Jump to content

SL a history of taste. Can one argue over taste.


Paulus

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I remember the original SL camera as a camera which was in the same league than the M. A straitforward camera which also looked straitforward.

 

Looking at the SL ( I may be wrong, because I did not see it live ) I cannot deny the feeling of wonder: I always have thought, that Leica designs were quite good. Even the R8/R9 had a kind of Leica look.

 

The new SL looks different in my opinion. If you take away the Leica dot and name, it could be mistaken for another brand. 

 

Of course this doesn't say anything about its photographic qualities, but still. I always tought that looks did count in a Leica camera. Or maybe this is the new Leica classic look?

 

Can one argue over taste?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paulus,

 

If Nikon had come up with the SP first, in the design of the M3, then the M format would forever be associated with Nikon. The SL has a passing resemblance to the A7, but that is nothing. Leica cannot make all its cameras look like the Barnack. 

 

The next version of the SL, people will say looks like a Leica.

 

John

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

...

If Nikon had come up with the SP first, in the design of the M3, then the M format would forever be associated with Nikon. The SL has a passing resemblance to the A7, but that is nothing. Leica cannot make all its cameras look like the Barnack. 

...

 

To deliver the copy before the original is a dream of each copyist. :)

Those who want to take pictures with a camera in the size of the new SL, will accept any design that is ergonomically perfectly in their hands, whether it is a development or just a quote of previous photographic technique.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the design, it's forward thinking and progressive. There are visual cues from the past on a design for the future and even, perhaps, from the future. It's ironic and quite shocking (which I think is the main issue) that probably the most futuristic design available, and with real cine, is from the oldest company steeped in tradition who has never really had a cine camera. I would say it's a good mix of form and function and I feel like I understand the design because it's what I'm looking for and in many ways what I've been asking for - ie. not small and toy like, full featured and full sized to work with the size of lenses the system needs.

 

I think it comes down to wether you welcome change or not, something I personally like. It's a departure, and one I am enjoying and find exciting. I just think it's way ahead of it's time, even at it's own expense, not having the lens range to do it justice. I think it will be a seminal and landmark design not just for Leica, but the whole industry. To me it's a statement of the best kind - We are Leica and this is what we can do - wether you like it or not, the design commands respect, IMO, that it deserves.

Edited by Paul J
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We can't argue over taste, but we like to talk about it.

I like the design and graphics/lay-out of the digital led-display on the top, it's neat and an oasis in the industrial design that reminds of Ruhrgebiet melting furnaces.

I might like it after a few months though and tend to agree with Paul J

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do like change. It is really important to me.

 

Strangely, I also like the look of the SL but I'd never claim it to be bold or new in design terms. Rather, it is conservative and well balanced, though I could do without the unnecessarily retro styling around the "prism": a bit of artifice that doesn't sit well with the functional aesthetic that should have been carried through to the end.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't argue over taste, but we like to talk about it.

I like the design and graphics/lay-out of the digital led-display on the top, it's neat and an oasis in the industrial design that reminds of Ruhrgebiet melting furnaces.

I might like it after a few months though and tend to agree with Paul J

Well, may be it's a little bit early. Sometimes a design really starts to work when I keep it in my hands.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Change is fine if it leads to something better; change for its own sake is pointless from a practical point view – although not necessarily from a marketing or sales point of view. I have already written about changing the conventional M-style shutter speed dial to an unmarked "user configurable" multi-function "click wheel". (See separate thread.) My view is that Oskar Barnack got the design of the very first Leica pretty much right the first time. Continuous improvements led to the M3 and the M line, which in essence remains unchanged. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The T the was inspired by smartphones. Fine for some, perhaps. I don't mind the prism type hump for the EVF on the SL at all, because it allows for a much larger viewfinder. It also looks part of the design. Mounting a Visoflex EVF on an M or a compact camera ruins its clean streamlined look, IMO.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...