Am I the only one liking what Leica is offering here?

[rramesh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Because I don’t quite see how it would fit in Panasonic’s business strategy. Or put simply, I am not convinced they would earn rather than lose money with a FF system.

 

Panasonic could adopt the T mount for their FF mirrorless.

[lct]

Never heard that Panasonic is interested by full frame so far. Too little money to earn i guess.

[Advertisement]

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

[cpclee]

I think part of the reason for the gain in the size and weight of 35mm photographic gear is that a lot of former medium and large format film shooters are now shooting 35mm / full frame digital.  They make up a lot of the people buying up the big, manual focus lenses (eg. Zeiss Otus) because they are used to working slowly and don't mind the bulk and weight.  So the 35mm market is not as homogenous as it used to be.

 

 

Edward, the weight gain of dSLR lenses as of late confuses me.  For years we all wished for lighter, easier to carry gear.  Things were going pretty good around 2010 for FF dSLR users - more stabilized lenses, mostly F4's, high optical performance (relatively speaking), and so on.

 

Then came the 55mm Otus, Sigma ART primes, Canon & Nikon prime updates (L and G), and the latest - Milvus.  I don't buy into the idea that this bulking up is all due to sensors and MP gains.  The M lenses are downright puny in comparison, and at least by technical measure, very strong performers on full frame.

 

I think this weight gain is more marketing than technical.  Since FF dSLRs cannot get as small as mirrorless cameras like the Sony A7 line, the dSLR makers swung the opposite direction with the implied message:

 

  Pro = bigger gear

  The bigger gear = the more pro

  Thus to be the most pro, we have must the biggest gear!!!

 

Leica is not advertising the SL as a "compact" system, so they are not really beholden to any size restrictions.  Though, I think the big lenses will turn away some would-be buyers.  The two basic reactions written in just about every on-line article have been - "it's huge" and "it's expensive".

 

Around this time next year, I'll be very interested to see what technology from the SL trickles down to the next M.  If the M inherits all the LV / EVF functionality (albeit via an external finder), by then I might be ready go back to a smaller camera.  But for now, I've pre-ordered the SL.  On a thread somewhere, somebody said Leica won't sell 100 SL's.  1 down, just 99 more to go  LOL

[cpclee]

When Leica labels the SL as a mirrorless for professionals, that is not much different than Rolex calling their Oyster watches for professional divers.  These are all products with overbuilt qualities for an imaginary professional audience so they will sell more to their actual well-heeled amateur market.  I think that is a very intentional marketing strategy which is probably very effective.

 

There are professionals who use Leicas but not in any meaningfully big numbers anymore.  The most important attributes to professional shooters are C/P, reliability, serviceability and a full line of accessories.  None of these are Leica's strong suit.  

 

Likewise Rolex used to own the professional market (they were called "tool watches") but not anymore.  You no longer need a Rolex to dive, to tell GMT time (if you were an aviator), etc. like 40 years ago.

 

Today in many countries in the world Leicas are sold in boutique Leica Stores by men and women wearing white gloves.  They moved away from the professional market a long time ago.  

 

 

 

Now this IS an interesting comparison and indeed the A99 with a EVF of the quality of the SL and the other advances that have been packed into the A7 mkII's would IMO be far more tempting to any 'Working Pro' mostly because you would have immediate access to a full range of superb lenses and of course it would cost a lot less. As interesting and good as the SL body is without a full range of lenses that a 'Pro' will use I can only see it selling to the very well-healed amateur and the 'Pro' who has a lot of money to spare and there are not many of them.

Edited October 24, 2015 by cpclee

[-Lss-]

Never heard that Panasonic is interested by full frame so far. Too little money to earn i guess.

 

Like I said earlier in this thread, I have heard Panasonic has (had) interest in full frame. What they have expressed more clearly, of course, is commitment to MFT.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Like I said earlier in this thread, I have heard Panasonic has (had) interest in full frame. What they have expressed more clearly, of course, is commitment to MFT.

 

I'll believe that when Panasonic makes an official announcement. The FF non-rangefinder market has been dominated by just three manufacturers and now along comes Leica trying to gain market share. What might Leica think if their partner Panasonic does offer a FF camera which undercuts the SL in an already relatively crowded marketplace? And consider the fact that Panasonic would also have to design, manufacture and offer FF lenses - when they are struggling to compete with and keep up with Olympus. Resources are probably already stretched and trying to additionally encompass FF when they have no experience or track record in that sector could be very risky. 

 

dunk

[-Lss-]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'll believe that when Panasonic makes an official announcement.

 

Sure. If they announce a camera, most will believe they intend to launch it. I don't personally expect they are making such a move.

[thebarnman]

I like it, but I am a film user so it's probably not for me.  The only thing to complain about the SL body is that little hand grip on the right side of the body.  I read you need more of a "kung fu grip" because the part that sticks out is narrow. 

 

Regardless, I like how the SL can accept R lenses.  At the same time I wonder if a R90 lens on the SL can perform the same as a dedicated SL90 lens (assuming they are both of the type APO etc.) without any degradation because of having to use an adapter for the R lens?      

 

 

I know film is probably a bad word on this thread, but all this talk about 24 megapixels vs more from another camera manufacturer, and the arguments that one type of sensor might result in more picture noise because of trying to cram too much information into the same sized sensor and waiting or constantly upgrading for more auto features whether it's faster performance or better sensors drives me to be glad I'm shooting on film.

 

The R9 is a big and heavy camera, though it handles nice and fits in my hands very well, and being a SLR; is great for my R90 lens.  One day I think it would be nice to get something smaller, such as a M (M6 or M7) to use for a wider lens (since I don't like switching lenses on a camera) or possibly a SL if I decide one day to switch to digital.    

 

 

 

 

[jaapv]

When Leica labels the SL as a mirrorless for professionals, that is not much different than Rolex calling their Oyster watches for professional divers.  These are all products with overbuilt qualities for an imaginary professional audience so they will sell more to their actual well-heeled amateur market.  I think that is a very intentional marketing strategy which is probably very effective.

 

There are professionals who use Leicas but not in any meaningfully big numbers anymore.  The most important attributes to professional shooters are C/P, reliability, serviceability and a full line of accessories.  None of these are Leica's strong suit.  

 

Likewise Rolex used to own the professional market (they were called "tool watches") but not anymore.  You no longer need a Rolex to dive, to tell GMT time (if you were an aviator), etc. like 40 years ago.

 

Today in many countries in the world Leicas are sold in boutique Leica Stores by men and women wearing white gloves.  They moved away from the professional market a long time ago.  

Whilst it is true that not many professionals use Leica this is more a reflection of the  absolute number of cameras built. I would not be surprised, in fact I am convinced, that the percentage of cameras sold to professionals is considerably higher with Leica than with any of the other popular brands.

[ramarren]

...The one lens on offer is too slow and it's variable aperture is far, far, from desirable. It's an f4 lens. It's completely impractical for a pro and I have no idea what Leica are thinking with this. ...

 

I made a heck of a lot of photos in my "professional" portfolio with 20-35/4 when I was shooting Pentax gear and a Nikkor 25-50/4 at other times. What's so 'far far from desirable' about 24-90/2.8-4? Seems a pretty decent zoom range and max aperture to me. Image samples from a number of the reviewers show that it performs very nicely too. It is a bit heavy but then what pro-grade zoom lens isn't? 

[IkarusJohn]

I made a heck of a lot of photos in my "professional" portfolio with 20-35/4 when I was shooting Pentax gear and a Nikkor 25-50/4 at other times. What's so 'far far from desirable' about 24-90/2.8-4? Seems a pretty decent zoom range and max aperture to me. Image samples from a number of the reviewers show that it performs very nicely too. It is a bit heavy but then what pro-grade zoom lens isn't? 

 

What prograde zoom of the same range is faster?  I couldn't find one (other than the Canon 28-70/2.8 fixed aperture).

 

It's a bit like megapixels, I guess - better numbers are more desirable.

[peterv]

I like the camera/new system a lot. Actually it's exactly what I had hoped for and I'm glad Leica came up with this versatile tool.

 

This thread reminded me of Lensrental's Roger Cicala's famous graph:

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

When Leica labels the SL as a mirrorless for professionals, that is not much different than Rolex calling their Oyster watches for professional divers.  These are all products with overbuilt qualities for an imaginary professional audience so they will sell more to their actual well-heeled amateur market.  I think that is a very intentional marketing strategy which is probably very effective.

 

There are professionals who use Leicas but not in any meaningfully big numbers anymore.  The most important attributes to professional shooters are C/P, reliability, serviceability and a full line of accessories.  None of these are Leica's strong suit.  

 

Likewise Rolex used to own the professional market (they were called "tool watches") but not anymore.  You no longer need a Rolex to dive, to tell GMT time (if you were an aviator), etc. like 40 years ago.

 

Today in many countries in the world Leicas are sold in boutique Leica Stores by men and women wearing white gloves.  They moved away from the professional market a long time ago.  

Still, I think that percentage-wise, Leica is selling far more cameras to professionals than Canikon are. The reason one does not see too many Leicas in professional hands is because there are not too many photographers using Leicas in general.

[LocalHero1953]

I like the camera/new system a lot. Actually it's exactly what I had hoped for and I'm glad Leica came up with this versatile tool.

 

This thread reminded me of Lensrental's Roger Cicala's famous graph:

The SL has already been through this journey as Option A compared to the Sony A7Rii as Option B, and it's not even in the shops!

Or perhaps it's the other way round. Your choice.

Edited November 15, 2015 by LocalHero1953