Sony A9 making me rethink Leica Setup - any A9 owners?

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

so, is an out of focus MF/bad AF shot better than a stabilized [iBIS] AF shot that can be printed and sold ?

 

simply because of IQ and tolerances needed for that IQ ? if its out of focus and will be deleted....IQ ?

 

This is mainly caused by Leica's strict tolerances, coupled to Leica's micro-lens sensors. But who knows; I certainly don't...

Edited March 22, 2018 by frame-it

[helged]

so, is an out of focus MF/bad AF shot better than a stabilized [iBIS] AF shot that can be printed and sold ?

 

simply because of IQ and tolerances needed for that IQ ? if its out of focus and will be deleted....IQ ?

 

 

As I said, I don't know... But misalignment(s) of the sensor may heavily influence outer edges/corners when using wide angle lenses (as is the case for mis-aligned lens-elements in WA lenses). So after spending lots of thinking and testing of sensors with micro-lenses - something that is needed for back-compatibility with most M-lenses - my bet is that Leica is very reluctant to potentially degrade the performance of WA-lenses due to IBIS.

 

A similar argument holds for not introducing an option that allows switching off noise reduction for long exposures. Leica argues that NR is needed in order not to degrade the output, whereas many (most?) of the users would like to see NR turned off.

[BernardC]

so, is an out of focus MF/bad AF shot better than a stabilized [iBIS] AF shot that can be printed and sold ?

It's hardly that simple.

Leica sells two stabilized zooms for the SL, so let's not pretend that you can't get any stabilization with the system.

By the way, Panasonic kept IBIS out of the GH5S (which has a much smaller and presumably lighter sensor than the SL), so maybe they share Leica's concerns. Nikon and Canon also skip IBIS for their full-frame cameras.

 

AF: it's not the fastest system, but not the slowest either. If you need a system with  the fastest AF performance, then get that instead of the SL.

[Chaemono]

And it can do birds in flight and flying horses at horse races. Season starting soon BTW. 

[Donzo98]

I don't think there is much to debate about the AF superiority of the A9 compared to the SL. It is clearly much better.

 

The question is "Do you really require/ desire that speed?"

 

For people that shoot mostly stationary or slow moving subjects, that AF speed is not needed.

 

The SL offers better build quality, better lenses, the best capability for use with M glass, and better ergonomics. The other thing I don't like about Sony is the speed at which they upgrade their bodies. I don't need to be tempted every year

 

I don't need the AF of the A9. I love the SL... I'm happy with it.

Edited March 22, 2018 by Donzo98

[FlashGordonPhotography]

As I said, I don't know... But misalignment(s) of the sensor may heavily influence outer edges/corners when using wide angle lenses (as is the case for mis-aligned lens-elements in WA lenses). So after spending lots of thinking and testing of sensors with micro-lenses - something that is needed for back-compatibility with most M-lenses - my bet is that Leica is very reluctant to potentially degrade the performance of WA-lenses due to IBIS.

 

A similar argument holds for not introducing an option that allows switching off noise reduction for long exposures. Leica argues that NR is needed in order not to degrade the output, whereas many (most?) of the users would like to see NR turned off.

 

The excellent edge and corner performance of the Sony 12-24 and 16-35GM would indicate that IBIS doesn't have to degrade corner performance in wide lenses. It just has to be done properly.

 

Anyway, camera movement does way more IQ damage than IBIS does anyway. Even at higher shutter speeds (<1/500).

 

Leica once claimed no serious photographer would use AF. Nikon said 24x36mm sensors weren't neccesary. Claims about IBIS are more of the same. If you haven't got it then tell everybody it's bad. Until you make it and then it's good. Just look at Fuji before and after the XH1.

 

Gordon

[Donzo98]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The excellent edge and corner performance of the Sony 12-24 and 16-35GM would indicate that IBIS doesn't have to degrade corner performance in wide lenses. It just has to be done properly.

 

Anyway, camera movement does way more IQ damage than IBIS does anyway. Even at higher shutter speeds (<1/500).

 

Leica once claimed no serious photographer would use AF. Nikon said 24x36mm sensors weren't neccesary. Claims about IBIS are more of the same. If you haven't got it then tell everybody it's bad. Until you make it and then it's good. Just look at Fuji before and after the XH1.

 

Gordon

 

Funny post...and I agree.

[dancook]

This thread was never about the speed of the A9, that's not even a question - it is top of the range and far superior to the SL which cannot do C-AF or focus in low light with any consistency in non-optimal conditions.

 

I wanted to know if anyone owned both the SL and A9, and how they divide the workload - what the SL offers them that the A9 doesn't. Mostly I was concerned about the image quality of the A9, perhaps people saved their leica for portraits..

 

But actually, now I own the A9 - I am selling my Leica because the image quality is excellent and I'll always want the speed available to me.

It can be made relatively small with a 35mm 2.8 zeiss lens, and it's silent with flipscreen - so excellent street camera for me too.

Edited March 22, 2018 by dancook

[Guest VVJ]

I am less optimistic that Leica will allow IBIS to enter their system(s). 

 

If Leica passes on IBIS the SL2 will be a stillborn child.  

 

All other mirrorless systems targeted at stills (except for the 2 medium format ones) have IBIS and almost all actual users will tell you that it works well.

 

Unfortunately I am afraid you might be right...  I guess we should know this year...

Edited March 23, 2018 by JorisV

[FlashGordonPhotography]

While I will use the A9/A7R3 combo I now have for a lot of work stuff, I haven't decided what to do about my SL kit. I just got the 90!! I'll probably keep it for a bit. Any depreciation has already happened. I have two main reasons.

 

Although the Sony lenses are superb (especially the 85GM which is special) I still think the SL50 is the best drawing 50 I've ever owned. It's a personal opinion but since I'm the one making it. Where I don't need super low light AF I know I'll want to use the SL50. I could almost walk into a room with the SL50 over one shoulder and the GM85 over the other.

 

And finally, I like the new Sony bodies. They look much the same as the V2 but a bunch of incremental upgrades has led to a much better camera. Much more usable. Far less annoying stuff getting in the way. However, I have yet to use anything that works as nicely as the interface on the SL. The X1D is close but the SL is king. And the balance is better on the SL. The 90-280 is big but the rest, although not small have sensational balance and usability. I really don't like unbalanced cameras. Leica has this right. I'm actually interested in a small 50 now. Maybe I'll do that as I'm very seriously thinking of getting out of the M system.

 

Gordon

Edited March 23, 2018 by FlashGordonPhotography

[frame-it]

exactly

almost all actual users will tell you that it works well.

 

 

Edited March 23, 2018 by frame-it

[Chaemono]

I’ve decided to sell my entire Sony equipment because birds in flight and horse races can be shot with the SL and the two zooms and I find the Sony lenses inferior. Palm sized dogs running towards me is an enterily different matter but I don’t own one.

[helged]

If Leica passes on IBIS the SL2 will be a stillborn child.

 

All other mirrorless systems targeted at stills (except for the 2 medium format ones) have IBIS and almost all actual users will tell you that it works well.

 

Unfortunately I am afraid you might be right... I guess we should know this year...

One difference between SL and other FF mirrorless systems is that M-lenses is a part of the SL-system, wide angle M-lenses included. Take 21mm Super-Elmar-M as an excellent example. This back-compatibility may result in more conservative choices from Leica's perspective. Plus that Leica is generally not in front regarding new features.

 

That being said, I am of course glad that ibis works on various systems. Wheather/when Leica offers IBIS is another issue. Time will tell...

Edited March 23, 2018 by helged

[mmradman]

Couple of reminder why not IBIS:-

SL was designed to be both video and stills camera, SL2 probably follows this approach.

Video mirrorless camera seem to avoid IBIS.

Native SL long zoom lenses are fitted with IS/VR, same as Canon/Nikon.

Leica, drawing on expertise of its technology partners, does its own thing.

 

Why SL, at least for me, over A9 or any other Sony Alpha camera:-

Leica M & R lenses are fully compatible with SL, can't comment for Sony Alpha as i never used one but read enough about image quality issues when used with RF lenses and "KOLARI" type fixes, etc.

Catching small dog running in sharp focus as much as it looks impressive has been done before, perhaps easier with A9.  I don't even use or own AF lenses except one old dust gathering Nikkor AFD 18-35mm. If I wanted same result i would use M camera, maybe even SL, anticipate and walk away with one shot.  Machine gunning, are you kidding me? 

If Leica passes on IBIS the SL2 will be a stillborn child.  

 

All other mirrorless systems targeted at stills (except for the 2 medium format ones) have IBIS and almost all actual users will tell you that it works well.

 

Unfortunately I am afraid you might be right...  I guess we should know this year...

[thighslapper]

One difference between SL and other FF mirrorless systems is that M-lenses is a part of the SL-system, wide angle M-lenses included. Take 21mm Super-Elmar-M as an excellent example. This back-compatibility may result in more conservative choices from Leica's perspective. Plus that Leica is generally not in front regarding new features.

 

That being said, I am of course glad that ibis works on various systems. Wheather/when Leica offers IBIS is another issue. Time will tell...

 

..... and one other point that has been overlooked is that the SL2 was probably already on the drawing board when the SL1 was released ........ and there were precious few full frame cameras with IBIS at the time..... or the clamouring demand for it. 

 

It is only in the last year or so it has become a global 'must have' feature ...... and if you look at lots of articles from 2016 plenty of folk had misgivings about the potential optical degradation which is a feature in some implementations..... particularly with wider angle lenses. 

 

I would put the chances of IBIS in the next SL at no better than 50:50 ....... and it will only appear if Leica can engineer a system that does not compromise optical image quality AT ALL ....... or like compulsory dark frame NR, disabled when they feel it does compromises image quality. 

 

Most of the A9 AF wizardry is sensor and processor based ....... if Leica can incorporate that then the SL2 would be a fine camera ....... but note that the A9 is pegged at 24mpx to achieve this. You are unlikely to get this degree of performance AND a much bigger sensor as well  .

 

Like most things is life ..... you cannot have everything .... so you will just have to hope Leica pick the improved feature set that YOU want ..... 

[helged]

..... and one other point that has been overlooked is that the SL2 was probably already on the drawing board when the SL1 was released ........ and there were precious few full frame cameras with IBIS at the time..... or the clamouring demand for it.

 

It is only in the last year or so it has become a global 'must have' feature ...... and if you look at lots of articles from 2016 plenty of folk had misgivings about the potential optical degradation which is a feature in some implementations..... particularly with wider angle lenses.

 

I would put the chances of IBIS in the next SL at no better than 50:50 ....... and it will only appear if Leica can engineer a system that does not compromise optical image quality AT ALL ....... or like compulsory dark frame NR, disabled when they feel it does compromises image quality.

 

Most of the A9 AF wizardry is sensor and processor based ....... if Leica can incorporate that then the SL2 would be a fine camera ....... but note that the A9 is pegged at 24mpx to achieve this. You are unlikely to get this degree of performance AND a much bigger sensor as well .

 

Like most things is life ..... you cannot have everything .... so you will just have to hope Leica pick the improved feature set that YOU want .....

Well put. And indeed, '...AT ALL...' is key here, plus access to the newest technology, obviously.

 

And regarding SL2 - I imagine that prototypes are either in test mode by now, or are going to be tested in real life very, very soon.

Edited March 23, 2018 by helged

[scott kirkpatrick]

Couple of reminder why not IBIS:-

SL was designed to be both video and stills camera, SL2 probably follows this approach.

Video mirrorless camera seem to avoid IBIS.

 

Why SL, at least for me, over A9 or any other Sony Alpha camera:-

 

Catching small dog running in sharp focus as much as it looks impressive has been done before, perhaps easier with A9.  I don't even use or own AF lenses except one old dust gathering Nikkor AFD 18-35mm. If I wanted same result i would use M camera, maybe even SL, anticipate and walk away with one shot.  Machine gunning, are you kidding me? 

 

In reverse order -- dogs in flight (DIF):  Elliott Erwitt, the world master of these pictures, used Leica M with 90 or 135mm lenses.  He thinks thru his pictures from the dog's point of view.  He likes dogs, preferring French dogs over the dogs of other nations.  I'm more of a cat person, and would never compete.  It's not the equipment, it's the attitude.

 

Olympus E-M1.2 and Panasonic GH-5 have an excellent hybrid video solution, with IBIS and OIS that work together.  But Panasonic took it out for the video-mostly GH-5S.  Their official line seems to be that stabilization gets in the way of some of the more elaborate shooting environments, but I suspect heat in long takes is also an issue (a magnetically floating sensor is harder to cool).  Black Magic and RED (video-only professional "mirrorless" cameras) do not use IBIS.  But Leica seems to want to have it both ways.

[dancook]

 It's not the equipment, it's the attitude.

 

My attitude is that I don't want to have to master 'dogs in flight' to get a cool action shot of my pup.. 

 

It's not a passion of mine, I'm not going to start photographing other people's dogs, I just want to be able to get the shot and move onto something completely different.

Edited March 23, 2018 by dancook

[simon_hsn]

+1 for IBIS. For many, it will be a deal breaker if the SL2 doesn't have it. 

 

Mostly people, who have never actually owned a camera with IBIS are the ones to consider it as unnecessary. Though it is great both for stills and more so for video: 
- Video is basically not usable without some form of stabilization, be it lens IS, IBIS or a tripods/gimbal/slide cam. I own a GH5 for filmmaking and "Dual-IS" (IBIS + Lens IS) is so good, that you do not need a tripod anymore. This is a real game changer. As usual with game changers, it takes a while until everyone gets it. The "I.S.-Lock" feature only came out half a year ago.

- For photos, it helps to avoid motion blur in almost every picture. This is true also for higher shutter speeds and will become increasingly important with high resolution sensors that will come in the future (no, we will not stay at 24 MPX for the next 100 years). I see many many pictures here in this forum that have this kind of "blurry" images. The folks who regularly use cameras with IBIS know what I am talking about. For all skeptical folks: Try a photo session without I.S. on your SL zooms and you know what I am talking about. The new non-stabilized SL lenses are technically so amazing, let's not make them suffer. 

- It makes framing a lot easier: Compare your framing experience with the stabilized SL 90-280 mm vs. a non-stabilized Leica R lens in that range and you know what I mean. Again, it adds a lot to usability here, especially with legacy lenses. 
- The SL lenses are already comparably slow (f2 Primes, f4.5 at the wide end of the zooms), with sensor technology that tends to be always behind the very best in class in terms of ISO performance, IBIS would help to make this a non-issure for real use of the system in the field. This is where the SL also has a big advantage: It can potentially borrow the tech from Panasonic (which is arguably leading here) and has a bigger mount than say Sony-E, so I suspect it could actually work better. 

 

I remember the same discussion about optical stabilization with people worrying about a degraded image quality, especially in Leica-Land. Surprisingly, everyone appreciates the stabilization of the SL Zooms a lot, so why not make it even better and gain Dual-IS?!

 

IBIS is clearly a revolutionary technology and all cameras in the future will have it, because of its clear advantages. Let's read this in 10 years

Edited March 23, 2018 by simon_hsn

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[dancook]

Let's read this in 10 years

 

When I'll want IBIS for my bionic eye implants? 

 

it's the natural progression of photography for me