Would you prefer an R10 over SL?

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't find it surprising at all.

 

However, my conclusion ... I'm not sure I reached one yet.  I xhaven'tbeen prepared to be too critical of the new system until I understand it better.  On paper, and from what I've seen, I can understand why people I respect tremendously have reviewed the thing pretty thoroughly, used it for a few weeks or months (until the shine of a new toy has worn off, as one put it), and they've confirmed their orders..............

 

..........................................

Thankfully, even if I decided today to buy the camera and confirmed my order (I have lodged an order), I would still have plenty of time to change my mind.  Leica can't even give me an NZ price yet, let alone a delivery time.  I ordered my 28 Summilux in May last year, and still no word on when I might get that ... It's all just vapourware down here.

 

 

These sort of discussions often lead to polarised views, though I suspect you and I are quite near the centre.

 

There are a lot of things I like about the SL, but at the moment it feels like a number of nice ideas put together yet failing to make a coherent and compelling whole. But that's just an opinion like all the others, both positive and negative. The good reviews are encouraging, but not really persuasive yet, though nor should they be expected to be.

 

At heart, I'm questioning (not rejecting) the idea that the EVF is enough to justify a whole new system, because it certainly won't be a unique feature in a full-size DSL camera for long and then the SL will have to compete on its other features, which don't sound terribly advanced right now and they're not even available for us to try out yet, so time is a bit of an enemy to Leica in this regard too.

 

I believe that the future will encompass EVFs and good OVFs will become rather rarified luxuries, which by definition means that other qualities than an EVF will be needed to beat the competition and I don't relish Leica's resources being directed towards a camera that, entirely subjectively, holds little interest for me personally Neither does a DSLR which the SL feels most like. I acknowledge that Leica understands all this far better than I do, but that in itself doesn't influence my photographic preferences.

 

In some respects I'm arguing with other opinions than yours here John, but that's the nature of a forum, so please indulge me. Thank you...

[mjh]

What I meant to say is telecentric is not a requirement for the SL, but seems to be how Leica has chosen to position the native SL lenses, possibly as a way of differentiating from the M and R lenses.

What differentiates SL lenses from M and R lenses is that they are AF lenses. Still the SL can deal with any of these.

[Advertisement]

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

[cpclee]

I'm not making a prediction, I'm simply entertaining the possibility that if Leica had made the S a full frame camera, they wouldn't have done well, and even better in the long haul when competition exists.

 

As far as I can see, in 5 - 10 years the competition will be most intense in mirrorless, not SLR.  So is it so wise to head that way?

 

 

So you suggest Leica should launch a new DSLR system and simply wait until the likes of Canon and Nikon wither; then whatever DSLR market share is left is owned by Leica and their DSLR business will finally be profitable. Well, good luck with that.

[cpclee]

I quote Wikipedia's entry for "telecentric lens":

 

"Telecentric lenses tend to be larger, heavier"

 

Wikipedia articles are not known to be error free, but this description is consistent with my understanding of telecentric designs.

 

 

Again, (near) telecentricity has little to do with lenses being big and heavy. You are barking up the wrong tree.

 

What differentiates SL lenses from M and R lenses is that they are AF lenses. Still the SL can deal with any of these.

[thighslapper]

'Dunk, that's more than once now that you've suggested that people who less than enthusiastic about the SL are somehow attempting to be aggravating, or are dinosaurs. I don't think that's helpful or friendly.

 

Can we discuss our different thoughts about cameras without resorting to this kind of thing please?'

 

I'm a genial Stegosuarus. 

 

Still think cameras with mirrors are heading for extinction though. 

 

Leica have always ploughed a rather lonely furrow that at times has wandered a bit erratically ...... part of the charm really 

Edited October 29, 2015 by thighslapper

[davewolfs]

The SL is a brand new system, not an adequate solution for M or R lenses.

 

M lenses are better served by the Leica M and telemeter.

If Leica wanted a R lenses solution it would have built an adaptor transmitting diaphram command.

The S lenses adapt better on the S.

 

When you consider that you do not believe any more all said about a camera playing in another field than the Sony Alpha, this is the one to compare the SL with.

 

Now an updated M with up to date EVF would make sense, or a SL if Leica was able to provide an adequate adaptor closing automatically the diaphragm when the shutter is triggerred.

They could even build or make build by others same smart adaptors for Nikon and Canon lenses allowing autofocus.

They would not lose much since their dedicated lenses are very few, for the moment.

 

More generally the problem for Leica is getting state of the art sensors, Sony seems to have winned the race and still gaining speed.

That's why i am not optimistic on the future of the SL.

Perfecting the M was a much less dangerous choice and at the same time more useful for Leica customers.

 

Someone please remind me why you need the diaphram to adjust when using an EVF? 

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, understood. A camera waiting for a system.

 

Hmm. Lessee ... One native lens available at launch. Dedicated flash units available at launch. Remote release available at launch. Adapters for M and R lenses available at launch. How many six-bit-coded M lenses does that imply? How many supported R lenses? 

Bellows unit, extension tubes ... et cetera. 

 

Yes, it's a new system camera, with a pretty extensive existing system ready to be exploited and a future system of lenses and accessories yet to come. All will come to pass in time. 

 

G

[asiafish]

It depends on what the R adapter ends up looking like.  If it has automatic stop-down, then the SL will in fact be a modern R.

[wildlightphoto]

Someone please remind me why you need the diaphram to adjust when using an EVF? 

 

Using the Sony a7II I find I can get closer to critical manual focus more quickly with the lens at full aperture vs. lens at working aperture.  Stopping down at the moment of exposure increases DOF and reduces the effect of minor focussing errors.  Very useful with active subjects.

[IkarusJohn]

Using the Sony a7II I find I can get closer to critical manual focus more quickly with the lens at full aperture vs. lens at working aperture.  Stopping down at the moment of exposure increases DOF and reduces the effect of minor focussing errors.  Very useful with active subjects.

 

This is what Tim Ashley recommended with the M(240) using Live View.

 

I haven't used an automatic aperture camera since my Nikon F5 and Hasselblad 503cx, but I have used the Sonys and the Leica T with EVF.  I understand what people say about the benefits of focusing wide, then stopping down just before the shot, but to be honest I would only do this with static shots where focus was critical.  Most off the time, handheld, the adjusted brightness of the EVF is fine for focusing.  Unlike with an optical SLR, the viewfinder does not go all dark and horrible and critical focusing is as easy to achieve as any other focusing.

 

In short, a non-issue in my experience in actual use.  Somewhere back in the mists of the forum, I posted some kitesurfing pictures where I was knees deep in the tide with a NEX-5n and Distagon 15/2.8 and they are perfectly crisp (from memory), shot at working aperture.  There is no difficulty in my experience doing this, but if you are really worried about it, focus wide and stop down as Tim suggests.  I've never bothered, nor needed to.

 

Cheers

John

[ramarren]

John, 

 

That's pretty much what I've said too, the many times I've been asked about it. Open wide for critical focus and then stop down when needed ... Most of the time, at modest apertures, there's no need but it's a useful technique for absolute critical focus. Even Tim Ashley seems to agree with that. 

 

Having moved from mirrorless back to SLR a few times since 2008, I have to say that it's almost always a retrograde step. You do it because there's something in the SLR system you're returning to that is simply not approachable with the mirrorless system. I don't think that's going to happen with the Leica SL. 

[wildlightphoto]

In short, a non-issue in my experience in actual use.  Somewhere back in the mists of the forum, I posted some kitesurfing pictures where I was knees deep in the tide with a NEX-5n and Distagon 15/2.8 and they are perfectly crisp (from memory), shot at working aperture.  There is no difficulty in my experience doing this, but if you are really worried about it, focus wide and stop down as Tim suggests.  I've never bothered, nor needed to.

 

Try using a 280mm lens to photograph a hummingbird.  There's no time to manually stop the lens down, or to move a focus point, or to magnify the view.

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!

Edited October 30, 2015 by wildlightphoto

[lct]

Great pic but if you have the time to open, stop down and shoot, you have even more time to stop down and shoot.

[wildlightphoto]

Great pic but if you have the time to open, stop down and shoot, you have even more time to stop down and shoot.

 

The whole point is I don't have time to open, stop down and shoot.  The photo was made with the R8/DMR which has a 1965-technlogy automatic aperture mechanism.  It's a technology I'd like to use in a modern camera.

Edited October 30, 2015 by wildlightphoto

[ramarren]

Doug, 

 

The likelihood is that you wouldn't have to. You rarely need any focusing aid with a 280mm lens, and even at f/11 the focus point will just pop in at those distances. I've spent a lot of time with a 600/8 mirror lens .. Finding the focus point is simply not an issue. (Getting enough DOF ... That's an issue!)

 

Of course, auto diaphragm operation would be nice, and no one can say yet whether it will be a part of the dedicated R Adapter SL when that comes out. My point is that it's not really a necessity; it's a nicety that you might well find yourself defeating a lot of the time inorder to better visualize the DoF. 

 

Actually, a larger issue with EVFs and very long (or very high magnification) work is display jitter. The Sony A7's 60fps refresh suffers badly as light levels decrease and long lenses become hard to hold steadily enough to frame and focus. The Olympus E-M1 with 120fps refresh and more adaptive compensating behavior does a huge amount better. I'll be very interested to see how well the SL's EVF does in this regard, although I do expect it to be good. 

[biglou]

Douglas, Leica communication about a R and M solution is misleading, i am with you here, R lenses need automatic diaphragm and M lenses the optical viewfinder the M has.

You cannot reliably and quickly focus these lenses when the diaphragm is closed using an EVF.

So yes, you can use R and M lenses on the SL, also on the Sony A7r as a matter of fact but with obvious limits.

[lct]

[...] You cannot reliably and quickly focus these lenses when the diaphragm is closed using an EVF. [...]

If i can everybody else can.

[ramarren]

Douglas, Leica communication about a R and M solution is misleading, i am with you here, R lenses need automatic diaphragm and M lenses the optical viewfinder the M has. You cannot reliably and quickly focus these lenses when the diaphragm is closed using an EVF. So yes, you can use R and M lenses on the SL, also on the Sony A7r as a matter of fact but with obvious limits.

 

You say that with such didactic surety ... I wonder what I did with the A7 for the year and a half I experimented with it? :-)

 

In all that time, I never once found focusing R lenses to be a problem, and they were basically all I used with it. I did find imaging quality and the overall clumsy, klunky operation of the Sony to be a problem, which is why I sold the thing. 

[wildlightphoto]

Of course, auto diaphragm operation would be nice, and no one can say yet whether it will be a part of the dedicated R Adapter SL when that comes out. My point is that it's not really a necessity; it's a nicety that you might well find yourself defeating a lot of the time inorder to better visualize the DoF.

 

 

Are you familiar with my photos?

 

Visualizing DOF is the least of my worries.  For my subjects it's really simple, there isn't any DOF.  When I do have the luxury of being concerned with DOF or the appearance of out-of-focus areas DOF preview is as simple as pressing a button, and I do that long before the subject is in the viewfinder.  The DOF preview is 1959 technology.  When DOF is an issue I have time to push a button.

 

What I don't have time for is manually stopping a lens down when subjects like a hummingbird are within the field of view for a fraction of a second.  In that fraction of a second I find I can get much closer to precise focus with the lens at full aperture.  I don't have time to magnify, move the magnified box and focus, I don't have time to tweak the focussing ring back and forth when the lens is stopped down and the transition between 'focussed' and 'almost focussed' is much less abrupt.  Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

 

PS just to clarify I am currently using the 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R and other longer lenses on a Sony a7II.  I am familiar with the benefit of the brighter viewfinder when the lens is stopped down.

Edited October 30, 2015 by wildlightphoto

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[biglou]

 

You say that with such didactic surety ... I wonder what I did with the A7 for the year and a half I experimented with it? :-)

 

In all that time, I never once found focusing R lenses to be a problem, and they were basically all I used with it. I did find imaging quality and the overall clumsy, klunky operation of the Sony to be a problem, which is why I sold the thing. 

 

 

 

My " didactic surety " comes from experience having tried R, M lenses (and Otus) on an A7r.

If you have time and photography static subjects, it can be done perfectly aperture closed using magnification and eventually bracketing.

 

Try now to photography the subjects Douglas likes (with as good results) or walk with an M lens and be ready anytime should the " decisive moment " comes is really something else.

In the good old days testers measured the lag when trigerring the shutter and the quickest was best.

With an EVF (on the Sony, i don't know about the Leica) first you must wait for it to start functioning, and this do not take milliseconds...

At last for me.

Edited October 30, 2015 by biglou