Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

All I was told is that they feel the need to cover 50 MPx and 75 MPx in ‘MF.’ The person also said SL2 to come in late 2019 or in 2020. The L-mount being part of it is my guess purely based on “more opportunities” for it that Dr. Kaufmann mentioned and that we will hear more about it on June 14. He couldn’t have meant the SL2.

[Paul J]

Mirrorless imaging is just an alternative to OVF. It has nothing to do with image quality or your required field of photography application (unlike AF capability on sports & wildlife photography),.....I see it as asking for the stars to be aligned instead of asking for core that matters.

Besides, shouldn't the wait be on the next S to be possibily a mirrorless camera?

I do not see the L mount going to become a MF system unless Leica wants to combine S & SL into one system,...meaning less sales & less profit.

 

 

I'm quite puzzled how you feel you can answer for everyone like that.

[LocalHero1953]

I'm quite puzzled how you feel you can answer for everyone like that.

+1

By that argument, what you see through the viewfinder, and how you use the camera "has nothing to do with image quality or your required field of photography application" - not my experience in the real world, but it's good to hear a range of opinions!

 

On the OVF/EVF and mirror/mirrorless front, I took my M240 out for the day yesterday - it had been a bit neglected recently between the SL and CL. I had to refresh my muscle memory for focusing again, but it was exposure control where I found my practice had moved on a bit: with the CL and SL I now often use A-mode together with the histogram and exposure compensation to protect highlights. On the M I have to get used to the absence of either a histogram or blinkies, and found I had blown highlights a couple of times: a cloud white sky and a passing wedding dress. 

 

I wonder if some future iteration of the M, even if a hybrid viewfinder is beyond affordable technology, might find a way of placing a histogram in the VF.

[Jeff S]

 

I wonder if some future iteration of the M, even if a hybrid viewfinder is beyond affordable technology, might find a way of placing a histogram in the VF.

A Leica exec (I think Stefan Daniel) did say last year that attempts to incorporate a hybrid finder have resulted in unacceptable compromises to both viewing systems.

 

Personally I’m happy that the M still requires me to think and judge. But I take pics and make prints purely for pleasure. The M10 gives me everything I need in a digital M (as long as my eyes can cope).

 

Only time will tell how a complementary system might affect the use of the M. It’s been there for me for 35 years or so, and worked well in the film days alongside other systems and formats. I suspect future use, barring eye issues, will come down to portability needs. But technology may fool me again.

 

Jeff

[Vieri]

I'm still rather puzzled as to how you are going to get a 'MF' sized sensor in a camera with an L mount. 

 

And furthermore you already have 45mpx, 14.8 stops DR and fast AF in a 35mm format sensor in the Nikon D850, so the equivalent technology is available. Why would they bother ?

 

 

- You can't

 

- Exactly. I mentioned long time ago that a SL-II with 36-42mp would be the next logical step, the technology is there and the willing to buy in the user base is definitely there as well. And - also logically - I think that we'll see that happen after they update the S to a higher pixel count (60-65mp, I'd say).

 

As always, speculating is a lot of fun

 

If I am right about the specs above, all that remains to be seen is timing - and that is the thing... my guess would be a new S this year and a new SL next year, if we keep to Leica's usual update cycle.

 

Best regards,

 

Vieri

[lx1713]

I'm still rather puzzled as to how you are going to get a 'MF' sized sensor in a camera with an L mount. 

 

 

It's a good point. I considered the Alpa and realised that I'm comparing it against a purely digital sensor body (X1D)  while the lens I compared is a digital start of the art Rodenstock, it's still used for film stock. It still uses a central filter which corrects for vignetting physically. The Hasselblad X1D's lenses are designed tele centric to accommodate sensors only and corrects vignetting in camera.

 

To investigate if I'm right, I checked a Mamiya 645 lens which I still have.

 

Mamiya inner diameter is 6cm and the outer mouth diameter is 6.5cm. This is for a film format with diagonal of 70mm (56mm x 42mm) - 6 cm for 7cm diagonal

Leica SL inner diameter is 4.9cm and the outer mouth diameter is 5.2cm. This is for a sensor format with diagonal of 44mm (36mm x 24mm) - 4.9 cm for 4.4 cm diagonal

 

Here the mouth of the SL is proportionally bigger than the diameter of diagonal vs that of Mamiya. It may well be that the SL's mouth is designed wide for their PL Cine lens mounts but if they were to fit a 30 x 45 sensor, I think Leica can use non tele centric designed mf lenses in some use cases. After all it already accommodates M lenses, some of which are non tele centric, in a sensor design that has micro lens array to compensate for M lenses.

 

I might still be wrong though but it's an unusual decision reminiscent of the micro 4/3 choice of a wider than needed mouth. 

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A Leica exec (I think Stefan Daniel) did say last year that attempts to incorporate a hybrid finder have resulted in unacceptable compromises to both viewing systems.

 

Personally I’m happy that the M still requires me to think and judge. But I take pics and make prints purely for pleasure. The M10 gives me everything I need in a digital M (as long as my eyes can cope).

 

Only time will tell how a complementary system might affect the use of the M. It’s been there for me for 35 years or so, and worked well in the film days alongside other systems and formats. I suspect future use, barring eye issues, will come down to portability needs. But technology may fool me again.

 

Jeff

Yes, the smoke signals from Leica suggest a full hybrid is not going to happen.

 

The difference from the film era is that digital is more susceptible to irretrievably blown highlights than film. I don't know whether it's a simple inverse of film's irretrievably blocked shadows hazard, but I seem to spend more time avoiding blown highlights now than I ever did avoiding blocked shadows.

[Paul J]

I think the L Mount medium format sensor may be possible. But it's probably a hopeful and optimistic projection.

 

It's not quite as simple as looking at throat diameter and sensor size. Look at how snug the Sony a7R sensor is inside the body. The corners are clipped by the mounting hardware and body and yet the lenses are able to project.

 

The SL sensor has quite a lot of breathing space. But the larger than 35mm "throat size" may just be for better corner performance.

 

Its fun to think about at least.

[Jeff S]

Yes, the smoke signals from Leica suggest a full hybrid is not going to happen.

 

The difference from the film era is that digital is more susceptible to irretrievably blown highlights than film. I don't know whether it's a simple inverse of film's irretrievably blocked shadows hazard, but I seem to spend more time avoiding blown highlights now than I ever did avoiding blocked shadows.

You evidently never used slide film. Same highlight issues (but like the Monochrom, not recoverable). Great learning.

 

Jeff

Edited May 13, 2018 by Jeff S

[LocalHero1953]

You evidently never used slide film. Same highlight issues (but like the Monochrom, not recoverable). Great learning.

 

Jeff

Not often - yes, I'd forgotten that was the other way round.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I'm sure someone smarter than me can see the "how" of getting the L mount to take a larger sensor. I still don't see the "why". Surely, since we'll need a whole set of new lenses there's no reason to use the L mount, unless we want to be able to use SL lenses in crop mode and TL lenses in crop crop mode.... Pluse we'll need a $2K adaptor to use the new lenses and it'll take 5 years to get more than a few smaller ones.

 

The current S isn't a big body. Well, not for that sensor. Take out the mirror and you save a ton of weight. It'll be under a kilo. That's probably more important. Make the grip a bit deeper for better handling or even better sculpt it like the X1D. Make it ergonomic as all get out. Handling paradise. But keep the flange distance and mount. Then you have instant access to a stunning range of the fastest available miniMF lenses (they work really well AF wise, on the SL. So just use that tech). Redo the zoom and make a longer one. Add some f4 versions of the current line up for portability ( or just make the zooms f4.5, stabilised and spectacular). Keep the buttons and use the SL menu, EVF, focus system. Keep the current battery. (Please!!! No more new batteries!!)

 

Another advantage is that you can maintain a more expensive OVF version beside the EVF version, if you want to have the only option for that in this market.

 

Besides a slightly smaller body, whats the advantage of a MF L mount?

 

Gordon

 

p.s. I also don't think the resolution of the S is relevant to the resolution of the SL. The current S till makes nicer files than the Nikon D850/A7R3 (14.8 stops is marketing, not reality) with less resolution.

[peterv]

I think the hints Dr. Kaufman gave in the interview to LuLa could indicate a mirrorless S with SL mount. I've been looking at this picture and I think the SL mount just might accommodate 30 x 45  ​

The adapter is already there, et voila, a mirrorless MF Leica to compete with the likes of the X1D and such.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[LD_50]

It makes absolutely zero sense to me for Leica to use the SL mount for a larger sensor. This would abandon the excellent S lenses that already exist for the larger sensor, including the CS lenses that make the system desirable for studio use. I see no benefit to doing this. It would require every S lens to be adapted and would possibly require a completely new lens lineup to cover the image circle.

 

They already have a mirrorless back for the S mount in the Sinar S 30|45. https://sinar.swiss/products/digital-backs/#!/0

 

Add a grip and EVF and you’ve a camera not much larger than the SL.

[Paul J]

I'm sure someone smarter than me can see the "how" of getting the L mount to take a larger sensor. I still don't see the "why". Surely, since we'll need a whole set of new lenses there's no reason to use the L mount, unless we want to be able to use SL lenses in crop mode and TL lenses in crop crop mode.... Pluse we'll need a $2K adaptor to use the new lenses and it'll take 5 years to get more than a few smaller ones.

 

The current S isn't a big body. Well, not for that sensor. Take out the mirror and you save a ton of weight. It'll be under a kilo. That's probably more important. Make the grip a bit deeper for better handling or even better sculpt it like the X1D. Make it ergonomic as all get out. Handling paradise. But keep the flange distance and mount. Then you have instant access to a stunning range of the fastest available miniMF lenses (they work really well AF wise, on the SL. So just use that tech). Redo the zoom and make a longer one. Add some f4 versions of the current line up for portability ( or just make the zooms f4.5, stabilised and spectacular). Keep the buttons and use the SL menu, EVF, focus system. Keep the current battery. (Please!!! No more new batteries!!)

 

Another advantage is that you can maintain a more expensive OVF version beside the EVF version, if you want to have the only option for that in this market.

 

Besides a slightly smaller body, whats the advantage of a MF L mount?

 

Gordon

 

p.s. I also don't think the resolution of the S is relevant to the resolution of the SL. The current S till makes nicer files than the Nikon D850/A7R3 (14.8 stops is marketing, not reality) with less resolution.

 

 

 

I do think the mirrorless is the future. That's not to say the SLR S has doesn't have it's place still though for those that want it.

 

 

But I consider a direct image off the sensor is far better, especially for high res Medium Format which is much more demanding of focus. Then there are the other benefits of Mirrorless like exposure preview in viewfinder, b/w preview, spirit levels etc. It would just make medium format easier to work with. Also it would likely mean a reinvigorating of lenses - the S has become stale in that regard. Infact as far as I'm aware one of the reasons the 350 for the S never came to fruition was because the difficulty in focusing. This could really open things up there and get things moving.

 

If I can bring my hefty investment of M lenses forward to use them on a new Medium Format body, even in crop mode, it would be a major plus for me. The less bodies the better, all lenses working on one body which has maximum potential with a medium format sensor is the dream - just add what ever lens you need for the job. Noctilux, 90-280, an S for full Medium Format coverage etc.

 

Being able to adapt an even wider range of lenses from other brands an formats is a major plus too. I'm sure we will start seeing 3rd party offerings from companies like Zeiss for Medium Format.

 

Having the S lenses to work with straight away is obviously awesome too.

 

4K motion from a smaller 35mm part of the sensor for low rolling shutter. Oversampling motion for higher quality.

 

I think I'm repeating myself now but it would be a bit of a dream camera for me I think.

[helged]

I do think the mirrorless is the future. That's not to say the SLR S has doesn't have it's place still though for those that want it.

 

 

But I consider a direct image off the sensor is far better, especially for high res Medium Format which is much more demanding of focus. Then there are the other benefits of Mirrorless like exposure preview in viewfinder, b/w preview, spirit levels etc. It would just make medium format easier to work with. Also it would likely mean a reinvigorating of lenses - the S has become stale in that regard. Infact as far as I'm aware one of the reasons the 350 for the S never came to fruition was because the difficulty in focusing. This could really open things up there and get things moving.

 

If I can bring my hefty investment of M lenses forward to use them on a new Medium Format body, even in crop mode, it would be a major plus for me. The less bodies the better, all lenses working on one body which has maximum potential with a medium format sensor is the dream - just add what ever lens you need for the job. Noctilux, 90-280, an S for full Medium Format coverage etc.

 

Being able to adapt an even wider range of lenses from other brands an formats is a major plus too. I'm sure we will start seeing 3rd party offerings from companies like Zeiss for Medium Format.

 

Having the S lenses to work with straight away is obviously awesome too.

 

4K motion from a smaller 35mm part of the sensor for low rolling shutter. Oversampling motion for higher quality.

 

I think I'm repeating myself now but it would be a bit of a dream camera for me I think.

Let the dream come through...

[lx1713]

I'm sure someone smarter than me can see the "how" of getting the L mount to take a larger sensor. I still don't see the "why". Surely, since we'll need a whole set of new lenses there's no reason to use the L mount, unless we want to be able to use SL lenses in crop mode and TL lenses in crop crop mode.... Pluse we'll need a $2K adaptor to use the new lenses and it'll take 5 years to get more than a few smaller ones.

 

The current S isn't a big body. Well, not for that sensor. Take out the mirror and you save a ton of weight. It'll be under a kilo. That's probably more important. Make the grip a bit deeper for better handling or even better sculpt it like the X1D. Make it ergonomic as all get out. Handling paradise. But keep the flange distance and mount. Then you have instant access to a stunning range of the fastest available miniMF lenses (they work really well AF wise, on the SL. So just use that tech). Redo the zoom and make a longer one. Add some f4 versions of the current line up for portability ( or just make the zooms f4.5, stabilised and spectacular). Keep the buttons and use the SL menu, EVF, focus system. Keep the current battery. (Please!!! No more new batteries!!)

 

Another advantage is that you can maintain a more expensive OVF version beside the EVF version, if you want to have the only option for that in this market.

 

Besides a slightly smaller body, whats the advantage of a MF L mount?

 

Gordon

 

p.s. I also don't think the resolution of the S is relevant to the resolution of the SL. The current S till makes nicer files than the Nikon D850/A7R3 (14.8 stops is marketing, not reality) with less resolution.

 

 

The "why" is very important to me, being a pragmatist, so that's a very important question to answer.

So if we have a larger sensor, not necessarily 30x45mm, what's the benefit?

 

Let's pick 27mm x 40mm ( a sensor diagonal of 48mm):

 

4/3, square formats will have less mp losses. Somewhat like what Panasonic did with the GH5S's larger than M43 sensor. Coming from a Sinar P system with a multiformat film back, I do miss that concept.

 

With a square format of 27x27, you take over Hasselblad's legacy of owning the square format. A bit of a hyperbole I admit  27mm is hardly enough to challenge the X1D. Maybe a 30x40 chip for a 30x30 file will do the trick.

 

1.2x crop factor for S lenses. 24 becomes 28, 70 becomes 85, etc. This allows Leica to retain S users while a mirrorless version is developed, not that I believe it was part of their strategy.

 

Instead of IBIS where the sensor vibrates to compensate for shake, a larger sensor compensates for shake by on chip hardware computation. With a fast cpu, it should be possible. Make that 2 chips.

 

This is a large "IF", if native SL lenses are designed ground up to have a generous image circle compared to its TL cousins. I know from large format use, the cost of manufacturing a wide angle lens with a larger image circle is considerable but consider that 16-35 f3.5-4.5, don't you think it's a little excessive? How many 16-35 looks like that? 

 

Lastly, whatever unsold S007 CMOS chips might find a new home in an L mount body    And it will surely please S users to have S batteries in this body 

 

The S lenses remain reference lenses on an S body as will SL lenses remain such.

 

This remains speculation but it isn't a moonshot by any stretch of imagination.

Edited May 14, 2018 by lx1713

[FlashGordonPhotography]

The S sensor isn't so bad. It's popular to malign the age and resolution but it compares favourably to other miniMF sensors, especially since it is 16 bit compared to 14 bit in the current 33x44 Sony chip. And the lenses......

 

It's the limitations Leica place on it I can't stand. LENR. Weirdly short exposure times.

 

I understand that Leica can't market a 37MP sensor in the next S. But if the CAMERA were improved (ie: a big SL without LENR) I wouldn't have bought the X1D or Pentax. If you can get the focus right off centre the S files are sublime.

 

Gordon

[lx1713]

I would be very happy to have an S sensor in a L body even cropped. It becomes a matter of using the right body for the task. Or as a backup when it isn't up to the task. Always a nice problem to have.

[peterv]

I don’t think Leica needs to introduce uncommon sensor sizes like 27mm x 40mm or such. If anyone prefers square or 4:3 one can crop.

Leica is all about 2:3 (they practically invented this aspect ratio) which is fine by me since I do a lot of 16:9 and wider cropping. The so called Leica Pro Format is 30 x 45, which is a sensor size I like a lot. Not too big, and certainly not too small. The old “but is it real MF?” discussion is of no interest anymore in this digital age, it is what it is and for me it’s the right size. The X1D sensor is ~ 100mm2 larger, wich is of little or no consequence, the S lenses more than make up for that.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[lx1713]

I don’t think Leica needs to introduce uncommon sensor sizes like 27mm x 40mm or such. If anyone prefers square or 4:3 one can crop.

Leica is all about 2:3 (they practically invented this aspect ratio) which is fine by me since I do a lot of 16:9 and wider cropping. The so called Leica Pro Format is 30 x 45, which is a sensor size I like a lot. Not too big, and certainly not too small. The old “but is it real MF?” discussion is of no interest anymore in this digital age, it is what it is and for me it’s the right size. The X1D sensor is ~ 100mm2 larger, wich is of little or no consequence, the S lenses more than make up for that.

 

What I was thinking is to reuse the 30 x 45 sensor from the S but just use a smaller part of the sensor that can fit the available space in an L mount. It may not be possible to use the entire sensor "as is". Remember it's speculation until Leica demonstrates that it's possible.

 

Having a larger crop space is important for some. As well as appealing to those who work in 4:3 or 1:1 aspect ratio. There's a natural efficiency when you need to shoot hundreds of 8x10 or delivering square art. At the end of the day the SL needs to be versatile in more ways than just being able to shoot with lenses M, TL, SL, Thalia, Cine luxes, etc. In video you already are stuck with a non 3:2 ratio so it's not a peculiar notion.

 

The 27mm x 40mm dimension is a conservative calculation based on the throat dimension of the L mount of 49mm. I just used the existing dimensions for the fun of calculating the possible fit. 

Edited May 14, 2018 by lx1713