S Owners Who Own SL

[Agent M10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a lot of traveling to do this year and was thinking of picking up an SL and a couple of lenses. Last year I hauled the S to a few different countries and the kit started to grow heavy. The S’s IQ is great. Would I be setting myself up for some disappointment? Interested in hearing from those who have tried both systems.

[mgrayson3]

I always regret not having the S if the subject is in its range. If weight is a concern and you don't need the reach and IS of the 90-280, I prefer the TL2/CL. The 11-23 and 35/1.4 are truly excellent lenses. That would be my travel kit. (I don't have the normal TL zoom, and the long TL zoom, not being stabilized, is more difficult to use.) The SL and its lenses aren't particularly light, but the AF is super fast (50/1.4 aside).

 

Actually, the Q has optics as good as anything outside the S system - if its focal length works for you, just take it.

 

But the S and its lenses are different creatures entirely. I took it, the 24, and the 70 on a walking trip. It was manageable, and the results fantastic. I think I'd take the 24, 45, and 100 next time. The 120 is superb, but heavier and less well balanced than the 100.

 

--Matt

[Advertisement]

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

[Photon42]

Your Name suggests you have an M10. If yes, you already have a lighter camera and - even more importantly - lighter lenses. The SL with Zoom is already 2kg, and you were talking a couple of lenses. Last time I had the S with 24/70/120 in an F-Stop backpack and it was definitely ok. I brought as well a smaller camera, but mostly used it only when going out in the evening. The S with 24/70 is also a great combination. You do not have to lug around everything everywhere while on vacation.

[helged]

SL+24-90 for me on travel/hiking. S for more specific/targetrd shooting. If I bring the S for general shooting, S+24+70 is a fine combo.

[erlingmm]

Depends on what kind of travel, if mainly flights/car I take the S, either full system in the case, or a couple lenses (always 24, then zoom or 70) in a bag. Would not want to miss best shots with best gear.

Sold my SL system, too close to S in weight and size. Got the TL2 with a couple of lenses for tourism, but always travel with M10 or S in addition.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

SL for speed and versatility and S for IQ. Difference between an S and 30-90 versus an SL and 24-90 isn't that much.

 

However,

 

The S zoom is poor. You could take an SL with 24-90 and your S with primes. The S to SL adaptor works really well so you'd use your S primes on the SL body if you need the mirrorless advantage.

 

Gordon

[John McMaster]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It depends on which S you have, IMO the S(007) has good enough high ISO that I can use it as my only camera usually travelling with 24, 45, 70 and 120.

 

john

[glenerrolrd]

Have the S,SL and M10 ....and plenty of experience with each .  My order for travel would be M10,SL and the S unless I planned on working with a tripod .   The S has by far the best image quality and if I was looking for that ...I would pull out the F Stop back pack and take it . 

 

I spent 18 days in IRELAND traveling with two S bodies and the 30,45,120 and 180 lenses .  CUBE and RRS tripod .  Terrific gear ..this trip was 80% landscape and 20% street/travel .  The S was the right kit and I appreciated the weather sealing .  I was able to shoot on the street for a few days with the S .....it was more the camera awareness that bothered me over the weight .  We were carted around in a Van so walking no  more than a few miles a day wasn t required .  

 

In Florida this winter I ve been shooting at the South Florida Fair using two SL bodies and four Leica R lenses 19,28,50,80 or 100.  With the R lenses I ve had no trouble focusing and they fit the SL like a glove .   I don t like at all the 24-90 and 90-280 zooms ..UNLESS... I am shooting action where they are a must .   The Zooms are just uncomfortable compared to the R prime lenses .  I have shot the fair every year for the last 6-7 years using the S ,the M and now the SL .  I think I prefer the SL with the R primes .  This is 3-4 hours per shoot walking constantly but will plenty of places to rest .  

 

Normally I would be using the M10 bodies but they are having a spa visit getting recalibrated ..hopefully back soon .  

 

If I am working a city ....New York,Paris,Havana,Miami .....I always prefer the M10 .........here I assume the daily 10 miles carrying the gear which is no fun even with the M . 

 

The key for me was to stop trying to like the SL zooms and moving back to the legacy R lenses .  

Edited January 21, 2018 by glenerrolrd

[Bill W]

I have both the S and SL. We traveled to Scotland for two weeks and I only took my SL with 24/90, M10 with 50APO and 28 cron. This all was fitted into a Tenba Cooper 13. While this is still sort of heavy, I rarely took all of it with me while walking around which we did a lot. 

[tom0511]

I have cl, m10,sl and S.

I have to say that S is max IQ but SL is not bad.

For outdoors in mixed weather I prefer the SL over M. With the 24-90 and IS and EVF the SL is just much more flexible and fast than M10.

[helged]

I have cl, m10,sl and S.

I have to say that S is max IQ but SL is not bad.

For outdoors in mixed weather I prefer the SL over M. With the 24-90 and IS and EVF the SL is just much more flexible and fast than M10.

 

Exactly my experience as well. Others will, undoubtedly, put M10 a head of the SL. But for me, SL+24-90 is a system where I have full and instant control of focus and exposure, with focal lengths covering 90+ percent of my type of photography, with image stabilisation, with instant wake-up time and very high frame rate (if desired), all in a water sealed package.

 

It would be good if Leica could release a high-quality S zoom that is not too big and not too heavy. Based of the excellent SL- and TL-zooms, they of course can...

Edited January 22, 2018 by helged

[Jeff S]

 

It would be good if Leica could release a high-quality S zoom that is not too big and not too heavy. Based of the excellent SL- and TL-zooms, they of course can...

Or at least with OIS, with SL zooms IQ level.

 

Jeff

[xiaubauu2009]

Exactly my experience as well. Others will, undoubtedly, put M10 a head of the SL. But for me, SL+24-90 is a system where I have full and instant control of focus and exposure, with focal lengths covering 90+ percent of my type of photography, with image stabilisation, with instant wake-up time and very high frame rate (if desired), all in a water sealed package.

It would be good if Leica could release a high-quality S zoom that is not too big and not too heavy. Based of the excellent SL- and TL-zooms, they of course can...

Good quality zoom that covers 3x zoom range will be big heavy and incredibly complex for correct required. Alternatively make it a 2x zoom. Then might be easier? The behemoth of the P1 zoom makes Leica zoom look like a mini caterpillar.

[hoppyman]

I think it depends a lot on what subjects you like to shoot when you are travelling and what your intended use of the images is (stock, memories, commercial, prints etc)
I use the S (Typ 007) and the SL in studio environments. The SL  (with 24-90) really doesn't feel a lot lighter/smaller in handling for me. I value the zoom and the focus system though. When I nail the technique the files are great from the SL of course but the S files are just superior (as they should be of course).

For me, both systems are more than I want to carry and use when travelling. I used to carry the M when I was shooting some travel and street. I think the CL looks very promising for that now.

Edited January 23, 2018 by hoppyman

[Agent M10]

I appreciate the feedback. We don't have a local dealer where I live, so I haven't had the chance to put my hands on an SL. But, based upon everyone's comments, it doesn't sound like I'd save a lot of heavy lifting moving to an SL for travel. Looks like my money would be better spent picking up another S lens or even the 008 when it comes out, then investing in the SL at this point in time.  

[xiaubauu2009]

I appreciate the feedback. We don't have a local dealer where I live, so I haven't had the chance to put my hands on an SL. But, based upon everyone's comments, it doesn't sound like I'd save a lot of heavy lifting moving to an SL for travel. Looks like my money would be better spent picking up another S lens or even the 008 when it comes out, then investing in the SL at this point in time.  

 

 

SL price has decrease quite a bit but you are right, no point in picking up that as it's another system again.... and it's still quite a heavy machine.

[hkgmatt]

I have never taken my S006 for travel, not so much because of the weight but because it is not as versatile and quick as an M or an SL for my style of traveling (the S007 would probably be slightly better in this regard). I don't hesitate to take the SL (and/or the M) for traveling because the SL with the 24-90 and the 90-280 with their image stabilisation covers most bases. I don't have the 30-90mm S. The SL's size may seem big at first, but it is such a useful and ergonomically well designed camera that it simply has never been an issue. Like Helged, I even take the SL+24-90mm on long hikes without thinking twice.

[Agent M10]

I have never taken my S006 for travel, not so much because of the weight but because it is not as versatile and quick as an M or an SL for my style of traveling (the S007 would probably be slightly better in this regard). I don't hesitate to take the SL (and/or the M) for traveling because the SL with the 24-90 and the 90-280 with their image stabilisation covers most bases. I don't have the 30-90mm S. The SL's size may seem big at first, but it is such a useful and ergonomically well designed camera that it simply has never been an issue. Like Helged, I even take the SL+24-90mm on long hikes without thinking twice.

 

 

Actually, I didn't make myself clear with the original post. Most of the weight of the S system comes from air/hotel travel. I use a Pelican case for the system and that adds all the hassle of bags, boarding, etc. I just throw the M with a couple of lenses in a backpack when I use it. So, my question really revolved around the idea of whether the SL would be an easier system to travel with. Out in the field the S isn't a problem at all.

[hkgmatt]

I just throw the M with a couple of lenses in a backpack when I use it.

I do the same with the SL, but not the S. The SL is my go everywhere camera (sometimes only with an M lens rather than a zoom). But it cannot compete sizewise with an M camera and lens which is such a wonderful and compact package.

Edited January 27, 2018 by hkgmatt

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tom0511]

IMO the 24-90 lens alone, combine with the ability to also mount M lenses makes the SL a good system for travel. 

Oc course the M with just 2 or 3 lenses is even smaller. But you are also limited to manual focus and shorter focal lengths.

The size advantage of the SL over the S starts to show as soon as you use the 24-90 instead of the S with 2 or 3 lenses.