AlanJW Posted December 1, 2015 Share #101 Posted December 1, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) There's a review of the SL with 50mm lenses up on Reid Reviews. Whenever I log onto his page, I think to myself, never again. Then I see the lens he's testing is an out of production LTM Cosina Voigtlander Colour Skopar f/2.5 50mm lens, and I think why bother? I want to know how the SL performs with current Leica lenses, not $300 secondhand out of production Voigtlanders, or Zeiss or any other third party lens manufacturer's products. I want to know what happens with Leica's current lenses. The second lens is the CV f/1.5 Nokton ... ho hum. If I thought I could get a refund, I'd cancel my subscription ... I let my subscription lapse because of the impossible interface. I'd subscribe out of curiosity again if he fixes that. I notice that Luminous Landscape has now gone to a subscription model, so obviously there are other ways to protect content. I also agree that some of the analyses posted can get quite esoteric, not having any relation to the way I shoot. Yet there are others that are more pertinent, and I wish he would get some modern system that one could, for example read on a tablet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 1, 2015 Posted December 1, 2015 Hi AlanJW, Take a look here Reviews. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jrp Posted December 1, 2015 Share #102 Posted December 1, 2015 Another couple, for the record: http://www.focus-numerique.com/test-2690/compact-a-objectifs-interchangeables-leica-sl-typ-601-presentation-caracteristiques-1.html (a typically fair account) https://www.ephotozine.com/article/leica-sl--typ-601--expert-review-28314 (a little superficial) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 2, 2015 Share #103 Posted December 2, 2015 https://www.ephotozine.com/article/leica-sl--typ-601--expert-review-28314 (a little superficial) Cited: "Whilst there are many bold claims made about the Leica SL, it does not match the focus speeds of the fastest cameras in our tests, although is still very quick. Continuous shooting is very quick at 11fps, but does not match the high speed of the D4s and 1D X, which offer similar speeds with continuous AF. That's not to say that the Leica SL isn't an extremely quick camera, it is, it's just that as Leica are claiming it is faster than everything else, it means we are naturally disappointed when we find it isn't as quick as they say." Leica has probably tested the SL against the Canon 300D + EF 50/1.8 Also interesting to note how most reviewers seems to ignore that focusing speed and accuracy widely varies with different lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Lowe Posted December 2, 2015 Share #104 Posted December 2, 2015 I let my subscription lapse because of the impossible interface. I'd subscribe out of curiosity again if he fixes that. I notice that Luminous Landscape has now gone to a subscription model, so obviously there are other ways to protect content. I also agree that some of the analyses posted can get quite esoteric, not having any relation to the way I shoot. Yet there are others that are more pertinent, and I wish he would get some modern system that one could, for example read on a tablet. I understand your frustrations with RR's interface. Adobe announced today that they intend to kill Flash. It will continue to exist but in a diminished form under a new name. This doesn't mean that Sean Reid has to stop using it, of course. But it's now very much on a clock. Desktop and mobile web browsers will not keep supporting Flash for that long. Maybe a couple of years. Maybe less. Eventually, RR will have to move away from Flash in order to remain viable. I'm actually surprised he uses it now given that the iPhone and iPad don't support Flash. He's losing out on a lot of potential business. I don't regret my subscription but that is absolutely a lousy interface. And there are many better solutions available for RR to leverage. Pre-built, no less. Back on topic, are there any detailed reviews of the 24-90 lens besides PC Mag? I've been hoping to see one from Lloyd Chambers. His emphasis on judging a lens based on tech is not my favorite thing, but I do appreciate the comparisons and his thoroughness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted December 3, 2015 Share #105 Posted December 3, 2015 And another fair review http://www.lemondedelaphoto.com/Leica-SL-le-Leica-surprise,11502.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted December 24, 2015 Share #106 Posted December 24, 2015 http://www.shutterbug.com/content/leica-sl-mirrorless-camera-review (with colour chart). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted December 24, 2015 Share #107 Posted December 24, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Shutterbug does a nice job of covering color rendering (pretty accurate, and slightly undersaturated) in both still and video modes. And they have found the perfect model to use as an example in this area. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirage Posted December 24, 2015 Share #108 Posted December 24, 2015 Unfortunately Steve Huff's "thoughts on the SL" has just reinforced my view that he is just out to continue as a popularist blogger with no real or useful information to aid one's decision making when buying/using cameras. At least his initial reaction was honest – his review not so. Or isn't it true, that the Leica community was hoping for something like an "EVF M" or a "Q with interchangeable lens". But instead, Leica introduced the incarnation of the Tigerpanzer ignoring all possible benefits of "mirrorless" systems (hardware and firmware as well). Interesting camera though. But is Huff's initial reaction really not understandable? A lot of people were shocked at first by the camera. By the way, the best reviews came from Jono Slack and Kristian Dowling. While all of their positive statements are true, they mention the con-s as well. Not so Huff in his final review, which is a sugar dipped hymn - trying to befriend the Leica aficionados after his initial "thoughts on the SL". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirage Posted December 24, 2015 Share #109 Posted December 24, 2015 The truth is that Leica have decided not to produce a direct competitor to the Sony A7, but to build the first really substantial mirrorless camera Truth is, that Leica have decided not to produce a direct competitor to the M, and built another half-baken mirrorless camera. The crispy side (image and built quality) is delicious, but concept and ergonomics show Leica standing confused between three worlds: DSLR-s, rangefinders and EVF mirrorless cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 25, 2015 Share #110 Posted December 25, 2015 Well, we could spend a lot of time fretting about what Leica could have built, or what they didn't, or what they might (but won't) but we know what they did build, and actually, it's very good. I generally feel time is enter spent understanding what we have. Leica knows a bit more about this than I do, and probably you, for that matter. It is what it is, and it's worth finding out how it works, don't you think? Merry Christmas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted December 25, 2015 Share #111 Posted December 25, 2015 As we approach 2016 there is still nothing on the horizon to match the SL. Pentax's forthcoming FF offering appears to be a DSLR. Canon and Nikon do not have anything FF mirrorless … and Sony's transient offerings are probably still months behind the SL as regards EVF quality. Canon seem to be in a real pickle as regards developing an EF compatible mount suitable for FF mirrorless. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted December 25, 2015 Share #112 Posted December 25, 2015 Truth is, that Leica have decided not to produce a direct competitor to the M, and built another half-baken mirrorless camera. The crispy side (image and built quality) is delicious, but concept and ergonomics show Leica standing confused between three worlds: DSLR-s, rangefinders and EVF mirrorless cameras. Or do you mean "IMHO"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 25, 2015 Share #113 Posted December 25, 2015 As we approach 2016 there is still nothing on the horizon to match the SL. Pentax's forthcoming FF offering appears to be a DSLR. Canon and Nikon do not have anything FF mirrorless … and Sony's transient offerings are probably still months behind the SL as regards EVF quality. Canon seem to be in a real pickle as regards developing an EF compatible mount suitable for FF mirrorless. dunk Ok, just asking…Seeing that Nikon and Canon do yet offer any "top end" mirror less camera could that be because there's still quite a viable resistance to an EVF replacing the DSLR/OVF amongst many "pro" or serious amateur users? You can count me as one for sure….. Having tried the SL, and also owning the Q and a Panasonic GH4, ( that in itself has a pretty decent EFV ), I for one wouldn't choose an EVF camera over a camera that offers an optical or DSLR/mirror viewfinder simply because I don't consider the electronic viewfinders to be "there" yet, not by a long chalk despite their ever increasing specifications. The SL pales against the S, sure I know that they are different beasts if only in terms of pricing but still for me I'd rather wait to be able to afford or justify the extra costs of such a camera than go with something like the expense of a SL that's sure to be outdated technically in a few years. Not so much with OVF cameras, my Nikon D700 kit is still a very viable workhorse earning it's living some 5-6 years on, I personally don't think a EVF camera would have a similar "lifespan" before being outdated. Ok, now I'll stand back………. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 25, 2015 Share #114 Posted December 25, 2015 Sony's transient offerings are probably still months behind the SL as regards EVF quality. A camera without native lenses is nonsense, and Sony is years ahead of Leica as regards fine native mirrorless lenses. About the EVF, the one in the A7R2 is excellent, and I think the next wave of A7 cameras (in a few months) will probably have equal or better EVF than the SL. EVF apart, the Sony is technically a better camera at half the price. The only reason for me to get the SL would be compatibility with some of my M lenses, but considered the $4250 price difference and the size of the camera, I decided to keep the Sony and buy excellent native Zeiss lenses with the extra money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted December 25, 2015 Share #115 Posted December 25, 2015 A camera without native lenses is nonsense, and Sony is years ahead of Leica as regards fine native mirrorless lenses. About the EVF, the one in the A7R2 is excellent, and I think the next wave of A7 cameras (in a few months) will probably have equal or better EVF than the SL. EVF apart, the Sony is technically a better camera at half the price. The only reason for me to get the SL would be compatibility with some of my M lenses, but considered the $4250 price difference and the size of the camera, I decided to keep the Sony and buy excellent native Zeiss lenses with the extra money. Exactly … waves of them … transient offerings are Sony's speciality … I've got one and can't wait to get rid of it. Maybe their next A7 variant might have an EVF to equal the SL … but the SL is not just about its EVF. Amongst other attributes, its Leica lens' compatibilities score with Leica enthusiasts - and native SL lenses will be available. Furthermore, after reading reviews of Sony FF lenses some appear to be lacking edge performance - in fact considering the price they're weak and do not offer value for £$€. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 25, 2015 Share #116 Posted December 25, 2015 Canon seem to be in a real pickle as regards developing an EF compatible mount suitable for FF mirrorless. There cannot be such a thing as an "EF compatible mount for mirrorless" because the EF is a SLR mount, and its flange distance (computed to host a mirror) cannot be reduced, whether there is a mirror or not. All that is needed to use EF lenses on a mirrorless camera is an adapter, but there won't be many advantages at this point, as this results in almost the same size and weight of a SLR camera and lenses, just without the "R" (the mirror). Curiosly, "SLR" without the "R" is "SL" . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 25, 2015 Share #117 Posted December 25, 2015 Exactly … waves of them … transient offerings are Sony's speciality … I've got one and can't wait to get rid of it. Maybe their next A7 variant might have an EVF to equal the SL … but the SL is not just about its EVF. Amongst other attributes, its Leica lens' compatibilities score with Leica enthusiasts - and native SL lenses will be available. Furthermore, after reading reviews of Sony FF lenses some appear to be lacking edge performance - in fact considering the price they're weak and do not offer value for £$€. What you call "transient offerings" I call options and fast time to market. Besides, considered the prices, you can upgrade the best Sony camera twice and still pay the price of a single Leica camera. About edge performance of Sony lenses, you should cite which ones. It is easy to blame a $350 lens comparing it to a Leica equivalent that costs 10 times as much Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted December 25, 2015 Share #118 Posted December 25, 2015 What you call "transient offerings" I call options and fast time to market. Besides, considered the prices, you can upgrade the best Sony camera twice and still pay the price of a single Leica camera. About edge performance of Sony lenses, you should cite which ones. It is easy to blame a $350 lens comparing it to a Leica equivalent that costs 10 times as much Sony 24-70 FE which is not a cheap lens. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted December 25, 2015 Share #119 Posted December 25, 2015 Sony 24-70 FE which is not a cheap lens. I have to agree here. Granted, I can buy 4 of them for the price of a SL 24-90... but that zoom is something Zeiss/Sony need to update asap, and I am not touching it with a 10-foot pole. Also because I prefer primes. My Loxia 21/2.8 should be shipped very soon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 25, 2015 Share #120 Posted December 25, 2015 [...] About the EVF, the one in the A7R2 is excellent, and I think the next wave of A7 cameras (in a few months) will probably have equal or better EVF than the SL. EVF apart, the Sony is technically a better camera at half the price. The only reason for me to get the SL would be compatibility with some of my M lenses, but considered the $4250 price difference and the size of the camera, I decided to keep the Sony and buy excellent native Zeiss lenses with the extra money. Is there a reason why you did no have your A7R2 modified by Kolari Vision? Just curious as my little A7S mod. works fine with my M lenses (did not try them all though) so i wonder if a modified A7R2 could be a valid alternative to the SL601. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.