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

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...

 

Can you see yourself going out to dinner with friends and lugging that huge camera and lens?  Where do you put it down so you can eat or have a drink?  Add two or three SL primes and you will need to be like a pro golfer and have a caddy to carry it for you.  

 

Do it all the time. Camera goes into a small shoulder bag that sits on the floor next to me or hangs on the back of my chair. The SL with 24-90 fits very comfortably into a Domke F5XB along with spare battery and a few other incidental accessories, same as my X or M-P with a couple of lenses. Or my R8 plus a couple of lenses for that matter. The R8 kit weighs more. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Manoleica]

I'm very happy with my XVario & M-P240 Safari Set.. (Both offer mouthwatering IQ)

I use a small Lowepro bag..for whichever camera I'm going to use.. Over the shoulder & away..

Absolutely agree the SL is the dream camera for some. To me the SL offers nothing I do not already have.. Now the S if I had to go the DSLR route would be my choice..

[Ai_Print]

So- if you are on the road for five weeks what will you do? Carry two systems @ 14 Kgs like I used to do with M and R or one versatile M system @ 8.5 Kg like I do now? Travel photography has no convenient access to one's home camera cupboard.

One has to decide what the priorities are in the final images.

 

A year ago, I spent 6 weeks living in my high tech solar powered camper in Death Valley, CA. I had my Leica M3 and a whole 4x5 kit with me.

 

When I eventually go to Iceland at some point, it will be nothing but Hasselblads with about 3 different black and white films.

 

In the spring it will be my Leica M3 & M6 with my only three lenses and about 70 rolls of Provia 400X in Cuba.

 

Last Spring it was my Nikon FM3A and F3 with just a 28, 50 and 105 in Costa Rica, that kit was only a tad physically bigger than what my Cuba kit will be.

 

The list goes on and on, I have a ton of gear and can make it as simple or as complex as I want it to be.

[IkarusJohn]

Crikey

[jonoslack]

Jono, to me, the Leica CL was the perfect sized camera and the Q, which I love, is very close to it in size.  However, I have seen repeated far more often than warranted that the larger size and weight of DSLRs was a major negative factor and that this was a major factor in the purchase of an M.  I, like many others was expecting Leica to produce a Q sized camera with interchangeable lenses. 

 

Can you see yourself going out to dinner with friends and lugging that huge camera and lens?  Where do you put it down so you can eat or have a drink?  Add two or three SL primes and you will need to be like a pro golfer and have a caddy to carry it for you.  

Ah! John. You came back! Not the perfect troll then

As for the mythical FF CL. -You can make the body okay, but small, high quality AF lenses seem impossible (without a screwdriver mechanism at least) I was told that if the lens is good, then the motor has to be big to move the elements, there just isn't a shortcut. 

 

The SL with the 24-90 fits neatly into the Fogg B-Leica with a WATE tucked underneath. That's what I'd take anyway with an M and 3 lenses. I've done it lots of times. With an M lens attached it's even easier. But I never use compact cameras these days, they always end up sitting at home whilst I take along something less compromised. 

[Adam]

I think the OP raises a valid point but misses the issue that there are many types of photographers.

 

Those who make a living out of photography and lustfully list their equipment and the types of projects each fits may find the SL useful provided they have the budget means, and maybe the ego.

 

I am fortunately/unfortunately not a pro. All this talk about using a specific system for a specific project is not that relevant. For me the size to image quality ratio is more important than specialized features. I have missed many shots simply because my SLR would not fit in a bag. I want a camera system to carry as often as possible and yet be versatile enough to satisfy most of my shooting needs. The M system works that way, it is better for some things, worse for others. Life is full of compromises, and I find it a rewarding challenge to make do with one system.

 

The SL is not aimed at me, mostly an opportunistic walk around photographer who needs versatility and high quality in a small package.

[Ai_Print]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

All this talk about using a specific system for a specific project is not that relevant. 

 

Sure it is, that is the point...

 

Several users of Leica M equipment on this very site try to make it do everything and it can not and in the process of describing that action / fetish, they put down other gear, take great pride in saying they have kicked other gear to the curb. The thread in the M240 section that talks of the camera not being good for landscapes due to short maximum shutter speeds is a prime example of this. 

 

And did you just suggest that I am being ego centric by mentioning the way I use my tools when there is thread after thread on here about making lists of what Leica lenses or cameras one owns??

 

Really???

 

"Crikey" folks, just relax already...

[Adam]

Sure it is, that is the point...

 

No, not for me. Note, that I wrote this in context of what is relevant for me, not for someone who is a pro.  I applaud those who use specific equipment for specific purposes regardless of the law of diminishing returns. For one, it makes for a bigger market.  But this has no bearing on my equipment decisions, which are based on my needs, abilities, and compromises that I find acceptable.

 

 

 

Several users of Leica M equipment on this very site try to make it do everything and it can not and in the process of describing that action / fetish, they put down other gear, take great pride in saying they have kicked other gear to the curb.

 

Fine, criticize their posts, not mine.

 

 

 The thread in the M240 section that talks of the camera not being good for landscapes due to short maximum shutter speeds is a prime example of this. 

 

 

For me it is best camera for landscapes. Why? Because I take it with me to shoot them, as opposed to a DSLR or a medium format camera, which I do not.

 

In an ideal setting the S is probably better, and I am sure there are even bigger imaging devices that are even better. Point is, you need to factor in other variables like portability, cost, versatility, etc. Ultimately, it is a personal choice, which I would appreciate that you respect. Just as I respect your choice to use whatever it is that you use.

 

 

And did you just suggest that I am being ego centric by mentioning the way I use my tools when there is thread after thread on here about making lists of what Leica lenses or cameras one owns??

 

 

No. I said that some pros who lust having a lot of equipment might purchase the SL not because it is economically viable, but because it will boost their ego.

 

Not sure how you came to infer what you did from my post, especially since it never mentioned you, nor did I mean to offend.  

 

Also,  having an ego is not the same as being egocentric. The first is normal, the second is a problem.

 

"Crikey" folks, just relax already...

 

For once, I agree. May I suggest  before reading, and then before replying? 

[Likaleica]

But I *never* get my head wrapped up in the brand to the point that I would say or do something as stupid as to say I leave my DSLRs at home because I find them inferior to a Leica.

 

I do. They are. I use it if I have to. Now I won't. 

[Herr Barnack]

 

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

Maybe they traded them in on SL cameras?