Silver Fresco Posted October 21, 2015 Share #1 Posted October 21, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) As an M and R user, I'm wondering what many of the complaints about this camera are. Having tried an ME, and then selling it, and contemplating butchering my R lenses for either a Nikon mount or a Canon mount (some of which cannot be used on either full frame system), this, to me, seems like the perfect solution. No fiddly visoflex type attachment for the M, either, or shaving mirrors (or completely discarding some lenses for the R on Canikon). I'm actually liking what I'm seeing, and get the feeling that Leica are listening to their customers. Still, I could be wrong. For me, this is basically two cameras in one (the price comments seem to ring hollow, when, if I remember correctly, everyone was complaining about a 7K rangefinder when it came out). I also like the idea of a bit of size to the body. Having tried an a7... it's just too small and finicky, and doesn't go well with some of the bigger R lenses. I like the idea of a Leica body that is dedicated to Leica Lenses across a broad spectrum with a bit of heft. However, I'm feeling I'm one of a minority here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Hi Silver Fresco, Take a look here Am I the only one liking what Leica is offering here?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
zlatkob Posted October 21, 2015 Share #2 Posted October 21, 2015 You're right, it's the perfect solution for someone with R lenses, with the option to also use M lenses. It's a one-camera solution for all Leica lenses. It uses all of the advantages of mirrorless other than the potential for smallness. The body size makes sense too, especially for R lenses. A smaller body would make sense if it were dedicated to M lenses. The body size is comparable to the Nikon D750, but the SL is much thinner. And the D750 is not one of the really big DSLR's. People ask, "why make a mirrorless body as big as a DSLR?" I think the answer is that it's not as big as big DSLR (e.g., D810, D4S, 1DX), and yet it can take M lenses, which no DSLR can. At the same time, it's not as uncomfortably small for using larger lenses as the Sony A7 series. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjb Posted October 21, 2015 Share #3 Posted October 21, 2015 I too really like a lot of what the SL offers. I like the industrial design. Very pleased that Leica finally jumped into full frame, I/L autofocus segment. They did so via the mirrorless category, so as not to foolishly attack the fortified hill of DSLRs already occupied by Canon, Nikon. Highest res EVF, reportedly very quiet shutter, big buffer and FAST frame rate, weather sealed. Simple UI and assignable button layout. All very good. My biggest gripe is price, which I think is $4K+ more than it should be for body + lens. Other issues include just 24MP, no phase detect, no IBIS, fixed LCD. Not sure how fast the autofocus really is, the low light capability, and the dynamic range. Now all that's just so much armchair quarterbacking, so next I need to grab an SD card and go try it in the store and out on the sidewalk, taking the JPEG and RAW files home for examination and post edit. Even if if the typ 601 isn't what I need, my hope is the typ 602 will be spot on, whenever they launch their next SL! But please, Leica, bring the absurd pricing DOWN so more of us can justify the purchase! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 21, 2015 Share #4 Posted October 21, 2015 I admit to have hated the design at first glance, but I'm starting to be convinced it's going to be a success. First the camera is not big, I think it's well sized. The A7 is way too small even for my smallish hands. I used to get my fingers stuck between the grip and lens at several occasions. I like the size of the SL, build, features, basically everything except the lenses, or lack of them. That is why I won't buy one until at least the 50 lux is released. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
firststream Posted October 21, 2015 Share #5 Posted October 21, 2015 I don't need a $250.00 battery. I don't need weather-sealing, because my lenses aren't; nor are yours. I don't need professional dual-memory card slots. I'm an M-lens user, so I don't need an SL-mount adapter. (You do, and I'd happily pay the extra $600 for an M-mount adaptor to make all of us happy! ) There's no reason an M-mount lens user should have to pay more to use an SL body when the M240 is available. So why should you as an R-mount user, have to? Leica has cleverly added on professional upgrades which both increases the price point in actuality, and as a way to hide the exorbitant premium for the privilege of universal adaptability. I shudder to think what the next M body will cost...it may make the SL cheap, by comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 21, 2015 Share #6 Posted October 21, 2015 The battery costs 107 € at Leica Shop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 21, 2015 Share #7 Posted October 21, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I like it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted October 21, 2015 Share #8 Posted October 21, 2015 Me too. And think it's a great specialty addition to an everyday M user. Nicely conceived and done on many fronts. I might need one in a year or two. No, seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted October 21, 2015 Share #9 Posted October 21, 2015 The weight with the kit lens is what bothers me. I may well still end up buying it because it would be a great unitary travel camera with the kit lens. I would have been equally happy with a lighter, slower lens, especially having looked at its high ISO performance. I don't expect shallow DOF from a zoom lens, as long as I can mount my fast lenses to get that when wanted. I just felt that with a bit more development, they could have shrunk the dimensions and weight a bit. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Black Posted October 21, 2015 Share #10 Posted October 21, 2015 I like the SL and as the owner of many M and R lenses (amongst other SLR lenses), it's an attractive option. The price is annoying - I expected something closer to the $4995 (USD) price point. A 24 MP sensor when Nikon is 36 MP, Canon is 50 MP and Sony is 42.5 M M; that's the annoying part... I've printed plenty of M9 files at 24x36 and the results are good, but the results are better when pushing a 36 MP file to the printer. 36 MP would just feel more future-proof. 24 MP feels a bit like planned obsolescence... If Leica can deliver robust adapters optimized for the SL, I think that will make alot of Leica owners. "Optimized" for me means - • M adapter supports auto-magnification; currently I do not think this is the case • R adapter supports the R lens ROM contacts - thus populating EXIF and improving auto-ISO & flash performance (it'll know the focal length) Whether or not SL replaces my M-P is yet to be seen, but that's my hope. I've already paired the M-P with a Sony A7II set-up, so the SL offers a chance reduce from two cameras down to one. That's a very attractive proposition for my situation. Looking ahead, I do worry that Leica is on the wrong path in regards to the SL lenses. They are too "S" in their size. The product pictures of the 50 Lux ASPH SL seem to indicate something quite large. I thought the Sony 35mm F1.4 AF lens was big on the A7II (it's 1.4 pounds). The 50 Lux ASPH SL looks even bigger... eek...!... So I'm very focused on the adapter side. The AF lenses look like a no-go (for me). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 21, 2015 Share #11 Posted October 21, 2015 The 50 lux seems to be just slightly smaller than the sigma art in an online side by side comparison. It may be huge in RF standards but that's how a modern 50/1.4 looks like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdw Posted October 21, 2015 Share #12 Posted October 21, 2015 No, people just love to whine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbers Posted October 21, 2015 Share #13 Posted October 21, 2015 I think the many arrogant and self assured - from the hip -negative comments about the SL, dont take in to account what Leica have said they are trying to achieve with this camera. It is NOT targeted at the Sony R7 users. It is targeted at a certain group of professional users. The way I understand it, we should rather compare the qualities of the SL to the Nikon 4DS or the Canon EOS-1D X - NOT the Sony 7 - whatever!!, which is a very good enthusiast camera rather than a professional camera. This type of professional camera doesnt require resolution BUT: high Speed frames/sec, Perfect AF and good ISO, solid build, weather sealing and high reliability - All hallmarks of the forementionioned Nikon and Canon. To my understanding, Leica have introduced a very strong candidate which sets the standard in some of these parameters, to compete with these super-effecient picture machines. BUT using an industry standard EVF. If Leica can deliver (and NO ONE knows yet) the pricerange is the same as the Canon and Nikon. I personally think it makes sense, as it definately fills a gap between the M and S. I dont know if this camera delivers all that it promises, but it seems pretty clear, that Leica has put a lot of R&D in to pushing the boundaries of several industry benchmarks. I think they deserve a lot of credit and respect for this. Is this camera beautiful? Im not sure but I do know, that it is a lot nicer than the Nikon, Canon or SONY mentioned in this post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
janki Posted October 21, 2015 Share #14 Posted October 21, 2015 It has been practically impossible for me to read everything that has been written and said about the new Leica SL. But it seems that the majority are dissatisfied. Then I think it's okay to tell, that at least I find this camera absolutely perfect. The Sony A7 series and the Fuji XT becomes too small for my hands. Nikon's top models are far too big to lug around. Besides, I've never been able to reconcile myself with Nikon exaggerated rounded design. I do not like "pop-up flashes" either. It's only the price of the Leica SL that makes me hesitant. The country in the world with the fattest bank account, and the most orderly economy, does experience that its currency is weaker than ever measured against the currency of extremely indebted US, UK and EU. I am afraid that it will almost feels immoral to buy this camera for what must become the Norwegian price, after it is added 25% VAT. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 21, 2015 Share #15 Posted October 21, 2015 Despite being generally grumpy and a doubting thomas by nature I can see the merits of the SL ........ but for me it would be a 1 lens camera (the 24-90 or the fast 50) and I am never going back to carting a backpack of huge zoom lenses around with me like I did with my old Nikon gear. There have been plenty of occasions over the last few years when I sorely missed a camera like this but was unwilling to buy into another system with all the issues of unavoidable lens duplication and different menus/buttons/Raw formats etc. The M is excellent with M series lenses ....... but a bit unwieldy with R and other lenses. I have a feeling I will be playing with one on Nov 16th ........ as it is the only way I will satisfy my curiosity and really find out if I need ....... or want one of these in addition to my current pile of Leicas ....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 21, 2015 Share #16 Posted October 21, 2015 I agree on the single lens, though for sport, bird photography and the like I could see a place for a fast Tele from time to time. Wouldn't lug it about though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satijntje Posted October 21, 2015 Share #17 Posted October 21, 2015 It's only the price of the Leica SL that makes me hesitant. In germany, the SL body is 20 Euro less then the M-P 240! John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted October 21, 2015 Share #18 Posted October 21, 2015 I think the many arrogant and self assured - from the hip -negative comments about the SL, dont take in to account what Leica have said they are trying to achieve with this camera. It is NOT targeted at the Sony R7 users. It is targeted at a certain group of professional users. The way I understand it, we should rather compare the qualities of the SL to the Nikon 4DS or the Canon EOS-1D X - NOT the Sony 7 - whatever!!, which is a very good enthusiast camera rather than a professional camera. This type of professional camera doesnt require resolution BUT: high Speed frames/sec, Perfect AF and good ISO, solid build, weather sealing and high reliability - All hallmarks of the forementionioned Nikon and Canon. To my understanding, Leica have introduced a very strong candidate which sets the standard in some of these parameters, to compete with these super-effecient picture machines. BUT using an industry standard EVF. If Leica can deliver (and NO ONE knows yet) the pricerange is the same as the Canon and Nikon. I personally think it makes sense, as it definately fills a gap between the M and S. I dont know if this camera delivers all that it promises, but it seems pretty clear, that Leica has put a lot of R&D in to pushing the boundaries of several industry benchmarks. I think they deserve a lot of credit and respect for this. Is this camera beautiful? Im not sure but I do know, that it is a lot nicer than the Nikon, Canon or SONY mentioned in this post. There are several compelling reasons to suggest that it might struggle as a truly professional camera, as Paulmac (a professional photographer) has pointed out. But even setting aside the serious questions about hardware, infrastructure and support (any new system will be vulnerable to these problems initially), I think cost is an extremely important factor for professionals. Bearing in mind that unlike Nikon and Canon, there is not a huge range of cheap/used second bodies immediately available as back-up or alternatives to work with the same lens set, a pro will probably have to justify a kit cost many multiples of that of even a top-range Nikon/Canon equivalent, and I can't think of too many advantages over those stalwarts that the SL will offer as justification of this risk/cost combination. I can understand why some dedicated Leica enthusiasts including a small number of pros may find this new camera irresistible, but I can also understand the sincere sense of disappointment that some have expressed about the features of this camera that rule it out for them. I don't think that's terribly unreasonable do you? Certainly not arrogant or hip-negative, which I think was rather rude of you to suggest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 21, 2015 Share #19 Posted October 21, 2015 In germany, the SL body is 20 Euro less then the M-P 240! John I was going to comment on this as well. So far we've had a lot of shock horror reaction: Too big - based on the DPReview image of a woman with small hands. Comparative images with other cameras show this isn't actually true. Yes, it's bigger than the M, but it isn't huge as some say. The standard zoom is big, but it covers a wide range (24 to 90) and it has AF and image stabilisation. More critically, it has a wider mount than most others. Too heavy - perhaps. The M is also heavier than the plastic Japanese cameras. Too expensive - same price as the M. Is $5,000 for a new Leica zoom lens expensive? Last time I looked, there were no cheap Leica lenses, and this is cheaper than the R 28-90 last I looked on eBay. Only 24 MP - yep. Same as the M. Ugly - okay. Professional - as I've mentioned before, I really have no idea what this means. For me, it distinguishes the camera from what can be derisively called "consumer" cameras. You know the ones - they promise huge functionality and lots of features, but when it comes to delivering on their promises they fall short. I have no idea if a jobbing professional will buy this, and frankly I don't care. Call me a rich wannabe? Okay, I see that as your problem, not mine. Looking at the user interface, it looks more S(007) than anything else, and the EVF and AF is pretty much exactly what we were talking about months ago. A fail? Leica falling flat on its face? I don't think so, or should I say, I hope not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 21, 2015 Share #20 Posted October 21, 2015 I was going to comment on this as well. So far we've had a lot of shock horror reaction: Too big - based on the DPReview image of a woman with small hands. Comparative images with other cameras show this isn't actually true. Yes, it's bigger than the M, but it isn't huge as some say. The standard zoom is big, but it covers a wide range (24 to 90) and it has AF and image stabilisation. More critically, it has a wider mount than most others. Too heavy - perhaps. The M is also heavier than the plastic Japanese cameras. Too expensive - same price as the M. Is $5,000 for a new Leica zoom lens expensive? Last time I looked, there were no cheap Leica lenses, and this is cheaper than the R 28-90 last I looked on eBay. Only 24 MP - yep. Same as the M. Ugly - okay. Professional - as I've mentioned before, I really have no idea what this means. For me, it distinguishes the camera from what can be derisively called "consumer" cameras. You know the ones - they promise huge functionality and lots of features, but when it comes to delivering on their promises they fall short. I have no idea if a jobbing professional will buy this, and frankly I don't care. Call me a rich wannabe? Okay, I see that as your problem, not mine. Looking at the user interface, it looks more S(007) than anything else, and the EVF and AF is pretty much exactly what we were talking about months ago. A fail? Leica falling flat on its face? I don't think so, or should I say, I hope not. Not being critical of the SL but your points above do raise some questions... Too big? Compared to the Sony A7 it is quite a bit bigger isn't it? Too heavy? Plastic Japanese cameras? Really? Which plastic cameras (comparable to the SL) are you talking about? The Sony has a magnesium body I see... Professional? Any real pro, by that I mean someone who works full time as a photographer, will need (not maybe want but need) a comprehensive array of lenses and accessories and easy/fast support. The Leica is some way off that goal IMHO so no, the SL won't appeal to many pro's not because it's a bad camera, just that it simply doesn't yet have any 'pro' lenses to pair with it (and no, one cannot include M lenses). For the wealthier amateurs I'm sure it will serve very well, especially older users who are having some difficulty focussing with their rangefinders, they now have an option with a leading EVF and focus aids, without needing to sell a valuable and excellent set of M lenses. There's no need to try and rubbish other brands with comments like 'plastic Japanese cameras' in trying to justify why you like the SL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.