Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They are not. You delude yourself.

 

If your Hasselblad made crap photos you wouldn't use it, no matter that you think it looks pretty.

 

Yes they are............remember beauty is in the "eye of the beholder" The SL is UGLY. I can't say if it takes good pictures or not as I haven't paid attention to it, but the X1D is a sexy looking camera and without a doubt it will take amazing pictures in a competent photographers hand......................, remember the camera doest take the pictures its the photographer     :) 

Love

 

Neil

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

The X1D has a startup time of 7 seconds. This is in production copies.. Unacceptable. They lied about fixing all off this to their pre-order customers. I'd be pissed if I went ahead an pre-ordered one. A lot of other bugs they didn't fix according to someone who owns one. And he says they haven't told him when they'd get it settled.

 

Hope they can sort all that out in a firmware update sooner then later. Since it's a really good camera in theory for those who shoot walk about fine art work.

 

 

I'm putting my money into the new Fuji GFX. It looks as fast as the older X-T1 and I'm even talking auto focus speeds from the videos I've seen. The X-T2 is so brilliant that I have faith Fuji will do right by the GFX! And the announced lens lineup seems great. That 110/2

 

I'm listening carefully for reports about the operating speeds of both the GFX and the Hassy X1D.  The Achilles heel of these big sensors is the time to get information out without running smoking hot (which can't help image quality).  This affects shooting rate, AF speed and the quality of the liveview with moving subjects.  The fact that the SL and the X-T2, which are last year's and this year's technology, are doing pretty darned well on these measures doesn't mean that mirrorless 50 MPx MediumFormat is a reality just yet.  You can see steady increases in internal bandwidth showing up as the APS-C and FF cameras now routinely support writing to two chips.  First the SL does this, but only one UHS-ii chip, and not writing to both chips at the same time.  Then Fuji, six to nine months later supports one (X-Pro2) and two (both X-x2's) UHS-ii chips and can write raw files to one and jpegs to the second chip simultaneously.  And we start to accept without comment 10+ frames per second at the viewfinder and for shooting with continuous AF.   I hope to see these improvements move up to the "small" formats with 24 to 36 MPx in next year's APS-C and FF cameras.  An M240 refresh to the M360, anyone?  That could be done without cannibalizing sales of the SL and S.

 

scott

[Peter H]

Yes they are............remember beauty is in the "eye of the beholder" The SL is UGLY. I can't say if it takes good pictures or not as I haven't paid attention to it, but the X1D is a sexy looking camera and without a doubt it will take amazing pictures in a competent photographers hand......................, remember the camera doest take the pictures its the photographer     :)

Love

 

Neil

 

 

 

Normally you talk sense Neil, but in this case....

[LocalHero1953]

I'm listening carefully for reports about the operating speeds of both the GFX and the Hassy X1D.  The Achilles heel of these big sensors is the time to get information out without running smoking hot (which can't help image quality).  This affects shooting rate, AF speed and the quality of the liveview with moving subjects.  The fact that the SL and the X-T2, which are last year's and this year's technology, are doing pretty darned well on these measures doesn't mean that mirrorless 50 MPx MediumFormat is a reality just yet.  You can see steady increases in internal bandwidth showing up as the APS-C and FF cameras now routinely support writing to two chips.  First the SL does this, but only one UHS-ii chip, and not writing to both chips at the same time.  Then Fuji, six to nine months later supports one (X-Pro2) and two (both X-x2's) UHS-ii chips and can write raw files to one and jpegs to the second chip simultaneously.  And we start to accept without comment 10+ frames per second at the viewfinder and for shooting with continuous AF.   I hope to see these improvements move up to the "small" formats with 24 to 36 MPx in next year's APS-C and FF cameras.  An M240 refresh to the M360, anyone?  That could be done without cannibalizing sales of the SL and S.

 

scott

Some comments here on frame rate, refresh rate and EVF continuity during shooting (the achilles heal of too many previous mirrorles cameras), but not of the SL.

http://www.infofotografi.com/blog/2016/10/wawancara-dengan-dr-andreas-kauffman-dan-stefan-schulz-leica/

Scroll down to the interview, which is in English.

An interesting read for the comments on the future of the T, S, SL, and why a small SL or interchangeable lens Q is unlikely anytime soon.

[Peter H]

Thanks for posting the link Paul, interesting.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Interesting interview.  They go into a few areas that David Farkas did not reach in his interview with Schulz.  The comments on the X Vario and the T made me think that an upgraded T with better compute power and a resulting increase in AF capability might be the next offering.

 

scott

Edited October 6, 2016 by scott kirkpatrick

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting interview.  They go into a few areas that David Farkas did not reach in his interview with Schulz.  The comments on the X Vario and the T made me think that an upgraded T with better compute power and a resulting increase in AF capability might be the next offering.

 

scott

Diverting somewhat from the OP........

 

I thought long and hard about the T when it came out, but I found the EVF quality and shooting blackout unacceptable. I also thought that, given the size of the new mount, it would jump to FF in the next iteration - much more attractive. I wasn't expecting the SL. If the new TL is responsive like the SL, I'd look at it again - though conversely now I have the SL, I am very happy with the M as my small camera. Looking at the SL and TL as an integrated ecosystem, I have considered the new TL macro as an option for the SL.

 

With a nod to the OP, I still find it unclear how they can get the same synergy between the S and the SL as there is between the SL and the T: yes, there are similar interfaces, and yes, you can fit S lenses to the SL, but it's via an adapter, no different from a Hasselblad lens. I assume Sinar was bought in order to give Leica a good linked range from top to bottom, but there seems to be a discontinuity at present between the S and the SL.

Edited October 6, 2016 by LocalHero1953

[steppenw0lf]

Yes they are............remember beauty is in the "eye of the beholder" The SL is UGLY. I can't say if it takes good pictures or not as I haven't paid attention to it, but the X1D is a sexy looking camera and without a doubt it will take amazing pictures in a competent photographers hand......................, remember the camera doest take the pictures its the photographer     :)

Love

 

Neil

 

I have no idea which camera is "pretty" and which is "ugly". Most of the time I do not see it - simply looking through it.

But I touch it often, sometimes for several hours a day. So touch (haptics) is much more important. The SL feels a bit like the old Leica (R4, R5), maybe that's why I like it. In that sense the SL is "pretty" (have no other word for that).

The Fuji looks like many other MF cameras regarding size and material. I have not touched it, but from that I think I will very likely not like it.

The X1D looks different, so could be interesting to hold/use. But I do not like the lenses (too big and therefore front heavy). So the frontheavy combo is probably not really good to use. (like Rollei 6000)

Short: The SL is the best designed/best usable.        Like the S.

Edited October 6, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[lct]

R4 & R5 were significantly smaller than the SL. A breeze of fresh air then after the bulky Leicaflex and R3. Now we have another Leicaflex size wise i don't understand why.

Edited October 6, 2016 by lct

[LD_50]

R4 & R5 were significantly smaller than the SL. A breeze of fresh air then after the bulky Leicaflex and R3. Now we have another Leicaflex size wise i don't understand why.

I thought the R4 was similar in size to the Leicaflex and the Leicaflex looks a lot like an SL without the nice grip.

 

The battery size and grip on the SL help improve it's all-day useabilty for me and they contribute to its increased size relative to the old film cameras as well as other mirrorless FF cameras.

[steppenw0lf]

Add a MF lens to the SL and suddenly you are glad that it is not smaller.   

Or the SL 90-280.

The R4/R5 are smaller, but the "touch" is similar (metal and "leather"), hard and heavy for the size, with a softer part where you touch it.

Edited October 6, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Joshua Lowe]

7 second startup time?  That would rule it out for my purposes unless it has an instant-on standby mode.

[lct]

I thought the R4 was similar in size to the Leicaflex [...]

 

R4 to R7 were closer to digital Ms while SL is closer to the Hasselblad:

 

Fuji XE2: 129mm x 75mm x 37mm

Sony A7s: 127mm x 94mm x 48mm

Leica M240: 139mm x 80mm x 42mm

Leica R4s: 139mm x 88mm x 60mm

Leicaflex SL: 148mm x 97mm x 57mm

Leica SL601: 147mm x 104mm x 64mm

Hasselblad X1D: 150mm x 98mm x 71mm

[lct]

Add a MF lens to the SL and suddenly you are glad that it is not smaller. [...]

 

Been using Leica telephotos on my R4s with no problem at all. At its time, the range of R lenses went from 15mm to 800mm and Telyt 400 & 560mm were meant to be used handheld. 

[IkarusJohn]

Interesting interview linked over on Leica Rumours - it's always more informative getting honest comment from the horse's mouth, rather than tea-leaf speculation here.

 

Stefan Schulz makes a very interesting comment about frames rates and EVF blackout. The killer for me with the T was the blackout - it just didn't work for me. Stefan makes the comment that frame rate is critical for reducing that blackout (obviously). This does tend to suggest that the EVF (on top of heat from the sensor) and frame rates may be a problem.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion that while this is a great idea, the secondhand market for version 1, or even waiting for version 2, will be the ticket ...

[Peter H]

Interesting interview linked over on Leica Rumours - it's always more informative getting honest comment from the horse's mouth, rather than tea-leaf speculation here.

 

Stefan Schulz makes a very interesting comment about frames rates and EVF blackout. The killer for me with the T was the blackout - it just didn't work for me. Stefan makes the comment that frame rate is critical for reducing that blackout (obviously). This does tend to suggest that the EVF (on top of heat from the sensor) and frame rates may be a problem.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion that while this is a great idea, the secondhand market for version 1, or even waiting for version 2, will be the ticket ...

 

 

 

Yes, that sounds very possible.

 

I suspect (guess wildly) that the Fuji might be a better resolved camera in its first iteration than the Hasselblad, but neither is probably the sort of camera to buy on pre-order without having tested it thoroughly first, as Jeff has been saying all along.

[thighslapper]

Interesting interview linked over on Leica Rumours - it's always more informative getting honest comment from the horse's mouth, rather than tea-leaf speculation here.

 

Stefan Schulz makes a very interesting comment about frames rates and EVF blackout. The killer for me with the T was the blackout - it just didn't work for me. Stefan makes the comment that frame rate is critical for reducing that blackout (obviously). This does tend to suggest that the EVF (on top of heat from the sensor) and frame rates may be a problem.

 

I'm coming to the conclusion that while this is a great idea, the secondhand market for version 1, or even waiting for version 2, will be the ticket ...

 

.... and this interview does tend to confirm Leica's rather germanic philosophy of producing something with good, reliable, quality all-round performance rather than relying on a few headline features to sell a product.

 

There have been many theoretically great cameras that turn out to have an achilles heel that makes them unusable for a fair percentage of the market ....... the stupid button arrangements and menus made the A7 completely useless for me.

 

All it takes is one supremely irritating or poorly conceived design feature  and the camera is consigned to a cupboard. 

 

I'll always prefer a camera that doesn't irritate me and which I enjoy using ..... and am willing to forgo the extra pixels, menu options etc etc to achieve that. 

Edited October 7, 2016 by thighslapper

[ramarren]

The X1D has a startup time of 7 seconds. This is in production copies.. Unacceptable. ...

 

Second time I've read about the startup time, thanks - that would be a deal breaker for me.

 

 

Not even the early demo X1D units took seven seconds to boot up. I turned the demos on and off several times and they booted up in about a second, just like the SL. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[fsprow]

The X1D I tried also had a start up time of a second or so.  

[Peter H]

Not even the early demo X1D units took seven seconds to boot up. I turned the demos on and off several times and they booted up in about a second, just like the SL.

That's good to know, and much more realistic.