 24MP sensor. At the pixel peeping level I can't see any one arguing that a D810 or A7R2 would show more detail than an SL. Anyone printing regularly to 20x30 inches would be better off with a high MP count if all other things are comparable. Gordon If I put my 24 mp SL up against my 37 mp S and compared large prints I'm pretty sure I'd know in advance which camera would produce more detailed images on identical sized enlargements. I hope the OP received a full refund. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwarren Posted January 9, 2016 Share #8 Posted January 9, 2016 .....I hope the OP received a full refund. Honest question ahead: When one returns a camera, is a full refund the norm? I've never even considered returning a camera to the retailer, but I repeatedly see comments here that indicate "Sending it back to B&H/Amazon, or taking it back to the (whichever) retailer." Curious... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 9, 2016 Share #9 Posted January 9, 2016 That's why I always recommend that folks buy gear, new or used, from reputable dealers with warranty. One should read and understand the warranty conditions, which can vary. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted January 9, 2016 Share #10 Posted January 9, 2016 Sorry it didn't work out for you, but it's only sensible to understand that not every camera is right for every photographer. There is no be-all, end-all camera that does everything best. Thank the gods for all the excellent choices we have today! If I put my 24 mp SL up against my 37 mp S and compared large prints I'm pretty sure I'd know in advance which camera would produce more detailed images on identical sized enlargements. I hope the OP received a full refund. Sure, you're comparing a medium format, top of the line Leica camera and lenses with a 35mm format, top of the line Leica camera and lenses. Of course there's a difference, otherwise Leica could save a lot of money by not investing in development of both. Honest question ahead: When one returns a camera, is a full refund the norm? I've never even considered returning a camera to the retailer, but I repeatedly see comments here that indicate "Sending it back to B&H/Amazon, or taking it back to the (whichever) retailer." Curious... Returns depend upon the services and policies of the retailer you buy from. If I buy from B&H Photo, their policy is a satisfaction guarantee for a period of 14 days which nets a 100% return presuming that the returned item is fully packaged and re-saleable "as new". My local brick & mortar dealer offers the same policy, although I believe their time limit is 7 days rather than 14 days. Other vendors offer 100% on exchanges and a stocking fee on outright returns. Some do not offer returns other than for defective merchandise. it all depends ... read the service policy of your retailer before you buy. I don't do returns very often, but when I'm truly unsure as to whether an item is going to be suitable for my use, I always investigate the retailer's return policy carefully before putting my money down. It saves a lot of angst and frustration if you understand what both you and the retailer are committing to when you make a transaction. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted January 9, 2016 Share #11 Posted January 9, 2016 For the very same reason I would never buy at these shops as I would not like to receive demo items as new items. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 9, 2016 Share #12 Posted January 9, 2016 For the very same reason I would never buy at these shops as I would not like to receive demo items as new items. Practically every retailer (not just cameras), at least in the US, does the same if the merchandise appears and functions as new. Henry Posner from B&H once responded to a forum thread with this extended comment... http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/1944032 Now that's candor. It's the dealers that don't tell you this that you shouldn't trust. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 9, 2016 Share #13 Posted January 9, 2016 The Henry Posner post (from 2001) is a classic. Worth a few minutes to read. Even in these days of shopping on the internet for the best deal, arbitraging across currencies and around VAT, it reinforces the value of getting to know a retailer. scott 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted January 9, 2016 Share #14 Posted January 9, 2016 I buy most of my gear from three retailers, and have been doing so from the same three retailers for over 20 years. To me, it's well worth the small premium involved in working with the same people, getting to know them so that I can rely upon them, rather than simply bargain shopping for the lowest price all the time. There's much more value to be had in doing business with people I know and can rely upon. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsprow Posted January 9, 2016 Author Share #15 Posted January 9, 2016 Yes, I returned it to the dealer from whom I have purchased many cameras and lenses - within their 14 day return period for full refund. It is also likely that it will be sold again new as it was returned in "perfect" condition with all items and packing. I have returned perhaps three items over many years but recognize that this practice has its potential downsides for the next purchaser. I note that Apple as well as other manufacturers/vendors have similar full price refund policies re return, but I believe some clearly identify the item as "refurbished" and resell at a discounted price. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted January 9, 2016 Share #16 Posted January 9, 2016 Sure, you're comparing a medium format, top of the line Leica camera and lenses with a 35mm format, top of the line Leica camera and lenses. Of course there's a difference, otherwise Leica could save a lot of money by not investing in development of both. ...right, and the main difference as far as detail is concerned is the sensor resolution Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted January 9, 2016 Share #17 Posted January 9, 2016 ...right, and the main difference as far as detail is concerned is the sensor resolution That is not what my statement implied. I'll thank you not to put words into my statements. If that's your opinion, fine. Say it as your opinion and be happy with it. I've worked with both the A7 and A7r and compared the imaging between them. For the lenses I used, the A7 with 24 MPixels produced better image quality. Those are the same lenses I use with the SL, and the SL sensor is even better optimized for those lenses. I would not bother myself to lust for the 42 Mpixel A7R2 at all ... waste of time for me. And since I made 20x24 inch exhibition prints with a 5 Mpixel capture that won awards at three exhibitions, I see absolutely no real, practical benefit to my photography for the ultra-high pixel count cameras. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted January 10, 2016 Share #18 Posted January 10, 2016 That is not what my statement implied. I'll thank you not to put words into my statements. If that's your opinion, fine. Say it as your opinion and be happy with it. Of course it is not what you implied (because I don't agree) and of course all of my posts are my own opinion, so be happy with it. The fact a 24 MP camera has less detail than a 40+ MP camera is simply obvious. As far as image detail is concerned, the SL can't compete with the Leica S and the Sony A7R2 when each is shot with proper lenses and proper technique. This is simply a matter of MP, and being "top of the line" has nothing to do with it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted January 10, 2016 Share #19 Posted January 10, 2016 The fact a 24 MP camera has less detail than a 40+ MP camera is simply obvious. It may seem obvious to some, but it is false to fact. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglou Posted January 10, 2016 Share #20 Posted January 10, 2016 (edited) It may seem obvious to some, but it is false to fact. Maybe you have a link to some study conforting this statement or explanations ? Edited January 10, 2016 by biglou Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.