frame-it Posted July 6, 2017 Share #41 Posted July 6, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) a slightly curved grip would be nice. The SL body is beautiful IMO. Great ergonomics to shoot it with the highest quality lenses, be they primes or zooms. No changes, please.IMG_0570.JPG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 6, 2017 Posted July 6, 2017 Hi frame-it, Take a look here SL2 body speculation (now that the SL has seen a price cut). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Joshua Lowe Posted July 6, 2017 Share #42 Posted July 6, 2017 I'm fine with the shape of the body but I wish the finish were more durable. It's excessively fragile. Even more so than a black paint M. Technology wise the firmware updates have by and large fixed the issues I had. The 35% increase in write speed was a huge improvement. Waiting for the buffer to clear was one of my biggest gripes and now it's so much better. If I were to make a list of improvements I guess it would be the standard - more resolution, less noise, faster and more accurate AF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted July 6, 2017 Share #43 Posted July 6, 2017 I'm fine with the shape of the body but I wish the finish were more durable. It's excessively fragile. Even more so than a black paint M. ... Hmm. I've been using mine constantly since November 16, 2015 and there's not a mark on the finish yet. What am I doing wrong? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 6, 2017 Share #44 Posted July 6, 2017 Mine's showing signs of use. I suspect, because it's weather sealed, it gets rougher treatment than other cameras. Adds character, I guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted July 6, 2017 Share #45 Posted July 6, 2017 Hmm. I've been using mine constantly since November 16, 2015 and there's not a mark on the finish yet. What am I doing wrong? I'm showing some marks on the sharp top edges. It's like many anodized surfaces, very fragile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 6, 2017 Share #46 Posted July 6, 2017 Shame it isn't brass; but then think how heavy it would be ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sillbeers15 Posted July 7, 2017 Share #47 Posted July 7, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) - Exactly the same body form, shape and size. - More MP, 36 minimum. - Cleaner long exposures. - Optional long exposures noise reduction would be nice - Not for my work (landscape), but I understand that faster and better AF-C would be desirable by many. However, my preferred solution would be to have 2 DIFFERENT SL on the market, a SL for speed (the one we have now, 24 Mp, perhaps with better AF-c and faster continuous shooting) and one for resolution (36+ Mp, same AF as the actual one, no faster shooting, cleaner files for long exposures). What I feel is needed are native lenses, the ones announced with priority to the 16-35mm. A wider option (12 or 13mm fixed focal and filterable?). T-S lenses would be great to have. A longer zoom for sports (280-420 or 280-560mm f/4?) Best regards, Vieri Vieri, I suppose your wish would be more likely come through with Leica replacing their aging S007 with a mirror less MF platform. Just out of curiosity, why didn't you look into wide R lenses to go with SL for your landscape applications? Alternatively, WATE is available, so why not consider it with M10 for landscape? I would like to hear your comments? I'm at the crossroad of going for WATE on my M10 or wait for the SL16-35mm to make my SL more versatile for landscaping photography. I also wondered why aren't many interest on using wide R lenses on SL for landscape? Not good enough as the R lenses were designed before digital photography? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sillbeers15 Posted July 7, 2017 Share #48 Posted July 7, 2017 I would agree it is nice to see the SL replaced with a higher pixel sensor, but I would be cautious with my wish at the same time as well. For the reason of first, the current package is great as a general application camera. Second reason for being cautious is the processing speed, sensor size, AF capability must all improve in conjunction with a higher pixel sensor wish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apoqualia Posted July 7, 2017 Share #49 Posted July 7, 2017 Nonsense. My Panasonic GX8 is as well built as any Leica camera, and fully weathersealed. It performed well a temperatures over 40 degrees, where my M240 used to lock up. Not surprising, sa cameras like SL and Q have been developed in close collaboration with Panasonic. For daily use I prefer my M cameras, but not for these reasons There are only four professional camera manufacturers in the world. Those are Canon, Hasselblad, Leica and Nikon. They are the only merited to occupy that profession and serve customers. All others are producing gadgets and their products are not cameras. I think there should be a UN convention about it, to prevent random shops from abusing the term photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 7, 2017 Share #50 Posted July 7, 2017 Totally untrue, to put it mildly. Quite a few professional photographers are switching to mirrorless right now. Amongst them Wildlife specialists using Olympus and Panasonic, who both offer a nice line of "professional" gear and lenses. that are perfectly tailored to their speciality. Not that this label "professional" has any significance. Nobody even knows what the marketing adjective means, be it skis, cameras or kitchen equipment. BTW, you are forgetting Phase One, Sinar, Pentax, Alpa, and quite a few others as makers of quality gear. A professional photographer will use any camera that gets the job done and does not suffer from amateur brand snobbery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 7, 2017 Share #51 Posted July 7, 2017 PhaseOne producing gadgets? Very expensive gadgets! Sony, Olympus and Fuji apparently produce cameras many "professionals" seem happy with ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 7, 2017 Share #52 Posted July 7, 2017 Tongue in cheek detector on the brink again? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 7, 2017 Share #53 Posted July 7, 2017 Possibly, or input out of its measuring range. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjdrijfhout Posted July 7, 2017 Share #54 Posted July 7, 2017 SL is great camera to me, but IBIS and improved AFc/PDAF are on the wishlist. But one simple request would be to make the bottom of the SL2 align with the bottom of the lenses. Right now the lenses stick out 2mm below the bottom of the camera, which is very annoying when mounting it on things like gimbals, video head, etc. Happy to have a 2mm higher and heavier camera if that is what it takes. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted July 7, 2017 Share #55 Posted July 7, 2017 Vieri, I suppose your wish would be more likely come through with Leica replacing their aging S007 with a mirror less MF platform. Just out of curiosity, why didn't you look into wide R lenses to go with SL for your landscape applications? Alternatively, WATE is available, so why not consider it with M10 for landscape? I would like to hear your comments? I'm at the crossroad of going for WATE on my M10 or wait for the SL16-35mm to make my SL more versatile for landscaping photography. I also wondered why aren't many interest on using wide R lenses on SL for landscape? Not good enough as the R lenses were designed before digital photography? I am not so sure that a mirrorless S will come before the arrival of an upgraded SL, but I'll be very happy if it does. For my Landscape work, I use 2 SL bodies with the 24-90 Vario-Elmarit, 90-280 Vario-Elmarit, plus the 10 and 15mm Voigtlander. As well, I also own a 28 Elmarit-M and a Noctilux-M f/1. No need for R lenses: they don't add anything to my kit that M lenses couldn't do, and are bigger and heavier. The M10 for landscape is a no-go because it doesn't do long exposures over 125 seconds, which are fundamental for my work. I had a S 007 for about 6 months, and sold it for exactly the same reason (even worse, actually, since it was limited to one minute only!). Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted July 7, 2017 Share #56 Posted July 7, 2017 There are only four professional camera manufacturers in the world. Those are Canon, Hasselblad, Leica and Nikon. They are the only merited to occupy that profession and serve customers. Hard to believe that holding on to my lens for eight months before returning it un-repaired for lack of parts constitutes serving customers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithlaban.co.uk Posted July 7, 2017 Share #57 Posted July 7, 2017 Professionals use a broad range of cameras made by a broad range of manufacturers. One of the most important factors any professional would take into account when making the choice would be the level of services offered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 7, 2017 Share #58 Posted July 7, 2017 Tongue in cheek detector on the brink again? Possibly, or input out of its measuring range. Yeah, really good. Honestly. Great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 7, 2017 Share #59 Posted July 7, 2017 Yeah, really good. Honestly. Great. Thank you so much, you are too kind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted July 8, 2017 Share #60 Posted July 8, 2017 ...Just out of curiosity, why didn't you look into wide R lenses to go with SL for your landscape applications? Alternatively, WATE is available, so why not consider it with M10 for landscape? I would like to hear your comments? I'm at the crossroad of going for WATE on my M10 or wait for the SL16-35mm to make my SL more versatile for landscaping photography. I also wondered why aren't many interest on using wide R lenses on SL for landscape? Not good enough as the R lenses were designed before digital photography? I have and use the Elmarit-R 19mm f/2.8 v1 and the Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5 regularly with the SL. Both are delightful performers and ergonomically suit the SL perfectly, but the WATE is actually a better performer. The SER15 is one of my favorite lenses on the SL ... but I'm not a landscape shooter most of the time. I use them for other things... The later 19mm v2 and Super-Elmarit-R 15mm f/2.8 are much better performers than my older model R lenses; they are also significantly pricier. For my purposes, I'm content with what I have. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.