Leica SL buy or wait?

[Enbee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As you can see, there are a lot of opinions.

 

I bought mine the first day they were available for sale and have not regretted it for one instant. I have no intent to buy another even if a new model with some different features comes available—no need at all. There's a point where the notion that quantum leaps with every new model stop happening. The SL is that point for me: I don't need anything more.

 

What do you intend to do with your second camera? Can the SL do it? If yes, buy one. It's really that simple.

 

If it doesn't, well, no one will know what the next SL model does until Leica announces it. I personally can't think of anything else I need that can't be addressed in firmware development, if there's enough reason for Leica to do it.

Thanks so much! It surely can do things that I am unable to do with my mp240. I tried it once and fell in love with the way works and picture quality is ofcourse what Leica is known for.

 

Any place in London or Paris where I can get a good deal? Anyone like Ken Hansen ( though there can only be one of him)!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Advertisement]

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

[Enbee]

Yes I agree completely, you should never buy a SL - neither now nor in a few months. You will not find many recommendations in favour of it - it is simply too expensive, has not enough modern features, is excellent for manual focus, but bad for using flash ...

I never saw a full-hearted recommendation in favour of it from any "scientific" web-site, since it was announced.

 

So if you have to ask - DON'T. Everybody agrees. Even people who have never used one.

 

By the way I have mine since January 2016 and feel very happy since then - the happier the more native lenses I get.

Thank You! Love your sarcasm..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Enbee]

There's a better built mirrorless camera than the SL?

 

The M isn't usually considered mirrorless (plus the RF has them anyway). Not the X1D or GFX. I've seen those and they're nice but not the same as the SL in build quality although the 'blad is close. The lenses didn't feel that tough in the hand though. Same for the EM1.2, XT2 and A7R2 all of which, I own.

 

I'd be interested what mirrorless camera is put together better than the SL.

 

Gordon

I would love to try the others out and see as well. I felt so good holding the SL - the ergonomics were fantastic when I tried it as compared to some others in the same range as the SL.

[Enbee]

If you can afford a minimum $10k start up, $850 battery grip, $850 flash, $250 battey etc...why not.

 

I have it and love it. I also have all system from canon/nikon/sony so I know exactly what the SL can/can't do. So, go for it.

I wonder the same!

[Enbee]

That's what bothers me... why not use that money for a CaNikon, Leica M or some other mirrorless option? I'm not sure what the SL offers other than disappointing zoom lens and that EVF :/

The red dot - I say

[Enbee]

I take it you have both zoom lenses. What has disappointed you about them?

 

 

You don't say what you would use a second camera for? If it is mainly walkabout, street, travel, then I would pick something smaller and lighter. I would be disappointed with it myself, because of its weight and bulk (even for use with M lenses, IMO). If it is events, portraits etc, then the SL and its native lenses make a good choice.

For streets, walkabouts even landscapes I love the m. For morning/evening portrait I have used M with some great results. I have tried it for a studio shoot and got some stunning results. However, during some weddings and events I have missed some key shots probably because of MF and I think SL will help fill that gap. Would it?

[Enbee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting.... What exactly is disappointing about the SL zoom lenses? Optically they are very highly regarded. People gush over the 90-280. They have very fast and accurate AF and their range is better than any of their competitors.

 

Are you talking about the size/weight? Yes they are big. But no bigger/heavier than any of their 35mm competitors. The Sony is just as large. The Canikons are slightly smaller but on bigger bodies and with less range.

 

The SL has plenty of weaknesses. I'm surprised that the zoom lenses would be listed among them.

 

Don't buy the SL if.....

 

* you shoot sports at a professional level.

* you want a dive housing for it.

* you need very long telephoto lenses with AF for it.

* you think the expense in purchasing will give you immediately better image quality.

* you need off camera TTL flash or HSS flash.

* you want something small and light.

* you need more than 24MP.

* you think Leica will have a 20 lens system by next year.

* you get headaches and dizzy using EVF cameras (some people do).

 

for the above there is a better solution for you.

 

Do buy the SL if

 

* you can afford it and you just want one.

* you want a great EVF.

* you want the best built mirrorless camera currently available.

* you want a versitile camera that can use a wide variety of "alt" lenses.

* you want to use your AF Nikon lenses on an EVF body.

* you want to use Canon and Sigma AF lenses.

* you shoot architecture with Canons TS lenses.

* you like the simpler button and menu layout compared to alternatives.

* you need a camera to strap your new SL 50mm Summilux on.

* you want to use Leica S, TL, R or M lenses on an EVF camera.

 

If my all my gear were stolen the first cameras I would replace would be my SLs. By far the most flexible "professional" system I've ever used and it suits perfectly they way I like to work/play. YMMV.

 

Certainly, eventually Leica will upgrade the SL. However the current hardware is very good indeed. Most people who have issues really seem to cite firmware issues/wishes. Except for the usual upgrades to sensors/video codecs/processors that happen naturally there's not a huge deal wrong with the SL hardware wise.

 

You might look into lightly used and loved bodies. I recently picked up a second body from a lovely guy who wanted an M10. Mint condition and at a significant reduction in price.

 

Gordon

Thank You for all great suggestions!

 

I like the first argument - I want to buy one! That should do it no .

 

I should add - I got serious about photography only after I bought a Leica! Though it doesn't really mean anything!

[Enbee]

I take it you have both zoom lenses. What has disappointed you about them?

 

 

You don't say what you would use a second camera for? If it is mainly walkabout, street, travel, then I would pick something smaller and lighter. I would be disappointed with it myself, because of its weight and bulk (even for use with M lenses, IMO). If it is events, portraits etc, then the SL and its native lenses make a good choice.

Thank You. As I have mentioned in my previous answer it's the use of AF. Also one of the limitations of Leica M is 60 seconds on B mode. Does the SL suffer with the same limitation? What's the maximum time that the camera will capture?

[Joshua Lowe]

Do you have a rental option? If you're in the USA there are a couple of places.

 

The Leica stores are also doing SL test drives.

[AlexP]

I wonder the same!

as said, i got the SL "just because i can". You should do the same. There is no need for excuse or reason. Life is short. Enjoy it as long as you're not in debt. That is my philosophy.

 

Edited April 10, 2017 by AlexP

[Enbee]

Do you have a rental option? If you're in the USA there are a couple of places.

 

The Leica stores are also doing SL test drives.

I am not. In India right now we don't have a Leica presence here yet.

[Enbee]

as said, i got the SL "just because i can". You should do the same. There is no need for excuse or reason. Life is short. Enjoy it as long as you're not in debt. That is my philosophy.

 

I like that philosophy!

[LD_50]

Thank You. As I have mentioned in my previous answer it's the use of AF. Also one of the limitations of Leica M is 60 seconds on B mode. Does the SL suffer with the same limitation? What's the maximum time that the camera will capture?

SL allows up to 30 min without bulb setting. I am not sure the maximum with bulb setting. The English manual simply states the following:

 

"Note:

For longer exposures than 30 min, use the B setting, which is available by turning the top dial counterclockwise beyond the 30 m setting. With B, the shutter remains open as long as you keep the shutter button fully pressed."

[AlexP]

Thank You for all great suggestions!

 

I like the first argument - I want to buy one! That should do it no .

 

 

of course...here..some motivation for you. lol

 

[Enbee]

of course...here..some motivation for you. lol

 

That's good enough!! Thank You!

[Enbee]

SL allows up to 30 min without bulb setting. I am not sure the maximum with bulb setting. The English manual simply states the following:

 

"Note:

For longer exposures than 30 min, use the B setting, which is available by turning the top dial counterclockwise beyond the 30 m setting. With B, the shutter remains open as long as you keep the shutter button fully pressed."

Fantastic! That should help with Astro as well - I am hoping!

[matnz]

of course...here..some motivation for you. lol

 

 

 Bit off topic but how do you find the TL 35mm? I've been strongly considering this as a lighter AF stroll/street option than the 24-90 while I patiently wait (well not so patiently) for the 75 and 35mm SL crons.

[AlexP]

I like it a lot. Small, light. I don't mind the reduce resolution due to 35mm mode. Sharp, fast af focus

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[matnz]

Thanks @AlexP, I might just have get one and besides, it should also be good on the TL2 with built in EVF once its released later in the year . I think the SL crons will address most of the size/weight issues that some have with the current SL native lenses, and I am looking forward to their arrival.

Edited April 10, 2017 by matnz

[LocalHero1953]

For streets, walkabouts even landscapes I love the m. For morning/evening portrait I have used M with some great results. I have tried it for a studio shoot and got some stunning results. However, during some weddings and events I have missed some key shots probably because of MF and I think SL will help fill that gap. Would it?

I believe it would, though I'm neither a pro nor a wedding shooter. I use it for musical performance, portraits and community groups. So similar sort of usage, with need for AF.

Edited April 10, 2017 by LocalHero1953