Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[gbealnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

FWIW, we've taken three X1Ds in trade in the last few months. Either for SL or S.

 

And if you get embarrassed with having too many, I'll trade my SL against one, seriously.

Gary

[IkarusJohn]

Couldn't agree more, David.

 

I get rather tired of people talking of the SL as a struggling or soon to be discontinued system (as with the T/TL).  Anything but.  I love the way that Leica worked hard and long on the SL, and it shows.  Leica's commitment to the L mount seems very firm, and I am loving using my SL and 50 Summilux-SL (the zooms have been resting).  It's a fabulous system, and when I want something smaller and/or lighter, I have the TL2 and 11-23 zoom or M system.  What could be better?

 

The X1D initially had me very interested.  That fabulous sensor in a compact package, but when the reality started to become clear, my interest cooled.  I loved my 500 series Hasselblad, but the reality of this new system had me wondering - the slow EVF, questions in my mind over whether or not the lenses would be a match for the Leica lenses I have already.  It's a commitment to jump into a new system, and while Gordon and others have made a go of it, my sense is that the X system is not as resolved as the Leica offerings.  The X1D just seems rushed to market, and I question how long it will take them to develop a more finished camera and system like the SL, and where will the SL have moved to when they do?

 

At this stage, there are four XCD lenses - 120-90-45-30, all f/3.5 primes, apart from the 90 which is 3.2.  Leica has three covering 24-280 in two 2.8/4 zooms and the 50 Summilux, with f/2 primes imminent for 90-75-50-35 and a further 16-35mm f/ 3.5/4.5 zoom.  Now, I'm sure that there will be many here who will complain they're taking too long (so are the new XCD lenses) and once they're released the AF is slow, they're too big, too heavy, too expensive or have focus shift.  The reality of the 3 current SL lenses is that they are fantastic - they can't be smaller or lighter and they cost what they cost (reasonable by Leica standards).  Critically, these lenses perform really well by Leica standards.  Do the slower XCD lenses compare?  I don't know - Gordon and others say they're very good, but are they as good?

 

I appreciate that comparing a 24MP sensor based camera with a 50MP based camera is apples and oranges, but not really.  There is increased resolution (twice as many pixels), but the sensor size itself is well less than double dimensions, I don't miss more pixels and we're still well short of the fabulous 6x6 dimensions of the wonderful 500 series camera I rather stupidly sold.  My point is the benefits of the 50C sensor are marginal for most photographers, and not enough to justify entering this new system.  For those not already invested in Leica, it could be a toss up, but the SL is well conceived and well finished, where I don't think the X1D system is (yet).

 

By the time it is, I'm guessing my SL will be dying and I will be looking at an SL4 ...

Edited January 16, 2018 by IkarusJohn

[Jeff S]

But even David believes that the S provides significant IQ advantages to the SL, not just because of resolution, but colors, transitions, etc, plus opportunities for bigger prints or cropping. Bigger sensors can make a difference, even if not close to MF film sizes. And the 50 MP of the X1D can’t hurt.

 

I for one will be putting the SL and X1D systems through their paces, taking pics and making prints. I’ll leave others to their own impressions or conjecture.

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

But even David believes that the S provides significant IQ advantages to the SL, not just because of resolution, but colors, transitions, etc, plus opportunities for bigger prints or cropping. Bigger sensors can make a difference, even if not close to MF film sizes. And the 50 MP of the X1D can’t hurt...

 

I'm sure David does.  I was expressing my opinion and my experience - 24MP is plenty, for me.  If I go to medium format, 6x6 would appeal.  ​For me the gain of going from 24MP to 50MP doesn't warrant the cost of moving to another system, and there are more advantages in remaining with the SL.

 

I for one will be putting the SL and X1D systems through their paces, taking pics and making prints. I’ll leave others to their own impressions or conjecture.

 

Wait, don't tell me. You're going to test the cameras for yourself by renting them ...  

 

I'm not sure your comment was aimed at me, or if the oh not so subtle dig about "conjecture" was also intended, but I'll play.  I had ordered the X1D and a couple of lenses, and canceled my order when reality hit.  I don't need to test every camera that might catch my attention.  I'm happy with the SL system.  That is my experience and my preference.  It is not "conjecture" that when looking at the benefits offered and the potential downsides of the X1D I decided that a switch to or addition of that system did not warrant the expense.

 

But then, I'm not sure you got that bit.

 

Cheers

John

Edited January 16, 2018 by IkarusJohn

[Jeff S]

As you wrote, “My point is the benefits of the 50C sensor are marginal for most photographers, and not enough to justify entering this new system”.

 

Did you conduct a survey, too? Or just conjecture?

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Oh yes, I did rent one camera in the last several years, the S006.

 

And the M 50 APO.

 

Hard work.

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yep, as I wrote - marginal benefit.  Do the maths, a poll wouldn't change the outcome.

[Jeff S]

Don’t need math to look at prints.

 

So all S and X1D and Pentax 645Z owners see only marginal benefits? Oh wait, the S has only 37.5 MP.... microscopic benefits, I guess.

 

Jeff

[FlashGordonPhotography]

 

I think the concept of the X1D is a good one. But it does feel rushed to market. Leica waited patiently to jump into mirrorless with the SL until all the technology was available to do it correctly. The main reason for the SL's 11 fps frame rate is the fast readout of the sensor, not sports shooting. The 4.4 MP EVF is still unmatched two years later. Contrast detect AF on the SL zooms is as fast (or faster) than phase detect AF on DSLRs, and completely silent. These achievements are not accidental. Leica wanted to build a mirrorless camera that could viably compete with OVF DSLRs.

 

People seem to forget the farce that was the SL firmware 1.0. The flash wouldn't fire at certain shutter speeds. Banding in the files. Auto ISO. The list goes on. It too was pushed to market well before the firmware was usable. I had actually told Leica my camera was coming back as not fit for purpose when the f.w. 2.0 betas started. Even now the SL firmware does stupid stuff and has dropped functions from V2. It isn't all sunshine and lollipops in SL land.

 

And it's a point to note that as of today there are more available lenses for the X1D than the THREE Leica got out in two years! Hard to see how Leica was ready to come to market with the SL.

 

And you're wrong on the AF speed. Several DSLRs still trounce the SL in AF speed, especially in CAF. Even the D500 will out focus it easily and that's not even a "pro" body. The 1Dx2 and D5 run rings around the SL. The SL AF is fine. But a DSLR killer it 'aint. As a working camera it certainly does compete in many areas against the big boys. And it's my personal choice of work horse. I have two. But not in AF. My shooting partner uses 1Dx2's. It 'aint even a close fight in CAF.

 

And finally Hasselblad have stated that DJI's investment is a minority shareholding which allowed them to ramp up X1D production due to higher than expected demand. Sound familiar (cough *blackstone* cough)?

 

I love my SL's but let's not make them out to be more than they are.

 

Gordon

[Jeff S]

Plus if one compares the larger sensor X1D to Leica’s MF system, namely the S, it’s not as if it didn’t come with issues, from lens delays (and still no follow up on once anticipated T/S lenses, teles, etc), AF motor issues, service and turnaround problems (especially US), and more.

 

Trade offs with every camera system.... as always. I appreciate having these and other great choices, despite growing pains or other issues. We’re spoiled these days.

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

I'd forgotten about the issues with FW1.0; particularly for flash. However, as I don't use flash (I have an SF40, but it doesn't seem to work at all), I found the SL worked fine with FW 1.0.  Undoubtedly FW 2.0 was a vast improvement - didn't take long to issue either.

 

As for AF, still faster than I can focus an M camera manually.  Even the "benighted" 50 Summilux works fine for me.  To be honest, though, I'm not a huge fan of AF as I can rarely get any AF to focus on what I want and to stay focussed on it, regardless of the manufacturer.  So, I tend to use manual focus, and press the joystick for AF - works well.

 

As for lenses, I don't really accept that only three AF SL lenses is a problem - they cover a far greater range than the four XCD primes, and they're faster (if that's important - not sure it is).  Both systems enable the use of other lenses with adapters, so I'm not really bothered.

 

Each to their own.

[Belle123]

 

I appreciate that comparing a 24MP sensor based camera with a 50MP based camera is apples and oranges, but not really.  There is increased resolution (twice as many pixels), but the sensor size itself is well less than double dimensions, I don't miss more pixels and we're still well short of the fabulous 6x6 dimensions of the wonderful 500 series camera I rather stupidly sold.  My point is the benefits of the 50C sensor are marginal for most photographers, and not enough to justify entering this new system.  For those not already invested in Leica, it could be a toss up, but the SL is well conceived and well finished, where I don't think the X1D system is (yet).

 

By the time it is, I'm guessing my SL will be dying and I will be looking at an SL4 ...

You are very verbose as always but get it wrong. It is comparing apples to oranges. You buy the X1d for medium format and ability to take such a small phenomenal camera places you would think twice or not even consider otherwise for medium format. It’s not designed for every circumstance, every user, etc. I get tired of these arguments. If your one of those that are going to pick and pick and pick at every flaw in comparison to the SL, then don’t buy it.

[Steve McGarrett]

I think the concept of the X1D is a good one. But it does feel rushed to market. Leica waited patiently to jump into mirrorless with the SL until all the technology was available to do it correctly. The main reason for the SL's 11 fps frame rate is the fast readout of the sensor, not sports shooting. The 4.4 MP EVF is still unmatched two years later. Contrast detect AF on the SL zooms is as fast (or faster) than phase detect AF on DSLRs, and completely silent. These achievements are not accidental. Leica wanted to build a mirrorless camera that could viably compete with OVF DSLRs.

 

As evidence that this was the camera Leica intended to build, check out this Q&A session I attended with Stefan Daniel from 2010:

 

Q&A with Stefan Daniel from 2010 LHSA Meeting in Wetzlar: Mirrorless cameras, future directions and the Leica R System

 

No one in the room, including me, realized it at the time of course. I merely thought he was referring to the next generation M camera with live view, which ended up being the M240. And that was certainly part of the discussion, but if you read carefully, you'll see he references a DSLR-like mirrorless for professionals.

 

Wow, amazing read it in 2018...

"we are committed to offer you a solution to use your R lenses on a digital full frame Leica. If you see the development in the CMOS sensor technology you will see that many customers already bought Panasonic G1 or GH1 cameras with an electronic viewfinder so our goal is to offer a mirrorless camera which can also take R lenses and then you could focus those R lenses manually through the electronic viewfinder"

 

This is the SL without a doubt, not the M240 with the VF add-on...

[IkarusJohn]

You are very verbose as always but get it wrong. It is comparing apples to oranges. You buy the X1d for medium format and ability to take such a small phenomenal camera places you would think twice or not even consider otherwise for medium format. It’s not designed for every circumstance, every user, etc. I get tired of these arguments. If your one of those that are going to pick and pick and pick at every flaw in comparison to the SL, then don’t buy it.

I shall try to be more concise in future.

[tom0511]

I am a user of M/CL/SL and S.

I really like the SL for its flexibilty and speed.

I still find the S shines cmpared to the SL in regards of color, tonality, detail and "natural" look.

But I am put off the the weight of S lenses when I am travelling, outside hiking etc.

The x1d would fit well here with a compact 45mm lens, compact body (and I could use my xpan lenses)

 

x1d vs SL...I believe speed, flexibility, lenses go straight for the SL.

But then there is the natural looking detailed pop of MF images.

[IkarusJohn]

After a reasonably disappointing few weeks, taking few photos and having them largely fail through my own incompetence, I am reminded that photography (for me) is about content and actually capturing my vision of the subject matter.  That is the challenge we all enjoy, I suspect.

 

A lot of what I see taken with the X1D I really like, and once the technical issues (such as they are) have been resolved, I can really see the appeal of the X1D camera and a couple of lenses, limited to those lenses.  But that would only be if I was starting out, or if I sold everything I have (which is not out of the question).

 

The critical point is, having a larger sensor will not improve the failing in most of the photography I see (mine included) - poor concept, poorly conceived, poorly executed.  Doesn't matter how good the camera is, it won't solve this problem.  I'm wondering if I should sell everything but my TL2 and the two lenses I have and concentrate on what I want to photograph, when and where to put my camera ...

[EoinC]

After a reasonably disappointing few weeks, taking few photos and having them largely fail through my own incompetence, I am reminded that photography (for me) is about content and actually capturing my vision of the subject matter.  That is the challenge we all enjoy, I suspect...

I think many of us go through these epiphanies on occasion, John, and (for me) they often precede a nice run of just taking photo’s, where simplicity is the main driver. They are also very useful for temporary GAS suppression.

I doubt if you need to sell anything - Just take one of your favourite camera / lens combinations, and go and find some light to capture, without thinking about “What if”.

[Paul J]

After a reasonably disappointing few weeks, taking few photos and having them largely fail through my own incompetence, I am reminded that photography (for me) is about content and actually capturing my vision of the subject matter.  That is the challenge we all enjoy, I suspect.

 

A lot of what I see taken with the X1D I really like, and once the technical issues (such as they are) have been resolved, I can really see the appeal of the X1D camera and a couple of lenses, limited to those lenses.  But that would only be if I was starting out, or if I sold everything I have (which is not out of the question).

 

The critical point is, having a larger sensor will not improve the failing in most of the photography I see (mine included) - poor concept, poorly conceived, poorly executed.  Doesn't matter how good the camera is, it won't solve this problem.  I'm wondering if I should sell everything but my TL2 and the two lenses I have and concentrate on what I want to photograph, when and where to put my camera ...

 

 

It's a journey, John. You should absolutely concentrate on what you what to photograph and just keep going. It just gets to that point where cameras are really unimportant and gear is a distraction. No camera makes a better photographer. In terms of selling don't rush into anything either, then that becomes another distraction.

 

All it takes is one good photo to get you feeling back in tune with your self and your vision and back on track again.

Edited January 18, 2018 by Paul J

[Agent M10]

x1d vs SL...I believe speed, flexibility, lenses go straight for the SL.

But then there is the natural looking detailed pop of MF images.

 

 

Are you shooting the SL with the 50 Lux? Karbe's comments about the technological leaps of the SL lenses has piqued my interest in the system.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[IkarusJohn]

Thanks Eion & Paul.  Great advice.  I think I'll just put everything away, but one camera and one lens - probably the SL and 50 Summilux.  First I need to check all the menu settings and test the lens - I can't imagine how I got so many out of focus images with an AF lens.  It will be operator error, I'm sure.

 

Cheers

John