Did you trade your DSLR for an SL?

[R3D-D0T]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What do you use the SL for that the DSLR could not?

[Advertisement]

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

[ramarren]

No. I just stopped using the DSLR. I like using the SL more. 

[youngjohn]

I used a Nikon D4s outfit professionally (I've used Nikon for about 20 years) and switched to 2 x SL bodies, 24-90, R21-35 and a couple of R primes earlier this year. No regrets, much prefer my new setup.

[rriley]

I prefer to shoot tethered with the D5s via Capture One vs using the SL so I'm not quite ready to get rid of it.

[Jeff S]

I didn't trade anything, but I've considered pros/cons of the SL versus a DSLR as a complement to my M system.  (I'm also considering some medium format options, including the S, which is like a big DSLR, and the Hasselblad X1D....but that introduces other considerations).

 

Obviously both can take quality pics in right hands, but the SL does offer some benefits and some drawbacks, regardless of DSLR brand.  

 

On the plus side, it's generally lighter and smaller, has no need to micro-adjust focus for each body/lens combo, offers VF focus aids (peaking, zoom mag, etc), is better weather sealed than all but pro-grade DSLRs (which are really big and heavy), and can adapt a multitude of lenses (Canon as well as M,S, T and R Leica lenses).  

 

On the minus side, the battery life is generally less (due to EVF), the native SL lens line is currently limited, and the AF is not quite up to DSLR standards (for sports, etc).  

 

There are other differences, which some may view as benefits and others as disadvantages.....body ergonomics, menu interface, EVF vs optical VF, the sensor (MP), etc.....on these fronts, I generally prefer the SL except for the EVF experience.

 

For me it's not so much what either system could be "used for", as you say, as both systems could be used for most all of my intended subject matter (I don't shoot sports), providing I'd be willing to adapt lenses until the SL line is rounded out.  It's more about whether the overall system provides a comfortable shooting experience.

 

Jeff

[seekwul]

Just sold my Nikon D3S last week and I'm trying to decide if I should get a D5 or the SL. I have a bunch of Nikon lenses bought over the years.... But even more M lenses for my M240P. As I get older, I like the idea of autofocus more and more, especially in non-landscape situations.

 

Any advice would be helpful.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not really. I sold my last 35mm DSLR (let's leave MF out of it for a bit) years ago (Canon 5D2's) went with a mirrorless/M combination. The SL is my favourite and most used mirrorless body but I keep cameras from Sony, Olympus and Fuji as well. My only DSLRs are medium format now but I look forward to the X1D mirrorless system. I shoot 90% of my work with the SL and have either a S2, Sony A7R2 or M in the bag as a compliment/backup depending on the job.

 

I have no need for the CAF of a pro sports camera and I appreciate the benefits of an EVF over an optical viewfinder. I find the SL to be the best platform for Canon's tilt shift lenses and the MPE65. It's also the best body to use my Noctilux and 135mm APO M lenses on. I'm quite happy with just the two zooms and use my WATE for wide angle. I could be perfectly happy with the manual focus primes i have but will likely get the 50mm and if Leica make an 85-100mm Summilux one of those as well.

 

Other things I appreciate are a low ISO of 50. So useful with fast lenses. The large EVF and accurate spirit level. Live histogram. The stunning build quality. The lovely shutter snick. GPS tagging of images. The focal range of the zooms suits me better than the "normal" 24-70 and 70-200 combinations from Canikon. I even use the WiFi app for remote shooting.

 

What you lose are super tele lenses with IS, wireless TTL flash and pro sports continuous focusing. These matter little to me but might for others. Personally, if I need those things I'd probably buy a XT-2 and the 100-400 fuji (I have and love the XPro2). rather than carry a Canon 600mm. And I have extensive experience with manual off camera flash and use both Elinchrom and Godox systems almost every day.

 

Considering there's only two "native" lenses for the SL I'm a bit surprised that I already have every lens I need for my work (Canon TS-E's, the two zooms, Noctilux, Zeiss 100MP, Rokinon 14mm, fisheye, WATE) and that they're all fully functional on the SL.

 

If all my gear were lost or stolen I would have no hesitation in replacing the SL immediately and before any other camera i own. I would also consider the Novoflex adaptor and RRS arca swiss plate as must haves for the SL.

 

Gordon

[Arif]

I sold my D4 when the SL came out and sold all my Nikon lenses that I had managed to accumulate and only use Leica now (S/SL/MM/Q).  The things I miss now occasionally are the faster focus, higher ISO and the buffer when I shoot dance (street/stage) in low light.

[MediaFotografie]

No. I just stopped using the DSLR. I like using the SL more. 

 

same to me; my D800 (and older Nikons) are in holidays since the SL arrived

[steppenw0lf]

I like to compare old and new times. So I usually never sell old equipment. I typically hold on to it so long that it is not of much commercial value anymore. A professional sees this probably more pragmatic.

That's why I still have my R gear and many older M lenses. Without that I would probably never have bought the SL. (And would have saved a lot of money     ).

[scott kirkpatrick]

I like to compare old and new times. So I usually never sell old equipment. I typically hold on to it so long that it is not of much commercial value anymore. A professional sees this probably more pragmatic.

That's why I still have my R gear and many older M lenses. Without that I would probably never have bought the SL. (And would have saved a lot of money     ).

 

My last DSLR was an Olympus E-1 that burglars removed while I was abroad shooting with M8s.  Otherwise, I have the same practice as above, and a rather full closet.  I still have some Hasselblad 500 gear, with a 39 MPx Phase One P45+ back, for those days when the lust for more megapixels overcomes me.  I stopped in at Bear Photo recently to see if I should upgrade that setup to 100 MPx, the current ultimate, but was told that the 500 series lenses were just not resolving at that pay grade.  And I am having too much fun with the SL and M and R lenses.

 

scott

[Guest VVJ]

Not really.  I still have a lot of medium format gear, both film and digital, which I don't really use anymore.  

 

I had 3 Fuji cameras (X-Pro1, X100s and X-T1) which I sold even though I really liked the Fuji glass.

 

I tried the Sony A7s briefly but did not like the ergonomics nor the initial glass (35mm, 55mm).

 

Mostly shooting SL and Q but also owning T, S2 and M9.

[seekwul]

I'm still on the fence; my main concern right now is the longevity of the SL line from Leica. I don't want to dump all of my Nikon gear, switch to the SL and have Leica discontinue it after a year or two. I may wait to see what's announced at Photokina.

[ramarren]

My last DSLR was an Olympus E-1 that burglars removed while I was abroad shooting with M8s.  Otherwise, I have the same practice as above, and a rather full closet.  I still have some Hasselblad 500 gear, with a 39 MPx Phase One P45+ back, for those days when the lust for more megapixels overcomes me.  I stopped in at Bear Photo recently to see if I should upgrade that setup to 100 MPx, the current ultimate, but was told that the 500 series lenses were just not resolving at that pay grade.  And I am having too much fun with the SL and M and R lenses.

 

 

Your closet sounds as crowded as mine. I still have my E-1 and a few lenses, both Hassy 500CM and SWC and a few lenses, amongst too much other gear. I am tempted still by the CFV-50c digital back for the Hassies... seems ideal since there are no "real" 6x6 backs available yet. 

[Guest Benqui]

I sold my Nikon Df after I had the possibility to test the SL. The Nikon worked perfectly without any problems and especially with the old lenses it was a pleasure. After one month with the SL I do not regret it. The combination of M lenses with the SL is perfect and with the old 1.4/35 you have a top street camera. I also like the b/w raws, I have to change almost nothing on the PC.

Best regards

Marc

[Guest Her Berger]

The Nikons and Canons ant whatsoever are workhorses.
The SL is a Leica but imho not as sexy as it should be.
For pro-use, I don't want to trade.
 

Imho.

[ramarren]

I don't need my camera to be 'sexy'. I want a camera to work with my primary lenses ... which are Leica M and R lenses. As wonderful as the Nikon D750 and its lenses might be, the D750 doesn't work as well with the Leica R lenses (after adaptation) and doesn't work at all with the Leica M lenses. 

 

Whether it's worth a trade from one to the other for 'pro-use' is another thing altogether, presuming you have a well-outfitted kit of Nikon or Canon lenses. I suspect it depends quite a bit on just what kind of 'pro-use' you have in mind and how happy you are using Nikon or Canon lenses.   

 

For me, the Leica SL is a thoroughly utilitarian, solidly made, high-performance camera that works with all my Leica lenses very well. 

[Vieri]

I switched to the SL from the Pentax 645z to get lighter for my hiking and landscape work without loosing quality (rationale being that the less Mp of the SL compared to the 645z would be compensated by the better glass). Ended up loving it, so much so that I got back into Medium Format, but this time a Leica S with 3 lenses... Great kit, they complement each other perfectly. What would I like more? Longer exposures on the S 007, and one high-resolution version of the SL

 

Best,

 

Vieri

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Suteetat]

Still shooting my D810, D500 with my 300/4 PF, 500/4e FL and 200-500/5.6 along with my SL. When I need tele in a very portable and relatively light setup, nothing beat D500 and 300/4 PF +/- TC. As much as I like SL with 90-280, there are going to be times when Nikon will get the job done much easier. 

However, I hardly ever use my Nikon 70-200 now as I prefer 90-280 more except when AF speed is critical (rare). Beyond 280mm then SL has nothing to offer so far but I would be very scare to think how much Leica might charge for 400/2.8, 500/4

But generally anything from 15-280mm, either my SL or A7r ii pretty much are in used instead of my Nikon although the soon to be released Nikon 105/1.4 has me intrigued.

[teiki arii]

Hi everybody,

I have used Canon EOS 5DMKI/5DMKII and now two of EOS 6D with my Leica-R lenses (28,35,50,macro60,90AA,macro100, 80-200,APO Modular 280, Apo 1.4x & 2x). I have no Canon lens at all. I am very happy with my twin cameras and I won't trade my DSLR for SL until I can manually focus with OVF cameras. SL EVF is the future as I'm getting older but Leica SL camera is really too expensive for me. EOS 6D is 1/7 of the cost of SL camera (with SL-R adapter) for similar results...

Best regards.