Leica SL a real camera for the pro.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

HI There

The point is that when hand holding - if you zoom in (of course, at open aperture where focusing is more accurate) . . . . then whilst zoomed in on your particular subject you achieve critical focus, you will not, however have any idea about composition, and in zooming out to get the composition right you will move (actually, you'll move even if you don't zoom out) . . . thus making the critical focus wrong

 

. . . . . . . . and it was never possible with optical viewfinders, whether Canon, Nikon or medium format. So I don't see how it can be that's how you've always seen it done?

 

. .  . and I'm sure my acquaintance is limited, but I don't know a single professional photographer who uses a camera with an EVF (except Red cameras for Video). 

 

The EVF of the SL is excellent - even with my slightly sub-standard eyes (not just a fool, but an old fool )I find it really easy to get good focus with manual focus lenses without zooming in . . . and without using focus peaking either. 

 

Your premise that magnification was never possible with optical viewfinders isn't entirely correct. It just isn't convenient. Even today many own an optical magnifier that they screw onto their M to achieve critical focus with some lenses. The lack of optical magnifiers in the Canikon world is simply because they have no interest in manual focus because apart from the tilt shift lenses they don't make MF lenses. Of the 3 architectural photographer I know all of them now have a Sony body specifically because they can now critically focus the 17mm TSE through the viewfinder.

 

I'd have to look it up but I vaguely remember a zoom magnifier being available as an accessory for the Nikon F3. The point is that critical focus has long been an issue with some manual focus lenses and for a long time there have been solutions limited by the technology of the day. An EVF allows some advantages in this area that Leica do not take advantage of. And just because we couldn't do it in the past is no excuse for not having it now. In the past we also didn't need the precision in focus that modern high resolution perfectly flat, two dimensional sensors require. The current M is already showing how difficult it is to get truly accurate focus from an optical system on a modern sensor.

 

Secondly you made the point about the process. I don't think this is correct either. Firstly since the focus magnify point is movable you should be able to compose/focus/shoot relatively fluidly. I certainly can with a Sony body. Because the focus magnify point moves you will be able to achieve a far more accurate focus for off centre subjects than you would on any optical finder system, all of which only have focus aids in the centre of frame. precise focus is a doodle off centre with a good EVF and magnification.

 

The process should be something like: You use the touch screen or 5 way controller to roughly place the magnifying frame on the camera. You frame the shot. Tap the 5 way controller to get magnification. Focus. Touch the shutter, adjust framing and shoot. This could be done faster than I can think it out. Doing it this way would be faster, have more accurate composition and have more reliable exposures than you could ever achieve on the M with the same lenses. Just like using a rangefinder this is simply a learned skill. It's fast and intuitive once you've done it for a while.

 

When I shoot a wedding I use the method above all day except when I'm using my M's. I use a Sony A7II at weddings specifically because I can accurately focus my 135APO, WATE and Noctilux, quickly and consistently during the wedding. On my own time when I'm not rushed and I can focus bracket I can focus great with the M. But when there's the pressure of a client I need to use the most efficient way possible to get those lenses to focus accurately ALL the time. With the Sony I can use the focus assist without taking my eye away from the viewfinder. I can also change the Shutterspeed, aperture AND ISO with the camera to my eye. This is possible but more difficult on the SL.

 

I have pretty good eyesight. Yours must be better than mine because there's just no way I can focus a WATE or MATE at mid distances with any confidence unless I magnify. A noctilux or 80-200R? Easy. But wider than 50mm or slower than 2.4 and I need magnification.

 

Finally, Leica NEED this thing to be great with MF lenses. The lens roadmap makes Sony look like they're fast at releasing lenses. Sony Australia actually included a Metabones or Sony lens adaptor when the A7 series first came out. Leica didn't even get the R adaptor ready for launch. With THREE lenses  in a whole year Leica only has the M adaptor as a single adaptor solution. They're also pushing the M lenses hard in the brochure and include the codes in firmware. Leica need to make the M lenses the best experience possible with the SL because that's all they've got until the 50 Summilux comes. Sure a decent zoom can do a lot but a working system it ain't. The vast majority of SL buyers will be M or S owners. S owners have been totally ignored because there's no adaptor for months. Leica needs M owners to love this camera for at least the next 18 months if they want to have the SL as a viable product line.

 

Considering that Leica is the only camera company that makes both cameras and manual focus lenses (excluding the Canon/Nikon TS lenses) and that they're going to rely on those manual lenses for such a long time before the AF versions arrive I find it bizarre that they didn't work the usability with M lenses out before launch. But since it seems to be the no 1 complaint I'm sure they're working on it. I sure hope they are.

 

Gordon

 

p.s. As far as this working photographer goes, the SL is still a long long way off being a single system suitable to work with. Maybe there are working photographers that can get their work done with a single body and a single zoom. I'm not one of them.

[Peter H]

Jono, I know a few pros who now use Fuji XT1s, and Fuji have a brilliant EVF (not the hybrid) that shows both the whole frame and the magnified portion simultaneously so that you can achieve critical focus while composing. Furthermore, in the magnified portion you can a variety of focussing methods. Sounds difficult but it works intuitively when the camera's at your eye, with no need ever to remove it.

 

Reading all about the SL,  in terms of the most important thing which is image quality it certainly looks and sounds impressive, and I have no doubt would surpass the Fujis and other smaller mirrorless cameras, but I suggest that for anyone not snobby about such things, Fuji have implemented to perfection many of the things that Leica seem to be struggling with. 

 

In this sort of respect, it sounds rather painfully behind the times.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Jono, I know a few pros who now use Fuji XT1s, and Fuji have a brilliant EVF (not the hybrid) that shows both the whole frame and the magnified portion simultaneously so that you can achieve critical focus while composing. Furthermore, in the magnified portion you can a variety of focussing methods. Sounds difficult but it works intuitively when the camera's at your eye, with no need ever to remove it.

 

Reading all about the SL,  in terms of the most important thing which is image quality it certainly looks and sounds impressive, and I have no doubt would surpass the Fujis and other smaller mirrorless cameras, but I suggest that for anyone not snobby about such things, Fuji have implemented to perfection many of the things that Leica seem to be struggling with. 

 

In this sort of respect, it sounds rather painfully behind the times.

 

Maybe you are not taking into account the fact that Fuji offer only APS ICL cameras and that with smaller APS sensors, innovative focusing aids are probably easier to implement.

 

Leica are still months ahead of both Canon and Nikon in the FF mirrorless market. Canon cannot introduce a FF mirrorless camera until their new lens mount is ready … maybe sometime next year … and currently it's not common knowledge as to what effect the rumoured new mount will have ref existing lens compatibility. The existing EF mount is too small diameter for a FF mirrorless platform. Canon are probably struggling more than Leica - which is maybe why Canon are lagging behind with the introduction of a FF mirrorless camera. 

 

dunk

[Peter H]

Maybe you are not taking into account the fact that Fuji offer only APS ICL cameras and that with smaller APS sensors, innovative focusing aids are probably easier to implement.………

 

.………………

dunk

I have no idea whether it's easier to achieve better viewfinder performance in a smaller, and smaller-sensor, camera. Someone would need to explain that to me because it,s way beyond my comprehension, and in my ignorance I have to say it doesn't feel intuitively that it should be terribly difficult. I'm probably wrong though.

 

Could someone please explain why?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Maybe you are not taking into account the fact that Fuji offer only APS ICL cameras and that with smaller APS sensors, innovative focusing aids are probably easier to implement.

 

Leica are still months ahead of both Canon and Nikon in the FF mirrorless market. Canon cannot introduce a FF mirrorless camera until their new lens mount is ready … maybe sometime next year … and currently it's not common knowledge as to what effect the rumoured new mount will have ref existing lens compatibility. The existing EF mount is too small diameter for a FF mirrorless platform. Canon are probably struggling more than Leica - which is maybe why Canon are lagging behind with the introduction of a FF mirrorless camera. 

 

dunk

The Sony E mount is significantly smaller than the EF mount and yet Sony don't seem to have any issues producing 35mm mirrorless cameras. And before someone jumps on me about how lacklustre the zooms are, that's only because Sony compromised to make them small and light. When they want to make a great lens they do. The 35mm 1.4, 55mm 1.8 and 90mm f2 are all world class optics. As are the Ziess E mount lenses. Also the Fuji APSC really does punch above its weight. And most of the Fujinon lenses are superb and as good as (but different to) the Leica M lenses. When the new XPro2 arrives in January with its 24MP sensor and the 33mm f1.0 standard arrives, they will become even more compelling.

 

I hadn't heard that Canon are making a new mount. Interesting. Personally i think more along these lines. Once upon a time Leica said that no professional would want autofocus. Once upon a time Kodak said that digital cameras would be a consumer product and professionals would stick with film (Leica said this too). Once upon a time Pentax said that an APSC digital camera was the largest sensor needed in a digital camera. Once upon a time Olympus said that the 4.3 sensor was the optimal design for digital sensors. Once upon a time Pentax, Olympus Kodak and Leica were the serious players in the photographic market place. However their desire to resist change, protect their legacy products that had given them all their power and their lack of ability to read the market properly bit them all in the butt. Only Leica and Olympus have survived but only just. Canon and Nikon have stated that they don't see the serious photographer moving away from the DSLR. Unless that attitude has changed in the last year and they're working furiously on a "real" mirrorless system, history could very well repeat itself.

 

The SL sensor isn't class leading. But it's a very good sensor that betters many (hello Canon). For most of us, even working photographers, we're already at a point of sufficiency with sensors. The SL has some nice features (the EVF, dual slots, ISO 50) but those will be caught very soon (actually the Sony a99 already has all of those plus much more, and a lens range). It'll be the lenses and the user experience that keeps the SL alive in the end because they just can't compete with Sony's rapid development pace and sensor fabrications or Fujis price point. Thankfully the SL is a lovely camera and superbly built. It's the best built 35mm camera in the world right now. If Leica make it the best user experience there is then it will do well.

 

Gordon

[earleygallery]

Jono, I know a few pros who now use Fuji XT1s, and Fuji have a brilliant EVF (not the hybrid) that shows both the whole frame and the magnified portion simultaneously so that you can achieve critical focus while composing. Furthermore, in the magnified portion you can a variety of focussing methods. Sounds difficult but it works intuitively when the camera's at your eye, with no need ever to remove it.

 

Reading all about the SL,  in terms of the most important thing which is image quality it certainly looks and sounds impressive, and I have no doubt would surpass the Fujis and other smaller mirrorless cameras, but I suggest that for anyone not snobby about such things, Fuji have implemented to perfection many of the things that Leica seem to be struggling with. 

 

In this sort of respect, it sounds rather painfully behind the times.

 

Funny, I just saw a post on a Facebook group I follow, a pro wedding/event guy is selling off his FF Canon gear as he's just switched to a Fuji X system.

[colonel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Fuji x-trans sensor produces wonderful photographs. Fuji have especially got the colours right, particularly for people.

However the dynamic range is noticeably less then FF in my experience and the noise only appears low due to its propensity to discard detail.

Lastly, even with the best Fuji lenses, it struggles to combined pin sharp with absolute detail and acuity.

 

There is nothing wrong with this fine sensor but I have found repeatedly that comparing APS-C cameras, however good (and the A6000 has by far the best APS-C sensor IMHO), to competent FF sensors is a path to nowhere. Also the danger of pursuing this direction is then comparison with the best of the M4/3s sensors. Even the humble RX100 turns out outstanding photos on a good day, infused with DR, colour depth and micro contrast .....

 

In terms of what pros use, I had seen plenty of "paid photographers" using APs-C systems, including the 50D, D300 and a 650D (shock horror!). It all depends on what the client expects, what the photographer is comfortable with and he/she intends to do in terms of processing and reproduction with the photos ...

[dkCambridgeshire]

The Sony E mount is significantly smaller than the EF mount and yet Sony don't seem to have any issues producing 35mm mirrorless cameras. And before someone jumps on me about how lacklustre the zooms are, that's only because Sony compromised to make them small and light. When they want to make a great lens they do. The 35mm 1.4, 55mm 1.8 and 90mm f2 are all world class optics. As are the Ziess E mount lenses. Also the Fuji APSC really does punch above its weight. And most of the Fujinon lenses are superb and as good as (but different to) the Leica M lenses. When the new XPro2 arrives in January with its 24MP sensor and the 33mm f1.0 standard arrives, they will become even more compelling.

 

I hadn't heard that Canon are making a new mount. Interesting. Personally i think more along these lines. Once upon a time Leica said that no professional would want autofocus. Once upon a time Kodak said that digital cameras would be a consumer product and professionals would stick with film (Leica said this too). Once upon a time Pentax said that an APSC digital camera was the largest sensor needed in a digital camera. Once upon a time Olympus said that the 4.3 sensor was the optimal design for digital sensors. Once upon a time Pentax, Olympus Kodak and Leica were the serious players in the photographic market place. However their desire to resist change, protect their legacy products that had given them all their power and their lack of ability to read the market properly bit them all in the butt. Only Leica and Olympus have survived but only just. Canon and Nikon have stated that they don't see the serious photographer moving away from the DSLR. Unless that attitude has changed in the last year and they're working furiously on a "real" mirrorless system, history could very well repeat itself.

 

The SL sensor isn't class leading. But it's a very good sensor that betters many (hello Canon). For most of us, even working photographers, we're already at a point of sufficiency with sensors. The SL has some nice features (the EVF, dual slots, ISO 50) but those will be caught very soon (actually the Sony a99 already has all of those plus much more, and a lens range). It'll be the lenses and the user experience that keeps the SL alive in the end because they just can't compete with Sony's rapid development pace and sensor fabrications or Fujis price point. Thankfully the SL is a lovely camera and superbly built. It's the best built 35mm camera in the world right now. If Leica make it the best user experience there is then it will do well.

 

Gordon

 

Next spring Pentax plan to announce their FF digital camera http://www.pentax.com/en/pentaxff/   … and it appears to to be a DSLR.

 

dunk

[colonel]

Next spring Pentax plan to announce their FF digital camera http://www.pentax.com/en/pentaxff/   … and it appears to to be a DSLR.

 

dunk

Pentax obviously have done the calculation that the profit in cameras is continuing to go up market.

My view is that APS-C DSLRs have had their day. FF DSLRs will hang around for some years yet for multiple reasons.

[Peter H]

Back to the point: I was not suggesting that the Fuji XT1 is better camera than the SL, even though I there are certainly dozens (at least, probably hundreds by now) of full-time pros who have sold all their full-frame gear to replace it with Fuji and sometimes, but less often as far as I know, Olympus and Sony set-ups. In the right hands, they are capable of genuinely and uncompromisingly first- class results and the cost-to-performance ratio is stunningly superior to Leica, but we all know how diminishing returns work at the very highest levels.

 

The point is, to repeat, whilst the Fujis are not, ultimately, superior to Leicas, largely because of the smaller sensors, they are not to be dismissed as lightly as some do, and there are some important respects in which they are superior. These are the areas we should examine and discuss if we want to be constructive rather than defensive when it comes to the SL. Interestingly, the size of the best Fuji lenses confirms that Leica are right when they say that top quality AF lenses can't be small. Except for the Q Summilux, which is a special case. The price differential, however, is something else, as ever.

 

This is not a dig at Leica who make my favourite camera and lenses, but it would be nothing less than partisan to suggest that there's nothing Leica could learn from Fuji who are doing an excellent job almost under the radar as far as some photographers are concerned.

[jaapv]

Pentax obviously have done the calculation that the profit in cameras is continuing to go up market.

My view is that APS-C DSLRs have had their day. FF DSLRs will hang around for some years yet for multiple reasons.

It won't be easy for them to shoulder their way into a shrinking market.

[dkCambridgeshire]

It won't be easy for them to shoulder their way into a shrinking market.

 

Not only a shrinking market - it's a very fast changing market.

 

I attended a 'future of digital imaging' presentation yesterday and was amazed by the various types of sensors (they were named) which should be available within the next few years - I wish I'd taken notes.

 

One clear message that came across was that fast lenses i.e. wide aperture lenses will not be required … by virtue of the quality images achievable with future high ISO capable sensors … and eventually, non-focusing lenses will be in general use.

 

Cameras and lenses are heading for true point and shoot capability - with no focusing being required.

 

All focusing will be achieved in the post processing … as will selective DOF … and selective post-focus will be achievable with high megapixel sensors … not just with relatively low pixel count sensors as is the case now with Lytro images. 

 

If and when this becomes reality, 'naysayers' everywhere are in for more than a few shocks. 

 

The pace of change in digital imaging will continue to accelerate. 

 

Whatever we buy now is likely to be truly obsolete within 5 years - and that will apply to both cameras and lenses. 

 

However, one additional message which also came across is that there will always be a place for film ... but in a relatively niche market. 

 

Camera and lens manufacturers are very aware of these technological changes; those that fail to grasp the nettles at the right time and make the right marketing decisions could well be left high and dry. 

 

dunk

[Peter H]

Dunk, are there any camera manufacturers who you feel are failing to grasp the nettle?

 

As you say, they are all more aware than we are of the developments in progress. I don't know who you're referring to when you talk about "naysayers" but it must be obvious to everyone that we are still closer to the late 20th century at the moment in terms of photography and that the 21st century will soon be an unrecognisably different place. And that will be good for photography.

 

The sooner we reach the point you describe, the better, in my opinion.

[colonel]

We all know about the billion pixel black carbon sensor, probably make some forms of zoom obsolete.....

 

But if we are all wearing google glasses and our whole life is videoed then you can always grab a still from anywhere that you were looking.

 

The good news is that if film stays around then our lenses will too, so that's still a long term bet ....

[dkCambridgeshire]

Dunk, are there any camera manufacturers who you feel are failing to grasp the nettle?

 

As you say, they are all more aware than we are of the developments in progress. I don't know who you're referring to when you talk about "naysayers" but it must be obvious to everyone that we are still closer to the late 20th century at the moment in terms of photography and that the 21st century will soon be an unrecognisably different place. And that will be good for photography.

 

The sooner we reach the point you describe, the better, in my opinion.

 

From what I heard last night, choosing which are the right types of nettles to grasp is the difficult bit … trying to second guess which are best … deciding which warrant using valuable R&D resources … it's a minefield and no doubt all the main manufacturers are hoping they are grasping the best of them. 

 

dunk

[Peter H]

It is a long term bet. 

 

But I can't wait for the day when photography is no longer a means for knob-fiddlers to display their expertise and the stunning "quality" of their perfectly executed photos, and remembers that it is about photographs, communication, expression, exploration and recording things that matter in their own right, not for their technical qualities which should only ever be a means to an end.

 

I feel that the end is often overlooked while we spend most of our energies fruitlessly poring over the means.

[jonoslack]

 

But I can't wait for the day when photography is no longer a means for knob-fiddlers to display their expertise and the stunning "quality" of their perfectly executed photos, and remembers that it is about photographs, communication, expression, exploration and recording things that matter in their own right, not for their technical qualities which should only ever be a means to an end.

 

I feel that the end is often overlooked while we spend most of our energies fruitlessly poring over the means.

Hi Peter

I couldn't agree more - all the cameras available these days (and lots of phones) are capable of taking a good enough photos (if the photo is good enough ). . . . 

 

I like to keep the End and the Means in completely different boxes in my brain

[LocalHero1953]

It is a long term bet. 

 

But I can't wait for the day when photography is no longer a means for knob-fiddlers to display their expertise and the stunning "quality" of their perfectly executed photos, and remembers that it is about photographs, communication, expression, exploration and recording things that matter in their own right, not for their technical qualities which should only ever be a means to an end.

 

I feel that the end is often overlooked while we spend most of our energies fruitlessly poring over the means.

I read dunk's report in totally the opposite way - it will be the knob fiddlers who will create the images out of the computer files created with a focus free, unlimited DR device, operated by an unskilled, thought-free "photographer"! 

 

Post processing rules!

[jaapv]

Images, not photographs

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[dkCambridgeshire]

I read dunk's report in totally the opposite way - it will be the knob fiddlers who will create the images out of the computer files created with a focus free, unlimited DR device, operated by an unskilled, thought-free "photographer"! 

 

Post processing rules!

 

 

Yes … that is the most likely eventual probability … the image will owe even more to post processing than at present … But not so sure about the 'unskilled' argument. However, 'the dog eat dog' manufacturers could be vying even more than at present to convince potential customers of the need to adopt their products/systems. 

 

The possible resultant consequences of such "knobbing" could completely upset e.g. the current imaging rules of R.P.S., F.I.A.P.. P.S.A. etc … whose existing rules have already required amending in recent times to take account of digital manipulation … particularly as regards natural history. 

 

Do I still want a Leica SL … and a couple of lenses? … "YES" … But I'm wondering about their place within the imaging hardware / software 'global pool' in 5 years time. 

 

Plans to sell my Leica film cameras ( and some lenses) to fund an SL are on hold … I might need to reconsider film photography in a few years time to avoid becoming a 'knobber' … and what could be better than my  M3, M5 and M6? 

 

We're getting a bit 'off topic' with this discussion. 

 

dunk