Bad news for the SL.

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting to see the sort of increases in processing power that the next generation - of any camera - can expect ....... making even higher resolution EVF's possible and that mirrorless is definitely the future. 

 

If Leica can shoehorn this sort of power into the next SL with some more pixels in screen and sensor plus in camera IS ..... without ruining the current concept ..... then I would be more than happy to upgrade. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Leicaiste]

IBIS in the SL, that would be a great news. My longer R lenses would love it.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I don't think this matters for the SL crowd. But more the Canikon bunch is where this is obviously targeted.

 

Even with the utility of the SL it's still a deliberately niche camera. Price alone will see to that. But there's also certain a usability that's created by the lack of buttons and interface options that make the SL just plain different to the Sony's *many button* interface. Leica's seem to be the cameras no one else is willing to make because they won't sell in vast numbers. It's a brave strategy and only Fujifilm come even close. The a9 isn't competition to that market. It's decidedly a camera for the mass market Sony want to dominate.

 

Yes, *some* customers will decide between the a9 and SL but I think that number is small. If you have the money to enter the SL market you'll buy the camera you like not the one that's cheapest. And the SL and a9 seem to be at the opposite end of what a 24MP mirrorless camera should be. Both fine but ultimately different.

 

The Sony looks like a fine camera and the latest lenses for it are stunning. But for me, I bought into the SL because of a very precise reason (I like the button layout, build quality and utility) and this new camera hasn't changed that for me.

 

If I were Canon or Nikon (who are already sliding behind Sony in market share) I'd be paying very careful attention.

 

Gordon

[Joshua Lowe]

The samples on B&H look a lot more promising.

[SrMi]

IMO Sony A9 is more a treat to Nikon D5 and Canon 1D, however Sony's accuracy of focus has yet to be proven and it still misses essential long lenses. I do not see why A9 would be better than A7rII for landscape photography (except less convoluted menus), and I think SL is a better system for landscape photography than A7rII.

[jip]

 C'est Ca! 

[blacksinner]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i got different opinion, the a9 is $4500, the SL is $7450, i got mine for around $5,900. so in my opinion, considering the built quality, the the feature i actually use, the customer service, and the image quality from SL is incredible, i rather have SL than A9. $4500 for cheap built quality, that's a big no. and i used to shoot with a7rii, the screw on the body rusted, it scared me. so i looked for SL. and i moved on.

 

for wildlife and sports, i choose dslr, it is cheaper more rugged body, the lens option is much wider.

[Clactonian]

If I were a Sony user I would be extremely frustrated by the constant stream of new or updated models which immediately devalue existing cameras. The technology is impressive, if that's what floats your boat, but from a consumer's point of view the marketing policy is questionable in my book.

[caissa]

The samples on B&H look a lot more promising.

What do you mean by that ? Links ?

[dem331]

I think that I will wait for 50 fps.  20 fps cannot capture das Wesentliche.

[Paul J]

The a9r is brilliant, really it is, but it's nothing I need or want. If I was sports photographer who shot golf where no one is allowed to take photos during the swing because of noise distraction, and needed high frame rate and completely silent camera, then sure I would feel differently. I'm sure it will revolutionise things in that way.

 

But did people stop buying Ferrari's and Porsche's when Nissan made the GTR? There are plenty of videos on youtube of Nissans beating Ferrari's in a drag race, so will people stop buying them?

 

This idea that everyone will sell or stop using their cameras and systems to get one other particular camera which has "better" features that most will never need is a bit short sighted. I bought a vastly "inferior" M outfit and for the same price I could have bought a Canon 1DX and Nikon D5 outfit but I did that for a reason. Vice versa, for others I'm sure.

 

but the a9 is brilliant and I look forward to seeing how the rest of industry reacts. Sony really has reinvigorated the market. Without the a7 cameras I'm not sure the SL would ever exist.

[blacksinner]

If I were a Sony user I would be extremely frustrated by the constant stream of new or updated models which immediately devalue existing cameras. The technology is impressive, if that's what floats your boat, but from a consumer's point of view the marketing policy is questionable in my book.

 

hahaha... youre so right... thats one of the reason i moved to SL

[Ingo]

Technical innovation is key and I like to see what's happening in the market right now. 

I was a Canon shooter for xx-years and switched to Leica when the SL was released in 2015.

But this was a strategic decision and not a tactical one. It was because of the concept that Leica has in mind, the quality of the lenses and the very first EVF-camera that I really like. 

 

So I will not change my mind just because there is another new (although very interesting) piece of electronic available. 

[sillbeers15]

I see the introduction of the Alpha 0 a good thing as it will lift the benchmark for the coming Leica SL (Type 602?) which I'm looking forward to. The current SL is fine for non action photography. I find it a waste that the current SL's AF tracking cannot match up to the 90-280mm SL lens which offered incredible optical quality and super fast focusing speed. I think the next new model from Leica should be the medium format replace model and hopefully comes a new SL in 24months time. I am anticipating. So even the new Alpha 9 can offer promising autofocus tracking but it cannot temp me from leaving Leica glass quality.As a matter of fact that if the AF tracking performance of Panasonic GH5 receives good feedback, we will see the next SL with promising AF system.

[Tmuussoni]

IMO Sony A9 is more a treat to Nikon D5 and Canon 1D, however Sony's accuracy of focus has yet to be proven and it still misses essential long lenses. I do not see why A9 would be better than A7rII for landscape photography (except less convoluted menus), and I think SL is a better system for landscape photography than A7rII.

 

I am curious about your reasoning for this claim? I think it's exactly the opposite. I would think A7r II's main strength over SL is exactly in the landscape department: Higher resolution (never too much resolution for landscapes), better dynamic range, slightly better at high ISO, no limitations with bulb mode (inability to turn long exposure noise reduction for SL), IBIS (very useful if shooting handheld) and Sony Smooth Reflection application (really brilliant). Since I am currently looking to invest in a landscape system, as I have realized certain limitations in landscaping with Leica bodies will probably never change, these are exactly the reasons which keep me away from SL, sadly. Imo, SL's strenghts lay elsewhere: better EVF than A7r II, higher burst rate, larger battery, larger size (to those who prefer) and larger grip (to those who prefer, but this is subjective). Weather sealing is something I can't comment, since usually I don't trust in any manufacturers claims about weather sealing...

[jrp]

The A7R2 is a superior camera body, technically, for landscape shooting, and is compact.  But light (M) lenses and the zooms and built-in GPS make the SL a more practicable proposition, a position that should improve further when the new SL zoom and lenses emerge.

 

The key thing about the new A9 (which is clearly aimed at a different market from the existing A7 range: sports photographers and photojournalists) is the sensor technology (v fast readout).  That, added to IBIS pulls the Sony sensor away from the Leica one in yet another respect.

 

I have not idea whether Leica's sensor suppliers have access to the same technologies but, if not, in another year or two's time the Leica sensors will start to look as quaint as the M8/9's do to us now.

[Jeff S]

The A7R2 is a superior camera body, technically, for landscape shooting, and is compact. But light (M) lenses and the zooms and built-in GPS make the SL a more practicable proposition, a position that should improve further when the new SL zoom and lenses emerge.

.

The Sony G Master line for full frame) is growing fast, emulating the Canikon focal lengths in pro level weather sealed form, including 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 100-400 f4.5-5.6, 851.4, etc.

 

Jeff

[caissa]

 

 Without the a7 cameras I'm not sure the SL would ever exist.

The planning of the SL was started before the first of these mirrorless cameras was announced.

So it looks as if Leica had independently the same idea, but it took them longer to make it reality - probably because they waited for better and faster components, like the extraordinary EVF. And they were certainly in discussions with Panasonic and they must have started much earlier to design the AF electronics.

It s amazing that still no other vendor has announced a camera of equal EVF specs. (More than 18 months after SL announcement)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[caissa]

It is easy to write "this body is superior", but in reality it is not so easy to prove it. And the a7R II is not superior for me.

I would only agree that the sensor is maybe better, but the life cycle for sensors is very short.

So I agree that the a7RII is doomed, because it will very soon be replaced by a better follow-on model.  

 

I am still enjoying the color slides I made 20 years ago - though technically most modern pics are "superior". In the same sense a "superior" camera is almost worthless for me. I have no obligation to produce the most modern looking pics for a special clientele.

So a camera can only be superior, if I find my current camera is not good enough for my current projects and plans. First I have to find it inferior before I can find anything "superior". And then I will have a look for a clear distinction, a clear improvement. And not only a bunch of slightly improved features.

Without a clear distinction the "superiority" is just theoretical and mainly boring. (Like a new faster notebook or faster mobile phone).

 

I once had a Pentax LX as my "professional" body - for more than 10 years. I used it non-exclusively. Some cameras had "superior" feature like AF, but I never regarded them as superior, unless the results actually were.

The A9 is not yet there, so nobody can tell about the results - and certainly nobody can show any "superior" pics made with the new top-gun.

[saxo]

The technique of the brandnew a9 is great, offers a bright futur for digital photography:

 

imagine, the next generation of M camera might be totaly silent, without a shutter! The next generation of the SL will probably incoparate improved AFc.

 

Switching the system makes no sense IMHO, but the available technique will be used in future products by Leica, I'm sure.