What Happened to All the Forum Members that Said Their DSLR Stays Home?

[barjohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There quick searches on the Forum reveal the following results:

 

1. DSLR stays home 155 hits

2. DSLR too large 308 hits

3. DSLR too heavy 672 hits

 

Yet, suddenly a 2Kg camera is desirable.  There are too many threads in this forum where the owners of M8s, M9s, M... have stated that while they own a Nikon X or a Canon Y, those cameras stay home because they are too large or too heavy or both.  Suddenly those same individuals (at least some of them) are ready to purchase a DSLR with the red dot that is just as big and heavy, has less real capability and costs more?  Makes me think that it was lack of exclusivity or the red dot that really motivates these buyers more than what they stated.  Maybe they should have said they stay home because they don't give me the status I deserve.       

[Advertisement]

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

[sumolux]

Good question indeed !

 

But I think the answer is maybe right in front us: Leica glass.

Even the most fervent Leica hater admits to 'the love'.

And I suppose that some people might be willing to carry the extra load if the results perhaps warranted the extra calories?

[wildlightphoto]

Compare apples with apples.

 

The R8/DMR is a little over 1.5 kg, the Leica SL is 847 g (vs. the Leicaflex SL, about 750 g).  I'd be using the same lenses on any of these cameras so the weight savings would be about 650g less the weight of the adapter.  That's nearly a Leicaflex SL in weight savings.

[jaapv]

And 847 grams is a mite less than 2 Kg...

[Leicaiste]

 

There quick searches on the Forum reveal the following results:

 

1. DSLR stays home 155 hits

2. DSLR too large 308 hits

3. DSLR too heavy 672 hits

 

Yet, suddenly a 2Kg camera is desirable.  There are too many threads in this forum where the owners of M8s, M9s, M... have stated that while they own a Nikon X or a Canon Y, those cameras stay home because they are too large or too heavy or both.  Suddenly those same individuals (at least some of them) are ready to purchase a DSLR with the red dot that is just as big and heavy, has less real capability and costs more?  Makes me think that it was lack of exclusivity or the red dot that really motivates these buyers more than what they stated.  Maybe they should have said they stay home because they don't give me the status I deserve.       

 

 

 

An SL with M lenses will not that much larger than an M 240 with the same lenses.

 

You cannot say the same about a Canon 5D III equipped with the equivalent lenses. 

[ramarren]

My SLRs and DSLRs often stay home because I prefer to carry lighter equipment when out and about, yes. That's why I own lighter weight, smaller, yet still very high quality cameras. 

 

But said cameras are necessarily more limited in versatility, haptics, and capability than my SLRs and DSLRs. At times when the versatility and haptics matter, I eschew my preferences and take on the additional burden of carrying the larger, heavier camera. 

 

Are you you saying that just because I prefer one thing, I must never—CAN never—do the other thing regardless of how sensible it might be to getting what I want done? That's a bit silly, don't you think?

 

I've lately been carrying both M-P and R8 quite frequently. Using a macro lens on the M-P is a little awkward and a cinch with the R8. In the end, it doesn't make much difference .. They weigh within a few ounces of each other and both do a superb job. The SL will be the same as the R8—actually a little closer to M-P than the R8—and will provide an excellent digital capture solution for my walk around use with longer lenses. 

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well Jaap

the SL with the 24-90 is about 2 kg

(probably about the same as an M240 with a 24, a 35, a 50 and a 90.)

 

But even if all those messages were by different members it doesn't really amount to a very big proportion of the LUF crew.

 

I have this funny niggling feeling that BarJohn is trying to stir us up with taunts of hypocrisy (but nobody will rise will they

[LocalHero1953]

 

There quick searches on the Forum reveal the following results:

 

1. DSLR stays home 155 hits

2. DSLR too large 308 hits

3. DSLR too heavy 672 hits

 

Yet, suddenly a 2Kg camera is desirable.  There are too many threads in this forum where the owners of M8s, M9s, M... have stated that while they own a Nikon X or a Canon Y, those cameras stay home because they are too large or too heavy or both.  Suddenly those same individuals (at least some of them) are ready to purchase a DSLR with the red dot that is just as big and heavy, has less real capability and costs more?  Makes me think that it was lack of exclusivity or the red dot that really motivates these buyers more than what they stated.  Maybe they should have said they stay home because they don't give me the status I deserve.       

 

Sometimes a post is of more interest for what it says about the poster than for its content

[lct]

Some (most?) Leica users were expecting a smaller SL to be honest. As far as size is concerned, i would have preferred an R4-like to a Leicaflex-like body personally. R8 & R9 were even bulkier. 

 

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!

[jaapv]

Well Jaap

the SL with the 24-90 is about 2 kg

(probably about the same as an M240 with a 24, a 35, a 50 and a 90.)

 

But even if all those messages were by different members it doesn't really amount to a very big proportion of the LUF crew.

 

I have this funny niggling feeling that BarJohn is trying to stir us up with taunts of hypocrisy (but nobody will rise will they

Well, my M240 with 105-280 and extender is closer to 3 Kg (+150 g for the EVF ). It is still my preferred long lens combo.

[wildlightphoto]

Some (most?) Leica users were expecting a smaller SL to be honest. As far as size is concerned, i would have preferred an R4-like to a Leicaflex-like body personally. R8 & R9 were even bulkier. 

 

I can't speak for these most? Leica users, only for myself.  The R4-sized bodies are too small for me.

[Valau]

Hi All,

Last Thursday I visited Richard Caplan's shop and had the opportunity to handle the SL, Len Lyons, who showed it to me, did say the same as above about the weight of the SL + 24-90 lens, I got my M(240) + 50mm Summilux and compared them, in my opinion they were both of very similar weight and both were perfectly balanced with their respective lenses on!

the SL is a superb camera and does everything I would want of a camera, I will be able to use ALL my Leica lenses from screw, M to R,

David

[Leicaiste]

Some (most?) Leica users were expecting a smaller SL to be honest. As far as size is concerned, i would have preferred an R4-like to a Leicaflex-like body personally. R8 & R9 were even bulkier.

 

comp.jpg

Those measurement of the SL are taking into account the handgrip. They give a wrong impression of the real volume of the body.

 

Once you add a lens, the handgrip size is not important.

 

One should compare the size of the Leicaflex, R4, R8 and SL with the same lens. Let's say a R Summilux 50.

 

By the way, the SL 601 is the only of them which can work with the three Summilux 50. The M, R and L (SL).

[lct]

Those measurement of the SL are taking into account the handgrip. They give a wrong impression of the real volume of the body. [...]

 

Well even in 2D comparisons it is still a 147x104mm body vs 139x88 for my dear old R4s and 127x94 or something for a Sony A7. Just a fact, nothing to be ashamed about but it's like a class S MB sort of. Smaller than a limo but still big enough to emerge from the crowd .

[helged]

Add a hand grip plus EVF2 to M240, and the weight is essentially that of the SL. So no real difference for such a comparison.

[Peter H]

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

I have this funny niggling feeling that BarJohn is trying to stir us up with taunts of hypocrisy (but nobody will rise will they

 

Jono, I don't think it's hypocrisy at all, but I do think there's a little bit of rationalisation going on.

 

I don't think there's much wrong with that of course, being a prime exponent of the art.

[fastcar888]

 

There quick searches on the Forum reveal the following results:

 

1. DSLR stays home 155 hits

2. DSLR too large 308 hits

3. DSLR too heavy 672 hits

 

Yet, suddenly a 2Kg camera is desirable.  There are too many threads in this forum where the owners of M8s, M9s, M... have stated that while they own a Nikon X or a Canon Y, those cameras stay home because they are too large or too heavy or both.  Suddenly those same individuals (at least some of them) are ready to purchase a DSLR with the red dot that is just as big and heavy, has less real capability and costs more?  Makes me think that it was lack of exclusivity or the red dot that really motivates these buyers more than what they stated.  Maybe they should have said they stay home because they don't give me the status I deserve.       

 

 

I cannot speak on behalf of the Leica community; however, for me I am flat out tired of lugging vast amounts of equipment. Like some, I  have a high end Nikon DSLR with some of their best lenses. Do I think Leica lenses are superior? Yes. Nevertheless, I find that if  a camera is accessible and easy to carry, then I use it. Look at what the iPhone has done. My DSLR Nikons are stationary, and stay at home. My new Q is the go-to camera. When I owned the Leica M's, they became of go-to camera and lenses. 

 

I am in the camp of smaller cameras (like the Q), that do not require a flash more most situations. Micro 4/3 gained popularity for that reason. Leica has so much go give to its customers.  I hope they stay on the Q path. Although I can afford it, if were in the market for a DSLR, I would not choose Leica because I don't see the value or the rationale when compared to other high end systems. But I am not a pro. Some pro's  or non-pro's may feel it is worth it.  

 

IMHO there probably is validity to BarJohn's post. Owning a Leica, is part of an exclusive community;  one that can be rewarding, technically beautiful, uncommonly artistic, and fun. Having  experienced the privilege of being on a Leica retreat, I know that it is a bonding experience.  If one wants to spend 20k-50K to join the club, so be it. 

[IkarusJohn]

I'm not really sure if I fit this category or not.

 

I was a dSLR user (film - F5), and when my gear got stolen I was starting from scratch (after a fashion - I still had a Hasselblad system).  I'm not a pro and have no such aspirations.  I just like taking pictures, and I like to have gear which suits what I do.

 

So, no gear, I went into the camera store - told them what I had before, and they presented some new options.  They were particularly enthusiastic about the brand new Canon 5Dmk2.  I held what felt like a lump of plastic in may hands, with a huge lens, all covered with buttons and things I just new I would never take the time to understand, let alone use.  The aperture setting wasn't on the lens, and the shutter setting wasn't on the body, and I just felt depressed.

 

I did further research and found the M9 - a lot of internet searching and checking exchange rates and prices, and my camera finally arrived.  It was an awakening for me, and the honeymoon continues.  But, I soon ran into the limitations inherent in the M system - ranges outside 28-90 where the M excels.  We've been over this again and again, so I won't repeat it here.

 

So, I tried a number of systems to use in parallel with my M system.  The NEX-5n was nice, but too small, the kit lens was ho-hum and so I gave it to my son.  Next was the A7r - not for me.  Then a D800E - nice, but HUGE and complicated (sadly we never got on).  Then the Leica T - nice, but the EVF blackout was a killer for me, and it was too small.

 

So, next option - the SL.  I haven't ordered the AF zoom (yet), and won't be ordering the 90-280.  I will be using it with my M lenses and an R APO 180/2.8 & APO extender 2x.  That gives me the relatively compact M lenses from 15-90, and reasonable 180 and 360 (with extender).  Will I run into the same issues I have run into before?

 

Time will tell, but it's worth a try.  

 

Why not just use my M cameras?  No EVF, no live view, no video (really not sure about video, to be honest), no AF (haven't got along with AF recently, but it was good on the AF-S Nikon I had with my F5), no telephotos, no weather sealing etc etc.  I want a robust camera I can use for travel without taking lots of primes, and is good for sports, bird photography etc.

 

On paper, it looks like the LS might be the ticket.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ramarren]

I went to an annual gathering of friends this morning. I slung my X under my arm and had a great time. I made five exposures when I went out for a quick walk around the block. The X is small, silent, light, and never in the way. 

 

This is afternoon I needed to capture some items for a sale I'm managing. A short stint of tabletop work, in other words. I could bend the M-P to do it, and did with an adapted lens and the EVF, but it's not the camera best suited to this use. Either of the D750 or E-M1 or SL would do it better and faster. Tomorrow I'll go downtown for lunch and people photos at an event .. The M-P will excel at that. 

 

When I head down to Santa Cruz wharf to capture surfers, seals, gulls, and sails on Thursday, I need long lenses, tripod, etc. the SL or D750 will do that best ... 

 

The right tool for a job, that's all. 

[pico]

All this talk about weight and bulk leads me to to ask just what is acceptable. Is the upper limit from the elder Leica users? Is it a special set of younger users accustomed to lesser cameras ?  Just what is too heavy?