SL price and new A7III

[Giulio Zanni]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My dealer is now offering the SL at slightly less than 5000 euro. That is a substantial rebate compared to the original price. Does this mean that something new is coming? I currently have an M-D and I would like the evf for using the noctilux and 28 summilux wide open and I don't like the add-on evf of the M10. Ideally I would want an evf only version of the M. With the recent introduction of the Sony A7iii at less than half the price of the SL + ibis I am tempted to go for the cheaper option even if I am aware of the SL better menus, evf etc. Thought?

 

Thanks, Giulio

[helged]

There are rumours of a new 40mp FF Leica body in 2018. I would perhaps think that this could be a Q2, but possibly also the SL2, although I believe we are talking 2019 for the latter. But before we see a new FF body, or at least in tandem with a new higer-res FF sensor, we can expect a new S.

 

There are speculations that TowerJazz manufactures the sensor of the Nikon D850 (the first Nikon-sensor I am fully comfortable with, actually). If so - and with Leica's several past and present sensors coming from TowerJazz - one can foresee that new, non-Sony, high-res sensor(s) with microlenses are available for Leica. In addition, Leica needs to up-res the Maestro-II processor to handle more processing, (much) more data handling and quicker data transfers. I guess Maestro-III, or similar processors, are in-house. Time will tell...

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest VVJ]

IMO Leica will always support Leica lenses better than any other manufacturer and I personally would stick with Leica if your only goal is to shoot Leica lenses on a different body.  

 

I agree though that the price point of the Sony and the availability of IBIS is very tempting...

 

There are rumours of a new 40mp FF Leica body in 2018. I would perhaps think that this could be a Q2, but possibly also the SL2, although I believe we are talking 2019 for the latter. But before we see a new FF body, or at least in tandem with a new higer-res FF sensor, we can expect a new S.

 

There are speculations that TowerJazz manufactures the sensor of the Nikon D850 (the first Nikon-sensor I am fully comfortable with, actually). If so - and with Leica's several past and present sensors coming from TowerJazz - one can foresee that new, non-Sony, high-res sensor(s) with microlenses are available for Leica. In addition, Leica needs to up-res the Maestro-II processor to handle more processing, (much) more data handling and quicker data transfers. I guess Maestro-III, or similar processors, are in-house. Time will tell...

 

If such a body is around the corner I would agree that a Q2 is much more likely than a SL2.  I also see the SL2 in 2019 when the lens line-up is more complete.

 

And hopefully when there is a Q2 we also get a 28mm lens for the SL 

Edited March 2, 2018 by JorisV

[douglas fry]

I went from Canon 1DX's to Sony A7II's on the basis I could use my collection of M lenses, and I used a pair of Sony's for about a year....I didnt enjoy it, the wide M lenses werent great on a Sony the edges 'smeared' unless stopped down (I tend to shoot wide open 99% of time) the menu's were too fiddly and both cameras looked very tatty after just one year.

 

There is an issue with M lenses on SLR's (including the SL) in that when something is out of focus, on a rangefinder its obvious which way to rotate the lens barrel if the image is just blurry as per a Sony or SL then you need to rotate back and forth to get it on focus. I find it much faster to use a rangefinder with M lenses than the SL.

 

The SL btw and despite the paragraph above is much more suited to M lenses, so if speed isnt an issue then it is a good combo, with better results, (image wise) than the Sony. Obviously the Sony's have been updated since but I wont be going back.

[ramarren]

If you want the best performance out of a Leica lens, buy a Leica body.

If you don't care about best performance out of a Leica lens, why bother spending the money for them in the first place?

 

There is no comparison in actual, significant picture quality between my M or R lenses used on an M or an SL vs using them on a Sony. Either of the Leica bodies simply makes better photos than the Sony, regardless which model I've tried.

[ldhrads]

I went from Canon 1DX's to Sony A7II's on the basis I could use my collection of M lenses, and I used a pair of Sony's for about a year....I didnt enjoy it, the wide M lenses werent great on a Sony the edges 'smeared' unless stopped down (I tend to shoot wide open 99% of time) the menu's were too fiddly and both cameras looked very tatty after just one year.

 

There is an issue with M lenses on SLR's (including the SL) in that when something is out of focus, on a rangefinder its obvious which way to rotate the lens barrel if the image is just blurry as per a Sony or SL then you need to rotate back and forth to get it on focus. I find it much faster to use a rangefinder with M lenses than the SL.

 

The SL btw and despite the paragraph above is much more suited to M lenses, so if speed isnt an issue then it is a good combo, with better results, (image wise) than the Sony. Obviously the Sony's have been updated since but I wont be going back.

I agree with Douglas, I still have some difficulty with my M lenses on the SL, miss the split screen of the rangefinder or an old SLR type split prism!  Getting better at it though.  

[simon_hsn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

+1 for 28 mm lens for the SL !!! 

 

I hope Leica releases more lenses for the SL system, e.g. 24mm, 28 mm, 135 mm + a compact normal zoom (e.g. 28-75 mm) would be great. 

 

If you want to use M lenses, the SL will be a much better option, in my opinion. I have used the M-50 Lux & M-28 Cron on the Sony a7II for over a year and thought it was ok only until I have tested the SL for a weekend - what a difference. 

 

In my opinion, the usability and joy of use of the SL is far superior to any Sony, IMO. Sure, I get excited when Sony releases a new camera and I have a look at the spec sheet. The moment I go and try it out all that excitement is basically gone: You grab the Sony camera, hear that clunky shutter (compared to the super nice & smooth SL shutter), feel the much lesser built quality and look through a much inferior viewfinder and all the excitement is gone. 

I hope for a Leica SL2 with better autofocus, IBIS and GH5 like video quality (i.e. 10 Bit 4.2.2. internal).

[lx1713]

The price of Leica lenses is such that the price of an M body or SL is not that significant, relatively speaking.

And the SL for a first in its line is very well thought out and balanced in features, matchable with multiple excellent lines of optics.

 

Sony was only a very brief consideration for me. Too many negatives in the overall key features that's important to me to make the grade as my go to camera.

 

But no complains against Sony, Canon or Nikon, they are all pretty good for any job that I may want to do.

[thua]

+1 for ix1713,

those were exactly my considerations when buying a used SL body last year to be used with my Leica M lenses.

Technology of bodies are evolving fast, so only "state of the art" for best 2 to 3 years, the lenses are what makes the difference - and keep there value over decades.

 

cheers

thua

[robgo2]

I agree with Douglas, I still have some difficulty with my M lenses on the SL, miss the split screen of the rangefinder or an old SLR type split prism!  Getting better at it though.  

 

I think it is quite possible that once you get comfortable with focusing through the SL's high res EVF, you may come to prefer it to a rangefinder.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Speaking of Sony... Their new a7 Mark III seems to be a much better idea than a7R Mark III, as it incorporates the same AF as a9 and has better 4K video that a7R-III.

[Steve McGarrett]

Speaking of Sony... Their new a7 Mark III seems to be a much better idea than a7R Mark III, as it incorporates the same AF as a9 and has better 4K video that a7R-III.

 

AF coverage may be the same, but responsiveness and locking/tracking capabilities should be different, as the A9 has a stacked sensor with (probably slightly lower IQ/DR, but) way faster readout time.

[jrp]

A key difference is that the Sony cameras have IBIS, which is great for old, slow lenses.  Unfortunately, old Leica lenses, particularly wide angle ones, show edge smearing when used with Sony sensors.  So the IBIS and better sensor may not result in a better picture than with the SL.

 

Sony+Zeiss Batis lenses, if not the expensive G-Masters, is a good choice, if you're not already heavily invested in Leica glass.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Speaking of Sony... Their new a7 Mark III seems to be a much better idea than a7R Mark III, as it incorporates the same AF as a9 and has better 4K video that a7R-III.

 

The A9 outfocuses the A73 by some margin. Mainly though the A73 has the A72 viewfinder. Nothing like the R3 let alone the SL. Also the silent shooting readout os slow on the A73 and fast on the A9.

 

Still going to be a great camera though and a relative bargain. It'll brutalise the mid range DSLR market.

 

I like my A7R3 but I'd drop in in a second for a 40MP SL.

 

Gordon

[helged]

 

I like my A7R3 but I'd drop in in a second for a 40MP SL.

 

 

+1.

[Irakly Shanidze]

The A9 outfocuses the A73 by some margin. Mainly though the A73 has the A72 viewfinder. Nothing like the R3 let alone the SL. Also the silent shooting readout os slow on the A73 and fast on the A9.

 

Still going to be a great camera though and a relative bargain. It'll brutalise the mid range DSLR market.

 

I like my A7R3 but I'd drop in in a second for a 40MP SL.

 

Gordon

 

IQ wise nothing in 35mm format beats SL, except M10. If you need 40mp, most likely SL2 will be the camera for you. 

[Irakly Shanidze]

A key difference is that the Sony cameras have IBIS, which is great for old, slow lenses.  Unfortunately, old Leica lenses, particularly wide angle ones, show edge smearing when used with Sony sensors.  So the IBIS and better sensor may not result in a better picture than with the SL.

this is common knowledge

[Paul J]

That new A7 III is quite remarkable value.

[blacksinner]

you don't want leica lens on sony body. trust me. the infinity is not optimize on the new sony body. i tried on A7RIII i tried with couple of M lenses. and the actual infinity focused far from the infinity on the lens. on elmarit 28mm f2.8 is on the 5mtr!. and the field cultivator is quite terrible. the corner sharpness is not good for wide angle lens. however the center is insanely sharp with 42MP. try to ready the review http://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/a7r-iii.htm . i know this. is weird, but it true. it has something to do with the pixel sensor placement. and i also tried a7riii with techart adapter. it can autofocus even eye tracking very fast. i mean very fastt...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[frame-it]

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-kolari-ultra-thin-sensor-stack-modification/

 

 

That new A7 III is quite remarkable value.