Deliberate1 Posted August 24, 2016 Share #1 Posted August 24, 2016 (edited) 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 August 24, 2016 by Deliberate1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 24, 2016 Posted August 24, 2016 Hi Deliberate1, Take a look here SL questions from an S user. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
darylgo Posted August 24, 2016 Share #2 Posted August 24, 2016 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 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share #3 Posted August 24, 2016 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 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted August 24, 2016 Share #4 Posted August 24, 2016 (edited) 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 August 24, 2016 by steppenw0lf 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted August 24, 2016 Share #5 Posted August 24, 2016 (edited) 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 August 24, 2016 by steppenw0lf 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rriley Posted August 24, 2016 Share #6 Posted August 24, 2016 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. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted August 24, 2016 Share #7 Posted August 24, 2016 (edited) 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: 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 August 24, 2016 by ramarren 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted August 24, 2016 Author Share #8 Posted August 24, 2016 I think that's pretty decent, certainly good enough for my needs. Very impressive. Was that hand-held? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted August 24, 2016 Share #9 Posted August 24, 2016 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? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted August 24, 2016 Share #10 Posted August 24, 2016 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 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted August 25, 2016 Share #11 Posted August 25, 2016 Very impressive. Was that hand-held? Thank you! Yes, hand held and without IS. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted August 29, 2016 Share #12 Posted August 29, 2016 David, this might contribute to your decision: http://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2016/8/23/leica-sl 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted August 29, 2016 Author Share #13 Posted August 29, 2016 David, this might contribute to your decision: http://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2016/8/23/leica-sl Daryl, very informative article. Obliged for it. David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted August 29, 2016 Share #14 Posted August 29, 2016 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted August 31, 2016 Share #15 Posted August 31, 2016 (edited) 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 September 1, 2016 by thighslapper Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VVJ Posted August 31, 2016 Share #16 Posted August 31, 2016 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... 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.