Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[sunil]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

I think what I wrote in February bears repeating: 

 

"...The X1D is much more like the M than the SL in terms of what it can do, while it is much more like the SL in its size and weight. At some point I will decide whether its capabilities beyond what the M does are compelling enough for me to add it to the kit for yet a third complement to the other two. It can't replace either, but it can complement them very nicely. ..."

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/261949-leica-sl-or-hasselblad-x1d/?p=3222471

 

If you have a problem with the SL90-280 in terms of size and weight, how on earth will you handle the Hasselblad 300mm lens? It's fatter, two inches shorter, and half a pound heavier. By the time you crop an X1D image down to the same AoV that the SL + 90-280 enable, you've eliminated any pixel advantage the larger X1D sensor might have, and you don't by any means have the SL's responsiveness, depth of field, and shooting speed to work with. 

 

The SL and X1D are very different cameras. They just look superficially similar. Buy the SL for performance and speed, for lens flexibility. Buy the X1D for its bigger sensor with all that that means, and accept that it is slower, a bit more cumbersome in use, etc. 

 

 

Actually I think I'll have a problem with both the 90-280 on the SL and the 300mm on the X1D. However, if perhaps I used the 90mm on the X1D versus the 90mm zoom on the SL, the crop from the X1D might work out better given its higher resolution. I could be wrong on this but I'll have to try out both before buying. I'm almost inclined to go out on safari with my M and a 90mm and just enjoy myself without worrying about capturing that once in a lifetime shot. But then again, I like AF so back to square 1.

[Jon Warwick]

I think a lot of this decision depends on final print size. If all I wanted was 20"x16" prints, I'd happily use a 24mp camera. So i would pick the best hardware that I enjoyed using, and here I think both the SL and M10 feel very mature & finished products.

 

But I print large, and want the most colour depth and smooth transitions that I can get at that print size. For that reason I'm about to dump my Leica gears and buy the X1D. I have done a 40"x30" test CROP off a 60"x45" image from the X1D (told you I do large output and I'd never dream of pushing a 24mp to that size!) I've stuck next to it a same sized output from a 750mb drum scan off one of my 4x5 negs. I look at the two of them, and they have basically the same smoothness and tonal transitions - contributing to a realistic feeling of depth.

 

There is a massive difference in my view between 35mm FF / 24mp and MF / 50mp if you print large, and I think it's apparent on print sizes a lot smaller than I've discussed above. MF digital like the X1D brings a film-like gentleness back to the print - resolution differences aside, the MF just looks smoother.

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I think a lot of this decision depends on final print size. If all I wanted was 20"x16" prints, I'd happily use a 24mp camera. So i would pick the best hardware that I enjoyed using, and here I think both the SL and M10 feel very mature & finished products.

 

But I print large, and want the most colour depth and smooth transitions that I can get at that print size. For that reason I'm about to dump my Leica gears and buy the X1D. I have done a 40"x30" test CROP off a 60"x45" image from the X1D (told you I do large output and I'd never dream of pushing a 24mp to that size!) I've stuck next to it a same sized output from a 750mb drum scan off one of my 4x5 negs. I look at the two of them, and they have basically the same smoothness and tonal transitions - contributing to a realistic feeling of depth.

 

There is a massive difference in my view between 35mm FF / 24mp and MF / 50mp if you print large, and I think it's apparent on print sizes a lot smaller than I've discussed above. MF digital like the X1D brings a film-like gentleness back to the print - resolution differences aside, the MF just looks smoother.

Buy an S006 or 7 They print big and are cheaper than the X1D............and you then don't have to worry about the sh!tty IVF

[IkarusJohn]

Buy an S006 or 7 They print big and are cheaper than the X1D............and you then don't have to worry about the sh!tty IVF

?

 

X1D $9,000.00

 

S007 $17,000.00

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

?

 

X1D $9,000.00

 

S007 $17,000.00

X1D $9000

S006 ~$5k

Pro Center UK offered me 8000 pounds for S007 plus 3 S lenses as a trade in for a H6D-100.............go figure

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leica-S-Typ-007-Medium-Format-Digital-Camera-Body-10804-/311812172552?hash=item4899742b08:g:gfsAAOSw4CFYsKyt

[IkarusJohn]

X1D $9000

S006 ~$5k

Pro Center UK offered me 8000 pounds for S007 plus 3 S lenses as a trade in for a H6D-100.............go figure

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leica-S-Typ-007-Medium-Format-Digital-Camera-Body-10804-/311812172552?hash=item4899742b08:g:gfsAAOSw4CFYsKyt

One new, the other secondhand. Go figure.

[Jon Warwick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Buy an S006 or 7 They print big and are cheaper than the X1D............and you then don't have to worry about the sh!tty IVF

It's a good point and I've definitely considered it (and have tested and printed files I took with both a 006 and 007), but I prefer the image quality of the X1D for large prints. Plus the X1D is much smaller, lighter and vibration free.

[ramarren]

Actually I think I'll have a problem with both the 90-280 on the SL and the 300mm on the X1D. However, if perhaps I used the 90mm on the X1D versus the 90mm zoom on the SL, the crop from the X1D might work out better given its higher resolution. I could be wrong on this but I'll have to try out both before buying. I'm almost inclined to go out on safari with my M and a 90mm and just enjoy myself without worrying about capturing that once in a lifetime shot. But then again, I like AF so back to square 1.

 

 

The 90mm on the X1D is equivalent to about a 73mm focal length on the SL. So, to crop the X1D image down to the same FF 90mm field of view, you'll have to crop and discard somewhere around 23% of the pixels in the X1D image. That nets you about 38 Mpixel. I doubt very much that you'd see significant linear resolution difference between the SL's 24 and an X1D's cropped 38 Mpixel resolution based on looking at other cameras with resolution in this range and supposedly comparable lenses (are there any, really?).

 

For a safari, I'd want access to at least a 180mm lens with image stabilization. The M is out for that use entirely, unless I want it along for campsite photos. The SL90-280 lens is probably ideal for middle to large scale wild animals I would expect to encounter on a safari... 

[Jeff S]

One new, the other secondhand. Go figure.

But the depreciation can be steep. Popflash has a used S007, still with 1 year Leica warranty, for $9888.

 

Jeff

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Personally if I was going on Safari I would be leaving the leica gear at home and taking a body that can be used with a 600mm prime lens. I. E. A Nikon D5 or D800 [emoji3][emoji3]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

But the depreciation can be steep. Popflash has a used S007, still with 1 year Leica warranty, for $9888.

 

Jeff

Buying cameras is like buying cars (I've bought lots of both) and your going to loose money in a monitory sense. But if you've had the same amount of enjoyment out of that value then your quids in. There's a reason why the Leica S is more expensive than the X1D not just the red dot[emoji7][emoji7][emoji7][emoji7][emoji7]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jeff S]

Actually I think I'll have a problem with both the 90-280 on the SL and the 300mm on the X1D 1.

But I bet you'd gain a lot more from the handhold-ability of the SL zoom with IS than from the added resolution from MF, particularly given the faster frame rate (for safari) and the fact that MF will demand even more careful user technique. And the SL zoom is lighter.

 

Again, try before you buy. Find a demo X1D and try cropping a pic using a 90mm to tele equivalent. You've already made enough expensive mistakes.

 

Jeff

[caissa]

Try before you buy.

Can you hold it steady ? I found that I need at least 1/100th of a second, better even less for acceptable "sharpness".

The X1D has neither OIS/IS/VR nor wide aperture lenses. Remedy ?

That means using a tripod or a flash - so much about the "walk-around" camera.

(The in-lens shutter is not better than the SL shutter - I feel it makes even slightly more vibes.)

[Peter H]

Personally, I wouldn't dream of using an X1D with a 300mm lens any more than I'd dream of using an SL with a 35mm lens.

 

These cameras each have their unique strengths. Otherwise they'd be identical, and they're not.

 

As has been said about 973,000 times, one camera isn't better than the other, only more fitting for certain purposes, so it would help to be clear about your purposes before comparing.

[Jeff S]

Buying cameras is like buying cars (I've bought lots of both) and your going to loose money in a monitory sense. But if you've had the same amount of enjoyment out of that value then your quids in. There's a reason why the Leica S is more expensive than the X1D not just the red dot[emoji7][emoji7][emoji7][emoji7][emoji7] [/Quote]

 

I was supporting your point that one could get a S007 for close to the cost of the X1D. It just needs to be lightly used.

 

You're welcome.

 

Jeff

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited March 17, 2017 by Jeff S

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I was supporting your point that one could get a S007 for close to the cost of the X1D. It just needs to be lightly used.

 

You're welcome.

 

Jeff

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's my point.................Leica S bodies and lenses take a ~50% hit as soon as you buy it, but its okay if you enjoy using it and you keep it. I personally have had nightmares with mine, I had all my S lenses repaired and my S007 body replaced after two months. But hay that was then and this is now, all's working perfectly now and as we all know the S files are amazing and seeing as I only print up to 48 inches wide I have a whole boot load of pixies up my sleave. 

[Belle123]

Try before you buy.

Can you hold it steady ? I found that I need at least 1/100th of a second, better even less for acceptable "sharpness".

The X1D has neither OIS/IS/VR nor wide aperture lenses. Remedy ?

That means using a tripod or a flash - so much about the "walk-around" camera.

(The in-lens shutter is not better than the SL shutter - I feel it makes even slightly more vibes.)

Ok. Time for a report from an X1d owner. I am really having to super concentrate to hold steady, but in calm wind I am fine hand held. Even as slow as 60th of a second, sometimes, when lucky. 1/125th, no problem at all. But, there may be a slight movement from the shutter. Only tried it once on a tripod and results were not as good as anticipated. Probably due to wind so am thinking need heavier tripod. I may do some testing indoors to see if shutter causing movement. Anyway, I am so far very pleased and can work around quirks. The images are blowing me away, honestly. But at times I am missing Leica glass. So, good reason to hold onto my Leica gear. The Hasselblad lens is superb, don't get me wrong. Great for incredible detail, edge to edge. You can walk around with it, but extra concentration on holding steady is necessary. Can be done.

[Jeff S]

That's my point.................Leica S bodies and lenses take a ~50% hit as soon as you buy it, but its okay if you enjoy using it and you keep it. I personally have had nightmares with mine, I had all my S lenses repaired and my S007 body replaced after two months. But hay that was then and this is now, all's working perfectly now and as we all know the S files are amazing and seeing as I only print up to 48 inches wide I have a whole boot load of pixies up my sleave.

I'm well aware. And sometimes one doesn't even need to buy used to realize significant depreciation from an S.... a new S006 could have been bought for $6500 when the S007 hit the market and Leica was clearing inventory. This was bad for owners, but great for new buyers.

 

Jeff

[ramarren]

Personally, I wouldn't dream of using an X1D with a 300mm lens any more than I'd dream of using an SL with a 35mm lens.

 

These cameras each have their unique strengths. Otherwise they'd be identical, and they're not.

 

As has been said about 973,000 times, one camera isn't better than the other, only more fitting for certain purposes, so it would help to be clear about your purposes before comparing.

Hmm. What's wrong with using the SL with a 35mm lens? Did you never use a 35mm lens on an SLR? On an M? I've used a Summicron-R 35mm, Summilux-M 35mm, and Nokton 40mm lens on the SL ... It works very very well with all three of them. ???

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Peter H]

Hmm. What's wrong with using the SL with a 35mm lens? Did you never use a 35mm lens on an SLR? On an M? I've used a Summicron-R 35mm, Summilux-M 35mm, and Nokton 40mm lens on the SL ... It works very very well with all three of them. ???

 

 

 

Nothing wrong with it if that's what works for you.

 

I said I wouldn't dream of it, and I wouldn't, unless it was some kind of nightmare!