Leica SL Survey - Your Opinion?

[keithlaban.co.uk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wasn't looking for an auto focus camera. Had I been it would have needed to have less girth and heft than the SL body and the lenses would have also needed to be more compact.

 

I'm far from convinced about the performance of wide M lenses on the SL.

 

I admire the SL EVF and hope that we'll see an accessory version on the next M together with an improved processor and sensor.

 

I wish Leica all good things but fervently wish they had delivered an interchangeable lens version of the Q together with an M with the aforementioned upgrades. Had they then they would have had another sale or possibly two.

Edited October 23, 2015 by KeithL

[thighslapper]

I'll get one and dump my XV and T plus lenses.

 

Having M & Q and a pile of lenses (M, R, Visoflex) it makes some sense.

 

It won't be going on holiday or hiking with me,  but it adds plenty of flexibility to someone who is Leica only and has forsaken and liquidated all his SLR and other gear. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest]

Open your other eye, and it will be magically shown.

 

And by the way, the RF on the M won't even show what is inside the frame with lenses < 28mm 

This is so annoying that the only reason to buy the SL for me would be using my M ultra wides properly. Unfortunately, the SL is so expensive that I can buy all Loxia ultra-wides Zeiss will release for my A7R2. Which in turn has a much better sensor, makes my R lenses shine, has IBIS, has phase-detect AF, is light and compact.

 

Thanks for the hint, I never thought of that idea......but it's sort of true, you'll only see one side clearly when you open the other eye and probably nothing much at all if you're "left eyed". The idea of a viewfinder is to concentrate one on what the camera will see, to have to look around too would slow you down.

Anyway, I said what I said all from my own personal perspective in using both stills and movie camera viewfinders over five decades of work, other's experiences and expectations will obviously vary, as they do. 

However I agree that OVF on the M's have always been sadly lacking in regards to the use of lenses wider than 28mm, and that's been a pain. Even the Voigtlander Bessa R4, ( which I also own / use ), has an excellent optical finder/rangefinder that goes to 21mm.

[plewislambert]

The viewfinder and autofocus make it a competitor to the Canon 5D but the absurd size of the zoom reminds me of the mistake Leica made on the 4/3 Digilux 3 14-50mm zoom, a vast lens compared with the 14-45mm zoom on the early Panasonic micro 4/3  cameras that covered the same format and were very much smaller.  The build quality of that Leica zoom was impressive but its size (and that of the Digilux 3 body) must have hampered sales. The high price would have been a factor limiting sales. Does any of this sound familiar?

Now a digital Leica CL.... would that be made by Minolta (now Sony)?  My CL in fact was nothing like as solidly built as the M4-P I traded it for. Maybe that's a good reason for keeping my M240 until something better appears, so not the S or the SL then.  

One of the Panasonics offers a choice of formats within the circle covered by its lens. It would be nice to be able to change the proportions of the images on an M within the 43mm diagonal covered by the current lenses, such as 28x32mm or even 30mm square. The square format was well established amongst Rolleiflex and Hasselblad users.

It would need a new chip and shutter.....

Philip

[martenvangelderen]

I will not buy the new SL. I loved my R9/DMR combo and I think Leica should have modelled the new SL according to the R8/R9. Those two camera's had a handling (at least for my hands) far superior to any Nikon I have encountered so far. Unfortunately my DMR died on me and the refund was put into an M9-P. I sure would like to use my R gear again, which I will with the M (typ 246), but not with the new SL, I am afraid.

[Ai_Print]

Some people seem to think this camera will appeal to professional photographers. I've been a professional photographer for 35 years and the camera doesn't appeal to me in the least. Pros, like almost everyone else, want to be able to do their work without being burdened with large, heavy cameras. Those of us who need the big zooms and DSLRs will stick with Nikon and Canon. The Leica SL offers no advantage over them at all. I'd have much preferred to see Leica put their efforts into improving the M line--slimmer body, better dynamic range and better high ISO performance.

 

The introduction of this monster frankly shocked me.

+6

 

As in half a dozen local pros in my area including myself get together once a month to talk shop, business and personal projects and we did that this week. Three of us use Leica M in some form for a little or a lot of our work and we all agreed that none of us would ever consider this new offering.

 

One even went as far to say they have very good info that one of the "Big Two" is working on a competitive product in terms of a new era body. Another one who had grown tired of his 1st version Nikon 24-70 2.8 going in for repair every year due to barrel slop is utterly blown away by everything about the new 24-70 2.8E.

 

We all agreed that the numbers of pros who would commit to the SL "system" would be a lot smaller than the M system even in current form...and one of them is a Leica ambassador.

 

Just not sure how this new system is going to actually do in sales, seriously.

Edited October 23, 2015 by Ai_Print

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To be fair, professional photographers are not one homogeneous bunch. They are no different in this respect from professional drivers, an "occupation" which include those driving lorries, taxis, coaches and formula one racing cars.

 

That's true and I can speak only for myself. However, other photographers I am acquainted with who do the kind of work I do also have expressed no interest in this new Leica. I've talked to several of them about it and the immediate response is that it's too big and too heavy.

 

If there is an appeal among pros, my belief is that is will be limited to studio, rather than location, photographers.

[Guest]

I'm also hoping that Leica isn't over-reaching with making too many "systems" now.

I don't know how the S system has sold, but it's a high end high cost piece of gear with what I would assume to be a limited niche market, and now we have the SL with maybe again a limited market, hopefully not. I want Leica to stay viable but producing digital cameras is a very expensive business especially when coupled with high quality product. Too many costly systems not reaching sales expectations could hurt Leica badly.

Aaton the French movie camera company went under a few years back when the costs on producing an innovative S35 digital cinema camera just ran away from them, it was gutting to see them close the doors after so many years of making great cinema products. I still own some of their film cameras.

I will not be in the market for an SL but I do wish Leica well with it, we need them to stay healthy.

[pibitller]

My system is 'M', but 'SL' is a nice & great system.

 

Thanks

[mooky]

Most opinions here are likely - including myself - formed w/o having yet to even hold it, so of course, we hopefully have read as many early 'reviews' to help.

The idea of the SL is a good one, but to me, the design lacks inspiration though it seems functional, most reviewers seem to not like the grip. I just expected a bit more 'creative elegance', softer curves, etc., than this.

But one can get passed appearance, but ultimately, I don't need nor want vibration reduction in lenses or bodies, or most what I consider excess tech, autofocus, that's fine on occasion.

But why pay for features that drive up costs if I'm not using them? The EVF is what it is, but I don't need it either. As a 30 year SL/SL2/R (and M) user I was frankly disappointed with Leica's vaulting of the R system and user base.

I understand the reason, but now we have the SL, and I find myself thinking why didn't Leica just build a smaller S type DSLR that seemingly would be cheaper than the EVF, etc., etc.

It's a question now of what the AF prime lenses will be and when, and with or without vibration reduction? Lastly, I would actually enjoy the design more if the outer covering carried the tradition of 'leatherette', and actually had a 'SL' visually on the body.

[FMB]

We had some days to discuss the Leica SL and to form an opinion.

 

To get an atmospheric picture here are two questions to you_

 

1. Can you imagine to buy a Leica SL (Type 601)? Yes if I can sell my backup M9

 

And:

 

2. Who will buy the Leica SL over the next years? Mainly Leica M 240 users and profesional photographers

 

Please vote above and share your voice below...

[ynp]

Yes, I am interested in the camera, to supplement my S2 and to use my S lenses on a High ISO camera. I will consider the SL of and when the S-SL adapters are available. The 007 is too expensive as a second camera for my use. 

24 megapixel is fine for people shooting in my view. 

[Robert Kohlman]

If I were 20 years younger, not retired, and if there were no other current, decently priced "R-soulutions", I might opt to get one.  But, alas the Leica SL is too little, too late, and too much money for me.    My Canon 5D mk II and 6D with adapters (along with 24-105 and 100-400 Canon lenses) are my digital platform for use of my 15-or-so R-lenses.  All The Canon equipment cost less than the price of the Leica SL body.    I still shoot my film M2 and M4, along with my various R-models, but continue to struggle with the price of film/processing vs. digital imaging.  I love my R-lenses, but can only use them in stop-down mode on the Canons,  thus relegating their use in non-action situations.  I shoot a lot of race venues, so I use the full automation of the Canon and their lenses.  I have been a die-hard Leicaphile since 1966 starting with the Leicaflex Standard, but time and evolution of digital imaging products have forced me to temper my desire for newer Leica offerings. 

[leitztozeiss]

I've just about convinced myself to get a Q, and also this SL to use with M glass until the 90-280mm, which will be welded to the SL. They hooked me with the "fastest autofocus" claim......

Edited October 23, 2015 by leitztozeiss

[Daedalus2000]

 

Many will be drawn to it but like the M240, will wait a year and pick it up second hand for lest than 1/2 the retail. The R adapter is at least a year away.

 

 

You can use the R->M and M->T adaptors together at the moment. I am not sure you get all the functionality but it should work.

[dkCambridgeshire]

You can use the R->M and M->T adaptors together at the moment. I am not sure you get all the functionality but it should work.

 

Novoflex already lists a Leica R to T adaptor i.e. the LET/LER  … which should work on the SL … assuming it does not trigger the APS mode. 

 

dunk

[Printmaker]

Everything about this camera is exactly what I expected. Sure, I'd like one. But for the same money I could get two nice used lenses for my S2 which might be a better investment. However, I reserve the right to change my mind.

[wudai_e]

Right now the entire part of the internet that actually cares about this camera has formed an opinion: This is a Sony copy. Can Leica shake that impression after the camera is released into the wild? I don't think so.

 

Cheaper cameras copying range finder style sells: Fujifim. 

Cameras copying cheaper cameras and trying to sell at three times the price without a decent lens line up: um... dare I say Hasselblad? And how did it work out for them? 

 

What Leica has is their range finder style of shooting. They need to hold on to that, trying to expand market share with just a "me too" against the bigger competition who can dish out cheaper more tech advanced "gadgets" much more quickly isn't going to work.

 

They should've focused on how to make the current M thinner and lighter, I would've been drooling for one if this is what they release but oh well, we can always hope right? 

[NZDavid]

I have always liked the M designs for their inherent simplicity and ergonomics as well as quality. I use wide rather than long lenses more often. I like optical viewfinders. I would have some need for an SLR-type camera on some occasions, but could not justify the expense of the SL when there are other more affordable options.

 

I still think a new SLR-type pro camera makes sense and is a smart move by Leica. I think we are unlikely to see a large number of Leica SLs suddenly cropping up at big sports matches or media events, but I think it will appeal to pros who get to choose their own gear.

 

I also think the success of the SL depends to a large extent on efficiency of servicing and how reliable it turns out to be – which, of course, is unknowable so far.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Daedalus2000]

Novoflex already lists a Leica R to T adaptor i.e. the LET/LER  … which should work on the SL … assuming it does not trigger the APS mode. 

 

dunk

 

The triggering of the APS mode is a good point.... I guess we can be sure that given that the M->T does not trigger that mode that the two adapters solution may work. Personally, I saw the Novoflex adaptor but given that I have an M and a T the two adaptors made more sense for me.