A landscape photographer Leica SL review

[Vieri]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How particular updates behave depends on the update as well as the brand and camera. For instance, all of the major updates from Olympus (2.0, 3.0, 4.0) have wiped all the settings, the intermediary ones (2.2, 3.1, 4.1) didn't. The Sony updates I did on the A7 wiped the camera, the Leica M9 ones did too, the Panasonic ones did, the Nikon didn't, etc. 

 

I agree it would be nice to have it completely automated, but I also don't see it as a huge deal. An update happens once or twice a year ... Surely it's not all that big a burden to save a profile, export profiles, and import them afterwards? 

 

Perhaps the more fundamental issue is that I really don't expect or desire so much automation. I like to know exactly what the state of my settings and camera are, and be in control of it myself. 

 

Indeed it is not a huge deal at all, and I appreciate it that other people might feel different about it. But since that is my review, I thought I'd put in whatever I'd like to see done differently or better - big or small

 

A great review and lovely photos. Thank you for posting it. I'm not personally convinced, however, that I would see the benefits of an SL for landscapes (given its DNA of being purposely compromised in terms of resolution in order to increase its speed for action shots). Landscapes are obviously one subject matter where higher rez is more useful due to nature's fine detail. I agree with you that many more megapixels would transform it. That's probably something that is oft said by certain members about all Leica's (me included), whether it's an S, M or SL ..... but I acknowledge that many others (sometimes it feels like the majority??) have the opposite view and see c. 24mp as a sweet spot for 35mm FF handheld cameras. And looking at how Leica keeps bashing out 24mp cameras in different formats, I'm disappointingly thinking that maybe a 40mp+ FF Leica may prove elusive for a long time.

 

Thank you very much Jon, glad you enjoyed the review and photos. About the SL for landscape, as you say it's about perfect EXCEPT for the resolution, which I'd like to see in the 40-50 Mp range. However, it has so many advantages for me that I'll put up with the skinny files for the moment being and see what Leica is going to do. I agree that 24 Mp is a sweet spot for most photographers, but if Leica wants to address ALL markets then they'll have to consider adding some Mp power to their lineup. Landscape, architectural, some studio applications would love a SL with more Mp, but not many would do the choice I did, probably, until having more Mp at their disposal...

 

Based on your review, I'm guessing you'd be pretty fond of the 4 button interface as well.  It didn't appear on the SL first.....context for the SL underpinnings.

 

I owned a Pentax 645 film camera.....and I can say that, for me, the form factor and handling of the S also wins hands down (even though I didn't keep the S).

 

No matter.   Glad the SL works for you....it might for me as well.

 

Jeff

 

Jeff, yes indeed, I would. BTW, the 4 button interface didn't appear on the S first either, I first used that interface on PhaseOne backs years before the S came out. And yes, the form factor and handling of the S wins hands down over the 645z. The SL works great for me, even if I'd like to see some more Mp...

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ramarren]

The big stopper for a Leica S system, for me anyway, is simply the cost of lenses. It's the main reason why I sat on the sidelines and didn't buy into the R system for all the time between 1968 and 2011: I simply could not afford the lenses to do what I wanted. 

 

Leica abandoning the R system was the best boon for me as people dumped the bodies and lenses for very little relative to their actual value. I had faith that something like the SL would happen so I bought lenses and a couple of R bodies until the SL came along. 

 

I bought one SL lens with the SL. It's probably the only one I'll ever buy unless some huge windfall comes my way. 

 

 

Well if buying native lenses isn't required, one can buy much less costly lenses for the S as well...Contax, Hasselblad, etc,, and use each with fully functional adapters made by Leica.  Many posting on the S forum do just that.  But I get your point.

 

You made me curious, so I considered my current four Hasselblad lenses (SWC 38mm, Planar 80, Makro-Planar 120, and Sonnar 150) and compared them against the field of view I get with square format on the SL with my R lenses vs what these Hassy lenses would produce on the S 30x45 format, cropped square: 

 

 

To get to something near what the SWC provides, or the SL with R15 or WATE, would require I buy a lens in the 21mm focal length range. The nearest I can find is the Leica 24mm made for the S, which is a $8600 lens. 

 

Sorry, but that's just not even close to my reality. The Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5 was about my second or third most expensive lens purchase ever, and it cost me $2100. (The WATE was more expensive, but since I'm getting three lenses in that price it averages out to be less expensive per focal length.)  

 

I generally don't put price as the primary consideration on getting the equipment I need, but price becomes rather a big obstacle when I simply cannot afford the expense. 

[Guest VVJ]

Indeed it is not a huge deal at all, and I appreciate it that other people might feel different about it. But since that is my review, I thought I'd put in whatever I'd like to see done differently or better - big or small

 

Fuji cameras initially wiped all settings as well.  People bitched about it online and Fuji fixed it quickly...

 

We are not talking rocket science here... Leica really has no excuse for not fixing this quickly...

[Jeff S]

BTW, the 4 button interface didn't appear on the S first either, I first used that interface on PhaseOne backs years before the S came out. 

 

As I already noted....post #4....it's these connections, which helped form the basis for the SL, that I thought were worthy of mention.

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

 

To get to something near what the SWC provides, or the SL with R15 or WATE, would require I buy a lens in the 21mm focal length range. The nearest I can find is the Leica 24mm made for the S, which is a $8600 lens. 

 

 

 

A used S 30mm lens (24 equivalent) can be found for near $4k.....still not in your ballpark and maybe not wide enough to suit, but a lot better than the price of a new 24, which is a more recent addition to the lineup.

 

While I could stretch for an S system cost-wise, the 007 with a set of primes (which I found I would need after testing the 006 and zoom) didn't seem prudent for me either, at least not now, and as long as the SL provides another alternative.  But I'd be looking at some native SL lenses, so unfortunately the cost would still be very Leica-like.

 

I would hate to have bought a new S back when a body alone was up to $29,000 (not that long ago).  With the precipitous drop in S system prices, with the lack of new lenses that were said to be on the way years ago (tilt/shifts, tele lenses, etc), with some QC issues with S lenses, and with Leica's focus on the SL system, it will be interesting to see what happens down the road with the S system in general.

 

Jeff

[Vieri]

A used S 30mm lens (24 equivalent) can be found for near $4k.....still not in your ballpark and maybe not wide enough to suit, but a lot better than the price of a new 24, which is a more recent addition to the lineup.

 

While I could stretch for an S system cost-wise, the 007 with a set of primes (which I found I would need after testing the 006 and zoom) didn't seem prudent for me either, at least not now, and as long as the SL provides another alternative.  But I'd be looking at some native SL lenses, so unfortunately the cost would still be very Leica-like.

 

I would hate to have bought a new S back when a body alone was up to $29,000 (not that long ago).  With the precipitous drop in S system prices, with the lack of new lenses that were said to be on the way years ago (tilt/shifts, tele lenses, etc), with some QC issues with S lenses, and with Leica's focus on the SL system, it will be interesting to see what happens down the road with the S system in general.

 

Jeff

 

Used S lenses do make more sense financially than buying new, of course, but there aren't many around - especially if you look for the 24mm which is still pretty new. More, the 24 is just a 19mm equivalent, which might or might not be wide enough for you (it certainly is not for me...). The SL, even with the 24-90mm, provides a very good alternative to the S in terms of what you get at a price which is comparatively affordable (!) if you consider that to cover 24-to-90 you'd need at least 3 S lenses...   To me, if you don't need something unique to the S (whatever it might be for you, Mp, a particular lens, etc) the SL offers a pretty good alternative - and even more so if you already have M lenses (or even EOS lenses, now!).

[jrp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I suspect that the S is needed most when what you need is credibility with your clients, rather than final results, except is very particular situations.  More so, if you compare it with a 42Mpx Sony.  Yes, the medium-format look is great, but 35mm seems more practical.

[Jeff S]

Used S lenses do make more sense financially than buying new, of course, but there aren't many around - especially if you look for the 24mm which is still pretty new. More, the 24 is just a 19mm equivalent, which might or might not be wide enough for you (it certainly is not for me...). The SL, even with the 24-90mm, provides a very good alternative to the S in terms of what you get at a price which is comparatively affordable (!) if you consider that to cover 24-to-90 you'd need at least 3 S lenses...   To me, if you don't need something unique to the S (whatever it might be for you, Mp, a particular lens, etc) the SL offers a pretty good alternative - and even more so if you already have M lenses (or even EOS lenses, now!).

 

I've ended up with the SL as my likely choice, but mostly because the S option that I thought would overcome the cost hurdles (an 006 vs an 007, and the zoom rather than a set of primes), did not ideally suit for other than daylight/tripod work.  The S24 would have been a nice to have, not a real need.  

 

For me, the first priority with any camera is the viewing system.  If I don't like how I see (and focus on) the subject, nothing else matters.  The S meets this criteria in spades.  After that, a lot of things come into consideration, including the interface/ergonomics, the lenses, weather sealing, IQ that translates to my print needs, and more.  After a trial with the S006 and zoom, I found that the cons outweighed the pros, for the price I was willing to pay.  The 007 with a set of primes would have suited much better, but current costs (especially if full warranty is included) are a major deterrent.

 

With the SL, I'm still coming to grips with the viewing system.  It's terrific as EVFs go, but the tv-screen-like viewing is still jarring to me.....although I warm to it a bit more each time I test it.   And I certainly recognize its benefits (including not having to micro-adjust body/lenses, which isn't the case for some DSLR options I've considered).  As with the S, I like the interface, ergonomics, weather sealing and the lenses (albeit not nearly enough of them yet).  Unlike the S30-90, the SL24-90 works well handheld in variable conditions, due to IS, lens speed and higher camera ISO range.   The fact that I can use my M lenses on it is a bonus, but not a need.....my M lenses already work perfectly on my Ms ( I stick with 28-90). But it would be nice to have a back-up body, even for S lenses if I ever do go that route (or for that matter, a Canon).

 

I made prints from both the S and SL I tested, and while there are differences, I'm more impressed than I thought I would be with the SL files so far.  It's not medium format, but it suits many of my needs and tastes.   I'll wait until the Fall to see what the market brings, but so far the SL seems a strong complement to my M system.

 

Jeff

[CBM_Photo]

Nice Review..I took an SL to Death Valley a few weeks ago to test it for landscape and travel use. Very happy with it. Some images are here if anyone is interested : http://www.death-valley-pho-1.cbm.photography

[jmahto]

Nice Review..I took an SL to Death Valley a few weeks ago to test it for landscape and travel use. Very happy with it. Some images are here if anyone is interested : http://www.death-valley-pho-1.cbm.photography

Very nice pictures. Death Valley is my favorite place to shoot.

[Vieri]

I've ended up with the SL as my likely choice, but mostly because the S option that I thought would overcome the cost hurdles (an 006 vs an 007, and the zoom rather than a set of primes), did not ideally suit for other than daylight/tripod work.  The S24 would have been a nice to have, not a real need.  

 

For me, the first priority with any camera is the viewing system.  If I don't like how I see (and focus on) the subject, nothing else matters.  The S meets this criteria in spades.  After that, a lot of things come into consideration, including the interface/ergonomics, the lenses, weather sealing, IQ that translates to my print needs, and more.  After a trial with the S006 and zoom, I found that the cons outweighed the pros, for the price I was willing to pay.  The 007 with a set of primes would have suited much better, but current costs (especially if full warranty is included) are a major deterrent.

 

With the SL, I'm still coming to grips with the viewing system.  It's terrific as EVFs go, but the tv-screen-like viewing is still jarring to me.....although I warm to it a bit more each time I test it.   And I certainly recognize its benefits (including not having to micro-adjust body/lenses, which isn't the case for some DSLR options I've considered).  As with the S, I like the interface, ergonomics, weather sealing and the lenses (albeit not nearly enough of them yet).  Unlike the S30-90, the SL24-90 works well handheld in variable conditions, due to IS, lens speed and higher camera ISO range.   The fact that I can use my M lenses on it is a bonus, but not a need.....my M lenses already work perfectly on my Ms ( I stick with 28-90). But it would be nice to have a back-up body, even for S lenses if I ever do go that route (or for that matter, a Canon).

 

I made prints from both the S and SL I tested, and while there are differences, I'm more impressed than I thought I would be with the SL files so far.  It's not medium format, but it suits many of my needs and tastes.   I'll wait until the Fall to see what the market brings, but so far the SL seems a strong complement to my M system.

 

Jeff

 

Jeff,

 

I totally agree with you re: the viewing system. As I mentioned in my review, I was very sceptic about Leica's choice of putting an EVF on their first pro full-frame (non-rangefinder) camera, but looking through it simply changed my view (pun intended). As you, I am feeling still a little uncomfortable with what you call the "tv-screen" experience, having been used to optical finders for all my life, but there are advantages to the EVF and the SL's EVF is a fantastic one indeed. As a complement to the M system, the SL is - IMHO - unbeatable. As a replacement for the S, well, it depends on what you shoot and what you need in terms of resolution. A high-res version of the SL would definitely be entering MF territory as far as IQ goes, and a system with a fast, 24 MP SL for people needing speed and a slower, 40-50 Mp SL for landscapers and studio photographers, with all the lens flexibility that the SL offers, would be a serious contender in the pro arena and a serious alterative to MF for those using it.

 

Best,

 

Vieri

[Vieri]

Nice Review..I took an SL to Death Valley a few weeks ago to test it for landscape and travel use. Very happy with it. Some images are here if anyone is interested : http://www.death-valley-pho-1.cbm.photography

 

Thank you Colin, I am glad you enjoyed the review. DV is a great place, one I keep coming back to and always want to come back from more once I leave it.

 

Best,

 

Vieri

[sillbeers15]

 

While I love Leica M cameras and have been shooting with them for years, I never used one for my landscape work - they simply aren't designed for that. Normally not a brand associated with Landscape Photography, when the Leica SL came out this time Leica's offer looked very interesting for my work and I decided to give it a try. Read to see how I liked it:

 

https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/06/landscape-photographer-in-depth-leica-sl-review.html

 

Thank you for your interest, best

 

Vieri

 

Would the launch of the Hasseblad x1D fit your wish list of a Landscape Photographer more than SL now that you can get 50MP from a medium format mirrorless?

[helged]

Would the launch of the Hasseblad x1D fit your wish list of a Landscape Photographer more than SL now that you can get 50MP from a medium format mirrorless?

 

 

The high MP count in a smallish and rather low-weight body is interesting, indeed. The success of the system might depend on the line of lenses available.

 

145 Leica lenses (old+new) can be used on the SL, plus loads of lenses from other brands. Lot's of possibilities. The central shutter used in Hx1D limits the lens choices for the Hassey, at least until smart adapters are available. 

 

That being said, many landscape photographers were more than happy with the Mamyia 6/7 system with "only" five lenses available (from 43 to 210 mm or, for most users, four lenses from 43-150 mm due to difficulties to focus the 210 mm). 

 

Looking forward to Photokina in Sep - including what Leica will/might release regarding the future of the very versatile SL system.

[wattsy]

That being said, many landscape photographers were more than happy with the Mamyia 6/7 system with "only" five lenses available (from 43 to 210 mm or, for most users, four lenses from 43-150 mm due to difficulties to focus the 210 mm).

 

 

Exactly. Many great landscape (and other) photographers use even fewer than that. Frankly, even a single fine lens combined with this new camera (ideally with an optical accessory viewfinder in the hotshoe) would make it a terrific digital camera for landscape if high resolution digital is your thing.

[helged]

In the film days, Mamyia 7/7II with the 43 and 65 mm lenses were pretty much all I used. When the digital sensors entered the scene, the dream was a digital version of the Mamiya rangefinder. Perhaps the new Hassey is as close as one can get.

 

If a distraction into the non-Leica past is allowed ... below is a photo shot with the Mamyia 7II/43mm on Fuji Provia 100F film (about 4 sec exposure time, I guess). The boat is the modern but traditional, miniature incarnation of the Viking ship, built by my uncle in the mid 1960-ies. (deleted according to the forum rules).

[Vieri]

Would the launch of the Hasseblad x1D fit your wish list of a Landscape Photographer more than SL now that you can get 50MP from a medium format mirrorless?

 

Well, while I LOVED Hasselblad's announcement, my main gripe with MF is the lack of seriously wide wide-angle options; this, sadly, doesn't address that (yet). A 30mm would provide me with a 24mm FOV equivalent lens, which is still not wide enough - and, by the way, less wide than what I got with the 28-45mm on the Pentax 645z. So, while this addresses the weight and size concern, doesn't fix the wide-angle issue for me. However, if Hasselblad will give me a 20mm (16mm FOV equivalent), then we'll start talking See below for one more point...

 

The high MP count in a smallish and rather low-weight body is interesting, indeed. The success of the system might depend on the line of lenses available.

 

145 Leica lenses (old+new) can be used on the SL, plus loads of lenses from other brands. Lot's of possibilities. The central shutter used in Hx1D limits the lens choices for the Hassey, at least until smart adapters are available. 

 

That being said, many landscape photographers were more than happy with the Mamyia 6/7 system with "only" five lenses available (from 43 to 210 mm or, for most users, four lenses from 43-150 mm due to difficulties to focus the 210 mm). 

 

Looking forward to Photokina in Sep - including what Leica will/might release regarding the future of the very versatile SL system.

 

This is my other point: the SL allows me to use a ton of M lenses that I already own, and to get down to 12mm and even 10mm once the new Voigtlander lens will be out. To me, a higher Mp count SL would be much more useful overall than the Hassy - though, that thing is damn sexy

 

In the film days, Mamyia 7/7II with the 43 and 65 mm lenses were pretty much all I used. When the digital sensors entered the scene, the dream was a digital version of the Mamiya rangefinder. Perhaps the new Hassey is as close as one can get.

 

If a distraction into the non-Leica past is allowed ... below is a photo shot with the Mamyia 7II/43mm on Fuji Provia 100F film (about 4 sec exposure time, I guess). The boat is the modern but traditional, miniature incarnation of the Viking ship, built by my uncle in the mid 1960-ies. (deleted according to the forum rules).

 

For the moment being it is, indeed. However, 43mm on the 6x7 Mamiya 7 has a FOV equivalent of 21mm, which the Hassy still doesn't offer (nor does the Pentax 645z). The Hassy 24mm H, adapted, will go down to about 19mm FOV equivalent, which is good but not extremely wide (and has a filter thread of 95mm, limiting the use of filters to very large systems).

 

All that said, I am very happy about this Hasselblad - it bodes extremely well for the future of portable, high-res MF   now we'll have to wait and see how the system develops. Until then, I will enjoy my SL and hope for a ultra-wide native lens and a higher-Mp version of the camera...

Best,

 

Vieri

[steppenw0lf]

Would the launch of the Hasseblad x1D fit your wish list of a Landscape Photographer more than SL now that you can get 50MP from a medium format mirrorless?

 

First the Hasselblad is only an announcement, no real experience, no real photos.

Second the SL is only a few months old, the lenses are not yet paid off, some not even delivered.

Third the difference (24MP vs 50 MP) is not overwhelming. There are many other options already on the market. And sensor resolution is not everything, but some seem to forget that every time they hear of a high pixel number. Pavlows dog knows how that feels.

So why should this (paper tiger) suddenly change the whole game - isn't this a strange idea ?

Congratulations: Convincing strategy to switch the camera system every few months, really professional !

 

This is a question for seekers how to burn money in the most exotic or capricious way - a colleague coined the term "advocentists" or "advodentist"  (Zahnwalt)    

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[FlashGordonPhotography]

 

For the moment being it is, indeed. However, 43mm on the 6x7 Mamiya 7 has a FOV equivalent of 21mm, which the Hassy still doesn't offer (nor does the Pentax 645z). The Hassy 24mm H, adapted, will go down to about 19mm FOV equivalent, which is good but not extremely wide (and has a filter thread of 95mm, limiting the use of filters to very large systems).

 

 

Vieri

 

The Pentax 28-45 is a 22 to 35mm equivalent and works great with Lee 100mm filters. That's close enough to be irrelevant. There's also a discontinued 25mm (19mm equiv) but they're hard to find. So the Pentax (and Leica S) has lenses as wide as the Mamyia 7II plus the option of zooms, macros and substantially longer lenses as well. Some of the lenses have IS.

 

What the new H has is size. But it needs a system to be useful. I'm very interested in the camera as the sensor is the same as the 645Z which blows the SL sensor out of the water. I'm not giving up my SL anytime soon as it fills an important place in my working kit  (and I'm even adding an S) but the 50mp Sony sensor cameras are also fabulous. I really hope it does well. I'm happy with my 645Z. If the H gets a decent set of lenses I'll probably get one but not if I have to give up the coverage my 645Z gives me now.

 

Gordon

[Jeff S]

Well, while I LOVED Hasselblad's announcement, my main gripe with MF is the lack of seriously wide wide-angle options; this, sadly, doesn't address that (yet). A 30mm would provide me with a 24mm FOV equivalent lens, which is still not wide enough - and, by the way, less wide than what I got with the 28-45mm on the Pentax 645z. So, while this addresses the weight and size concern, doesn't fix the wide-angle issue for me. However, if Hasselblad will give me a 20mm (16mm FOV equivalent), then we'll start talking See below for one more point...

 

 

The X1D will take H system lenses via an adapter, including the 24mm (19mm FOV).....but expensive and not weather sealed.

 

Jeff