Jump to content

Is the Leica SL doomed?


jrp

Recommended Posts

It's not the only promoted post. And the people use their names to promote it. So what's the problem ? Others call it being an "ambassador".

You mean this is biased and the "titanic review" is not ?   :p  :D

At least they show photos and videos they took with the camera - ignore the rest, if you like.

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Advertisement (gone after registration)

An interesting piece of analysis:

 

http://thephotofundamentalist.com/leica/leica-sl-doomed/

 

Are the M and SL lines going to merge, the writer speculates?

No, because the SL2 sensor is likely to be very competitive vs. the best FF sensors out there. See here: http://www.towerjazz.com/prs/2017/1030.html

 

And the SL lenses are excellent. α7R III has a better sensor than the SL but the FE lenses are a bit sh!t and it’s a lot more difficult for Sony to catch up in optics. Leica can and will in sensor technology. It’s like that bumper sticker that says “I might be fat (SL sensor) but you’re ugly (Sony lenses) and I can go on a diet.” :)

Edited by Chaemono
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another view on the Leica SL by three photographers. Far from the "titanic" view.   :)

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/139294-reflecting-on-the-leica-sl-three-photographers-talk-about-the-mirrorless-marvel

 

FYI, Kristen Meister has already dropped the Leica SL and moved back to Nikon.

https://scenictraverse.com/blog/2017/10/29/a-new-chapter-the-nikon-d850

Link to post
Share on other sites

The D850 sensor is terrific but Leica with its sensor partners will close the gap in the SL2 likely next year. The SL lenses rock. A user in a thread that is now closed (surprise, surprise :) ) insisted that I do these. I refused at first, but he was bagging for it. So, here we go. I have tons of all kinds of shots like these. Will keep posting them. :)

 

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-x8Mwmw/

 

α7R III + FE 24-70/2.8 G Masterly resolution at 24 mm

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!

ISO 200 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec.

SL + 24-90 Vario-Elmarit-SL at 24 mm

ISO 200 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec.

Edited by Chaemono
Link to post
Share on other sites

And now the crops

 

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-x8Mwmw/

 

α7R III + FE 24-70/2.8 G Masterly resolution at 24 mm

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!

ISO 200 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec.

 

SL + 24-90 Vario-Elmarit-SL at 24 mm

ISO 200 f/2.8 @1/2000 sec.

Edited by Chaemono
Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI, Kristen Meister has already dropped the Leica SL and moved back to Nikon.

https://scenictraverse.com/blog/2017/10/29/a-new-chapter-the-nikon-d850

 

 

And from a more recent blog post she does a comparison between the 850 and the SL in which states:

 

"This is where it gets tough. In many ways, the cameras both performed exactly as they should have. The Nikon D850, which has twice the sensor resolution of the Leica SL, won any comparison looking for micro-details in the image. But the Leica SL also holds its own in real world shooting, where the difference in resolution only becomes noticeable when zooming in beyond 600%. 

Leica clearly produces a better lens than Nikon, which should have never been in doubt. Leica is generally considered in a league of their own when it comes to lens designs. But the problem is that the improvement isn't that substantial. Yes, it's there, but only if you are pixel peeping, like we're doing here, are you ever going to notice.

Finally, we need to talk about the difference in user experience. I greatly prefer using a mirrorless camera with electronic viewfinder to a prism, meaning I favor the shooting experience of the Leica SL to the Nikon D850."

 

http://scenictraverse.com/blog/2017/12/14/d850vsleicasl

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And from a more recent blog post she does a comparison between the 850 and the SL in which states:

 

"This is where it gets tough. In many ways, the cameras both performed exactly as they should have. The Nikon D850, which has twice the sensor resolution of the Leica SL, won any comparison looking for micro-details in the image. But the Leica SL also holds its own in real world shooting, where the difference in resolution only becomes noticeable when zooming in beyond 600%. 

Leica clearly produces a better lens than Nikon, which should have never been in doubt. Leica is generally considered in a league of their own when it comes to lens designs. But the problem is that the improvement isn't that substantial. Yes, it's there, but only if you are pixel peeping, like we're doing here, are you ever going to notice.

Finally, we need to talk about the difference in user experience. I greatly prefer using a mirrorless camera with electronic viewfinder to a prism, meaning I favor the shooting experience of the Leica SL to the Nikon D850."

 

http://scenictraverse.com/blog/2017/12/14/d850vsleicasl

 

Well said! I moved to Leica because I ENJOY using the camera far more than other brands. While there will always be cases where one camera has a slightly better feature, these days any of the major brands will deliver more quality than most photographers need. I look to my tools to enhance my photography experience in "real world shooting" rather than worrying about pixel peeping. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly tongue in cheek, I guess it comes down to whether you prefer your lenses or your pixels. Or perhaps whether you enjoy an ergonomically comfortable camera with a magnificent viewfinder or the frisson of excitement from viewing your photos at 600%.

 

Fortunately, there are cameras which do both well. I think with camera reviews there is sometimes too much attention on how a sensor can handle bad light or boring detail shots and not enough attention on how they render good light, so the linked reviewer did a good job trying to capture some “real world” scenarios.

 

For me, I’m using Leica systems because when the light is good I’d rather have a Leica than anything else.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Alistairm, on 18 Feb 2018 - 12:47, said:

Slightly tongue in cheek, I guess it comes down to whether you prefer your lenses or your pixels. Or perhaps whether you enjoy an ergonomically comfortable camera with a magnificent viewfinder or the frisson of excitement from viewing your photos at 600%.

 

Fortunately, there are cameras which do both well. I think with camera reviews there is sometimes too much attention on how a sensor can handle bad light or boring detail shots and not enough attention on how they render good light, so the linked reviewer did a good job trying to capture some “real world” scenarios.

 

For me, I’m using Leica systems because when the light is good I’d rather have a Leica than anything else.

 

Totally agree.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so bored with the whole 'more pixels' meme as well as with the 'leica is doomed' meme.

Let's not forget the "it doesn't work in low light" meme, where someone under-exposes a shot by five stops, tries to get them back in ACR, and then declares the camera worthless.

 

As far as I am concerned, the low-light issue was solved 10 years ago when the 5D2 came out. Every top-tier camera since has been great in low light. The SL at ISO 12,800 is even better than the 5D2's ISO 3,200! Is this kind of performance really a showstopper?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, because the SL2 sensor is likely to be very competitive vs. the best FF sensors out there. See here: http://www.towerjazz.com/prs/2017/1030.html

 

And the SL lenses are excellent. α7R III has a better sensor than the SL but the FE lenses are a bit sh!t and it’s a lot more difficult for Sony to catch up in optics. Leica can and will in sensor technology. It’s like that bumper sticker that says “I might be fat (SL sensor) but you’re ugly (Sony lenses) and I can go on a diet.” :)

Just out of curiosity, how many FE-lenses have you actually used? You have shown your "tests" with Sony 24-70 in numerous threads already, but what about other lenses? You say that Sony FE lenses are "bit shit" so I guess you have tested all of them or at least very many of them to make such a statement. I know that there aren't many Leica SL-lenses to do comparisons with, certainly you have compared at least Sony GM 50mm to Sl 50mm and Sony GM 85mm to SL 90mm and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...