Vip Posted November 15, 2015 Share #1 Posted November 15, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) The new SL appears to be a gorgeous camera in any spec. But… My God the lens size are impressive. Where is the Leica M heritages? Even after seeing the impressive MTF graph this lens are beasts. Where is the SL size benefit over Leica S? It is a 24x36 mm sensor not a medium format. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 15, 2015 Posted November 15, 2015 Hi Vip, Take a look here Size Matters. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
digitalfx Posted November 16, 2015 Share #2 Posted November 16, 2015 Are you making this assumption based on photos, with no scale reference? The lens is no bigger than similar zoom lenses from other manufactures and the SL is not a rangefinder so yes the body is larger than an M body but still smaller than a DSLR. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted November 16, 2015 Author Share #3 Posted November 16, 2015 I am not making assumptions on visual impression. On numbers. The lens, not the camera are very, very big. Not bigger than competitors, but much bigger than M lenses. Are you hoping Leica following competitors mildly better or as always make a revolution, surprising anyone like did many time in the past? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted November 16, 2015 Share #4 Posted November 16, 2015 The SL is not an M. There's no reason to expect that its dedicated lenses are going to be M-sized. It's an entirely different kind of camera, closer in specification and intent to the S system. Leica M lenses are made very small for their format coverage by taking advantage of the characteristics of a rangefinder body and film characteristics, which has caused a lot of problems in bringing the M to digital capture. Leica SL lenses are designed from scratch for high performance on digital sensors. It is what it is. :-) 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 16, 2015 Share #5 Posted November 16, 2015 I am not making assumptions on visual impression. On numbers. The lens, not the camera are very, very big. Not bigger than competitors, but much bigger than M lenses. Are you hoping Leica following competitors mildly better or as always make a revolution, surprising anyone like did many time in the past? The M lenses are made to be compact for the rangefinder. There was never any prospect that the SL lenses, made with AF for the larger L mount, and made without compromise, were ever going to be the size of M lenses. They're very different things. I don't think it was ever a reasonably expectation that Leica would make the AF lenses for the SL the same size as M lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaGuy2014 Posted November 16, 2015 Share #6 Posted November 16, 2015 SL + the zoom lens in hand, it's not dissimilar to the canon 5dsr + 24-70mm f/2.8. The blogosphere has latched onto the "size" meme, but I don't think the SL's footprint is outrageous. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted November 16, 2015 Author Share #7 Posted November 16, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Originally developed for SLR cameras in which, due to the mirror box, a long back focal distance is required for short focal lengths (the distance between the back lens element and the film plane must be considerably longer than the focal length), the lenses (retrofocus design) can be more compact and ideal for mirrorless thanks to their optimized ray path. The prove is that lens as the Zeiss one, with a sturdy construction, autofocus, with excellent optical and mechanical performance can be very compact as seen on Sony full frame. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted November 16, 2015 Author Share #8 Posted November 16, 2015 The future Leica competitors are not DSLR as Canon or Nikon. These are already selling less than years ago. It will the upcoming mirrorless full frame as Sony which already a best seller. Look the size! Customers are leaving DSLR because want the same quality in a more compact size. So dot compare with those. This is already not the target Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2015 Share #9 Posted November 16, 2015 Umm - Technically, there is not much difference between EVIL and SLR lenses, provided one wants the camera to control the aperture. There is no real size constraint either as there cannot be any viewfinder blockage. Thus we can expect the lenses to be in the same size range as SLR lenses - the SL lens is comparible to other SLR lenses of similar quality - and to the better R lenses. The M range has always had much smaller lenses for the reasons above. It is surprising to be surprised at this long-established situation. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted November 16, 2015 Share #10 Posted November 16, 2015 Actually small lenses for FF mirrorless turned out to be a myth. The available small lenses are compromised, and the good quality lenses are not smaller than SLR lenses. Whether there is a mirror or not, the lens has to be at a certain minimal distance from the sensor to avoid oblique rays related issues. It is better that the camera body has some size/weight to counter balance the lenses, small light bodies with large heavy lenses do not mix well. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2015 Share #11 Posted November 16, 2015 For instance I was looking at telezooms for the Sony Alpha range, just to see if there would be a nice smallish backup lens to be used on the NEX. Forget it. They weigh in at 1500 grams more or less - and are not cheap. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 16, 2015 Share #12 Posted November 16, 2015 Now that SLs are on the street, perhaps we can now concentrate on actual performance and photos rather than this kind of opinion-led thread, which deals solely with personal preferences. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2015 Share #13 Posted November 16, 2015 Well, opinions on ergonomics, weight/size and aesthetics do influence buying decisions as well. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted November 16, 2015 Share #14 Posted November 16, 2015 Now that SLs are on the street, perhaps we can now concentrate on actual performance and photos rather than this kind of opinion-led thread, which deals solely with personal preferences. What happened to freedom of expression? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 16, 2015 Share #15 Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) What am I, an administrator? I'm just expressing my opinion. Edited November 16, 2015 by LocalHero1953 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2015 Share #16 Posted November 16, 2015 What am I, an administrator? I'm just expressing my opinion. rather than this kind of opinion-led thread, 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 16, 2015 Share #17 Posted November 16, 2015 Well, opinions on ergonomics, weight/size and aesthetics do influence buying decisions as well. Yes. And I agree that, coming from an M, these lenses are large. But, on the day these cameras hit the streets, I'm still looking forward to photos and experiences of the SL in hand. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 16, 2015 Share #18 Posted November 16, 2015 Your irony filter is set a bit high this morning. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted November 16, 2015 Share #19 Posted November 16, 2015 What am I, an administrator? I'm just expressing my opinion. Me too 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted November 16, 2015 Author Share #20 Posted November 16, 2015 Look at the size of the old zoom for Leica R for a similar focal length excursion. Was not an M size but neither an S size 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.