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

[dancook]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Try the Hassy before buying - I´ve heared more negatives than positives. Sure the camera looks cool and the name is promising, but operation and IQ seem to be not that good.

Why don´t you try the Fuji GFX50s?

It's why I said X2D it would be nice is there is a successor to fix the negatives

[Advertisement]

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

[eprom]

It's why I said X2D it would be nice is there is a successor to fix the negatives

 

Ah, didn´t realize that. So why not waiting for the S-008? I wouldn´t be surprised if Leica would show up with a mirrorless MF.

[dancook]

Ah, didn´t realize that. So why not waiting for the S-008? I wouldn´t be surprised if Leica would show up with a mirrorless MF.

I've never considered it due to cost, but I'll have a look if it comes up

[Jeff S]

Try the Hassy before buying - I´ve heared more negatives than positives. Sure the camera looks cool and the name is promising, but operation and IQ seem to be not that good.

Why don´t you try the Fuji GFX50s?

I’ve tried both. FW updates have fixed a host of X1D negatives reported early on. Some things, like no joystick, require hardware changes, but even there Hasselblad has incorporated a surprisingly effective screen touch solution (while maintaining EVF viewing) to move focus. The IQ is terrific; not sure what reports you’re referencing.

 

The GFX turned out not to be my cup of tea handling-wise. The X1D is far more comfortable and portable, not just a pretty face. But the GFX does everything it needs to do and also has fine IQ.

 

After early reports, I was also expecting to have to wait for an X2D for a competent machine, and was frankly surprised at the progress made in short order. The lens line, though, is still in early stages of delivery, so I’ll be waiting for some like the zoom to hit market before further consideration. And if in the meantime there’s word on a new body, so much the better.... but I could live with the X1D as is, especially as the price keeps dropping significantly.

 

Jeff

[Chaemono]

I think the lenses wide open are a bit crap.

 

https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-9FSKSS/

[Jeff S]

Plenty of reports say the opposite, which is why I tried it for myself with the first 3 lenses. No concerns when making prints and comparing it with my M10. Different strokes...

 

Jeff

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You're more diplomatic than I am Jeff.

 

I really wish people would stop citing first impression reports on the X1D and not looking for more recent reports. Same with the SL, actually. Both systems have improved dramatically since release. Having said that if both cameras had fully functional firmware and a more rigorous testing program (expanded testing base apart from the traditional street photographer that Leica seem to prefer) then we wouldn't have a bunch of half reviews to read.

 

I prefer the Leica lenses most of the time. But saying the HB ones (or Sony) aren't any good is just rubbish. The X1D lenses are super sharp from wide open, across most of the frame. The hexagonal boke is gone at wide open. The files are incredible. And with the Sony the 85mm GM has 11 aperture blades and an aperture ring. It's just awesome. The 24-105 resolves like the 24-90SL and is matched by a (5.6) 100-400. Both top end zooms. And Hasselblad's out of camera colours and accutance are something else. It's the camera I need to turn sharpening DOWN on occasionally. Ridiculous. And the A7r3 and A9 outfocus the SL by some margin. Eye focus is some sort of voodooo hippie magic.

 

I have hardly touched my M10 since getting the X1D and with an A7R3 in the closet the SL is a hard ask. BUT. Nothing draws like those lenses. Better? Nope. But unique and if you like it (I do) it's hard to move way. However I have 40K woth of M sitting doing nothing and I have to make a decision about it soon. The X1D has mojo. Plenty of Mojo. And it's a hugely satisfying camera in use.

 

I still use the SL because of the lens draw and the camera is better in every way except sensor IQ, flash and the stupid LENR Leica insist on. 90% of the time I only need 24MP. But the A9 is tempting when you see how blazing fast it is. Push a button and thing just become easy in horrible conditions. When you're working, that matters.

 

It's getting a bit tiring reading the constant barrage of "this is crap", "the lenses aren't any good" and "Leica is better" from those who haven't used the gear they're complaining about. It really is. It's like arguing what's the fastest car when we mostly drive in a 50kmh speed zone. We're in a golden age of gear from all brands. The starting point is excellent and it goes up from there.

 

Gordon

 

Gordon

[Chaemono]

I don’t read reports. I posted links to pictures. The lenses wide open are sh!t.

 

https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-9FSKSS/

[thighslapper]

I don’t read reports. I posted links to pictures. The lenses wide open are sh!t.

 

https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-9FSKSS/

 

Although you seem to be a bit like a record stuck in a groove on this ....... I have to agree that the M10 and SL with the best of Leica lenses produce images with a clarity that are comparable to many systems with significantly larger sensor sizes. 

 

More pixels don't improve images unless there is a comparable increase in lens quality and resolution ......  

Edited March 11, 2018 by thighslapper

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I don’t read reports. I posted links to pictures. The lenses wide open are sh!t.

 

https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-9FSKSS/

 

1. In most of those images I see no real world differences. Most images seem to show that the X1D files are very sharp across the frame with gobs of detail.Maybe you can explain how the M10 is so superior? And also how you know your tests aren't flawed re focus accuracy, camera shake etc....

2. These are old. There's been several firmware upgrades for the lenses to enhance focus as well as how the lens handles wide open.

3. I actually own and use both systems.

 

Your conclusions are incorrect. However you are entitled to your opinions, of course.

 

Gordon

[lx1713]

 

I've been taking hundreds of crappy photos whilst I played with the 20FPS + c-af, not really caring for composition and content..

 

I don't think I was using the right AF settings, but I was getting shots of my puppy running towards me in the rain.

 

DSC00742 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

DSC00743 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

Yuffie Run - Test Shot by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

DSC00745 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

tomorrow I'll do some street photography in london, but since it's been a while and it's a new camera no promises !

 

 

These shots look pretty convincing to me 

[dancook]

I took the Leica SL 75mm f2.0 to show to some of my photography buds at the pub, it became clear that focusing in this light was still problematic even for an f2.0 prime. It took many seconds to hunt for focus, I eventually got this in focus with single AF square on the eye.

 

Patrick - SL Test by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

I wouldn't even consider these poor conditions compared to weddings/events.

 

So same place again last night - I took my A9's and set to wide area focus and face detection and just let it's do it's thing at 20 FPS, shutter speed was often too low for how little technique was used and just being played around with, but it tracked subjects with C-AF and face detection in the same light the SL was failing to get a shot.

 

Here are 800 photos from last night just crammed into a 25 second video.

 

 

So it's just to say I'm happy with the reliability of the camera to focus and when the time comes, to get the shot - or even give me a choice of shots. I will certainly set up a single point AF profile so I have more control over AF choice, but when things are hectic it will definitely shine.

Edited March 13, 2018 by dancook

[helged]

I took the Leica SL 75mm f2.0 to show to some of my photography buds at the pub, it became clear that focusing in this light was still problematic even for an f2.0 prime. It took many seconds to hunt for focus, I eventually got this in focus with single AF square on the eye.

 

...

 

I wouldn't even consider these poor conditions compared to weddings/events.

 

So same place again last night - I took my A9's and set to wide area focus and face detection and just let it's do it's thing at 20 FPS, shutter speed was often too low for how little technique was used and just being played around with, but it tracked subjects with C-AF and face detection in the same light the SL was failing to get a shot.

 

Here are 800 photos from last night just crammed into a 25 second video.

 

...

 

So it's just to say I'm happy with the reliability of the camera to focus and when the time comes, to get the shot - or even give me a choice of shots. I will certainly set up a single point AF profile so I have more control over AF choice, but when things are hectic it will definitely shine.

 

 

As expected - if I may say so - the SL af cannot compete with the best in class. I have used Nikon D500/D5/D850, and it is amazing how fast - and generally accurate - the af is, even in very dim light/low contrast situations. For more ordinary shooting, the SL works fine. And I prefer the output from the SL w/Leica lenses. Given the subject is in focus, obviously...

Edited March 13, 2018 by helged

[dancook]

As expected - if I may say so - the SL af cannot compete with the best in class. I have used Nikon D500/D5/D850, and it is amazing how fast - and generally accurate - the af is, even in very dim light/low contrast situations. For more ordinary shooting, the SL works fine. And I prefer the output from the SL w/Leica lenses. Given the subject is in focus, obviously...

 

Yes, it shouldn't really be news to anyone. Just an example of how my frustrations are now alleviated and for all the workarounds I've been given, I'd rather just have equipment that I can rely on for the job I want to do.

 

I would love an SL with the AF performance of an A9 it would be..dare I say.. perfect

 

I looked down at the A9 the other day to check the shutter speed.. oh I can't...

Edited March 13, 2018 by dancook

[lx1713]

Yes, it shouldn't really be news to anyone. Just an example of how my frustrations are now alleviated and for all the workarounds I've been given, I'd rather just have equipment that I can rely on for the job I want to do.

 

I would love an SL with the AF performance of an A9 it would be..dare I say.. perfect

 

I looked down at the A9 the other day to check the shutter speed.. oh I can't...

 

 

Nothing like a satisfactory solution to do the job we need to do  . 

It's a good time to be. Relatively easy solutions for many photography problems. Even with two or three systems, we are still loading up less than 10 years back, shooting more accurately, delivering higher resolutions, much better quality, etc. Thanks for sharing the journey, Dan.

[frame-it]

As expected - if I may say so - the SL af cannot compete with the best in class. I have used Nikon D500/D5/D850, and it is amazing how fast - and generally accurate - the af is, even in very dim light/low contrast situations. For more ordinary shooting, the SL works fine. And I prefer the output from the SL w/Leica lenses. Given the subject is in focus, obviously...

[robgo2]

Yes, it shouldn't really be news to anyone. Just an example of how my frustrations are now alleviated and for all the workarounds I've been given, I'd rather just have equipment that I can rely on for the job I want to do.

 

I would love an SL with the AF performance of an A9 it would be..dare I say.. perfect

 

I looked down at the A9 the other day to check the shutter speed.. oh I can't...

 

If fast, accurate autofocus is a high priority, then it looks as though the A9 is hard to beat. Meanwhile, I keep plugging away with MF lenses on my trusty SL, and I keep discovering "new" lenses that blow me away. This seems to be an acceptable setup for my photographic needs, which is the key point. Use the tools that get the job done, always remembering that there is no perfect camera.

Edited March 13, 2018 by robgo2

[frame-it]

i thought AF is always supposed to be fast & accurate ?

 

 

 

impressive AF...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If fast, accurate autofocus is a high priority, then it looks as though the A9 is hard to beat. Meanwhile, I keep plugging away with MF lenses on my trusty SL, and I keep discovering "new" lenses that blow me away. This seems to be an acceptable setup for my photographic needs, which is the key point. Use the tools that get the job done, always remembering that there is no perfect camera.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Flu]

A relatively new addition to the Sony camp is Profoto! I love the SL, but if your photography includes playing with strobes especially if you need/want HSS, the Sony gets a check in that box. Works like a charm!

Edited March 14, 2018 by Flu

[helged]

i thought AF is always supposed to be fast & accurate ?

 

 

 

"Supposed to": yes. Actually: depends on.

 

It's not my impression that a single all-singing-all-dancing machine exists, yet. But top-end Canikon and Sony A9 and Olympus are very good. Friends that have gone from Canikon to A9 are generally satisfied, but it's certainly not my impression that the Sony A9 af is the "best-in-class". For bif, as an example, a myriad of situations exists, from predictive to highly erratic movements, movements towards you/away from you, rapidly shifting light conditions (from highlights to deep shadows), low to high contrast, poor light situations (twilight), disturbing elements in front/back of the bird(s), using moderate to large tele lenses, lenses stopped down to f2.8 or at f5.6, the effect of image stabilisation, etc. etc.

 

For a system to be capable for the above situations (and more), you need a lot of computational power and very quick lens movements. And, I would guess, quite some engineers and testers...

 

Two major problems with Leica's implementation of af in SL is (1) the (very) few options you have to tune - or to set - the af priorities, and (2) that the optical stabilisation is far to slow for erratically moving subjects. For the latter, quick movements of the lens leads to a far to long adjustment time of the image on the sensor.

 

Regarding (1): This is obviously an advantage from a simplicity point of view, and thus in line with Leica's thinking. But it means problems for specialised situations. Regarding (2): Leica's af is really excellent for more static photography - likely the situation for most Leica shooters.

 

I don't state the above to enter a word war what's best. But it's safe to state that there are systems out there that have more reliable af than Leica SL. Still, I use for the SL+L-optics for 80-90 percent of my shooting.