Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'DSLR'.
I had the chance to look at the new SL today and here are my thoughts, if anyone is interested! The first impression - even for someone who uses a DSLR - is that the body and lens are big, the lens particularly so. It's a very hefty lump of metal and glass. I think the 'thinness' of the body (compared to a DSLR) actually makes it feel bigger, due to the body/lens balance. The focus/zoom rings on the lens have a nice weighty and smooth feel to them. Very Leica-like. I do wonder though, why Leica couldn't make a lens with a constant f2.8 aperture at the size it is. I have said before that the grip looks like it might not be so comfortable as a more ergonomically designed body, and some others have said they have found it uncomfortable in prolonged use. Well shortly before looking at the SL I had looked at an R8 body. The R8 is often criticised for being too big and bulky, but actually it fits the hands very well indeed due to its shape - it was clearly designed to do so, hence the 'bulk'. It's a pity, IMHO, that Leica didn't follow some of the design cues of the R8/9 with the new camera. That said, the body is very well made and everything has a nice quality feel about it, as you would expect. I quite liked the lack of writing and symbols although it does mean that if you pick up the camera for the first time - as I did - you can't easily find your way as you can with say a Canon or Nikon. Users will need to spend a lot of quality time getting to know their camera to the point where using the controls becomes like touch typing! I was particularly keen to see how the EVF looked. I'm no fan of EVF's, they have always seemed very laggy and I find it uncomfortable viewing a small TV screen through a small hole! With a compact I actually prefer the LCD screen on the back of the camera as a viewfinder. I have read comments from some that they have found the SL's EVF so good that it is difficult to tell that it's not an optical finder. Well, sorry to say, I don't agree. It still is very much an EVF, albeit the best one yet. It's big and clear, a huge improvement over any others I've seen/tried. When you press the shutter there is a momentary blackout which feels very much like using DSLR. So, the SL is impressive as EVF's go, but….it's still an EVF! I accept that will be a big tick for some users though. Focus on AF seemed comparable to my Canon's as far as speed (on single point AF inside) but certainly didn't feel any faster. No question the SL is an impressive camera, and it's great to see Leica produce something truly new and market leading. I wasn't able to take any photos but from what we've seen so far the lens/sensor both perform well. Would I buy it? I can see the appeal of the SL, and it would be fun to try it out properly, but even if the cost weren't an issue for me, I wouldn't choose it. For my purposes, I still prefer the DSLR. I have a film M and some lenses and if I wanted to go digital with those I'd choose an M, for the more compact size and rangefinder focussing. I don't think the SL does anything better than a DSLR or an M, but obviously it offers the versatility of accepting pretty much any lens on one body, which will be a big benefit for some.
Ideally, I would use my Leica M10 only with Leica or other M-mount lenses. However, given the advantages of high quality DSLR cameras for telephoto photography and optical stabilization (e.g., for whales and other sea and land wildlife, or for people or other relatively small subjects far away), I wonder how many of the photographers on this forum would use a DSLR and telephoto lens in addition to or instead of the Leica M10 with a 135mm or shorter lens? I have DSLR lenses (prime and zoom) that, in the telephoto range, go from 135mm up to 600mm. In turn, the faster of my lenses can take teleconverters up to double those focal lengths, and there is also a 1.5 apparent increase if using a half-frame sensor instead of full-frame. I have both the smaller Nikon D500 DX frame and a D800 FX frame. My current plan on vacation trips where a long focal length would be useful, will be to take (1) my Leica M10 with perhaps a 135mm lens in addition to one or more of my "normal" focal lengths (right now I have 35mm and 50mm and am considering a 75mm), plus (2) a Nikon camera body with a long lens. I rarely use a tripod. Thus, for lenses in the long range of focal lengths, image stabilization has been important to me. So . . . I will be very interested in what others do in regard to sticking with Leica M-mount lenses when they are photographing people, wildlife or other relatively small objects at long distances. And for those of you using a Leica M-mount 135mm lens, do you find any problem with its lacking image stabilization? I think I would buy a Visoflex 020 EVF for use with the 135 not only to see the image better than in the small frame-lined portion of the optical viewfinder, but also to hold the camera more still against my face rather than holding it away from me while looking at Live View.