Donzo98 Posted December 9, 2016 Share #1 Posted December 9, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello Group.... I recently became a Leica "guy" after recently purchasing a Q. I really like it. I have been and still am a Nikon fan. I have a lot of Nikon glass, both MF and AF. I currently have my D810 up for sale because of my Q purchase. I also have a super low mileage D5 which I am keeping for the moment. Considering my love affair with the Q... I am looking hard at the SL. I have heard that the "usable" ISO ceiling on the SL is 800... which seems crazy. Is that really true?? The D5 is really overkill for me... but I love the high ISO performance when needed. The other issues are the crazy high price, and lack of AF Leica lenses at the moment. I can live with the price because I would liquidate some of the Nikon stuff. The Leica 24-90 looks sexy... but the Nikon 24-70 VR isn't too bad either. The Nikon is 2K plus... which certainly isn't cheap, but the 24-90 price!! Yikes... Opinions please?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 9, 2016 Posted December 9, 2016 Hi Donzo98, Take a look here NEW to Leica... SL question.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
blacksinner Posted December 9, 2016 Share #2 Posted December 9, 2016 It depends on how you interpret "usable" really. i'm coming from A7RII and nikon D750 which is really good at ISO. the noise on SL is different than on A7RII, with sony i got very ugly grain noise. but really with SL i really don't mind, except shooting landscape with i prefer lowest ISO possible, but with face, street, other, i really don't mind. in fact i love it. the 24-90 is really a big lens, i used to bring small lenses. i wish there are smaller AF lens available. currently i use voigtlander lenses, and it works really well. i really love the result. i love this camera more than anything i've ever tried. A7RII and D750 is really behind my past, i've never missed them. except for birding i choose DSLR over any mirrorless. the 24-90 is great, but not while shooting, it is heavy for this focal range. on the other hand. it is possible to have only one lens. maybe another ultra wide angle and 70-200 maybe. but in the end, you might want to buy fast normal focal length lens liekk 35 or 50mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phongph Posted December 9, 2016 Share #3 Posted December 9, 2016 Hi Donzo98! I traded in Nikon 810, Nikon 24-70 Nano, Nikon 70-200 Nano ... for Leica SL 601 and will not look back NiCa. SL 601 can be used with native AF lens as SL 24-90, SL 90-200 or some coming prime lens of SL Lux 50 f1.4, SL Apo 75 f2, SL Apo 90 f2, SL 35 f2 ... and Leica M, R, S or Nikon lens, Canon lens with adaptor. Currently, I am happy with SL 601, SL 24-90 ASPH and M Apo 50 f2. I may get the 90-280 ASPH next year! Have a good day! Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted December 9, 2016 Author Share #4 Posted December 9, 2016 Thanks for the responses!! What do you think of the high ISO performance of the SL? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted December 9, 2016 Share #5 Posted December 9, 2016 You can start with the camera only and add SL lenses later. I used for the first 6 months only "manual" lenses. First Leica R and M, then Contax, Nikon, Zeiss, Pentax, Tamron, Sigma, ... I do mostly macro, so this was quite natural for me - I used macro lenses from a large number of manufacturers. And for manual focusing the SL with its highres EVF is great. (Much better than my D800 or 5Ds). Only later I added the SL 90-280 lens - for me much more useful than the SL 24-90. I also come from Nikon (D800), so I still use often the 17-35, the micro 70-180 and the 135 DC lenses (until Leica offers something equivalent). If your 24-70 is the newest E type, then there is also an AF adapter from Novoflex. If it is D or G you have to use it manually (with a cheaper adapter). There is also an AF adapter for EOS lenses - the T/S lenses are very popular with SL users. The 11-24 is also closing a gap. The high ISO capability of the SL is fine, but for me it stops at 6400 (maybe 12800). But others have already taken shots at 20000 with nice results. For me this was not so crucial - rather that I was able to use the R and M lenses with a sensor designed for them. Another feature is the electronic 1/16000th of a second. It offers the possibility to freeze even fast movement (water drops). And also in video mode the SL offers 120 frames/s for slow motion effects. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted December 9, 2016 Share #6 Posted December 9, 2016 ISO 6400 is the top setting I use. Why not review images online or download and PP to decide what you think? Leica price is always going to be higher than Nikon. I do prefer the SL+24-90 over my old D4s+24-70G. I did not have the newer VR version. D800 or D810 is hard to beat though for IQ. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted December 9, 2016 Share #7 Posted December 9, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello Group.... I recently became a Leica "guy" after recently purchasing a Q. I really like it. I have been and still am a Nikon fan. I have a lot of Nikon glass, both MF and AF. I currently have my D810 up for sale because of my Q purchase. I also have a super low mileage D5 which I am keeping for the moment. Considering my love affair with the Q... I am looking hard at the SL. I have heard that the "usable" ISO ceiling on the SL is 800... which seems crazy. Is that really true?? The D5 is really overkill for me... but I love the high ISO performance when needed. The other issues are the crazy high price, and lack of AF Leica lenses at the moment. I can live with the price because I would liquidate some of the Nikon stuff. The Leica 24-90 looks sexy... but the Nikon 24-70 VR isn't too bad either. The Nikon is 2K plus... which certainly isn't cheap, but the 24-90 price!! Yikes... Opinions please?? I don't know who told you that ISO 800 is the highest usable ISO. I've gotten excellent results all the way up to ISO 20000. I generally keep it way under that but don't believe all the guff you hear. For me, I have a full Nikon kit. It's been sitting unused in the closet since I bought the SL+24-90. The SL is just that much more satisfying a camera to use, as far as I'm concerned. I'll sell the Nikon stuff soon. Both are good systems, you can do superb photography with either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted December 9, 2016 Share #8 Posted December 9, 2016 Since you have the Q you already know the answer. Performance is essentially the same. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted December 9, 2016 Author Share #9 Posted December 9, 2016 I am loving this little guy, that's for sure... As for the SL... need to do some more reading and OBSESSING Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted December 9, 2016 Author Share #10 Posted December 9, 2016 Since you have the Q you already know the answer. Performance is essentially the same. Gordon I didn't realize the Q moves off of 1.7 Seems like I always wind up there.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted December 9, 2016 Author Share #11 Posted December 9, 2016 I don't know who told you that ISO 800 is the highest usable ISO. I've gotten excellent results all the way up to ISO 20000. I generally keep it way under that but don't believe all the guff you hear. For me, I have a full Nikon kit. It's been sitting unused in the closet since I bought the SL+24-90. The SL is just that much more satisfying a camera to use, as far as I'm concerned. I'll sell the Nikon stuff soon. Both are good systems, you can do superb photography with either. A friend sent this link earlier tonight... https://www.cinema5d.com/leica-sl-review-part-1-hands-on-real-world-footage-in-4k/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted December 9, 2016 Share #12 Posted December 9, 2016 A friend sent this link earlier tonight... https://www.cinema5d.com/leica-sl-review-part-1-hands-on-real-world-footage-in-4k/ That link is obviously referring to video. As said, you have a Q you can check high ISO with or you can download and PP images yourself from the SL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted December 9, 2016 Share #13 Posted December 9, 2016 More reading for the SL: Jono Slack: http://www.slack.co.uk/2015/The_Leica_SL.html ; http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2016/07/year-leica-sl/ D. Farkas: http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/04/leica-apo-vario-elmarit-sl-90-280mm-f2-8-4-lens-review-telephoto-titan-for-the-sl-typ-601/ Overgaard: http://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-Camera-Typ-601.html For Pixel Peeping: https://www.flickr.com/groups/slleica/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meerec Posted December 9, 2016 Share #14 Posted December 9, 2016 Thanks for the responses!! What do you think of the high ISO performance of the SL? I shoot at ISO 50,000 with very usable files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted December 9, 2016 Author Share #15 Posted December 9, 2016 Thanks for the links.... excellent reads! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted December 9, 2016 Share #16 Posted December 9, 2016 I have used it up to iso6400 with very good results. Movie is different, it seems there is some movie noise reduction which you can not turn off which softens high ISO movie. But for photography it works very well at higher ISO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted December 9, 2016 Share #17 Posted December 9, 2016 As to the iso 800 figure ....... 800/1600 is probably as high as you can go without any noticeable reduction in overall image quality .... ie you can set this limit and be confident all your images are going to be excellent. 1600 to 20000 or so the final result depends very much on subject matter (in particular how much shadow is involved) and how the sharpening/noise reduction trade off works out in processing later. Up to 6400 the results are good and usable for most purposes .... and plenty have posted pics here much higher than this that at screen resolutions look as good as much much lower iso's. Leica output from the latest generation of sensors produces a nice film like granularity at very high iso's that is not obtrusive. Having said all that ...... I have 1600 set as a maximum and rarely exceed that ...... with OIS on the AF lenses enabling quite silly slow shutter speeds there are few situations where I need to go higher .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted December 9, 2016 Author Share #18 Posted December 9, 2016 As to the iso 800 figure ....... 800/1600 is probably as high as you can go without any noticeable reduction in overall image quality .... ie you can set this limit and be confident all your images are going to be excellent. 1600 to 20000 or so the final result depends very much on subject matter (in particular how much shadow is involved) and how the sharpening/noise reduction trade off works out in processing later. Up to 6400 the results are good and usable for most purposes .... and plenty have posted pics here much higher than this that at screen resolutions look as good as much much lower iso's. Leica output from the latest generation of sensors produces a nice film like granularity at very high iso's that is not obtrusive. Having said all that ...... I have 1600 set as a maximum and rarely exceed that ...... with OIS on the AF lenses enabling quite silly slow shutter speeds there are few situations where I need to go higher .... Thanks for the response... I guess that's why I love the Q so much. I'm usually wide open and even low light with a 28mm lens I don't need crazy high ISO's. With the SL things would be different especially using the 24-90... since the MAX aperture is F4 at the long end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted December 9, 2016 Share #19 Posted December 9, 2016 What do you think of the high ISO performance of the SL? This is ISO 3200 with an extreme crop. I like the SL's noise pattern much better than the Sony a7II's noise pattern at similar ISO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted December 9, 2016 Share #20 Posted December 9, 2016 Thanks for the response... I guess that's why I love the Q so much. I'm usually wide open and even low light with a 28mm lens I don't need crazy high ISO's. With the SL things would be different especially using the 24-90... since the MAX aperture is F4 at the long end. I think you will be surprised at what you can get away with using the 24-90 with OIS on ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.