Jump to content

SL questions from an S user


Deliberate1

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Friends, my primary is an S (006) that I shoot with the 70mm as well as the Zeiss for Contax 645 120mm and 35mm that connect with the C adapter. Outstanding, 4x5 - like results on tripod. And very good hand-held so long as there is plenty of light. Same issue with my beloved M9.

I am looking for a much more capable low light camera. I have considered the Q and Sony Rx1 rII but do not want to be restricted to a single focal length. And I would like to be able to use my M and S glass, via adapters.

So first question is the low light capacity of the SL with fast glass like the M Summilux 50mm 1,4, or slower as with 70mm Summarit S 2.5.

Again, I use the Zeiss lenses via adapter. Can I stack the S adapter on the C adapter?

If there is anyone who has actually used S glass with the SL, examples and observations wouldbe appreciated.

David

Edited by Deliberate1
Link to post
Share on other sites

David, the sports column of DxO tests will give the relative low light capabilities of the each camera tested.  The Sony A7s is currently the top rated camera, the SL might do well in low light for many needs however it's rating is not amongst the best.  

 

http://www.dxomark.com/best-cameras-for-sports

 

http://www.dxomark.com/cameras/brand-leica/resolution-from-24-to-100-mpix/sensor_format-sensor_fullframe#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankLln

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

David, the sports column of DxO tests will give the relative low light capabilities of the each camera tested.  The Sony A7s is currently the top rated camera, the SL might do well in low light for many needs however it's rating is not amongst the best.  

 

http://www.dxomark.com/best-cameras-for-sports

 

http://www.dxomark.com/cameras/brand-leica/resolution-from-24-to-100-mpix/sensor_format-sensor_fullframe#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankLln

Very informative and helpful.

Obliged

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the results with the SL very good up to ISO 6400. (Theoretical max for the sensor is 50000).

Some say even 12500 is usable, but probably not for someone with an S background.

But the SL seems a very good "smaller companion" to the S anyway.  (SL  = S light   ;) )

Coming from S I cannot imagine you will be happy with the Sony user interface. (or the colors, or its tiny size)

 

But if you are typically using a tripod, you will never need the high ISOs (max 800 or 1600 where it is excellent). And handheld you have OIS with the new AF lenses.

You have plenty of possibilities with the SL, not possible to describe everything here.

For me a Sony is simply out-of-the-question. But I am biased.     (Have M246 and SL; and D800 and 5Ds "from before").

 

And yes, all M and R lenses work perfectly on the SL (Summiluxes like the R 1.4/80 are really nice, though my personal favorites are the macro lenses, especially the Apo Macro Elmarit-R 100). But I also like the WATE (16-18-21) and the M 28 lenses very much. (There is even a high-class 1.4/28 if you like.) All M Summiluxes (quite a selection) and Noctiluxes are also great and easier to focus than on the M. But I usually prefer the Summicrons as they are often of astounding compactness.

 

 

P.S. the numbers in DxOmark are for me rather meaningless - I cannot clearly see how they are derived. So I would never base a decision on that.

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I read, S lenses work well on the SL (with AF, but maybe slower, and the motor is a bit noisy).

Regarding S lenses on SL, there is a separate thread for it:  

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/263563-s-lenses-for-the-sl/

And this :   http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/261167-s-adapter-for-sl/

Maybe even more ...

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So first question is the low light capacity of the SL with fast glass like the M Summilux 50mm 1,4, or slower as with 70mm Summarit S 2.5.

 

If there is anyone who has actually used S glass with the SL,

 

 

The EVF makes low light photography pretty easy.  I have used it with the Noctilux.

 

As to the S lenses on the SL, I have the S Macro and the S TS, both work fine and are really excellent lenses.  The Macro is slow to focus, and the motor is noisy but the results are outstanding.  Both are on the heavy side but would normally be used with a tripod although the Macro would make a very nice portrait lens.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... I am looking for a much more capable low light camera. I have considered the Q and Sony Rx1 rII but do not want to be restricted to a single focal length. And I would like to be able to use my M and S glass, via adapters.

So first question is the low light capacity of the SL with fast glass like the M Summilux 50mm 1,4, or slower as with 70mm Summarit S 2.5. ...

 

I ignore specs and DXO stuff. I just look at what I can get out of the SL. This test shot was only slightly edited from the raw capture:

 

 

29125061831_61326d68bb_o.jpg

Leica SL + Summicron-R 90mm f/2
ISO 20000 @ f/4 @ 1/80
LR Noise Reduction set from default 25 to 53.
 
To see a full res JPEG: https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8440/29125058961_ef075f6d85_o.jpg

 

I think that's pretty decent, certainly good enough for my needs. 

Edited by ramarren
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

David, the sports column of DxO tests will give the relative low light capabilities of the each camera tested.  The Sony A7s is currently the top rated camera, the SL might do well in low light for many needs however it's rating is not amongst the best.  

 

http://www.dxomark.com/best-cameras-for-sports

 

http://www.dxomark.com/cameras/brand-leica/resolution-from-24-to-100-mpix/sensor_format-sensor_fullframe#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankLln

A bit puzzling: the SL is worse than the M240 for sports?

Am I reading this wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Friends, my primary is an S (006) that I shoot with the 70mm as well as the Zeiss for Contax 645 120mm and 35mm that connect with the C adapter. Outstanding, 4x5 - like results on tripod. And very good hand-held so long as there is plenty of light. Same issue with my beloved M9.

I am looking for a much more capable low light camera. I have considered the Q and Sony Rx1 rII but do not want to be restricted to a single focal length. And I would like to be able to use my M and S glass, via adapters.

So first question is the low light capacity of the SL with fast glass like the M Summilux 50mm 1,4, or slower as with 70mm Summarit S 2.5.

Again, I use the Zeiss lenses via adapter. Can I stack the S adapter on the C adapter?

If there is anyone who has actually used S glass with the SL, examples and observations wouldbe appreciated.

David

 

I only got my S-Adaptor L yesterday so I've only tested to make sure it works. It does. AF is slow though. I need to update the firmware in my 35mm for it to work on the adaptor. My 70 and 120's are fine. It's not going to be great with dynamic shooting but considered shooting will be OK. Honestly, my first though was to switch to MF. It's exactly how I expected a PDAF lens to focus on a CDAF body.

 

As far as I'm aware you can't stack the S-Adaptor L with any of the S adaptors.

 

M glass works well on the SL. Most lenses are close or equal to their M performance. The Noctilux is actually a bit better on the SL (less PF). Fast lenses are much easier to focus accurately.

 

ISO noise wise above ISO 800 it's 2-3 stops better than the S2 I have. The SL does have a stop or so more noise than the best in market (A7S or A7R2, Pentax K1, Nikon D810) but it's still as good as most and ahead of others. It also has a reasonably pleasing grain structure unlike many. Colours also hold up well at higher ISO's compared to a lot of other 35mm sensors.

 

Gordon

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

David, this might contribute to your decision:

 

http://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2016/8/23/leica-sl

 

 

I can't understand this person's ranting. He rants about the focus, he rants about the possibility that Leica will drop the SL by pointing to the R system (uh, they made the R system cameras for over fifty years... even when they didn't sell all that well...!), he rants about all kinds of stuff and gives no concrete information. What does it mean for the sensor to be "better"? The SL has two step focus magnification, it's just not on the toggle button (it's on the LL button). What's this about selecting a focus point ... with a manual lens and manual focus? There are no focus points with a manual lens and manual focus, there's only the magnification area. Yes, it resets to center after you half-press the shutter release... You want focus points, put the SL24-90 lens (or any other SL or T lens) on the camera and set a focus point, the SL will return to it every time you enable magnification. 

 

Worthless article as far as I'm concerned. No information, just ranting about stuff in a way that shows little understanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have come to the conclusion that any camera review that offers opinions is at best viewed with suspicion and at worst viewed as worthless. 

 

I review of capabilities, functions, ergonomics and some basic facts and figures is helpful ...... but everyone falls into the trap of posting a completely unrepresentative selection of images that usually tell you precisely zero...... and then pontificate on what they show as if they are 'test images' and furthermore offer nothing sensible to compare them with. 

 

I've tried to produce valid comparisons and it is well nigh impossible to claim that they are free of faults and potential bias. Best to just post the comparisons and let the reader draw their own conclusions. 

 

The best test of a camera is the 'wallet test' ....... stump up the money ..... try it ..... and see if you really think your cash has been well spent. If not sell it on at a small loss and benefit from the wisdom your mistake has imparted .....

 

Most reviewers get one free to try for a while which inevitably colours their judgement ......

Edited by thighslapper
Link to post
Share on other sites

The best test of a camera is the 'wallet test' ....... stump up the money ..... try it ..... and see if you really think your cash has been well spent. If not sell it on at a small loss and benefit from the wisdom your mistake has imparted .....

 

+1.  I need to feel the camera and then shoot my subjects for a period of time... then I will know whether the camera will work for me or not...

 

Reviews and pictures that are part of reviews do very little for me...

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...