Leica SL Survey - Your Opinion?

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Let's say that the SL is the best non-RF camera for M lenses but the M is the best overall camera for them certainly.

[edwardkaraa]

The SL is definitely not an ideal M lens platform, unless one likes to shoot at f/8 and above. I will delay my purchase until at least the 50 lux is released.

[lct]

The SL is definitely not an ideal M lens platform, unless one likes to shoot at f/8 and above [...]

 

 

OK for wides when sharp corners are required but i did not expect significant problem at 50mm and above. Do you have any info about that?

[EdwardM]

looking at the poll results i have to admit that it will be sort of "Love or Hate" camera from Leica for me.

Based on my first impression its NO GO for me, but my biggest concern is that i can fall in love after first touch 

[edwardkaraa]

 

OK for wides when sharp corners are required but i did not expect significant problem at 50mm and above. Do you have any info about that?

Not really, but extrapolating from my A7 behavior I would expect anything below 75mm to have degraded performance to various degrees depending on lens design. It also depends on how sensitive the user is to corner blur. Some people don't seem to mind it.

[rshseow]

In this opinion poll "Who will buy Leica SL?"

As of today, 27.5% suggest that "Owner of M and R lenses"

 

Jono Slack comments that the SL works rather well with M lenses. Screen shot attached.

 

Sounds like a good news for M lens owners.

Richard

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!

[edwardkaraa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jono Slack comments that the SL works rather well with M lenses. Sounds like a good news. Screen shot attached

Richard

That's why I said it depends on user sensitivity. Quite usable for some maybe quite bad for others. Better to look at comparisons and judge for oneself.

[IkarusJohn]

I was interested that the SL has marginally better resolution in the centre with M lenses than the M(240). Don't ask me who said this, I couldn't tell you. I've read so much recently, I'm forgetting who said what. It's dancing on the head of a pin, really - a bit like corner softness. There if you look for it. 

[edwardkaraa]

I was interested that the SL has marginally better resolution in the centre with M lenses than the M(240). Don't ask me who said this, I couldn't tell you. I've read so much recently, I'm forgetting who said what. It's dancing on the head of a pin, really - a bit like corner softness. There if you look for it.

Very eloquently said

[CheshireCat]

I was interested that the SL has marginally better resolution in the centre with M lenses than the M(240).

 

Quite unlikely.

Probably a test error due to the fact that some M lenses go slightly beyond infinity, and the M to SL adapter thickness may marginally compensate for the error.

[edwardkaraa]

Quite unlikely.

Probably a test error due to the fact that some M lenses go slightly beyond infinity, and the M to SL adapter thickness may marginally compensate for the error.

Are you sure that the photos are at infinity?

[satijntje]

My main reason to buy the SL would be to use it with a Noctilux.

I'm getting close to retirement age and my eyes as well :-(

Therefore I have to move away from the rangefinder to EVF.

So if it turns out that focus peaking will be working better then on the M240, it will be a buy, otherwise I will have to look around for something that starts with A7....

I will do my own testing on the 13th November in Wetzlar and will decide then.

John

[IkarusJohn]

Are you sure that the photos are at infinity?

 

If I recall correctly the test images were done at 3 to 5 metres. I don't think anyone has tested at infinity, have they?

[edwardkaraa]

If I recall correctly the test images were done at 3 to 5 metres. I don't think anyone has tested at infinity, have they?

Jono did. Still waiting to see the photos

[davewolfs]

My main reason to buy the SL would be to use it with a Noctilux.

I'm getting close to retirement age and my eyes as well :-(

Therefore I have to move away from the rangefinder to EVF.

So if it turns out that focus peaking will be working better then on the M240, it will be a buy, otherwise I will have to look around for something that starts with A7....

I will do my own testing on the 13th November in Wetzlar and will decide then.

John

If I were betting I would put money that the next M will be solving this issue as well. In fact if they are creative no reason why it can't be just as or more intuitive than a pure EVF.

[ramarren]

I've decided: I ordered mine.

 

I'll let all you naysayers know whether I felt it was worth it or not in a year or so.

Yeasayers: we'll be talking when it arrives and I start learning it. 

 

Now on to the important matter ... I wonder which bag I need for it? OMG ...!

 

onwards! 

[pico]

I've decided: I ordered mine.

 

I'll let all you naysayers know whether I felt it was worth it or not in a year or so.!

Thank you. It is rare that a canary volunteers.

[Guest]

I have to say that I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread on the SL, it's been and will most likely continue to be a valuable discussion.

For me it has clarified what I personally want to see from Leica, the SL for a number of reasons already mentioned in my earlier posts is not for me though of course I wish Leica well with it.

 

I would not go with an EVF on any serious "system" / Pro' camera because for me no matter how much resolution it boasts an EVF will never replace an OVF, ( even though I do have and appreciate the qualities of the Q for what it is..... ). 

 

This thread has underlined what I would like from Leica and that would simply be another M rangefinder that is slimmed down to pre' M240 size. If it's ever possible a M7 sized digital M would be a fabulous tool to have. Perhaps Leica is considering upgrading the M line with something like an EVF / OVF rangefinder combination, maybe something that could offer a form of peaking in the OVF, who knows.....But if it adds anymore weight and girth to the M or takes away the OVF that for me would be a mistake and undesirable. The M9 range was perhaps the best sizing for a digital RF M so far.

 

The SL's EVF is doubtless excellent, best in class so far it's said, but that too will be superseded for sure in the not too distant future by other systems in the now endless digital upgrading race. The Sony's too have EVF's so for me that's a move I'd not make.

Because of it's SLR / OVF the Leica S is a system I'd be more interested in would I be able to justify the expense of the body and three or four lenses to make up a base kit, but I can't, the cost is way too out there. 

 

When I need to work with lenses greater than 50mm I pick up my Nikon 700, "old" by digital standards but still a great camera with good colour science and as reliable as all heck. Leica glass is as we know just outstanding, but Nikon glass is pretty damn good too, I've little or no complaints with it in over four decades or so of working with Nikons, ( and Leicas of course ). So how to justify the expense of going into yet another new system when what one has is really good enough?

 

Anyway, thanks for all of the great posts on this thread, I'm enjoying reading and learning new and interesting points of view from them, but more and more I'm understanding that what I now have in my still camera kits, ( M's/Q Leicas and SLR Nikons ), is probably good enough for now and perhaps the monies for me would be better spent on the post side of things, a second large format printer perhaps and better ink-sets and more papers.

 

Cheers

Peter

[psss]

the EVF in the SL is very nice, i don't find as astounding as other people have...i am used to EVF from fuji and sony and the difference here is that it is larger and the refresh is great.....i did not really notice a big difference in resolution....i did find it a little contrasty and the color to be too saturated....this might have been fixed by diving into menus, i don't know, either way it is something that future FW upgrades can deal with......an EVF will never be the same as an optical solution.....but i prefer to have the advantages an EVF offers and they are getting better and better and better....

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[pico]

All these opinions from people who have not used the camera! It's the definition of downright ignorance.