SL-P, and/or SL-MONOCHROM

[ZiggyZulunuz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello, everyone.  I need to know before I commit to invest in the SL, (now that there's a Summilux-SL 50mm);  Will Leica introduce an SL-P, and/ or an SL-MONOCHROM?  I just bought an MM (typ246} AND an APO 50/2-asph this year.  It has become an utterly expensive preoccupation for me.  Leica knows how to rejuvenate loyalty.

[LD_50]

What would an SL-P offer that you want? There are wishlist threads on the forum regarding the next iteration of the SL. I wouldn't expect it for a few more years.

 

I doubt there would be enough interest to warrant a monochrome sensor for the SL. Leica needs to expand the lens lineup and work on firmware improvements before changing the hardware.

[ZiggyZulunuz]

I suspect the M will be relegated to a film-only body (a la Nikon F6).  The mirrorless viewfinder on the SL exceeds the rangefinder accuracy of the M, and both bodies are similarly priced.  I find myself composing with live-view or the EVF on my M(240) and MM(246) now more than ever.  AND, I'm almost convinced that Leica means to usurp Zeiss' OTUS trio with their new opto-mechatronic primes.  The MM (246)  is indeed perfect in every way.  I guess what I'm ultimately wanting is to protect my lens investments from obsolescence.  They should have called the SL the "M" (typ501), an evolution of the old M5. Thank you.

[LD_50]

I suspect the M will be relegated to a film-only body (a la Nikon F6).  The mirrorless viewfinder on the SL exceeds the rangefinder accuracy of the M, and both bodies are similarly priced.  I find myself composing with live-view or the EVF on my M(240) and MM(246) now more than ever.  AND, I'm almost convinced that Leica means to usurp Zeiss' OTUS trio with their new opto-mechatronic primes.  The MM (246)  is indeed perfect in every way.  I guess what I'm ultimately wanting is to protect my lens investments from obsolescence.  They should have called the SL the "M" (typ501), an evolution of the old M5. Thank you.

This really doesn't make much sense to me. The SL mount is very different than the M. I believe the M will continue in digital form, even if someday there is no optical RF.

 

You can use your M lenses on the SL. No obsolescence.

 

How does any of this relate to an SL-P or monochrome?

[ZiggyZulunuz]

Leica has traditionally introduced "-P" versions of the various M-cameras.  Since the M9, they have also introduced "MONOCHROM" versions (sans bayer array) of the digital M.  I agree, the M must continue in one form or another.  It is akin to the Porsche 911 in its iconography.  Frankly, I can't see it competing with the SL as a digital mirrorless alternative.  As an M8 owner, I abstained from buying an M9, an M9P, and an M(9)-MONOCHROM, while all of the experts were touting the advantages of CMOS sensors.  I stuck to my Adox and Delta-100, anxiously awaiting the day the M10-MONOCHROM would be introduced.  I had no choice but to purchase an M(240) because after working with live-view MF backs, I was spoiled.  The professional M cameras lack logos and superfluous markings, yet are easily identifiable as THE Leica product, like the contours of a Porsche 911.  I wonder if the same conspicuous modesty is preordained for the SL?  I would have rather purchased an M-P(240) versus the red-dot M(240).  I guess I'm averse to logos and badges.  My fascination is truly with the lenses, which is why I own OTUS lenses but no Nikon or Canon bodies.  I apologize for the wordiness...I shall test drive an SL tomorrow.  Thank you.

[Jeff S]

Get a black dot from DAG for your M240.

 

http://www.dagcamera.com/store/p460/Black_M240_Leica_Logo_%2812mm_dia.%29%2C_also_fits_Leica_T_Camera.html

 

Use forum search if you have any questions on easy installation.

 

Jeff

[ZiggyZulunuz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, Jeff S.

[steppenw0lf]

The price is stiff.  

[Jeff S]

The price is stiff.  

 

Forty bucks?  Leica would charge $1000 extra and call it a special edition.

 

Jeff

[ramarren]

I suspect the M will be relegated to a film-only body (a la Nikon F6).  The mirrorless viewfinder on the SL exceeds the rangefinder accuracy of the M, and both bodies are similarly priced.  I find myself composing with live-view or the EVF on my M(240) and MM(246) now more than ever.  AND, I'm almost convinced that Leica means to usurp Zeiss' OTUS trio with their new opto-mechatronic primes.  The MM (246)  is indeed perfect in every way.  I guess what I'm ultimately wanting is to protect my lens investments from obsolescence.  They should have called the SL the "M" (typ501), an evolution of the old M5. Thank you.

 

 

Since buying the SL, I stopped using my M-P except with M lenses and the rangefinder. To the point at which I bought an M-D typ 262—sans EVF, sans LCD, just pure rangefinder—and the M-D has now become my favorite M and emotional favorite camera (although the SL is without a doubt my best/most versatile camera). For me, the M-D is "indeed perfect in every way": as simple to use as a digital camera can be. The SL is the 'next wave': a super modern camera that enhances my lenses from M and R systems as well as delivering on its own new generation lenses, with features above and beyond anything an M can deliver. It's right to give it a new name, it's not an M in any way. 

 

I have no idea why a "P" or "Monochrom" variant of the SL is a contingent to 'protect lens investments from obsolescence' ... that doesn't make any sense to me. 

[sillbeers15]

Every digital camera turns obsolete in 3 years after it being released as available in the market. It is a tool to be used, perhaps more of liability and certainly no asset. What more about investments are we talking about?