Willy ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° Posted October 21, 2015 Share #121 Posted October 21, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) In an effort to break up the current trend of "bitter-sweat" opinions, I would like all of you to please refer to the Leica SL Review by Jono Slack. As I read it, I found it unfortunate that Jono was forced to test a camera that was conceived and built on a very cohesive, essential and indivisible marriage of lenses and camera, with non-proprietary lenses. Even with that handicap in mind, it’s a great review for the SL (or mini S), which happens to be an optically appealing design. I am getting the feeling that this “marriage” of lenses having been conceived for that particular body (and vice versa), is the new concept that Leica has created and wants to sell. Accordingly, the frowned upon deceiving F stops of the zoom are of no consequence as is the alleged deficient MP count. The intrinsic electronics of the body and the finely crafted motorized lenses (just like the S) create a complete IQ, and underscore that creation of “bare essentials“ that can only work perfectly when working in unison - no matter what size and weight. I hope the SL becomes a success story for Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Hi Willy ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°, Take a look here first images of the new SL. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jto555 Posted October 21, 2015 Share #122 Posted October 21, 2015 I'm not talking about the M. Yes it's just launched but are you seriously going to buy an SL and then use it for T lenses? APS-C & 10 MP ? I guess there are dafter ways to waste money…. If you are right about the T lenses changing the camera to an APS-C with just 10MP the yes it is a waste of money for everybody, including Leica. I think the camera will be a great camera, and could be a great system if given time. But judging from the reaction it is getting I just hope Leica have not bet the company on this camera!!! I would say there is a lot of anxiety in the Leica boardroom today... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 21, 2015 Share #123 Posted October 21, 2015 If you are right about the T lenses changing the camera to an APS-C with just 10MP the yes it is a waste of money for everybody, including Leica. I think the camera will be a great camera, and could be a great system if given time. But judging from the reaction it is getting I just hope Leica have not bet the company on this camera!!! I would say there is a lot of anxiety in the Leica boardroom today... Just going on Jono's review of the camera. Obviously the T lenses won't cover the FF sensor so it automatically crops down to the area of an APS-C sensor, which from the SL's FF sensor produces a 10MP image. I don't see this as an issue, in that I don't see the point in spending £5K on a body one is going to use with lenses for a crop sensor. But it does at least allow anyone with the T to also use their lenses on the S if they wish to (I can't use my Canon EFS lenses on a FF body). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted October 21, 2015 Share #124 Posted October 21, 2015 Leica takes pride in the fact that the SL works with lenses from any Leica system. It would have been odd to exclude T/TL lenses, especially when they use the exact same L mount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 21, 2015 Share #125 Posted October 21, 2015 It would have been odd to exclude T/TL lenses, especially when they use the exact same L mount. Agreed. But what is really odd is 10 MP in 2015. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Lss- Posted October 21, 2015 Share #126 Posted October 21, 2015 It would have been odd to exclude T/TL lenses, especially when they use the exact same L mount. What is the difference between T and TL lenses please? I have only seen the TL line so far mentioned in the rumors leading to unveiling of the Leica SL. Edit. Okay, immediately found one article explaining that the mount (which I assumed was called T) is now called L bayonet, and thus future T lenses are TL lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter L Posted October 21, 2015 Share #127 Posted October 21, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) A fantastic camera, a profesional photographer's tool. For me unfortunately somewhat too pricey and too heavy, as I am aging and don't want to handle and carrie a large heavy camera. The largest camera I have owned is the R9 with a bunch of lenses, surprisingly this camera in spite of it's large size was very comfortable in the hand and easy to keep steady. I am happy with the small sized Leica T with 3 lenses, and the Leica Q that I am getting tomorrow , they cover all my needs and then some. This is an exiting time to be involved in photography, I think that Leica has done a great job with providing the world's photographers with fantastic cameras, something for everyone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted October 21, 2015 Share #128 Posted October 21, 2015 All in all I am not disappointed, I would even say I am glad this was not a new M. It could only mean the upcoming M might use even a better sensor. This one looks quite impressive at high ISO. Add a bit more dynamic range and I might be ready for the new M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 21, 2015 Share #129 Posted October 21, 2015 All a bit hypothetical for the moment, but I WILL be interested to see reviews of M lens performance on this body (and I AM interested to see if the EVF technology Leica have developed for the SL can be brought across to whatever replaces the M240 (probably as an external Viso). Certainly interesting times... I can't think of anything less I would like to do with an SL then put on M lenses 1. They look ridiculous on it 2. The M240 (and its successor), MP and M7 overall are a much better platform for them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jto555 Posted October 21, 2015 Share #130 Posted October 21, 2015 Well, I think we can guess what sensor the next M will have. And not a bad sensor at all, with good high ISO. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Black Posted October 21, 2015 Share #131 Posted October 21, 2015 Interestingly, I think a lot of us might have been thinking differently if the M adapter had been immediately available and testing had been done using these lenses rather than the AF monsters that we've seen thus far. I have the sneaking feeling that the SL might begin to make sense if the large zooms are seen as occasional tools and the M lenses are seen as the go for kit. If performance with M wides is good AND if long M lenses like the 135 A-T are easy to focus manually with the view finder, then the SL COULD be seen as a useful adjunct to an M. Carry an M-240 + an SL along with either existing R 80-200 or equivalent and you have a viable two body system with better reach than the M alone + the capacity to shoot 4K video. Shell out for the dedicated lenses later on if you feel the need (or maybe even find that there are adapters which will let you use Canon/Nikon zooms with the Leica SL body... All a bit hypothetical for the moment, but I WILL be interested to see reviews of M lens performance on this body (and I AM interested to see if the EVF technology Leica have developed for the SL can be brought across to whatever replaces the M240 (probably as an external Viso). Certainly interesting times... The Leica SL / M adapter is available right now - it's the Leica M / T adapter. The accessories are listed on the Leica page (here) and the adapter is #18771 which has been available for some time now. It reads the 6-bit coding which is nice, but I don't think it supports any type of auto magnification. This adapter works as-is and does not need a firmware update (I've already asked my dealer who is in Germany; he verified this with someone at Leica). For now Leica's approach to getting R lenses on the SL is via adapter stacking - this T adapter + the Leica M/R adapter. The Leica SL / R adapter eliminates the stacking and I think it may support ROM contacts (trying to verify that, though maybe Leica has not decided yet because this adapter's release is a long ways away... Autumn 2016). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Black Posted October 21, 2015 Share #132 Posted October 21, 2015 Regarding the SL's size, it's only ~10mm wider than a M and stands ~20mm taller. I weighed my M (M-P) and it's 851 grams - that includes: camera, Leica battery, 1.25x, Arte de Mano 1/2 case (open back), Thumbs-up and A&A rope strap. The M isn't exactly light. With the SL I would not use 1/2 case or strap, so for me the SL's 847g vs the M's 851g is a wash. The SL/M adapter will add alittle weight, but then so does the EVF on the M. I also have an A7II with the Sony vertical grip and the RRS L-Bracket. That little piggy (with a Novoflex M adapter attached) tips the scale at 1060g. Obviously the SL's volume a bit bigger than the M-240's, but some of the pictures on line are very deceiving. As for the SL lenses... those are just bonkers. The 24-90mm is nearly the same weight as the 30-90mm S and that 30-90mm S felt heavy on the Leica S...!... I've yet to see a published weight for the 50 Lux, but its volume looks really big. I'll stick with M and R lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted October 21, 2015 Share #133 Posted October 21, 2015 There's a fortune to be made by the first person to design a small, FF, AF lens system. Bodies could be made smaller in proportion (given the size of the lenses, there was no pressure on Leica to come up with anything smaller.) IS doesn't have to go in the lens - I'd be interested in Leica's rationale for putting it there. After all, they have included a sensor cleaning system. IS in the lenses is a bit of an unnecessary commitment to future large lenses, I'd have thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Black Posted October 21, 2015 Share #134 Posted October 21, 2015 Does Panasonic offer stabilized sensors? If so, then the question is quite valid (why did Leica go with stabilized lenses?) I'm guessing Leica used as much Panasonic "tech" as they could. It shortens development time, presumably lowers cost, and minimizes their patent infringement exposure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdw Posted October 21, 2015 Share #135 Posted October 21, 2015 Does Panasonic offer stabilized sensors? If so, then the question is quite valid (why did Leica go with stabilized lenses?) I'm guessing Leica used as much Panasonic "tech" as they could. It shortens development time, presumably lowers cost, and minimizes their patent infringement exposure. FWIW, stabilized sensors work best with a particular set of lenses on one mount. When you throw many different adapted lenses on, you'd have to configure the in-body stabilization manually (as with the A7R2). This may be a factor why it's in-lens, not in-camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 21, 2015 Share #136 Posted October 21, 2015 FWIW, stabilized sensors work best with a particular set of lenses on one mount. When you throw many different adapted lenses on, you'd have to configure the in-body stabilization manually (as with the A7R2). This may be a factor why it's in-lens, not in-camera. Sorry, this sentence "does not compute" Yes, IBIS works at best when it knows lens parameters, but this is always the case with native lenses. On the other hand, having to set the FL is better than nothing with M or R lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 21, 2015 Share #137 Posted October 21, 2015 There's a fortune to be made by the first person to design a small, FF, AF lens system. Sounds more like a good way to lose a small fortune. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted October 21, 2015 Share #138 Posted October 21, 2015 There's a fortune to be made by the first person to design a small, FF, AF lens system. If you want small and AF, go MFT (but then even MFT cameras and lenses aren’t as small as the Pentax Auto 110 was, using the same image format back in the analogue era). If you want small and FF, go M. But small, AF and FF – nope. Ain’t gonna happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 21, 2015 Share #139 Posted October 21, 2015 .... as Michael says ....... you are fighting against the laws of physics and optics ...... if you want fast apertures on full frame for low light and shallow DOF you are looking at big lenses ...... add AF and bigger still ..... add Zoom and bigger still ..... add high quality and correction of as much of the aberrations as possible and you are up to S and SL size lenses. You can stuff it on a small camera with a large mount if you like ...... and have crappy battery life and fiddly controls ....... but that hardly makes sense either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrödinger's cat Posted October 21, 2015 Share #140 Posted October 21, 2015 What are you but self-centered egotists frightened of some kind of fashionista putting you down? I have no idea what this means, but count me in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.