pico Posted October 30, 2015 Share #1 Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) My view, for better or worse, is that most of the negative criticism of the SL is from people who play in a game of impressionistic chatter which is the lowest common denominator of internet discourse - entirely immaterial, without personal experience of the camera. Nothing times nothing is nothing. Edited October 30, 2015 by pico 14 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 Hi pico, Take a look here Enough is enough.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ravinj Posted October 31, 2015 Share #2 Posted October 31, 2015 You are obviously speaking for yourself and I agree. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 31, 2015 Share #3 Posted October 31, 2015 I'm with Pico. Many pages with with most of us trying to work out what this camera is about - very little real information, lots of rationalisation and too much noise based on bigger all. That's just the way it is. Once we get cameras out, opinions will flow, digilloyd or some one will announce (shock horror) more banding, crappy this or that. Not without justification, after all, we had IR issues with the M8, sensor cracks with the M9, colour balance with the M(240), then the not so real like red filters on the Monochrom etc. the race will be the first to find it and publish about how crap Leica is. The rest of us will probably just keep on taking pictures. 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fcomarin69 Posted October 31, 2015 Share #4 Posted October 31, 2015 My view, for better or worse, is that most of the negative criticism of the SL is from people who play in a game of impressionistic chatter which is the lowest common denominator of internet discourse - entirely immaterial, without personal experience of the camera. Nothing times nothing is nothing. Amen Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KariP Posted October 31, 2015 Share #5 Posted October 31, 2015 Good topic! I've been wondering the same ... but this is how chat forums are. People waited for a camera with Q sensor, hi-res EVF and ability to shoot M-lenses. That's what we are getting. Was it so horrible that they moved the EVF from the corner to the centre of the camera and gave the bonus of using autofocus S, T and SL-lenses. This gives the camera much larger customer base (as a back up body for S users, step up for T users and new customers who need/want autofocus and possibly a zoom). Now finally Leica offers autofocus bodies in all three sensor sizes. As already figured out the size and weight of the body are OK (in line with M(240)+MFG+EVF). But then the brag about the lens (size and weight)... I've been traveling around with Olympus E-5, E-3, E-PL2 + 7-14 f4, 14-35 f2, 50-200 f3,5-4 plus stuff. My bag weighed 9-10 kg. And I was happy! My approach goes like this: my weight is 72 kg. With the bag we are 82 kg. As there are many people who by themselves weigh more and their bones, joints and muscles can take it why couldn't mine. And as far as holding the camera goes .. people pay for gym cards to be able to lift weights. E-5 + 14-35 f2 was about 1,8 kg ... so my SL + 24-90 won't be that bad. I have (pre)ordered one and I will be enjoying shooting with it! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted October 31, 2015 Share #6 Posted October 31, 2015 Nothing wrong with good honest criticism. It shows people care. Worse if they totally ignored a new product. Still, in relation to critics, I do have some sympathy for the comment attributed to British playwright John Osborne: "Asking a working writer what he thinks about critics is like asking a lamppost what it feels about dogs." 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 31, 2015 Share #7 Posted October 31, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nothing wrong with good honest criticism. It shows people care. Worse if they totally ignored a new product. Still, in relation to critics, I do have some sympathy for the comment attributed to British playwright John Osborne: "Asking a working writer what he thinks about critics is like asking a lamppost what it feels about dogs." Provided the critics know and understand what they are talking about ... but unfortunately some do not. They might regard their criticism as 'honest' … others regard it as predictable and inevitable negativity. If they made a trip to their nearest dealer to actually try the product it would be more to their credit. And when they repeatedly start singing the praises of their own non-Leica cameras and lenses on this forum … dunk 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglou Posted October 31, 2015 Share #8 Posted October 31, 2015 All the critics mean to me people where awaiting an upgraded M and where not really desiring an all new system DSLR sized. Now time will tell, a future SL might have more pixels, more new autofocus lenses and maybe a smart adapter fot Leica R lenses, actuating the diaphragm. It will presumably take many years before this new proposal becomes attractive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted October 31, 2015 Share #9 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) I really want to stay out of these tribal wars, but all this spec bashing of Leica led me to prepare this: Of course there are many other specs (and comparing 1DX FPS with SL FPS is probably silly), but MP isn't the only one. Personally, skin tone, AF, and ergonomics are more important to me than either MP or FPS, and DR at the level of modern cameras is fine across the board. Matt (Should have added a point at (80, 0.8) for the Phase One XF with IQ380 back ) Edited October 31, 2015 by mgrayson3 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomlianza Posted October 31, 2015 Share #10 Posted October 31, 2015 Hi to all, If I have a critique of Leica, it would be simply about their presentation of their cameras and the lack of coherent specifications for each camera line on their website. No camera universally fits everyone's work style, but when I look at Leica's range of cameras today, it is just so confusing. The new SL is clearly in a league of its own and for many users it simply will never be a must have. When I look at my collection of cameras and lenses, I have found that mirrorless bodies can accept nearly every lens. My fuji x pro 1 is very happy with Nikon, Leica R and leica M lenses. The electronic view finder with peaking is very easy to use. If I could afford it, I probably would buy an SL. but I just purchased an M 240. I sold most of my Fuji system (XT 1 many lenses) because of short battery life, viewfinder issues in bright light, very poor flash performance, to get the M 240 which is heavier and has worse flash performance. I felt that auto focus on the mirror-less Fuji bodies failed too often relative to my Nikon D800. The key point to be made is that the SL is analogous to a Swiss army knife, it is bigger and heavier than other blades, but it has much wider potential for use. One thing is certain however: If they are serious about auto focus, it had better be best in class. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted October 31, 2015 Share #11 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) My view, for better or worse, is that most of the negative criticism of the SL is from people who play in a game of impressionistic chatter which is the lowest common denominator of internet discourse - entirely immaterial, without personal experience of the camera. Nothing times nothing is nothing. I can't agree. I think you're taking it too seriously. This is a forum for discussing Leica cameras. Here's a new one that very few of us have yet seen, but because nearly all of us are enthusiastic about Leica, we're interested in it and want to talk about it, and I can't see anything wrong with that. I'm sure they'd rather try using it, but for most people that opportunity doesn't yet exist, so they do the next best thing and chat about it. We can't expect all reactions to be positive, so what else do you expect? Edited October 31, 2015 by Peter H 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted October 31, 2015 Share #12 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) A scatter plot of a search on this forum for the words "fail" and "disaster" shows heavy concentrations in the threads relating to the SL. I haven't done this search myself - I just made this statistic up. But it could be true. And it's my opinion anyway. Edited October 31, 2015 by LocalHero1953 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 31, 2015 Share #13 Posted October 31, 2015 Disaster (noun): A camera that naysayers cannot afford. Just kidding . 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted October 31, 2015 Share #14 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) I've chosen to go with the SL over buying an MM246 based on the specs, the instruction manual, and the lenses I have that I want to put to good use. I find using those lenses with the M-P to be too clumsy for me, and believe from what I've seen of the SL thus far that this will not be the case with it. Some of the user reviews have been useful and illuminating, mostly because I'm familiar with the reviewer and their personal predilections, and know how those map to my own. The constant negativity in some of the forum chatter I find to be an annoyance, and it obstructs sensible, reasoned discussion. I wish that folks who don't like or are not interested in this camera would simply state so and then let it go, rather than attempting to convince me and everyone else how much better their Fuji/Sony/whatever solution is. I have other cameras too and find them excellent for what I use them for. They're all different, and all have their compromises and issues. I've tried to do what I plan to do with the SL with them, and thus far have not found them to be the solution I wanted. I Suspect Leica knows their lenses better than any of them, or I, and presents the best solution for my needs. Edited October 31, 2015 by ramarren 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted October 31, 2015 Share #15 Posted October 31, 2015 Disaster (noun): A camera that naysayers cannot afford. Just kidding . If you can't afford it, then it's a camera that only wealthy amateurs with more money than photographic ability will buy, and then they'll just fondle it. (A corollary of this proposition is that wealthy people are those with more money than you) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo63 Posted October 31, 2015 Share #16 Posted October 31, 2015 I really want to stay out of these tribal wars, but all this spec bashing of Leica led me to prepare this: Of course there are many other specs (and comparing 1DX FPS with SL FPS is probably silly), but MP isn't the only one. Personally, skin tone, AF, and ergonomics are more important to me than either MP or FPS, and DR at the level of modern cameras is fine across the board. Matt (Should have added a point at (80, 0.8) for the Phase One XF with IQ380 back ) you appear to have made an error in your chart - the 1DX does 12fps (14FPS in high speed mode with no AF and the mirror locked up - mirror drops and AF resumes when you lift the shutter button back off "full press") but i agree entirely with your point - to me the important bit is the way a camera feels to use, i love the M, everything is laid out logically. I havent handled an SL yet, and i am unlikely to buy one, but bickering about DR, Megapixels and ISO is just silly - if the camera does what you need, then nothing else matters, many of those bitching about DR don't understand how to use the camera properly, chasing MP is pointless unless you make big prints, and as a photojournalist working afternoon/evening shift, i rarely go over 6400 ISO (with a f2.8 lens) the SL will be just fine, I'm not sure how its priced in the rest of the world, but here in Australia, for the price of a SL and 24-90 i could pick up a 1DX, 24-70, 70-200, pair of speed lights and a transmitter - and still have enough left over for a bag, lightstands etc - if i was buying my own work gear, i know which way i would end up going. Buying a Leica isn't done with the head though, part of it is done with the heart, if you need a connection with the camera, then you need to buy THE right camera for you, for me it was an M, and i am sure the SL will find a home with many who connect with it like i do with my M. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted October 31, 2015 Share #17 Posted October 31, 2015 Whether or not someone is legitimate to criticise a product, does not really matter in terms of reaching the heart of the client and, consequently, sales. Perception is reality, in a way. This is not exact science (so far). For me the answer is simply, that the SL is just plain ugly beyond all repair. Luckily, I am not earning any money (and never would, probably) from photography, so I can easily afford this opinion. Would I consider it sometime as a complement to the M9 and a replacement for the Q, if it would look really good and would have some interesting and small primes available? Most likely, yes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belle123 Posted October 31, 2015 Share #18 Posted October 31, 2015 I think everyone with an opinion just got a spanking - ha! Haven't even laid eyes on the SL other than photos and reviews and doubt I will until go to the big city again, as just picked up a new M246(yeah!). But I do think there are many pluses with the SL that I hope to see in other cameras Leica produces. I do agree some of the critics have gone a bit overboard. But, makes for entertaining reading. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 31, 2015 Share #19 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Come on guys. Those of you that are fortunate to own Leica gear are in the less than one percent group, as defined by the market share and for some, income. I believe we can take a little criticism. Conversely, it must be gratifying to own a less expensive camera that can claim the best ISO. Rick Edited October 31, 2015 by Rick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 31, 2015 Share #20 Posted October 31, 2015 People discissing a new Leica camera on a Leica camera forum?! How very dare they! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.