Leica SL (Typ 601) - Mirrorless System Camera Without Compromise

[siddhaarta]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Peter,

 

Interestingly there is no listing for adapters on the SL accessories list that I could see. I don't know if M lenses need an adapter, I assume they do. Certainly R lenses will or use the R to M plus M adapter. However I never like multiple adapters, no matter how good quality they are. 

 

Wilson

There will be a direct R-Adapter, but only in one years time ...

[dkCambridgeshire]

According to Sean Reid, performance with critical RF lenses IS NOT on par with Leica M 240. Surely, not all RF lenses are critical. He will publish more articles on this topic, comparing RF 9 lenses (15-50mm) with SL and M 240

 

Sean has requested that his reviews are not broadcast for the benefit of non-subscribers.

 

dunk

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[IkarusJohn]

Sean has requested that his reviews are not broadcast for the benefit of non-subscribers.

 

dunk

 

You know, I re-subscribed (against my better judgment) to read his reviews of the SL.  So far, I know what he thinks, but I'm no better informed.

 

This request, Dunk, just makes me wish I hadn't re-subscribed.  HIs fixation with securing subscribers and not being copied or quoted by those who don't pay him I find a complete turn off.  A really big turn off.

Edited October 21, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[lct]

Sean is a kind guy but he can hardly change the laws of copyright. 

[IkarusJohn]

Sean is a kind guy but he can hardly change the laws of copyright. 

 

What does that mean?

 

The laws of copyright are very different the World over, but generally quotation, properly credited, for the sake of discussion is permitted.  Copyright is a property right that rests with the originator of the work - the owner can prohibit reproduction without permission, he or she can license use, sell all the rights to it, but the owner cannot prohibit reference to it, discussion of it or limited quotation, in most jurisdictions.

 

Here (and in the UK), the best explanation I have had is that buying a work is like buying a book - you can keep it and read it as many times as you like; you can give it to your friends to read it, provided it is not re-published or broadcast, and you can make a copy provided it is used in substitution (i.e., a working or marked draft or backup) and not in addition to the original copy.

 

The US has different rules - and "fair use" is one of them.

 

I prefer to think of the hamburger mentality - people want it now and they want it while it's hot.  They'll pay for it.  Once it's cold, they won't.  I write a lot of legal and industry stuff which I post free on my website - I remain ahead of the competition by producing more and being faster.  Adding to the pool of understanding and promoting discussion is more important to me.

 

Where Sean is concerned, you can only access the material for so long as you have a subscription, so it is a limited access right.  I pay a fortune annually for online legal publications, and I can download any article I like for so long as my subscription is current.  Not one of those subscriptions (i-law, LexisNexis, ThompsonBrookers or WesLaw) only lets me read online when I have a current subscription.  I find that ... less than useful.  Michael's LFI at least lets me keep my magazines - they don't disappear off my computer and I don't have to post the hard copies back if I don't renew.

 

More critically, I wouldn't mind renewing (issues about some content and vegetables aside) if I could read the thing on my iPad, offline and if the interface didn't drive me completely crazy.  That has little to do with copyright.  If I wanted to copy his content, I'm quite sure I could - I don't see the point, frankly.

 

Cheers

John

Edited October 21, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[ravinj]

Build quality.

 

To bash someone's head or use as a weapon, then yes I agree. Otherwise not. 

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You know, I re-subscribed (against my better judgment) to read his reviews of the SL.  So far, I know what he thinks, but I'm no better informed.

 

This request, Dunk, just makes me wish I hadn't re-subscribed.  HIs fixation with securing subscribers and not being copied or quoted by those who don't pay him I find a complete turn off.  A really big turn off.

 

It's a matter of respecting his wishes - and as a project his review of the SL is ongoing i.e. a work in progress. So far I've certainly learnt facts from it that were not available elsewhere and expect to learn more as more is published. 

 

dunk

[IkarusJohn]

Apart from my teasing him about being the vegetable man, and perhaps some of the subjects of his photos, my comments are not meant to be disrespectful at all.  It's just that I don't really see asking us not to discuss his reviews as being realistic - it suggests some parallel world where you pay the subscriptions and he will share his secrets, but don't tell anyone else.

[earleygallery]

But do we need reviews of reviews? If you're interested pay up and go read Reid! 

 

The worst thing about any new Leica product is the almost endless stream of "my review of….." posts that swamp the forums for months afterwards. 

[IkarusJohn]

I agree with that; but isn't that the nature of forums?  We all winnow the grain from the chaff, and at times help people with the repeated dumb question the search function would answer.  I must confess I get a bit cranky with people who continuously post "Use the search function" - in the time it took to post that rudeness, they could answer the question; a rude posters just go straight into my burgeoning Ignore list (I don't seem to be missing any gold doing this).

 

Perhaps it's an indication of my profession, but when I cannot hold the camera in my hands and form my own judgment, I have no choice but to read specs and reviews.  I have never had the opportunity to try a Leica camera or lens before I've bought it - none.  That means I have no choice but to read what Jono and others write with care.  So, professionally, and in practical terms for photography, quoting, analysing, testing and discussing the opinions of others can be very useful.

 

I would never have known of Huff'n'Puff's fixation with communicating with the dead if it weren't for this forum, or of Thorsten's Scientology (which I have to admit does colour my views on him a bit, and not in a good way).  Sean's reviews would be so much better if they could be discussed, in my view.  Imagine if part of the subscription gave you access to not only the articles, but to discussion about them (like Ming does, and also on Pistonheads, though neither of those are subscription sites).

 

Stifling the circulation of information, and not allowing discussion and debate goes against pretty much everything I and my profession hold dear.

Edited October 21, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[dkCambridgeshire]

But do we need reviews of reviews? If you're interested pay up and go read Reid! 

 

The worst thing about any new Leica product is the almost endless stream of "my review of….." posts that swamp the forums for months afterwards. 

 

Worse than all the usual negativity from the armchair Leica board director wannabes who have never used the cameras / lenses? I will never forget al the balderdash posted by the naysayers following the release of the X-Vario. If they'd paid more attention to Jono's and others' reviews and maybe visited a dealer to try the camera before embarking on their 'let's trash the X Vario' campaign it would have been more to their credit. 

 

dunk

[ravinj]

I can see why Sean R would not want the key takeaway(s) of his reviews posted online as that is the content that most persons subscribe and pay for. For example, now that I know that M wides do not perform as well on the SL as the M240, I have no interest in subscribing to his site.

 

Coming back to the SL, here is my review: It is a great camera. Discussion about price, bulk, weight, 24MP vs 36MP, comparison to A7Rii is pointless. It is a unique beast and I am sure Leica is not worrying about meeting the price point for A7Rii or some other brand. They have a hold on a certain segment and will cater to it.

 

It would be foolish for such a small company to compete on the price or some other parameter like size just so they can create something that already exists in the market. So they did what they are good at: create a product that no one dares to produce at a price no one Japanese brand will dare to command. I wonder how many would buy the A7Rii if it was priced at $6,000. But Leica will sure sell as many SLs as they can produce. And when they can't (in 2018), the price will drop, like that of S2 and S006 on "special deals". 

Edited October 22, 2015 by ravinj

[k-hawinkler]

I can see why Sean R would not want the key takeaway(s) of his reviews posted online as that is the content that most persons subscribe and pay for. For example, now that I know that M wides do not perform as well on the SL as the M240, I have no interest in subscribing to his site.

 

Coming back to the SL, here is my review: It is a great camera. Discussion about price, bulk, weight, 24MP vs 36MP, comparison to A7Rii is pointless. It is a unique beast and I am sure Leica is not worrying about meeting the price point for A7Rii or some other brand. They have a hold on a certain segment and will cater to it.

 

It would be foolish for such a small company to compete on the price or some other parameter like size just so they can create something that already exists in the market. So they did what they are good at: create a product that no one dares to produce at a price no one Japanese brand will dare to command. I wonder how many would buy the A7Rii if it was priced at $6,000. But Leica will sure sell as many SLs as they can produce. And when they can't (in 2018), the price will drop, like that of S2 and S006 on "special deals". 

 

Pointless - not for me.  If it had IBIS and more pixels I would be inclined to get one. 

My R lenses do very well on my A7r2.  Stopping down manually is not a biggie for me.

Edited October 22, 2015 by k-hawinkler

[ravinj]

All of these are opinions, so feel free to compare, but there really is no comparison in my opinion!

 

I don't care about IBIS as I always use longer lenses with a tripod. But I have seen some of your long lens photos (much better than what I can do btw) so I know why you would like IBIS.

[digitalfx]

You know, I re-subscribed (against my better judgment) to read his reviews of the SL.  So far, I know what he thinks, but I'm no better informed.

 

This request, Dunk, just makes me wish I hadn't re-subscribed.  HIs fixation with securing subscribers and not being copied or quoted by those who don't pay him I find a complete turn off.  A really big turn off.

 

The bigger turn off is his format...as a subscriber we are punished. It is the most difficult way to read an article online, scrolling content is a PITA and being forced into the box viewer is pathetic. Every time I renew I say this is the last time...I wish he would consider his subscribers and stop being so paranoid. It is truly painful to read his content. I would actually pay more if he would just give us a real website.

Edited October 22, 2015 by digitalfx

[k-hawinkler]

All of these are opinions, so feel free to compare, but there really is no comparison in my opinion!

 

I don't care about IBIS as I always use longer lenses with a tripod. But I have seen some of your long lens photos (much better than what I can do btw) so I know why you would like IBIS.

 

Thanks.  BTW I agree with your main point about the market Leica competes in.  

Once Leica has more native lenses then they actually might take some business away from Canikon,

[barjohn]

Seriously?

 

Where did that come from?

 

It is "known" that the Q uses a Panasonic auto-focus system, and I assume that (or something similar) might be carried forward into this camera, but that hardly counts as "mostly Panasonic internals"

 

What else has the partnership brought to the party? Not the sensor. Not the Maestro chip. I am sure that Leica can design and build their own bodies.

The Maestro processor is not made by Leica.  If I recall correctly it is made by Panasonic for Leica (might have been Fuji).  Most speculation is that the foundry making the sensor is the Panasonic foundry (there are several threads here and elsewhere that surmise the same).  I have the Q and love it and I don't care that Panasonic may in fact make most of the internals.  I suspect that the firmware is also developed by Panasonic to Leica's specifications.

[40mm f/2]

The Maestro processor is not made by Leica.  If I recall correctly it is made by Panasonic for Leica (might have been Fuji).  Most speculation is that the foundry making the sensor is the Panasonic foundry (there are several threads here and elsewhere that surmise the same).  I have the Q and love it and I don't care that Panasonic may in fact make most of the internals.  I suspect that the firmware is also developed by Panasonic to Leica's specifications.

Nikon does not make its own sensors. Leica as a relative small company needs to buy parts and as long these parts are state of the art I am o.k. with it. The EVF is but the sensor may be not. I do not care as much about pixel count but what about dynamic range?

Edited October 22, 2015 by 40mm f/2

[zlatkob]

I can see why Sean R would not want the key takeaway(s) of his reviews posted online as that is the content that most persons subscribe and pay for. For example, now that I know that M wides do not perform as well on the SL as the M240, I have no interest in subscribing to his site.

 

As a former subscriber (and possibly future one) I can suggest that learning the takeaway point or headline can be enough to encourage a subscription as well as deter one.  You may now know that M wides do not perform as well on the SL as on the M240, but you don't know whether the difference is significant or for which lenses it may matter, if any, or under what circumstances.  So someone may still subscribe to learn those details.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[IkarusJohn]

Here's what Jono says:

 

I am intending to post the original files and the comparison between the Sony A7 mark 2 and the Leica SL in a later article, but suffice to say, that although the edges and corners of the M240 were slightly better than the SL, the results for the SL were hugely better than those from the Sony A7 mark 2.

 

For LCT, Jono also says it's easy to press the bottom left button for focus magnification with your thumb while the camera is at eye level.  He doesn't say which thumb ...

Edited October 22, 2015 by IkarusJohn