Leica SL Survey - Your Opinion?

[EoinC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For me, it is a nice camera, but not sufficiently different to what I already have (Digitals = M246 / A7R / 1DX) to be worth purchasing. If it were a MF sensor, I might change my mind. I'm sure it will be great for those who buy it.

[ramarren]

...

Now, I'm sure that I have missed some manufacturers, but even googling fast zooms, I couldn't come up with a single zoom of comparable range that is faster than 2.8-4.

 

Olympus offers 150/2, 35-100/2, 300/2.8, and 90-250/2.8 lenses in their Super High Grade set for FourThirds SLR. Equivalent focal lengths double the optical FL numbers. These are outstanding lenses usable by any FourThirds SLR and any Micro-FourThirds camera with an adapter. 

[IkarusJohn]

Olympus offers 150/2, 35-100/2, 300/2.8, and 90-250/2.8 lenses in their Super High Grade set for FourThirds SLR. Equivalent focal lengths double the optical FL numbers. These are outstanding lenses usable by any FourThirds SLR and any Micro-FourThirds camera with an adapter. 

 

Thanks for that.  When considering the trade-off between size, weight and speed, I was thinking more of 35mm rather than Micro-Four-Thirds. It's a good point, though. 

[Grant S Rogers]

Far to expensive and it wouldn't do what I want it to do. The price is almost insulting but maybe it will be popular with collectors rather than photographers? 

[remi]

I was expecting some kind of R10 so I can use my good old R lenses but the SL is not what I need.

Too big/heavy, much too expensive for what it is (just a combination of electronic components, almost no mechanical part; the garantie should be 5 years, not 2).

I was hoping Leica or Panasonic or Sony would produce one compatible body but am getting tired of waiting.

I do not care about video nor the 11 fps. Some say it should be used in studio (where the money is) but the S or the Hasselblad do the job with bigger files.

 

Personnaly, I do not want to buy another set of lenses dedicated to the SL (the 24-90 is ridiculously enormous and expensive and apparently not that good if I read the first tests). I do not think owners of S or T or M will buy an SL anyway as they already have the body(ies) they need. Only the R lenses owners could have been interested but I am afraid few of them will buy it.

I think Leica is more and more targeting the "not expensive enough my son" kind of buyers just like the watches makers do these days. Good for them if they can survive in the real world.

 

Technically, Leica may show some directions with the mirrorless/eyeres concept but the price of the SL + 1 zoom one can buy a Nikon 810 or a Canon 5DSr and 3/4 lenses. Even professionnal photographers have budget to control.

 

I am happy with my M9 (which I bought used, half price of a new one) and its lenses (I have recent ones from 21 to 135) but will give up and sadly soon sell my R lenses (from 15 to 280) and use my Nikon set which lenses are better every day (see the recent 300mm F/4! or older 200 micro)

 

Anyone interested with my R lenses ?

 

Remi

[stuny]

Remi -

 

There is a not insignificant cost to running this forum, so if you wish to sell any gear, please do so through the Buy & Sell section rather than mention it elsewhere on the forum.

 

Thank you.

[reynoldsyoung]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Give me a Q with 50mm 1.4 or better...done!  "Beast" cameras are not for me.  But, I am not a professional who might have a VERY different opinion.

[leica2f]

IMHO this is the ugliest Leica I have ever seen. All the great technical features aside, a camera in this price range should also look good. Compared to the Leica M or M-P (240) that have the same sensor size and resolution, the M-P is a true design icon based on functionality and the long tradition of Leica.

 

Why this ugly bulbous thing on the SL? There is no pentaprism to be covered.

 

Why this big size? The missing mirror box allows way smaller lens designs compared to regular DSLRs.

 

The SL weighs about as much as my old Canon 5D II body and is about the same size.

 

In times of airline travel restrictions less weight and size is more.

 

What I love about my M-P and it's lenses is the really small size without compromizing image quality in any way. Just compare the upcoming Summilux 50mm to the 50mm M-version.

 

What really disappoints me the most about the SL is that there is no in camera image stabilization. That would be a real key feature. Imagine having all of the old and new Leica glass stabilized... Olympus started out doing it and Sony made it available even for 24x36mm sensors. I wish Leica success with the SL, but I definitely prefer the M-series and use a fast firing autofocus camera from Japan for those few times I actually need it.

 

Cheers,

 

Frank N.

[dkCambridgeshire]

 

IMHO this is the ugliest Leica I have ever seen. All the great technical features aside, a camera in this price range should also look good. Compared to the Leica M or M-P (240) that have the same sensor size and resolution, the M-P is a true design icon based on functionality and the long tradition of Leica.

 

Why this ugly bulbous thing on the SL? There is no pentaprism to be covered.

 

Why this big size? The missing mirror box allows way smaller lens designs compared to regular DSLRs.

 

The SL weighs about as much as my old Canon 5D II body and is about the same size.

 

In times of airline travel restrictions less weight and size is more.

 

What I love about my M-P and it's lenses is the really small size without compromizing image quality in any way. Just compare the upcoming Summilux 50mm to the 50mm M-version.

 

What really disappoints me the most about the SL is that there is no in camera image stabilization. That would be a real key feature. Imagine having all of the old and new Leica glass stabilized... Olympus started out doing it and Sony made it available even for 24x36mm sensors. I wish Leica success with the SL, but I definitely prefer the M-series and use a fast firing autofocus camera from Japan for those few times I actually need it.

 

Cheers,

 

Frank N.

 

 

 

The SL is designed for use with telecentric lenses with optimum wide angle performance on a digital sensor - necessitating a new larger diameter mount.

 

dunk

[gsartori]

The Leica SL is simply an obsolete camera with only one lens. I mostly use Leica M but if I need fast AF I need access also to a range of lenses and for a camera that is really launched now for a market penetration in 2016/17/18,  24 Mega Pixels  are just laughable. I just want to recall that Nikon launched their 24MP, the  3DX at the end of 2008, 7 years ago and that Sony has a smaller, lighter cheaper camera that has been shipping for a while with 42MP, superior ISO and can use Leica M lenses. Do I need to add anything else? The SL is a sign of arrogance from Leica IMO. A bunch of german engineers probably started this project a long time ago with what would have been a "super camera" back then. Not anymore, now it's already obsolete.

[dkCambridgeshire]

The Leica SL is simply an obsolete camera with only one lens. I mostly use Leica M but if I need fast AF I need access also to a range of lenses and for a camera that is really launched now for a market penetration in 2016/17/18,  24 Mega Pixels  are just laughable. I just want to recall that Nikon launched their 24MP, the  3DX at the end of 2008, 7 years ago and that Sony has a smaller, lighter cheaper camera that has been shipping for a while with 42MP, superior ISO and can use Leica M lenses. Do I need to add anything else? The SL is a sign of arrogance from Leica IMO. A bunch of german engineers probably started this project a long time ago with what would have been a "super camera" back then. Not anymore, now it's already obsolete.

 

Not every current camera has, or needs 42MP … it's not necessarily the number of pixels which determine image quality. And, to suggest that a mirrorless platform with the finest EVF of any camera to date is 'obsolete' is nonsense. 

 

dunk

[leitztozeiss]

IMHO this is the ugliest Leica I have ever seen.[.....].

 

Cheers,

 

Frank N.

The M5 is the ugliest Leica mankind has ever seen.

 

The SL is a gorgeous heavy, solid chunk of aluminum that I WANT!!!!

[CheshireCat]

Not every current camera has, or needs 42MP …

 

It's not how big or dense it is... it's how you use it !

 

... yeah, right... 

[ynp]

After much thought I have said that this SL is well suited for S lens owners. Now I read from someone who visited the Leica booth at the PhotoPlus show that no S lens with CS can be used like on the S camera. So now why would an S lens owner with CS lenses (which many consider THE lens to get where there is a choice) want this camera?

 

In many shooting situations, including working out of the studio, I do not need strobes and the CS lenses are being shot using the focal plane shutter. You can choose either the focal plane or central shutters on an S-camera.

 

More and more often, than before, we use hot lights and LED lights instead of strobes outside, mostly because we shoot video alongside stills.

[pico]

So much concern for how a camera looks! I can't see it when I use it.

Is it a wardrobe thing?

 

It might be interesting to know what other objects the critics like or dislike.

[guyfawkes2]

When I first saw a front on photo, the Sony A7 series came to mind. Now that I have studied other photos comparing the body to DSLRs for example and seen the specs I will wait, but am inclined to not get one since as I age my eyes are getting much worse (the EVF could help here) and I find my muscle strength way less than 10 years ago. It is the later that convinces me for now that a 2 kilo Leica kit setup (body+lens) is not for me unless like someone else said somewhere I start pumping iron big time. Not likely.

 

I cannot justify getting one for the EVF only. Many expect the next M to have an improved EVF (I sure hope so) maybe along the Q or SL quality levels. I will wait for that answer since by the time a new M is announced the SL system will hardly be beyond still-born.

 

If I owned an S then I would get one because I feel its usefulness will be best used with S primes until such time as SL primes are out and more than one is released.  That said the timing of the direct S adapter will be key to sales to current S lens owners.

Indeed. A new M body with high res EVF built-in and dispensing with the mechanical rangefinder, a bit of an anachronism today anyway, is what I was hoping Leica would release.  The SL is simply toooooo heavy as a system body, and way toooo heavy using M or R lenses.

[earleygallery]

It seems people are looking at the SL as a digital back to use with anyone's lenses.

 

The point of Leica cameras was always to use Leica glass.

 

If cheaper but as good or better digital backs are/become available why would you pay a premium for the Leica?

 

OTOH if you have a good digital back and can use a great Leica lens with it...

[dkCambridgeshire]

It seems people are looking at the SL as a digital back to use with anyone's lenses.

 

The point of Leica cameras was always to use Leica glass.

 

If cheaper but as good or better digital backs are/become available why would you pay a premium for the Leica?

 

OTOH if you have a good digital back and can use a great Leica lens with it...

 

 

A friend uses a Canon 5D Mk III which he considers to be a superb camera. I use an R9/ DMR. My friend (who is also a forum member) accompanied me on a trip to try my Leica 800mm f6.3 Telyt S and he used the lens with his 5D Mk III ... on the same HD tripod. He thought he obtained some excellent images - and they're fine - but the image quality is not as pleasing or quite as sharp as the 10 MP DMR's. He regularly refers to this anomaly and is perplexed by the fact that his 5D Mk III was 'whooped' by the DMR. 

 

I would not be surprised if the SL produces better IQ than other FF ICL cameras - but we'll have to wait to see the image comparisons. 

 

dunk

[lct]

It seems people are looking at the SL as a digital back to use with anyone's lenses. [...]

 

They are not alone:

 

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[CheshireCat]

It seems people are looking at the SL as a digital back to use with anyone's lenses.

 

Actually, that's the only way to look at it right now, as there will be no native lenses for a long while.

 

This would not be a problem if Leica had surprised us with a new, innovative, light, mirrorless medium format camera and lens system. And then focus resources to make it the world's best photographic system.

 

... but unfortunately, they decided to play the copycat game, and surrender to their failure to innovate.