ericborgstrom Posted October 31, 2015 Share #21 Posted October 31, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have canceled my SL order. First, the reasons why I first ordered the SL: Faster EVF than the M. Evidently good focus assistance for my M lenses. No rangefinder (The rangefinder is too inaccurate with 50/0,95 75/1,4 and 135/3,4; anyway in my hands). Autofocus on new lenses. The weight was a problem though. This is why I canceled: SL not as good with wide M lenses than the three years old M (J Slack, S Reid) The sensor not up to the dynamic range and high ISO performance of the 24 MP Nikon D750 two years old (DP review). And the weight of camera and 24-90 lens combo still troubles me. Actually I expected a Q with a M mount. And a class leading sensor. I will continue with my M but now it is in Wetzlar for an out of spec rangefinder adjustment. /Eric Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 31, 2015 Posted October 31, 2015 Hi ericborgstrom, Take a look here Enough is enough.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Leicaiste Posted October 31, 2015 Share #22 Posted October 31, 2015 What always surprises me is some people (specially M users) seem to be personally offended that Leica invested R&D in anything other than their beloved M system. And some R users seem to be equally offended that Leica, 7 years after stopping the R system, dared to come with an EVF camera instead of a good old DSLR. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 31, 2015 Share #23 Posted October 31, 2015 The SL needs more 'in depth' reviews than have been published so far. Personally I am waiting for some comprehensive coverage of R lenses - the ones that Jono has not used in his review - especially the better quality Solms designed zooms. Also await Tech Radar's Angela Nicholson in-depth review (she has a already remarked on the banding) … and BJP's. But, the problem with hard copy magazine reviews is that they are seldom sufficiently 'in depth' - because of the available page space. Back in the 'good old days' Geoffrey Crawley would have published a whole book as a review of an important camera. Sean Reid's promised online series of R and M lens reviews for the SL is on the way. I'm quite happy to subscribe to Sean's reviews but I wish they could be published more quickly. I guess that because Leica is a relatively small company, there are not sufficient numbers of demo SL cameras and lenses available for all the potential media reviewers to use for sufficient lengths of time to enable a broader mix of in-depth hands-on opinions. Despite the criticisms published so far I'm encouraged by the fact that Jono has ordered an SL for himself … and was also encouraged by the fact that some weeks ago he also ordered a T. Jono's review of the XV was enough to persuade me that it offered more than sufficient potential for producing quality Leica images in a broad range of lighting situations. However, the SL requires a more measured assessment - especially for those potential users who hope to successfully marry their R and M lenses to the camera. We know that SL lenses are very thin on the ground - but Leica is also aiming the camera at R and M users - so maybe reviewers should have been provided with a greater range of same (especially R optics) to show potential buyers how capable the SL is … or is not. That's what the SL's built-in lens profile software is for. dunk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 31, 2015 Share #24 Posted October 31, 2015 Dunk surely reviews are just 'heresay' and by your own admission you can't make any comment or judgment on the camera without trying it personally (even though you have done exactly that). I take it you have already placed your order ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 31, 2015 Share #25 Posted October 31, 2015 I think talking about critics isn't very accurate. We're all potential buyers Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 31, 2015 Share #26 Posted October 31, 2015 Dunk surely reviews are just 'heresay' and by your own admission you can't make any comment or judgment on the camera without trying it personally (even though you have done exactly that). I take it you have already placed your order ? There are those experienced commentators whose hands-on reviews and unbiased opinions I trust and value … and those whose comments and opinions based on hands-off nothingness and predictable unjustified negativity I do not value. Suffice to say I will be trying the SL at an early opportunity and have already booked a place to do just that. dunk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 31, 2015 Share #27 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 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 I don't think that's really accurate, Rick. The instant this camera was released, many disappointed M owners piled in pouring ill-conceived scorn on the camera; followed by what appeared to be trolls. I have no problem at all with criticism based on fact (I think my posting record shows that I have no trouble pointing out to Leica they don't live up to my expectations), but what has gone on here was generally baseless and really damaging for an important new release for the company. For those of us not looking for a new M, and who have been waiting for a camera such as this for years, it has been really quite distracting trying to cut through the vitriol to get to the facts. I'm not surprised that some here aren't interested in this camera; some don't have a digital Leica at all (James?) and aren't in the market. Why are they here? The fact that some are here, despite their lack of interest does show how important this camera potentially is (better than not being talked about), but don't be surprised if some call other forum members on pretty unhelpful posting. Criticism, it isn't; less than considered, informative posting typical of this forum, it is. Edited October 31, 2015 by IkarusJohn 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted October 31, 2015 Share #28 Posted October 31, 2015 I suppose it all boils down to whether the person considering the SL is the sort that has to hesitate and consider before laying out that kind of cash for a camera. With the M cameras, such a person has only to contemplate whether or not they really desire a new M.....There is no comparable alternative. With the SL, that person has comparable choices. The buying public, at least those bound by budget, will approach the SL in a whole different way than they consider the M cameras. Hopefully Leica has done their market research well and sell a profitable number of the SL cameras. Sometimes I wonder how any of the camera companies survive in a day when internet banter can kill a model before it even hits the street. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted October 31, 2015 Share #29 Posted October 31, 2015 I have canceled my SL order. First, the reasons why I first ordered the SL: Faster EVF than the M. Evidently good focus assistance for my M lenses. No rangefinder (The rangefinder is too inaccurate with 50/0,95 75/1,4 and 135/3,4; anyway in my hands). Autofocus on new lenses. The weight was a problem though. This is why I canceled: SL not as good with wide M lenses than the three years old M (J Slack, S Reid) The sensor not up to the dynamic range and high ISO performance of the 24 MP Nikon D750 two years old (DP review). And the weight of camera and 24-90 lens combo still troubles me. Actually I expected a Q with a M mount. And a class leading sensor. I will continue with my M but now it is in Wetzlar for an out of spec rangefinder adjustment. /Eric Have you read BJP's Damien Demolder mini review http://www.bjp-online.com/2015/10/leica-sl-test-exclusive-first-impressions-review-from-wetzlar/ and his DR comments therein? dunk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 31, 2015 Share #30 Posted October 31, 2015 There are those experienced commentators whose hands-on reviews and unbiased opinions I trust and value … and those whose comments and opinions based on hands-off nothingness and predictable unjustified negativity I do not value. Suffice to say I will be trying the SL at an early opportunity and have already booked a place to do just that. dunk So you are here making comments on the camera, even though you haven't tried it personally, yet you criticise others for doing the same simply because you don't agree with their opinions. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted October 31, 2015 Share #31 Posted October 31, 2015 ................I'm not surprised that some here aren't interested in this camera; some don't have a digital Leica at all (James?) and aren't in the market. Why are they here? The fact that some are here, despite their lack of interest does show how important this camera potentially is (better than not being talked about), but don't be surprised if some call other forum members on pretty unhelpful posting. Criticism, it isn't; less than considered, informative posting typical of this forum, it is. I don't think that's quite fair either John. There's a difference between not being interested in buying a product and not being interested in it. I'm extremely interested in the SL. It's is a very important release, and I hope it is hugely successful. That in itself is reason enough to read all about it and to talk about it on-line with others who are also interested in it. Being one of the people less enthusiastic about some aspects of the execution of the idea behind the SL, (and admittedly, but honestly, disappointed that it didn't offer me much to get excited about personally) it initially felt to me that the unremittingly positive posts from some individuals were ill-considered, unrealistic and unhelpful. I was wrong of course, just as I think you are wrong to think in similar terms about the posts which you feel are unfairly negative. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 31, 2015 Share #32 Posted October 31, 2015 I'm not surprised that some here aren't interested in this camera; some don't have a digital Leica at all (James?) and aren't in the market. Why are they here? As it happens I have (do) have digital Leica's, and if Leica made the 'right' product I might have others, who knows. I've been using Leica's for oh about 30 years, that's why I'm here, thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericborgstrom Posted October 31, 2015 Share #33 Posted October 31, 2015 Have you read BJP's Damien Demolder mini review http://www.bjp-online.com/2015/10/leica-sl-test-exclusive-first-impressions-review-from-wetzlar/ and his DR comments therein? dunk Dunk, Thank you! I can also see that the SL sensor performance is under vigorous debate in an other thread in this forum. And I fail to understand why we shall be content with a sensor that is behind the two years old Nikon D750 in DR and Leica's even older M sensor in periferal performance. /Eric Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 31, 2015 Share #34 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) I don't think that's really accurate, Rick. The instant this camera was released, many disappointed M owners piled in pouring ill-conceived scorn on the camera; followed by what appeared to be trolls. I have no problem at all with criticism based on fact (I think my posting record shows that I have no trouble pointing out to Leica they don't live up to my expectations), but what has gone on here was generally baseless and really damaging for an important new release for the company. True, but I was responding to pico's comment about the internet. I had just finished reading the comments on DPReview and I can tell you that there exists a real visceral hate and resentment towards Leica owners, the company and the products by the majority of the posters on that site. And, I might add, a misunderstanding and disrespect for other's choices and priorities. I guess I just have to realize that this is out there and all I can do is feel fortunate to own some really nice Leica gear. That was all I was saying in response to pico's somewhat negative comments about those that engage on commenting on the internet. I certainly don't feel this way towards them for their choices. Rick Edited October 31, 2015 by Rick 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 31, 2015 Share #35 Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) I don't think that's quite fair either John. There's a difference between not being interested in buying a product and not being interested in it. I'm extremely interested in the SL. It's is a very important release, and I hope it is hugely successful. That in itself is reason enough to read all about it and to talk about it on-line with others who are also interested in it. Being one of the people less enthusiastic about some aspects of the execution of the idea behind the SL, (and admittedly, but honestly, disappointed that it didn't offer me much to get excited about personally) it initially felt to me that the unremittingly positive posts from some individuals were ill-considered, unrealistic and unhelpful. I was wrong of course, just as I think you are wrong to think in similar terms about the posts which you feel are unfairly negative. I don't think there's any problem at all with being less than enthusiastic about the camera, and saying so. Let me put this another way (and this is not about you, Peter) - unmitigated adoration of Leica and all it does is just as annoying and unhelpful as negative comments based on poor or no information. Perhaps I'm misreading the posts to date, but I'm with Pico in that I sense more of the latter than the former. I wasn't at all disappointed by this camera - intrigued would be more to the point. I'm still waiting for reliable information about its performance and the performance of the lens. Jono & Sean both have the sensor slightly behind the M(240) with M cameras, though looking at his images, I'm not bothered by the performance - apart from the 28 Summicron and the 15 Distagon, I don't think I have challenging wides. Future tests will tell us more, but Jono says the 28 Summilux is fantastic on the camera. It would be good to see more with the 90 Summicron, 50 Summilux and 21 Summilux. I'm not swayed by the DPReview tests - they are so bad, something else is clearly going on; and to be honest, I have found their tests in the past to be less than convincing. Actually, it's not so much the tests as their write-ups. I would never have bought the M9 based on their review, and yet that was a really fantastic camera. I don't and have never wanted a huge MP count camera - I think it's a waste of time, and provides little gain for significant cost in terms of what the rest of the camera can do. Weight, size and price, we've already talked about - it is what it is. What these figures do give, though, is something to seize on - MP count, price, dimensions etc give people something to grab - and on those measures, the camera is really hard to justify. So, leaving aside what the camera isn't (an interchangeable lens Q with S camera performance and priced at $500 above the A7), does it do what Leica says it is supposed to do? Isn't that the point? Leica made the decision to make this behemoth, priced in the stars with yesterday's sensor (if that's what you want to think) - now we know what it is, some of us would like to know if it does what it is supposed to do. I'm sorry James, my mistake (there was a question mark) - what digital Leicas do you have? You surely haven't been using those for 30 years ... though I'm not really sure how the number of years you've been using Leica cameras really fits. Edited October 31, 2015 by IkarusJohn Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted October 31, 2015 Share #36 Posted October 31, 2015 Dunk, Thank you! I can also see that the SL sensor performance is under vigorous debate in an other thread in this forum. And I fail to understand why we shall be content with a sensor that is behind the two years old Nikon D750 in DR and Leica's even older M sensor in periferal performance. /Eric I am puzzled about the relationship suggested between age and performance. Newer is not always the same as better. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 1, 2015 Share #37 Posted November 1, 2015 So, I here you spent a few weeks out at the lake. How was it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted November 1, 2015 Share #38 Posted November 1, 2015 Disaster (noun): A camera that naysayers cannot afford. Just kidding . Or one not made for me. It's all about me. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericborgstrom Posted November 1, 2015 Share #39 Posted November 1, 2015 I am puzzled about the relationship suggested between age and performance. Newer is not always the same as better. What is suggested is that those years could have been used to develope a product ahead of competitors. Not coming out with a sensor not bettering on sensors years older. DR (Nikon D750) and periferal perfornance (own M). That is Canon's game. But otherwise younger is not per se better. You are right there. Homerus and last years bestseller, perhaps. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 1, 2015 Share #40 Posted November 1, 2015 So, I here you spent a few weeks out at the lake. How was it. Virtually no internet, e-mail, no phone, TV, newspapers, electricity or water mains, or whatever. Heaven Those interested ( couple of South Africans of course) in Rugby had to take a 20 Km boat ride 1 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.