Thank You Leica for SL - unexpected occasion to love my M more and more

[Mornnb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No Leica will be priced the same/similar to Canikon. That's given.

 

I hear that Sony A7xx allows full AF functionality for EOS lenses. Does that mean Canon folks are moving to Sony bodies? Not a rhetorical, a real question.

 

Many are. Given that landscape shooting maxes out the abilities of sensors and that Sony's sensor is significantly better than Canon's, Sony bodies have become quite popular with Canon landscape shooters. Canon landscape shooters are putting their lenses on Sony bodies. (Canon glass is generally better than the native Sony/Zeiss glass).

The problem is the autofocus through the lens adaptor is very slow, meaning for most people Canon bodies do a better job.

 

LocalHero1953, on 26 Oct 2015 - 02:58, said:

Hasn't Leica always "priced itself out of its target market"? I can't remember when it hasn't been open to that accusation. Is this why Leica is still a niche manufacturer who had a survival struggle a few years back? Or is this why Leica is still around making high quality camera systems after 100+ years?

These are rhetorical questions - I certainly don't know the answer!

 

 

No. Leica has always been more expensive, but more in the 'Apple' sense of expense. More than other brands, but still affordable. In the last few decades their relative price has increased significantly.

Here is a price list from Century Camera in Chicago from 1960:

 

 

Leica M3 - $270 ($2,156.44 in 2015) body only, $399($3,186.73) with f/2.0 Summicron, $468 ($3,737.82) with f/1.4 Summilux

Leica IIIG - $163 ($1,301.85) body only, $292.50 ($2,336.14) with f/2.0 Summicron

Canon VI - $209.50 ($1,673.24) body only with Canometer, $319.50 ($2,551.78) with f/1.8 Canon, $419.50 ($3,350.46) with f/1.2 Canon

Canonflex - $170 ($1,357.76) body only, $299.95 ($2,395.64) with f/1.8 Super-Canomatic

Nikon SP - $245 ($1,956.77) body only, $329.50 ($2,631.65) with f/2.0 Nikkor, $375 ($2,995.05) with f/1.4 Nikkor, $544.50 ($4,348.81) with f/1.1 Nikkor

Nikon F - $329.50 ($2,631.65) withstandard eyelevel finder & f/2.0 Nikkor

Kodak Retina IIIC (big C) - $175 ($1,397.69) with f/2.0 Xenon

Argus C3 - $55.95 ($446.86) with case & flash

[Advertisement]

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

[jaques]

I am always very glad when leica brings out a new camera I don't want. Phew- missed another bullet (to the wallet).  This one is no different. It does seem to be a nice camera- but nothing to interest me. I like the M for the lenses, rangefinder and size.

\

[almoore]

Is there a virtue of light over heavy?  Not that I'm aware of. Cameras weigh what they weigh - I never really give it a second thought

 

Lightness is an enormous virtue, particularly for working photographers who need to carry more than a single body.

 

The prime reason that 5D3s vastly outnumber 1Dxs in the hands of professional photographers is weight rather than price. For the same reason, many photographers favour Canon's f4 L series zooms over their much heavier f2.8 equivalents. The bulk of the SL lenses is going to deter a lot of potential buyers.

[MarkP]

I am always very glad when leica brings out a new camera I don't want. Phew- missed another bullet (to the wallet).  This one is no different. It does seem to be a nice camera- but nothing to interest me. I like the M for the lenses, rangefinder and size.

\

 

Exactly why I passed on the Monochrome 246 (for the moment) over the v1 and the M-P over the M.

[Peter H]

..................... Is there a virtue of light over heavy?  Not that I'm aware of. Cameras weigh what they weigh - I never really give it a second thought. ..............

 

I'm rather glad Oskar Barnack didn't think this way.

[ramarren]

No Leica will be priced the same/similar to Canikon. That's given.

 

I hear that Sony A7xx allows full AF functionality for EOS lenses. Does that mean Canon folks are moving to Sony bodies? Not a rhetorical, a real question.

 

The Metabones lens mount adapters allow AF functionality for EOS lenses, it's not a native feature of the Sony cameras. Some Canon owners are moving to the Sony bodies as a result in order to save on weight and get access to the latest Sony sensor technology. 

 

I tried that that route with R lenses for a year. The experience didn't thrill me and I don't feel the quality of the results was up to snuff. But EOS lenses are not R lenses. 

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Metabones lens mount adapters allow AF functionality for EOS lenses, it's not a native feature of the Sony cameras. Some Canon owners are moving to the Sony bodies as a result in order to save on weight and get access to the latest Sony sensor technology. 

 

I tried that that route with R lenses for a year. The experience didn't thrill me and I don't feel the quality of the results was up to snuff. But EOS lenses are not R lenses. 

Very true.  R lenses are not stabilized, and must be manually focused, which if they are left stopped down, the EVF turns up the gain and becomes noisy, making focusing more difficult.  EOS lenses with the Type-IV Metabones adapter allows AF, IS and camera-controlled aperture.  Having used R lenses and EOS lenses on my Nex 6 I can say without hesitation the EOS execution is far less of a kludge and the results I got were far better than with R lenses. 

That said, I wouldn't give up my Canon bodies for an EVF, I just don't like them. 

[MT0227]

I'm very new to Leica, only about 3 weeks into my initial purchase of my M-P 240.  Here's my view after some hands on at PhotoPlus Expo:

 

A)  The M/M-P 240 is a very different tool than the SL.  If you want the "traditional"  Leica RF experience (in a digital way) and all that comes with using a RF camera, the M/M-P 240 would be my choice and was my choice knowing the SL was only weeks away.

 

B )  If you want a camera with RF capability that adds in a larger form factor and DSLR features like the EVF and AF (and feels that way), than the SL is certainly an option if you do not have this tool in your arsenal already.  I guess with lens adapters you can build out a kit with a mix of lenses that give you the best of both worlds under a single body.  The SL's focus peaking within its EVF worked will with my 35Lux FLE.  The shutter in not all that silent and is easily heard.  The EVF is quite impressive; auto focus (on the 24-90) was quick and very responsive.

 

C) If you don't have the cash for either A or B, I guess the Q would fill in the gap.  I'd personally save for either A or B (intentionally keeping out of the Leica/Sony debate).  The EVF of the Q pales in comparison to the SL and is much closer to the EVF2 for the M240 than the SL.  It just felt like a toy in comparison to the M240 and the SL.  Add in the single focal length and I just can't see it as a primary tool relative to the M and SL.

 

 

I made my choice for the M-P 240 under scenario (A), in addition to already having other tools to cover what the SL can provide; I will use these tools as my backup.  So far, no backup needed for my M and I'm quite happy with my purchase.

[Jeffry Abt]

I'm very new to Leica, only about 3 weeks into my initial purchase of my M-P 240.  Here's my view after some hands on at PhotoPlus Expo:

 

A)  The M/M-P 240 is a very different tool than the SL.  If you want the "traditional"  Leica RF experience (in a digital way) and all that comes with using a RF camera, the M/M-P 240 would be my choice and was my choice knowing the SL was only weeks away.

 

B )  If you want a camera with RF capability that adds in a larger form factor and DSLR features like the EVF and AF (and feels that way), than the SL is certainly an option if you do not have this tool in your arsenal already.  I guess with lens adapters you can build out a kit with a mix of lenses that give you the best of both worlds under a single body.  The SL's focus peaking within its EVF worked will with my 35Lux FLE.  The shutter in not all that silent and is easily heard.  The EVF is quite impressive; auto focus (on the 24-90) was quick and very responsive.

 

C) If you don't have the cash for either A or B, I guess the Q would fill in the gap.  I'd personally save for either A or B (intentionally keeping out of the Leica/Sony debate).  The EVF of the Q pales in comparison to the SL and is much closer to the EVF2 for the M240 than the SL.  It just felt like a toy in comparison to the M240 and the SL.  Add in the single focal length and I just can't see it as a primary tool relative to the M and SL.

 

I made my choice for the M-P 240 under scenario (A), in addition to already having other tools to cover what the SL can provide; I will use these tools as my backup.  So far, no backup needed for my M and I'm quite happy with my purchase.

Well put!

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Many are. Given that landscape shooting maxes out the abilities of sensors and that Sony's sensor is significantly better than Canon's, Sony bodies have become quite popular with Canon landscape shooters. Canon landscape shooters are putting their lenses on Sony bodies. (Canon glass is generally better than the native Sony/Zeiss glass).

The problem is the autofocus through the lens adaptor is very slow, meaning for most people Canon bodies do a better job.

 

 

I think this needs clarification. Canon shooters tend to add a Sony body because of the better sensor for some applications. Most of the Canon shooters I know have kept their Canon bodies and added an A7R for landscapes and wide DR applications. Secondly, *SOME* Canon glass is better than *SOME* Sony glass. There's no 2.8 zooms for the E mount system. The Canon 24-70mm 2.8L is considered the current benchmark for all zooms in this range. The Canon 24-70 f4LIS is a better overall performer than the 24-70 Sony/Zeiss. The 70-200 f4L Canon is about the same as it's Sony counterpart. The 55mm Sony is sharper than any Canon 50. The 35mm Sony's are both better than their Canon counterparts. The 90mm Sony macro is sharper than the Canon 100mm LIS macro. Canon have FAR more speciality lenses unless you adapt Sony alpha mount lenses.

 

AF using Canon lenses on Sony A series bodies is very slow except for the A7R2 and metabones IV (T) which allows near native focus speed except in low light for many Canon lenses including most of the current ones.

 

Gordon

[Mornnb]

I think this needs clarification. Canon shooters tend to add a Sony body because of the better sensor for some applications. Most of the Canon shooters I know have kept their Canon bodies and added an A7R for landscapes and wide DR applications.

I am a Canon shooter I used to have an A7, but I sold it. My M fills this role well. It's sensor is much better than Canon's and is not far behind Sony in terms of DR. Indeed my M is now my default go to camera, it does the job better. I only grab the Canon when I require 200mm and autofocus or one of their Ts-E lenses.

 

 

 

Secondly, *SOME* Canon glass is better than *SOME* Sony glass. There's no 2.8 zooms for the E mount system. The Canon 24-70mm 2.8L is considered the current benchmark for all zooms in this range.

The 70-200mm IS 2.8 Mark II and 11-24mm are also regarded as the current benchmark for zooms in their range. Indeed the 70-200mm is often regarded as the worlds sharpest zoom.

 

 

The Canon 24-70 f4LIS is a better overall performer than the 24-70 Sony/Zeiss. The 70-200 f4L Canon is about the same as it's Sony counterpart. The 55mm Sony is sharper than any Canon 50. The 35mm Sony's are both better than their Canon counterparts. The 90mm Sony macro is sharper than the Canon 100mm LIS macro. Canon have FAR more speciality lenses unless you adapt Sony alpha mount lenses.

Yes however this is no longer the case with 35mm, as Canon released a new version than out performs even the Sigma 35mm. However a decent 50mm still eludes Canon, who have a very mediocre offering in this range.

[rshseow]

A) The M/M-P 240 is a very different tool than the SL. If you want the "traditional" Leica RF experience (in a digital way) and all that comes with using a RF camera, the M/M-P 240 would be my choice and was my choice knowing the SL was only weeks away.

B ) If you want a camera with RF capability that adds in a larger form factor and DSLR features like the EVF and AF (and feels that way), than the SL is certainly an option if you do not have this tool in your arsenal already. I guess with lens adapters you can build out a kit with a mix of lenses that give you the best of both worlds under a single body. The SL's focus peaking within its EVF worked will with my 35Lux FLE. The shutter in not all that silent and is easily heard. The EVF is quite impressive; auto focus (on the 24-90) was quick and very responsive.

 

I made my choice for the M-P 240 under scenario (A), in addition.....

I like your ideas, indeed I enjoy using option A ie. M with small M lenses (no EVF just the RF) for walk-about, stealthy, zone-focusing, daily reportage and street photography. Convenient and fun.

 

I will get the SL for its EVF, 4K video, WiFi, GPS, compatibility with my collection of LTM, M, R, T, and weather sealing (body and its SL prime AF lenses) for beyond street photography - sports, outdoor adventure, studio, parties, still life, fine art etc.

 

Richard

[MT0227]

I like your ideas, indeed I enjoy using option A ie. M with small M lenses (no EVF just the RF) for walk-about, stealthy, zone-focusing, daily reportage and street photography. Convenient and fun.

 

I will get the SL for its EVF, 4K video, WiFi, GPS, compatibility with my collection of LTM, M, R, T, and weather sealing (body and its SL prime AF lenses) for beyond street photography - sports, outdoor adventure, studio, parties, still life, fine art etc.

 

Richard

 

 

Sounds like a reasonable plan since you seem to be heavily invested in Leica lenses already. 

[rshseow]

Sounds like a reasonable plan since you seem to be heavily invested in Leica lenses already.

Ya. M + SL suits me well.

[pico]

Ya. M + SL suits me well.

 

Do you have an SL? Already?

.

[rshseow]

Do you have an SL? Already?

.

Tested and placed order at the local store. Not sure on the delivery date. Hope it's in time for Christmas