"Why Sony's Full Frame Mirrorless System is a Mistake" -Does any of this apply to Leica SL?

[CheshireCat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wasn't happy with Sony but I don't go over to the Sony forum(s) to complain or to persuade anyone that Leica is "better"

 

 

I was commenting to your post, as I find your "too many buttons" argument a moot point.

The only comment I made about the A7 camera is that its setup menu is crap, but I understand this could be mistaken for a subtle persuasion attempt toward coprophilic Leica users. Sorry about that.

 

If you don't like to see the word "Sony" on a Leica forum, then please complain with the admins. Meanwhile, I suggest you avoid threads with a subject containing the offending word, as users are likely going to post comments that may hurt your feelings.

[AlanJW]

I was commenting to your post, as I find your "too many buttons" argument a moot point.

The only comment I made about the A7 camera is that its setup menu is crap, but I understand this could be mistaken for a subtle persuasion attempt toward coprophilic Leica users. Sorry about that.

 

If you don't like to see the word "Sony" on a Leica forum, then please complain with the admins. Meanwhile, I suggest you avoid threads with a subject containing the offending word, as users are likely going to post comments that may hurt your feelings.

Please be assured my feelings are not hurt.  I recognize the superiority of your intellect.   Looking up, as I had to, "coprophilic", your last post, however, is quite offensive.    

[ramarren]

Perhaps I wasn't clear.  IMHO the SL's viewfinder is a good EVF and I prefer it over the vast majority of DSLR viewfinders.

 

 

Thank you, Doug. Yes, your statement wasn't particularly clear—to me, anyway. 

[CheshireCat]

Looking up, as I had to, "coprophilic", your last post, however, is quite offensive.    

 

 

Really ?

 

Allow me to explain the pun in my last post: I said that the Sony menu is crap. You accused me of trying to persuade Leica users to buy Sony. Then I said that if so, this would only work with users who like crap.

 

Irony.

I didn't mean to offend anyone, and I don't see how you could be offended. But if I did, sorry about that.

[steppenw0lf]

 

The only comment I made about the A7 camera is that its setup menu is crap, but I understand this could be mistaken for a subtle persuasion attempt toward coprophilic Leica users. Sorry about that.

 

 

 

Many do not like this style of insulting with foreign expressions and alien ideas and then adding a smiley. 

Try to keep your comments on a "non-flame" level. Then your ideas will be better accepted. 

[adamdewilde]

Oh I can't wait until we stop driving the manufacturers toward more sharpness and pixels and start concentrating on "drawing." With any disregard to the uproar this may cause I will say this out loud: I sometimes feel that the M8 in print had more of the "bite" I love from 35mm film than any other camera from any manufacturer since. This includes my current MM1, which I compare more to the look of a fine grain medium format film like TMax.

 

If someone had the courage to develop an improved 10-15mp sensor with some real punch between ISO 200-1600 without the artifice of the "clarity" slider, they would have a winner on their hands.

 

Agreed. 

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Though I don't own one or want a Sony FF Mirrorless camera, I applaud Sony for pushing ahead in the direction they've taken, making advanced cameras that many people enjoy, and putting the pressure on the industry to examine their own offerings.

 

It doesn't mean everyone has to follow Sony but the industry, the profession and many enthusiastic photographers would be the poorer without them.

[Rick]

It doesn't mean everyone has to follow Sony but the industry, the profession and many enthusiastic photographers would be the poorer without them.

 

 

Meh.  I'd still have the M.  I loved my Canon 5DII and many others continue on with Canon and Nikon.  Fuji, Panasonic and and many other companies still thrill many others too.  I'm not sure I'd go as far as saying many would be poorer without them.  Kept in perspective, I'd say they are just another camera choice.  

 

Rick

[CheshireCat]

Meh.  I'd still have the M.  I loved my Canon 5DII and many others continue on with Canon and Nikon.  Fuji, Panasonic and and many other companies still thrill many others too.  I'm not sure I'd go as far as saying many would be poorer without them.  Kept in perspective, I'd say they are just another camera choice. 

 

Or let's just say our loved Leica gear will cost less, also thanks to Sony.

[jdlaing]

Or let's just say our loved Leica gear will cost less, also thanks to Sony.

 

Not even in your wildest immagination.

[CheshireCat]

Not even in your wildest immagination.

 

You sweetheart guy.

Very romantic thinking that money is nothing compared to feelings.

The only problem here is: cameras are not women.

[stuny]

agreed.

[jonoslack]

Returning to the original article, I do think that The A7 has a serious flaw, but only one, and it doesn't seem to be fatal.......and that's the lens mount, which is clearly narrower than optimal, and can't be fixed, certainly not a problem with the SL.

 

As far as size and fiddly buttons and menus, I assume that will all be definitively fixed with the A9 which will apparently be coming later this year - clearly it's going to be a match for their excellent new G zooms ( both in size and cost). It'll be a proper competitor for the SL, which really does seem to be of professional standard (which the A7 isn't).

 

I'll be fascinated to see what the resolution is....... Also rumoured is an A7r3 with 80 mp....... The Nikon and Canon professional models are 20mp and the SL is 24. I'm not sure that 'real  professionals want more than that, let's face it, you can make a picture of a footballer as big as a house from 20 mp, and if you want to process 1000 images in an evening, then 40mp is a pain in the ass.

 

It seems that mirrorless is on the brink of "growing up" and I find it really heartening that Leica have made the first serious contender - it'll be fascinating to see what Sony, Canon and Nikon come up with.

[Guest]

I understand that these discussions are mainly for pleasure and for having a good time and forgetting about the real problems of modern life.

But is it necessary to discuss if it was a mistake to create mirrorless cameras ? 

By the way what a stupid name, I would rather discuss which better name could be used for these systems - usually an item is described by what it offers, not by what is missing (e.g. turbo charged motors; electro-cars are not called petrolless cars).

The name "mirrorless camera" reminds me of the "horseless carriages" of long ago. No name for the future ....

 

The article is mainly a fight between admirers of Sony alpha vs Fuji APS-C. Both systems completely irrelevant for me and for many others. Not even so relevant to be against them. Shrugging it off seems the right reaction... maybe uttering "how interesting" to be polite.

 

On the street do I have to overtake every car with a different brand than mine to show my cars superiority and mine ? We would call this childish behaviour. We would think that it is stupid to endanger everybody for such a vane attempt.

If I had bought a wrong car, would I need to be bragging about it  and write long articles why it is so bad ? Or what would be the cleverest behaviour ?

This person has made a wrong camera buying decision - so what ? Life is probably full of wrong decisions - some people just take some time to realize, others even much more time.

When I read these "flames" I ask myself how old is this person ? Is it a newcomer in his job and needs to get attention at any price ? Which problem (financial, personal, ...) made him try this ? Or is it just his "personal" style, his way to differentiate from the others ? His way to sell his website ?

 

Back to the SL topic. The SL is a long-term investment for me. I do not react to what others say about it - time will tell. That was probably the reason why I chose Leica in the first place (decades ago in my youth). I cannot afford to buy a new camera of this price every few months or years. So I do not really care about the next SL, and much less about the next Sony or Fuji. (I do not loathe them, I am simply slightly indifferent, now that I got the new tool, the SL)

I will think about new equipment when there is a big step (not a "quantum step", because these are the smallest possible steps in nature/physics) so for example when the sensors and lenses offer 100-200 MP (no intention to start a "new" topic again). I actually hope this will take some years ...

 

If you feel so insecure that you depend on the next hot features, on the smallest camera, on the lightest lens, then maybe you should invest some time and effort in yoga or meditation - look for "mindfulness" e.g. Kabat-Zinn to find an intro.

 

It was mentioned that "the basis of his arguments is true". Well, I do not know - I also do not want to deny it. But truth is for me something completely different, more timeless, at least longer lasting than just a short discussion or "flame".

 

Truth is, I have a lot to discover with my new SL and it will take months or years before I can say, now I really have made good use of this expensive equipment.

 

Stephan

 

I agree a lot with you. I bought the SL for the same reasons.

 

However the Internet is there for people to complain. It is much easier than any other format to bitch about making a wrong decision or a supposedly "sub-par" product. Then you have marketing gurus, you know the ones who could sell a lemon for a car...... the hype and so on. It is not always the fault of a stupid buyer. There are so many factors influencing buying decisions. Like you say and I agree it is best to slowly make your buying decision, and then having made it disregard all the chatter about new-feature-new-this-new-that.

[Guest]

.....and if you want to process 1000 images in an evening, then 40mp is a pain in the ass.

Certainly agree with that!