Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[steppenw0lf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe this helps:

Imagine you had a SL for work and were forced to replace it by a X1D   ---   simply impossible.

Imagine you had a X1D for work and were forced to replace it by a SL   ---    simply impossible.

So both have their merits - both cannot replace the other.   So which is better ?

Edited October 12, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Advertisement]

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

[DezFoto]

Maybe this helps:

Imagine you had a SL for work and were forced to replace it by a X1D   ---   simply impossible.

Imagine you had a X1D for work and were forced to replace it by a SL   ---    simply impossible.

So both have their merits - both cannot replace the other.   So which is better ?

 

Imagine you're a portrait or product photographer and had an SL for work and were forced to replace it with a X1D --- it would work quite nicely. 

Imagine you're a wedding photographer and had an X1D and had to replace it with a SL --- it would work quite nicely.

 

Again, it's the context of what you would use the camera for, that makes a comparison relevant. Either way, the OP's question is being debated and whether you think it's valid question or not, really doesn't matter. 

[IkarusJohn]

Maybe this helps:

Imagine you had a SL for work and were forced to replace it by a X1D   ---   simply impossible.

Imagine you had a X1D for work and were forced to replace it by a SL   ---    simply impossible.

So both have their merits - both cannot replace the other.   So which is better ?

 

True, but if you had an SL for work, and it worked for you, you would replace it with another SL.  But, if it didn't work for you, you might well buy the X1D instead.  

 

The better analogy is, if you are an M user and want to expand into those areas which are not the M's strength, would you get an SL or an X1D (or the Fuji to the Pentax).  Sure, they are different cameras, and offer different strengths - that's why the comparison is interesting.  They both take pictures (unlike a Ferrari or a house), and apparently do it very well.

Edited October 12, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[Jeff S]

That's a good point, the S has the best viewfinder I've ever used, much better even than the one on my Hasselblad. I did however, find the EVF on the X1D perfectly acceptable as far as EVF's go, though the one on the SL is far superior. In isolation, I don't think anyone would complain about the X1D's viewfinder. 

 

I would.....based solely on my demo experience in June.  I'm waiting to test a production version that the reps assured would be much improved.  But then I'm not an EVF fan; the SL EVF was the first one I could at least tolerate, but still not without issues for me.  Others of course have opposing views.....as expected.

 

Jeff

[Guest VVJ]

Is it allowed to compare it to a chocolate tee pot?.... oops, I spelt that wrong too :-)

 

That would be venturing into Steve Huff territory... only at your own risk... 

[steppenw0lf]

Imagine you're a portrait or product photographer and had an SL for work and were forced to replace it with a X1D --- it would work quite nicely. 

Imagine you're a wedding photographer and had an X1D and had to replace it with a SL --- it would work quite nicely.

 

Again, it's the context of what you would use the camera for, that makes a comparison relevant. Either way, the OP's question is being debated and whether you think it's valid question or not, really doesn't matter. 

 

Even if you try your best, not to understand what I am saying, fact is that generally (apart from special cases) one camera cannot replace the other.

Or to say it simpler the cameras have non-overlapping competences. And if one of them is needed, then that's it.

 

And so which camera is better ?     Exactly, there is no answer to that.

 

Or to say it in your words: It is the context which makes one camera better or worse. And as there is no common context, there is also no fair (common) comparison possible.

It is only possible to say, in context A this camera is better, in context B this, in context C this .... etc. And this is trivial (or boring).

Edited October 13, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

All it boils down to is, people are talking about cameras.

 

Probably not that surprising here.

 

I like the idea of the multi-directional EVF on the Fuji. I wonder what it's like to use.

[pgk]

Having dipped into this thread and read bits but not all of it, I have to say that I can't see wanting an X1D, however I do have a (somewhat serious) query. How many potential users of such high end equipment such as the X1D actually see themselves using a P mode? I ask because to me having such a mode does seem a little odd on such a camera, but I'm a traditionalist so I may well be wrong in thinking that this is a bit of the 'specification over reality' syndrome. It just seems that, given its potential high end output, using a P mode doesn't make such good sense (and I don't reserve my query to just this camera).

[Peter H]

Having dipped into this thread and read bits but not all of it, I have to say that I can't see wanting an X1D, however I do have a (somewhat serious) query. How many potential users of such high end equipment such as the X1D actually see themselves using a P mode? I ask because to me having such a mode does seem a little odd on such a camera, but I'm a traditionalist so I may well be wrong in thinking that this is a bit of the 'specification over reality' syndrome. It just seems that, given its potential high end output, using a P mode doesn't make such good sense (and I don't reserve my query to just this camera).

I think Hasselblad is hoping to win quite a few new "lifestyle" customers.

[almoore]

How many potential users of such high end equipment such as the X1D actually see themselves using a P mode? I ask because to me having such a mode does seem a little odd on such a camera, but I'm a traditionalist so I may well be wrong in thinking that this is a bit of the 'specification over reality' syndrome. It just seems that, given its potential high end output, using a P mode doesn't make such good sense (and I don't reserve my query to just this camera).

 

I use P mode on EVF digital cameras, despite never having used any auto-exposure mode on film cameras.

 

I tend to alternate between manual (which is a dream with an EVF that offers a real time histogram overlay) and P, never bothering with shutter or aperture priority auto. It's worth bearing in mind that a flick of a thumbwheel will allow you to instantly bias the exposure that P mode offers - eg, it offers 1/500 at f5.6 and you'd rather have 1/125 at f11.

 

I see no reason not to have a P mode on a camera like the new Hasselblad. Incidentally, there's a short review of a pre-production model here:

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-10-11/hasselblad-x1d-review-hands-on-with-the-medium-format-camera

[DezFoto]

 

It is only possible to say, in context A this camera is better, in context B this, in context C this .... etc. And this is trivial (or boring).

 

Then go ahead and excuse yourself from the conversation, instead of trolling it.

[DezFoto]

Having dipped into this thread and read bits but not all of it, I have to say that I can't see wanting an X1D, however I do have a (somewhat serious) query. How many potential users of such high end equipment such as the X1D actually see themselves using a P mode? I ask because to me having such a mode does seem a little odd on such a camera, but I'm a traditionalist so I may well be wrong in thinking that this is a bit of the 'specification over reality' syndrome. It just seems that, given its potential high end output, using a P mode doesn't make such good sense (and I don't reserve my query to just this camera).

Most cameras have a "P" mode, even the high end professional ones. It's useful for setting the exposure you want, then you chose either to change your aperture or shutter speed to get the effect you're looking for and the camera will automatically keep that exposure. It's like an electronic version of the exposure controls on a Hasselblad V series camera. 

[dancook]

So where is the commonality ?  

 

I want to take photos, approximately 50mm-70mm (FF) field of view, of portraits and street scenes.

 

The X1D will do this and provide a higher quality image than the Leica SL, but the SL will be more flexible in other applications..

 

I will continue to weigh up the pros and cons as more details about the X1D emerge.

[alib]

 

 

I will continue to weigh up the pros and cons as more details about the X1D emerge.

 

Ming Thien has some more recently added stuff on is website.

[steppenw0lf]

I want to take photos, approximately 50mm-70mm (FF) field of view, of portraits and street scenes.

The X1D will do this and provide a higher quality image than the Leica SL, but the SL will be more flexible in other applications..

I will continue to weigh up the pros and cons as more details about the X1D emerge.

 

I completely agree that for you it is possible to use both cameras. And of course it makes sense to follow what's going on (I do that too).

But a special case is not a foundation for a general comparison.

I use mainly tele lenses and also a lot of macro lenses. So for me the SL is the much better choice. But do I infer from that it must be the better camera (for everyone) ?  No this is not allowed as this is also a soecial case.

In a few years latest the SL will also have 50 MP, and also my 5Ds does. And the X1D is then still a "bad" camera for tele work and for macro (maybe not for macro anymore, if they provide a good macro lens).

And that's the big difference: For the X1D a special lens needs to be built. For the SL I have today access to half a dozen excellent macro lenses (not built for it), and maybe I will get a native lens as well in a few years. And I can even try to adapt my Rollei midrange macro lens (Zeiss 4/120) though I do not expect too much of it on the SL.

 

So simply said: If 50 MP and the rendering of midrange is important to you, then the X1D is not better, it is simply the only choice. (vs SL)

And for others the SL is not better, but it is simply the only choice (vs X1D).

So all these comparisons are quite simple - almost boring, as there are many requisites that simply exclude one or the other.

 

To explain why I am interested and follow what's going on: If there was the possibility to adapt my Rollei 6000 lenses to the X1D, then suddenly I would be very interested in it. (But this is almost impossible). (The logical direction for Rollei users, the Rollei, Sinar, Leaf branch is far too expensive for me and now almost dead).

Edited October 14, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Guest VVJ]

IIf there was the possibility to adapt my Rollei 6000 lenses to the X1D, then suddenly I would be very interested in it. (But this is almost impossible). (The logical direction for Rollei users, the Rollei, Sinar, Leaf branch is far too expensive for me and now almost dead).

 

This should probably be the subject of a new thread but I am in the same boat as you are...

 

I own a Hy6 and 12 Rollei lenses (4 AFD primes and 8 Rollei 6000 lenses).  I never invested in a digital back because I had the feeling it was going to be a dead end...

 

After the acquisition of Sinar by Leica I was hoping that Leica would release an adapter for the S.  There were some rumors as well... but it does not seem to be happening...

 

Fotodiox recently released a bunch of Rollei 6000 adapters for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji and M43 but unfortunately none for the Leica SL...

[FlashGordonPhotography]

 

 

Fotodiox recently released a bunch of Rollei 6000 adapters for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji and M43 but unfortunately none for the Leica SL...

 

Are the lenses fully mechanical? If so you could double stack with the Nikon adaptor and a Novoflex Nikon to SL adaptor. I used a Novoflex Nikon to M and M to T double stacked for a (until a dedicated one became available and because I already had them) and it worked fine.

 

Of course that still doesn't help with the S.....

 

Gordon

[steppenw0lf]

The Rollei 6000 lenses have in lens shutter (like the X1D lenses) so they are electronic. (The Rollei66 has simpler lenses, but they need a bellows) The Fotodiox adapter adds a mechanical iris as a replacement - but it is between camera and lens, so probably not in an ideal place. Better than nothing, it is currently the only option I know to attach these lenses. (Have not tried it yet, but probably will.)

And yes, it is strange, but Fotodiox seems not to have any adapters for the Leica SL. (maybe copyright ?)

 

From Sinar you can get a digital back (37.5 MP) with the Leica S sensor for the Hy6. (Maybe this was the rumour you heard ?)

They also used to have larger sensors (up to 80MP) and Leaf had another 80MP sensor of considerable size (54x40mm).  

(Unfortunately for me all far too expensive.)

Edited October 14, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Guest VVJ]

From Sinar you can get a digital back (37.5 MP) with the Leica S sensor for the Hy6. (Maybe this was the rumour you heard ?)

They also used to have larger sensors (up to 80MP) and Leaf had another 80MP sensor of considerable size (54x40mm).  

(Unfortunately for me all far too expensive.)

 

No, the rumor was specifically about a Rollei 6000 adapter by Leica for the Leica S.

 

Phase One dropped support for the Hy6 a few years ago (and shortly thereafter also for Contax and Hasselblad V).

 

Four years ago I visited Photokina and you could play with the Credo 80.  Unfortunately that already no longer had the rotating sensor that older Leaf backs had.

[Guest]

November is demo delivery in Zurich. Looking forward to that hoping that it lives up to the hype and 'media excitement'.