wildlightphoto Posted May 25, 2016 Share #1 Posted May 25, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) My time with Thorsten Overgaard's Leica SL has come to an end I've written a review and posted it on my website at http://www.wildlightphoto.com/SL/index.html 14 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 25, 2016 Posted May 25, 2016 Hi wildlightphoto, Take a look here my SL review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
DMarc Posted May 25, 2016 Share #2 Posted May 25, 2016 Thank you for taking the time to write this. I think your review is "spot on". I have the same experience with the viewfinder when trying to photograph sport outdoors: a real let down :-( This has been discussed in another thread here and extensively on the getdpi forum, but there does not seem to be a solution. This camera is a pleasure to work with M lenses by the way ;-) Marc 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnloumiles Posted May 25, 2016 Share #3 Posted May 25, 2016 (edited) Some great wildlife shots! I assume if enough people speak up about the VF brightness issue it will be fixed with firmware. I don't shoot wildlife or fast moving objects so I haven't run into this problem. I went with the SL because it has everything I want and need in a Leica camera (which does include the ability to shoot professional video) and have not run into anything that has taken away from what I consider the best camera on the market right now. I know a lot of people make an issue of the size but I never really got the race to find the smallest housing possible for a full frame camera. To me the A7 cameras are too small for working on a job yet the image quality is at that level. I think the SL balances on the line between the ability to handle in all situations while using both Leica M lenses and large AF lenses, yet not break into DSLR territory. I traded in my M9 and S2, I'm all in on the SL and so far it's proven to be the right choice. Edited May 25, 2016 by johnloumiles 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted May 25, 2016 Share #4 Posted May 25, 2016 Good review, Doug. While it doesn't meet your needs/expectations, for me and my way of working the viewfinder behavior is right on the money. For my uses, the SL combined with either the SL24-90 lens or the R lenses I have outperforms every other digital camera I've owned in the past 15 years. Thank heavens there are plenty of good choices to cover photographic needs that are as diverse as ours! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted May 25, 2016 Share #5 Posted May 25, 2016 Thanks Doug - for being clear and providing strong arguments based on excellent examples. Let's hope Leica provides a fix; it should be doable, I would think. And please continue to post your images - it's a great inspiration! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 25, 2016 Share #6 Posted May 25, 2016 Thank you Doug. You wrote: « The camera's viewfinder defaults to automatic brightness mode, with 'exposure simulation' mode enabled with a half-press of the shutter release or by pressing the exposure simulation mode button on the front of the camera. The viewfinder reverts to the default automatic brightness mode after each exposure. » Do you mean the VF reverts to auto brightness even if the shutter release remains half-pressed after the shot? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted May 25, 2016 Author Share #7 Posted May 25, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Do you mean the VF reverts to auto brightness even if the shutter release remains half-pressed after the shot? I didn't try that. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
skimmel Posted May 25, 2016 Share #8 Posted May 25, 2016 I went with the SL because it has everything I want and need in a Leica camera (which does include the ability to shoot professional video) Hi johnloumiles, what has been your experience shooting video? Are you able to compare it to other options for shooting video (like Sony)? Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted May 25, 2016 Share #9 Posted May 25, 2016 (edited) Doug, I liked the honest review. However, I was wondering, why use a FF camera for wild life? Smaller crop sensor will have longer reach and only downside is high ISO noise. The high ISO noise can be addressed by in body stabilization as you have noted but then there are OM-D's with stabilization and longer reach. I guess the huge number of Canon/Nikon wildlife professional use FF since latest and greatest autofocus glass is available for that sensor format. But if one prefers old manual focus lens then FF body is not providing any advantage. Edit: I think SL has advantage only when native AF stabilized lens is used. (I am just an amateur with lots of questions). Edited May 25, 2016 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnloumiles Posted May 25, 2016 Share #10 Posted May 25, 2016 I've used(rented) the A7SII for a month to work on a film project and I was disappointed. The quality of the video was not what I hoped for. The 4K didn't seem like 4K quality (opinion) and 120 fps only available at 720p (fact). Lastly the camera itself was frustrating to use with its small size and endless menus. Previously I also owned a pocket cinema camera from Black Magic. That camera was so terrible I almost threw it in the Sein. The quality of the video was good because you have so much dynamic range to work with (like 13 stops) but the camera itself was hair pulling unless you had it hooked up to a rig with a monitor and even then the tiny sensor made using anything but the widest lenses a chore. I tried the GH4 for a few days and it really is the camera every one claims it to be. I just couldn't get behind the 2x crop on my lenses and the lack of a high fps. At that point I was stuck because there is really nothing else out there unless you want to step up to the next level of camera and even most of those are lacking in some way or another. It's not until you get to the ARRI and RED cameras that you don't have to make compromises except in the wallet and I definitely wasn't at that level of commitment. Then the SL came out and pretty much solved all my problems. Leica brand/full frame/1080 120FPS plus filling all my photographic needs. Of course it took me a while to figure out I should ditch all my current cameras to buy the SL but eventually I did and I'm really happy about it so far. The video is gorgeous straight out of the camera, much better then the other cameras I tried. Considering film productions were falling all over themselves to shoot movies and commercials with the Canon 5D when it first came out and the SL bests that thing fairly easily, I'd say there's not much you couldn't do with it. (Short of trying to film the next Star Wars or Avatar;) Hi johnloumiles, what has been your experience shooting video? Are you able to compare it to other options for shooting video (like Sony)? Thanks. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted May 25, 2016 Share #11 Posted May 25, 2016 Some great wildlife shots! I assume if enough people speak up about the VF brightness issue it will be fixed with firmware. I don't shoot wildlife or fast moving objects so I haven't run into this problem. l don't shoot wildlife, but l can well understand Doug's frustration, and l would also like to "fix" exposure simulation in the EVF. But l have shot fast moving objects (a children's music and movement group, and recently a Latin dance group), and l haven't encountered the problems of the EVF going suddenly too dark or too light depending where the metering point is. My experience is limited, but my scenarios have been indoors where contrast is likely to be lower than Doug's. My point is, it's not the fast moving objects that show up the SL's EVF limits, it's the high contrast subjects and the need for spot metering (though fast moving subjects make it difficult to find a workaround). This ought to be an easy f/w fix, so I hope it comes soon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted May 25, 2016 Author Share #12 Posted May 25, 2016 Doug, I liked the honest review. However, I was wondering, why use a FF camera for wild life? Smaller crop sensor will have longer reach and only downside is high ISO noise. The high ISO noise can be addressed by in body stabilization as you have noted but then there are OM-D's with stabilization and longer reach. I guess the huge number of Canon/Nikon wildlife professional use FF since latest and greatest autofocus glass is available for that sensor format. But if one prefers old manual focus lens then FF body is not providing any advantage. Edit: I think SL has advantage only when native AF stabilized lens is used. (I am just an amateur with lots of questions). I prefer using the 24mm x 36mm sensor because medium-format digital equipment is much too big. I want to make big prints with lots of detail and none of the over-processed look that results from noise reduction. The difference between 24mm x 36mm format and cropped formats is obvious to me. CaNikon is not an option because neither company makes a 24mm x 36mm mirrorless camera and having used a good EVF I'm not interested in using a DSLR. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VVJ Posted May 26, 2016 Share #13 Posted May 26, 2016 Interesting write-up, thank you! And sorry it did not work out for you but I personally would take a Leica SL over a Sony any day. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted May 26, 2016 Author Share #14 Posted May 26, 2016 Interesting write-up, thank you! And sorry it did not work out for you but I personally would take a Leica SL over a Sony any day. I'll certainly be watching for the SL Typ 602 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonPB Posted May 26, 2016 Share #15 Posted May 26, 2016 Thank you, Doug. That was an informative and amusing review, and I appreciate the effort, consideration, and craft in photography and writing that went into it. Critical though the ultimate outcome was, I think it highlights one aspect of Leica that I particularly admire. When they hit the nail on the head for a given photographer's needs, an order of magnitude becomes reconcilable. Leica seems to embrace that one cost of pursuing excellence will be missing the target entirely for some in order to redefine the center for others. And another thank you, for Thorsten. I'm American, so I'll probably mangle this Australianism, but the phrase seems fitting: good on you, mate. Cheers, Jon 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VVJ Posted May 26, 2016 Share #16 Posted May 26, 2016 I'll certainly be watching for the SL Typ 602 For other reasons that was my initial plan as well but I gave in... and so far I have been glad I did... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VVJ Posted May 27, 2016 Share #17 Posted May 27, 2016 I traded in my M9 and S2, I'm all in on the SL and so far it's proven to be the right choice. I also own the M9 and the S2, and also the T and Q. At least a few those will probably soon be changing owners as well... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnloumiles Posted May 27, 2016 Share #18 Posted May 27, 2016 We had the same exact setup. Kept the Q (of course) and the T. I love the T, one of the most misunderstood cameras and at the same time a work of art. I also own the M9 and the S2, and also the T and Q. At least a few those will probably soon be changing owners as well... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VVJ Posted May 27, 2016 Share #19 Posted May 27, 2016 (edited) We had the same exact setup. Kept the Q (of course) and the T. I love the T, one of the most misunderstood cameras and at the same time a work of art. I love the T as well but at the same time I have to acknowledge that I now mainly use the Q for walkaround and with the SL I have the zoom capabilities covered as well... The T needs a bit of an ISO bump and I have never been a fan of the expensive add-on EVF, and that feeling has only gotten stronger after using the EVFs of the Q and the SL which are both excellent. Edited May 27, 2016 by JorisV 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.