Jump to content

SL - a quick hands on review!


earleygallery

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My tests this morning proved to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that when I have the choice to use an R lens or an M lens on the SL, the R lens is the right choice, at least when it comes to my available lenses 50mm and shorter. No sophistry, just the results of my tests with my lenses. 

 

 

It appears that you drew this conclusion to some degree based on color rendering.  I was impressed with Kristian's online pics color-wise using the SL zoom, and wonder if you have any opinions regarding color output from the SL versus from an M (or from an S).  Of course screen posts don't tell the whole story, and PP actions/profiles can change everything, but what do you think out-of-camera color output in general (especially print-wise)?

 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have read comments from some that they have found the SL's EVF so good that it is difficult to tell that it's not an optical finder. Well, sorry to say, I don't agree

 

 

 

I agree (with you). I tried the SL today in the new Leica store in the City and it is certainly a beautiful camera. The build quality, fit and finish, etc. is up there with the S camera and it easily feels like a 5,000 quid camera. However, I found it quite uncomfortable to hold and don't think the EVF is anything like an optical VF – not even close. Maybe I'm just too used to an RF but the TV-like view and temporary black-out after each shot would quickly drive me mad. Not for me (I bought another film body instead :D ).

Edited by wattsy
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree you wouldn't mistake it for an optical VF (I now have one to play with, and I find it excellent). But both OVF and EVF have their pros and cons, and it comes down to whether the quality of the EVF has now reached an acceptable level so that you can make your choices on other grounds. 

- OVF pros: immediacy, responsiveness, contextual view etc; cons: not WYSIWYG, unusable (on an unadorned M) for long, wide, macro lenses, difficult to supplement with focus aids, data feeds.

- EVF pros: WYSIWYG, data feeds (can be a con!); cons: black-out (as on DSLR OVF), lag (but not on SL).

 

You pays your money and you makes your choice - they both have a place - there is no absolute right or wrong - horses for courses - right tool for the job (how many cliches do you want?)

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree you wouldn't mistake it for an optical VF (I now have one to play with, and I find it excellent). But both OVF and EVF have their pros and cons, and it comes down to whether the quality of the EVF has now reached an acceptable level so that you can make your choices on other grounds. 

- OVF pros: immediacy, responsiveness, contextual view etc; cons: not WYSIWYG, unusable (on an unadorned M) for long, wide, macro lenses, difficult to supplement with focus aids, data feeds.

- EVF pros: WYSIWYG, data feeds (can be a con!); cons: black-out (as on DSLR OVF), lag (but not on SL).

 

You pays your money and you makes your choice - they both have a place - there is no absolute right or wrong - horses for courses - right tool for the job (how many cliches do you want?)

 

 

I just can't wait (another cliche for you!) for the new M which may, just may, combine the best of both worlds in a way that also reduces if not eliminates some of the cons, or at least provides an ever-present way of selecting the appropriate style of shooting for the opportunity at hand. All it needs is an SL-style EVF to stick on the top.

 

It's the prospect of this super-camera (albeit not AF) that prevents me from lusting after an SL. I really do not want to go back to mutiple camera systems.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't wait (another cliche for you!) for the new M which may, just may, combine the best of both worlds in a way that also reduces if not eliminates some of the cons, or at least provides an ever-present way of selecting the appropriate style of shooting for the opportunity at hand. All it needs is an SL-style EVF to stick on the top.

 

It's the prospect of this super-camera (albeit not AF) that prevents me from lusting after an SL. I really do not want to go back to mutiple camera systems.

 

Hmm. I don't consider the M and SL to be multiple camera systems in the way that having a Leica RF and a Nikon SLR once were. With the M and SL bodies, you can use all the M lenses interchangeably between them, and even use R lenses on both. What you can't do is use SL lenses on the M body. 

 

I have no idea what Leica will do with the next M and its viewfinder/rangefinder optical system. But I'd hate to see an M both with a permanent, huge EVF lump on top, which is likely what's required to integrate the SL EVF into the M body without removing the optical viewfinder assembly. It could be a smaller or integrated hump if you went with only an EVF, but I own the M because there are times when I want an optical viewfinder/rangefinder. 

 

It will be interesting going forward... :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think with the release of the SL, all Leica need to do with the M is get rid of all the buttons and superfluous digital options. They can now legitimately update to an M60 style rangefinder, but using brass and/or aluminum to save cost on the stainless steel. All the digital gadgetry is now in the SL. The M will just be the pure photography experience like it used to be (plus the instruction manual will be much easier to write - as long as they remind their writers that the M it not a T).

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the digital gadgetry is now in the SL. The M will just be the pure photography experience like it used to be (plus the instruction manual will be much easier to write - as long as they remind their writers that the M it not a T).

 

I think the release of the M262 indicates that the M240 replacement will not be as you'd like. As much I like the ideas behind the M60, the M262 strikes me as a pretty good compromise for the "pure" digital body – essentially an "M9" brought up to date with the electronics and mechanics of the 240 platform.

Edited by wattsy
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think with the release of the SL, all Leica need to do with the M is get rid of all the buttons and superfluous digital options. They can now legitimately update to an M60 style rangefinder, but using brass and/or aluminum to save cost on the stainless steel. All the digital gadgetry is now in the SL. The M will just be the pure photography experience like it used to be (plus the instruction manual will be much easier to write - as long as they remind their writers that the M it not a T).

 

Please, no.

 

This is exactly why I've not been as enthusiastic as I might have been about the introduction of the SL.  By all means let the M262 cater for those who feel that a video button destroys the pure photography experience, but I want the next M to be a fully up-todate RF camera with a fully up-to-date EVF attachment. Many will know that I've been concerned that the SL will encourage people and eventually Leica to allow the M to become a heritage artefact, and this seems to be gathering pace. I am not happy! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was far more noticeable than the black-out on any SLR I've owned or used but perhaps the SL I was trying wasn't set-up to minimise it?

I don't know - I haven't had a DSLR for 4 years and then it was only a 550D. That and the Leica T (and the M EVF, which is worse than either) showed me how I didn't want it implemented. My OMD-EM5ii does not black-out, just freeze-frames, which I find confusing, but is not particularly slow. I haven't done anything to tweak it on the SL. I would describe it as "fast enough" - better to have no black-out at all, but quite acceptable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, no.

 

This is exactly why I've not been as enthusiastic as I might have been about the introduction of the SL.  By all means let the M262 cater for those who feel that a video button destroys the pure photography experience, but I want the next M to be a fully up-todate RF camera with a fully up-to-date EVF attachment. Many will know that I've been concerned that the SL will encourage people and eventually Leica to allow the M to become a heritage artefact, and this seems to be gathering pace. I am not happy! 

 

Thankfully, this is not a company directed by populist desires ...

 

I'm worried about your blood pressure, Peter.  Take a deep breath, and consider that Leica has a huge history with the M camera, huge numbers of legacy M lenses, and they continue to release new M lenses and cameras.  The SL is not rangefinder coupled, and while there is an overlap in functionality, the M remains the only CRF system on the market.

 

It also makes Leica lots of money.

 

While the M cameras of the future may have similar technology (EVF, sensor, processor etc), they will always be different.  Your fears are, I'm sure, unfounded.  You should just buy an SL, then all bases are covered ... it isn't a new system, it just adds to the M system.

Edited by IkarusJohn
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It was far more noticeable than the black-out on any SLR I've owned or used but perhaps the SL I was trying wasn't set-up to minimise it?

Hi Ian

I was wondering about this - slow SD card is the most likely culprit. Having read your remarks I've been doing some careful checking (just to see that I'm not going mad). To me the blackout time is less than any dSLR I've used - it does exist, but it seems more like a punctuation mark than a blackout . . . except very occasionally when it decides to take longer - I haven't pinned this down to any set of circumstances, but it seems more common when you've just turned on the camera.

 

As far as the EVF being like an OVF  -  of course it isn't, on the other hand, . . . . .  I made a special effort to think about this today . . . .  When I'm shooting it now seems like reality - not like a TV screen, and of course, in low light it's a great deal better than an OVF. . . . the real point is that I simply don't give it a second thought.

 

A rangefinder is quite a different thing - and long may it remain so - my M cameras aren't going anywhere, but the SL seems to me to be the best non-rangefinder camera I've ever used, and that's not a bad achievement. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ian

I was wondering about this - slow SD card is the most likely culprit.

 

As far as the EVF being like an OVF  -  of course it isn't, on the other hand, . . . . .  I made a special effort to think about this today . . . .  When I'm shooting it now seems like reality - not like a TV screen, and of course, in low light it's a great deal better than an OVF. . . . the real point is that I simply don't give it a second thought.

 

Hi Jono, it might have been a slow card because playback (and zoom) was far from instant. It reminded me a bit of the old M8/9 days when the image would jump into "focus" after a second or two.  I also don't doubt for a second that the EVF is a total non-issue for you and others using the SL and I'm happy to accept that the EVF implementation is the best yet (I'm simply not experienced enough with this kind of viewfinder) but I do take issue with your point that "of course it isn't" like an optical viewfinder. In the hype around the launch of the SL, a number of commentators and reviewers suggested that the EVF was so good it was comparable with an optical viewfinder. Leica's marketing also claims as such: "Due to its exceptionally high resolution and imperceptible latency time, the EyeRes viewfinder developed especially for the Leica SL could well be mistaken for an optical finder." Of course it is only marketing but, having tried out the SL, I think that claim is very misleading and I recommend that anyone thinking of buying the camera should at least test it out first. EVF aside, the camera seems wonderful and has much to be commended for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankfully, this is not a company directed by populist desires ...

 

I'm worried about your blood pressure, Peter. Take a deep breath, and consider that Leica has a huge history with the M camera, huge numbers of legacy M lenses, and they continue to release new M lenses and cameras. The SL is not rangefinder coupled, and while there is an overlap in functionality, the M remains the only CRF system on the market.

 

It also makes Leica lots of money.

 

While the M cameras of the future may have similar technology (EVF, sensor, processor etc), they will always be different. Your fears are, I'm sure, unfounded. You should just buy an SL, then all bases are covered ... it isn't a new system, it just adds to the M system.

Ha ha! Thanks for your concern for my health.

 

I'm not as angry as I sound. I'm quite a happy and contented soul actually, and my concern about the future of the M, though real, is on a level with my anxiety about how long my current tube of toothpaste will last. Well, sort of...

 

But you're wrong. The SL is a new system. If I end up buying one it will be at the expense of my M. Therefore It will have to be an improvement over it.

 

I'm not interested into going back to parallel systems. That's why I got rid of a huge Nikon outfit, and a very comprehensive Rollei system too, in the belief, so far proven correct, that there was nothing important to me in photographic terms that an M camera couldn't do if I was prepared to use my brain.

 

The truth: the SL is attractive because it is well made, looks good to my eyes(except for the faux prism which should be a different shape if it wants to hold a claim to minimalism or purity of design) and will be fun to play with. But it won't offer me anything photographically that matters.

 

That doesn't mean I won't ever succumb, but it will be an expensive toy, a new bit of tech to play with, rather than a necessary camera.

 

For my purposes, it is a Nikon in a party frock. And we all know a nice body in a cool dress can turn heads.

Edited by Peter H
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

... 

For my purposes, it is a Nikon in a party frock. And we all know a nice body in a cool dress can turn heads.

 

 

Perfectly said!

 

I just pulled out my Nikon F6 and played with it next to the SL for a bit. I don't have an AF zooms for the Nikon, just like I don't have any AF primes for the SL, so I put a comparable speed 50mm manual focus lens on both to see how they compared (Summilux-R 50/1.4 on the SL, Nikkor 50/1.2 AI-S on the F6). 

 

  • I'd forgotten just how much noisier an SLR is compared to the SL. All that flipping mirror business and the chatter of the film transport  as well. 
  • Viewfinder blackout at the same shutter speeds is identical. 
  • Personally, I could forget that the SL has an EVF, but that's irrelevant. What is relevant is that I find the SL easier to focus manually, even without using magnification or peaking, and I even have the split-image rangefinder focusing screen in the F6. 
  • The bodies are quite comparable in size and overall shape. The Nikon's a little rounder and has a slightly more complex set of buttons, knobs, and dials to learn and work with. The SL's simpler, a little thinner front to back, and the control UI does the same job as the Nikon with a few less discrete controls. I'd say they're about equal there. 

 

(I probably should have pulled out the D750 as a comparison, but honestly I like the F6 as an SLR body more than the D750. The noise is about the same as the F6. The D750 seems to have an explosion of more buttons and other discrete controls to manage with. The SL's control UI is FAR simpler and easier to remember than the D750, for me anyway, and seems comparably fast in use set up with a manual lens or with the AF zoom.)

 

Following this with pulling out the M-P is like jumping sideways into a different universe when you switch cameras. The M-P's traditional controls are ... different ... from the SL in almost every way. It's hard to compare speed of operation, because it's much more how well your muscle memory is attuned to one camera or another, and how well you remember what the controls on the specific camera do. I don't find one better than the other, at least not in a general, first-order approximation for all shooting, just different. 

 

Which would I pick if I could only have one? That would depend on my mood when the question was asked, more than anything else. I'm glad I'm not making that choice.  ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Jono, I find some of the comments regarding the EVF rather puzzling.

With autoreview off the 'blackout' must be in the order of milliseconds and quicker than a blink ..... it is unnoticeable in use.

Having used this camera extensively for nearly a month I have forgotten completely that the EVF is not optical ....... using the zoom lens at 60mm or so that mimics the FOV of the RF window the resolution to my eyes is comparable....  and has the great advantage that the view is always bright and crisp irrespective of the light levels. 

The same applies to manual focussing, you really don't need peaking or magnification 95% of the time ...... even with the Noctilux wide open, where my tests of manual unassisted focussing were within the 'in focus' range when compared directly with FP and magnification.

Furthermore, diopter adjustment on the RF is for a fixed distance ..... and cannot correct for everything from 0.7m to infinity ..... whereas the diopter adjustment on the SL is correct for everything.

As someone with a heap of Leica cameras and uses them all, I have no vested interest in justifying my recent financial incontinence by making 'fan-boy' statements.

Half an hour in a dealers is comparable to a drive around the block in a new car ...... it tells you remarkably little about long term usage ....... there is a lot that is customisable on this camera and unless you do this you will not realise its full potential. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...