Vieri Posted April 16, 2018 Share #161 Posted April 16, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) In the past,Vieri, you were far more direct about SL resolution desires than merely saying “I wouldn’t mind.” You wrote in your initial review.... “I think that one of the reasons behind Leica’s decision to limit the SL to 24 Mp, besides speed, might have been not to jeopardise Leica S’s sales. Whatever the case, I wish for the next iteration of the SL to have 36-40 Mp, at least. The best solution would be if Leica offered two versions of it, one 24 Mp aimed at the sport / fast shooting market, one 40 Mp or more aimed at the high resolution / slower shooting market. A Leica SL with 40+ Mp? Well, yes – THAT would definitely be seriously challenging medium format.” Jeff Jeff, first of all, I am happy to see that you read me with so much attention, thank you. I still stand by what I said. A Leica SL with 40+ Mp resolution would seriously challenge medium format: I think it would be easily as good as MF up to 60-80 Mp, but of course it's all speculation at this point As far as my statement above, after two years using the SL anywhere in the world and under any conditions, processing thousands of files, creating large prints with it - in short, having used it professionally for all my Fine Art Landscape work for two years, making myself and my customers happy with it, I believe that the Leica SL's 24 Mp thanks to its amazing glass are (about) enough for my work. That said, however, having more resolution would allow me to spend less time in pot-production to make 24 Mp print as large as 150 x 100 cm, and allow me to produce even larger prints, which I certainly wouldn't mind. Again, as things stand, MF offer is not for me, and as mentioned above I will post an article either today or tomorrow about my reasoning for that. Best regards, Vieri 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 16, 2018 Posted April 16, 2018 Hi Vieri, Take a look here So, who's buying the 16-35mm?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lx1713 Posted April 16, 2018 Share #162 Posted April 16, 2018 As a result of the last few posts I've spent a couple of hours looking at articles and videos about the MF options ....... yet again. So was I Quite a struggle actually. But a forum is a good thing particularly when a depth of knowledge is exchanged. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lx1713 Posted April 16, 2018 Share #163 Posted April 16, 2018 .. I will publish an article on my blog tomorrow or Tuesday at the latest about this. As you said, the difference in resolution is not so huge anyway - and the Leica lenses draw so beautifully that I don't really feel the need for MF just for the look. I wouldn't mind a higher resolution SL-II though, that's for sure, if I could keep the body, EVF (or better), UI, and everything that the SL has. Best regards, Vieri Yes, please. I have decided against MF but it's always good to see what nuggets I can savour. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 16, 2018 Share #164 Posted April 16, 2018 Jeff, first of all, I am happy to see that you read me with so much attention, thank you. I believe that the Leica SL's 24 Mp thanks to its amazing glass are (about) enough for my work. That said, however, having more resolution would allow me to spend less time in pot-production to make 24 Mp print as large as 150 x 100 cm, and allow me to produce even larger prints, which I certainly wouldn't mind. So then you still “wish the next iteration has 36-40 MP, at least”? Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 16, 2018 Share #165 Posted April 16, 2018 So then you still “wish the next iteration has 36-40 MP, at least”? Jeff Yes. I am curious to see where you are going with this, exactly, because I couldn't quite figure it out yet Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 16, 2018 Share #166 Posted April 16, 2018 It was a simple yes/no question if your view had changed. Seemed to me it had somewhat ... something that happens with each of us after using a system for years. No need to justify. But you happen to be the one offering reviews over time. I’m older than you, and have used many formats and brands, including Leica, starting in the early 70s. Image quality has been plenty good enough for my print needs for quite a while in this digital age....across brands. I focus more on the processing and printing end of the workflow, and front end camera choices relate more to the lenses, the ergonomics, menu and control interface, build quality, etc. MP is not a limitation for my print needs, and hasn’t been for some time. Others have different needs and preferences. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted April 16, 2018 Share #167 Posted April 16, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) As a result of the last few posts I've spent a couple of hours looking at articles and videos about the MF options ....... yet again. I have had to remind myself that none of the photos I have taken in the last 2 years would have been significantly better if I'd used any of these systems ..... a crap photo with more pixels, DR and better colour is never going to be converted into something wonderful, and the good shots will still be good even with a 'better' camera. Subject, composition and processing are 95% of an image and what you use contributes far less than we are led to believe by those trying to sell us cameras. After 2 years I can just about claim to using the SL to its full potential and don't have to think about what I'm doing too much. I've learnt to my cost that paradoxically with landscape photography you often need to react quickly as the light and situation changes and mastery of your equipment and accessories plays a bigger part than the actual equipment itself. I've now had a substantial release of G.A.S. and feel all the better for it...... Life was so much simpler when all you needed for medium format - even the real thing - was just a beaten up old Rolleiflex. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted April 16, 2018 Share #168 Posted April 16, 2018 Life was so much simpler when all you needed for medium format - even the real thing - was just a beaten up old Rolleiflex. ....... yes we had a house full of them (my father was a photographer) ... but of course I had to have a fancy Nikon F3 ...... that's where the rot set in ..... 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted April 16, 2018 Share #169 Posted April 16, 2018 (edited) Jeff, first of all, I am happy to see that you read me with so much attention, thank you. I still stand by what I said. A Leica SL with 40+ Mp resolution would seriously challenge medium format: I think it would be easily as good as MF up to 60-80 Mp, but of course it's all speculation at this point As far as my statement above, after two years using the SL anywhere in the world and under any conditions, processing thousands of files, creating large prints with it - in short, having used it professionally for all my Fine Art Landscape work for two years, making myself and my customers happy with it, I believe that the Leica SL's 24 Mp thanks to its amazing glass are (about) enough for my work. That said, however, having more resolution would allow me to spend less time in pot-production to make 24 Mp print as large as 150 x 100 cm, and allow me to produce even larger prints, which I certainly wouldn't mind. Again, as things stand, MF offer is not for me, and as mentioned above I will post an article either today or tomorrow about my reasoning for that. Best regards, Vieri *If" Leica make a 40MP plus SL2 and *IF* it has no LENR I'm possibly with you. Then again *IF* they make a mirrorless 60MP S with no LENR you're on your own. :) It's not so much the resolution, for me. The difference between an SL and an A7R3 is 5 inches of print size. Not a massive difference. And the lenses DO make up some of the difference. I see that a 40MP SL would outresolve and micro contrast a P645Z (but not the X1D). And mirrorless is the way to go for landscapes, for sure. The 16-35 is sure to be spectacular (that's the topic here. hehe) and there's no wide zoom (to 16mm equiv) in the mini MF world. Unlike you I have a huge issue with LENR. It frustrates me so much. Last week I was shooting an oncoming Lightning storm. 1 minute exposures to get multiple strikes. I'm not going to wait a minute between shots at base ISO and I'm not going to have two cameras on two tripods or switch back and forwards, in the rain. If Leica got rid of mandatory LENR at ISO's up to 400, I would (a) buy the 16-35 and ( lose about half the gear I own and shoot my Leica gear twice as much. I still think the SL and X1D are the two best handling and usability cameras I've ever owned. On both the layout, customisation and balance are superb. The S would be there if it was mirrorless. And the SL's are perfect for most of my *work* shooting. I have all the current lenses and two bodies (except the 75). Last week I had a choice to shoot a wedding on either the SL's or a Sony A9/A7R3 mix with GM lenses. I took the Leica. The SL does everything I *need*. My use for a large heavy 16-35 is very occasional so I'll use the CL/11-23 for that. *If* Leica want me to buy the 16-35 LENR must go. I won't buy or travel with any camera with LENR again. So if Leica want me to buy the new 16-35, S or the SL2, they know what they need to do. Gordon Edited April 16, 2018 by FlashGordonPhotography 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted April 16, 2018 Share #170 Posted April 16, 2018 I agree that mandatory LENR is a huge irritant that causes me to miss shots. Carrying a second body for this is a not a good substitute. Has anyone figured out how to cancel a long exposure once started without shutting off the camera? I have shot this way in some time but the last time I could only shut down the camera to cancel a shot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 17, 2018 Share #171 Posted April 17, 2018 *If" Leica make a 40MP plus SL2 and *IF* it has no LENR I'm possibly with you. Then again *IF* they make a mirrorless 60MP S with no LENR you're on your own. :) It's not so much the resolution, for me. The difference between an SL and an A7R3 is 5 inches of print size. Not a massive difference. And the lenses DO make up some of the difference. I see that a 40MP SL would outresolve and micro contrast a P645Z (but not the X1D). And mirrorless is the way to go for landscapes, for sure. The 16-35 is sure to be spectacular (that's the topic here. hehe) and there's no wide zoom (to 16mm equiv) in the mini MF world. Unlike you I have a huge issue with LENR. It frustrates me so much. Last week I was shooting an oncoming Lightning storm. 1 minute exposures to get multiple strikes. I'm not going to wait a minute between shots at base ISO and I'm not going to have two cameras on two tripods or switch back and forwards, in the rain. If Leica got rid of mandatory LENR at ISO's up to 400, I would (a) buy the 16-35 and ( lose about half the gear I own and shoot my Leica gear twice as much. I still think the SL and X1D are the two best handling and usability cameras I've ever owned. On both the layout, customisation and balance are superb. The S would be there if it was mirrorless. And the SL's are perfect for most of my *work* shooting. I have all the current lenses and two bodies (except the 75). Last week I had a choice to shoot a wedding on either the SL's or a Sony A9/A7R3 mix with GM lenses. I took the Leica. The SL does everything I *need*. My use for a large heavy 16-35 is very occasional so I'll use the CL/11-23 for that. *If* Leica want me to buy the 16-35 LENR must go. I won't buy or travel with any camera with LENR again. So if Leica want me to buy the new 16-35, S or the SL2, they know what they need to do. Gordon So basically it all boils down to LENR Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 17, 2018 Share #172 Posted April 17, 2018 (edited) I agree that mandatory LENR is a huge irritant that causes me to miss shots. Carrying a second body for this is a not a good substitute. Has anyone figured out how to cancel a long exposure once started without shutting off the camera? I have shot this way in some time but the last time I could only shut down the camera to cancel a shot. In my experience LENR only causes missed shots in very specific situations, such as Gordon's thunderstorms perhaps (and makes star trails impossible of course). Other than that, I found that I can easily plan your shots around LENR, and when that is not feasible then always having a second body with me works for me 80-90% of the times - two bodies, but one tripod only, switching cameras. With a little practice, I became pretty fast at it That doesn't work only when you don't have a lens suitable for the scene on your second body. No, as far as I know the only way to stop a long exposure is shutting the camera down. Best regards, Vieri Edited April 17, 2018 by Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted April 17, 2018 Share #173 Posted April 17, 2018 In my experience LENR only causes missed shots in very specific situations, such as Gordon's thunderstorms perhaps (and makes star trails impossible of course). Other than that, I found that I can easily plan your shots around LENR, and when that is not feasible then always having a second body with me works for me 80-90% of the times - two bodies, but one tripod only, switching cameras. With a little practice, I became pretty fast at it That doesn't work only when you don't have a lens suitable for the scene on your second body. No, as far as I know the only way to stop a long exposure is shutting the camera down. Best regards, Vieri Given a choice between me buying a second body and lens to match, and Leica getting rid of LENR, I know which I would pick! There are always workarounds, of course, but that doesn't take the onus off Leica to deal with a problem that has been solved by other manufacturers. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 17, 2018 Share #174 Posted April 17, 2018 (edited) Given a choice between me buying a second body and lens to match, and Leica getting rid of LENR, I know which I would pick! There are always workarounds, of course, but that doesn't take the onus off Leica to deal with a problem that has been solved by other manufacturers. Paul, I wouldn't consider LENR "a problem" by any means. It is a feature aimed at making long exposure's files as clean as possible. Leica chose not to let you deactivate it, to preserve the maximum quality to their files - a choice you and I can or cannot agree with, but a legitimate choice nevertheless. Especially so, considering Leica's philosophy of outputting maximum image quality files from their cameras. About a second body, for me as a professional photographer a second body is a must anyway - I wouldn't go anywhere without one, so I might as well put it to a good use while waiting for long exposures' noise reduction. For non-professionals, a backup body might not be a necessity but I strongly recommend to carry one anyway, especially if you go on an expensive trip / long trip / faraway from home trip / and so on. And, if you have a backup body with you, you might as well put it to a good use during long exposures' noise reduction... So, to me the only real kind of photography that you cannot do with LENR is star trails - for everything else this is just a non-issue for me. Best regards, Vieri Edited April 17, 2018 by Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted April 17, 2018 Share #175 Posted April 17, 2018 Paul, I wouldn't consider LENR "a problem" by any means. It is a feature aimed at making long exposure's files as clean as possible. Leica chose not to let you deactivate it, to preserve the maximum quality to their files - a choice you and I can or cannot agree with, but a legitimate choice nevertheless. Especially so, considering Leica's philosophy of outputting maximum image quality files from their cameras. About a second body, for me as a professional photographer a second body is a must anyway - I wouldn't go anywhere without one, so I might as well put it to a good use while waiting for long exposures' noise reduction. For non-professionals, a backup body might not be a necessity but I strongly recommend to carry one anyway, especially if you go on an expensive trip / long trip / faraway from home trip / and so on. And, if you have a backup body with you, you might as well put it to a good use during long exposures' noise reduction... So, to me the only real kind of photography that you cannot do with LENR is star trails - for everything else this is just a non-issue for me. Best regards, Vieri Well, it is a problem for me! As a result, l don't do long exposures - too much hassle. l quite understand that pros will need 2 cameras. They have the income, the cash flow and the tax benefits. As an amateur, l can't justify it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 17, 2018 Share #176 Posted April 17, 2018 Well, it is a problem for me! As a result, l don't do long exposures - too much hassle. l quite understand that pros will need 2 cameras. They have the income, the cash flow and the tax benefits. As an amateur, l can't justify it. I understand you might not like it However, you said "that doesn't take the onus off Leica to deal with a problem that has been solved by other manufacturers", but the truth of it is that there is no problems to solve - again, whether we like it or not, this is just a different philosophy behind the choice of features to be included or not in a product. About the two cameras, pros do need them because they can't afford to return home without the shot in case of camera failure, not because of tax benefits or anything like that. You'd be surprised, but generally amateurs have much more cash to spend in their gear than the majority of pros Best regards, Vieri 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted April 17, 2018 Share #177 Posted April 17, 2018 (edited) I understand you might not like it However, you said "that doesn't take the onus off Leica to deal with a problem that has been solved by other manufacturers", but the truth of it is that there is no problems to solve - again, whether we like it or not, this is just a different philosophy behind the choice of features to be included or not in a product. About the two cameras, pros do need them because they can't afford to return home without the shot in case of camera failure, not because of tax benefits or anything like that. You'd be surprised, but generally amateurs have much more cash to spend in their gear than the majority of pros Best regards, Vieri Vieri, from your signature you appear to be Leica ambassador. Diplomacy works both ways, rather than telling us what you think is good for us please convey to your masters that plebs would appreciate LNER being made user option rather than mandated. We had similar argument a while back about need to have Auto ISO enabled and few professional bloggers close to Leica were arguing that Auto ISO is not in Leica spirit. Leica is not religion but camera brand. I would also like to take occcassional long exposure shot but frankly built in LNER is putting me off, I am definerly not doubling on my hardware to achieve that. Edited April 17, 2018 by mmradman 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted April 17, 2018 Share #178 Posted April 17, 2018 I understand you might not like it However, you said "that doesn't take the onus off Leica to deal with a problem that has been solved by other manufacturers", but the truth of it is that there is no problems to solve - again, whether we like it or not, this is just a different philosophy behind the choice of features to be included or not in a product. About the two cameras, pros do need them because they can't afford to return home without the shot in case of camera failure, not because of tax benefits or anything like that. You'd be surprised, but generally amateurs have much more cash to spend in their gear than the majority of pros Best regards, Vieri This is just terminology. You may not like it, but LENR IS a problem for me and for plenty of others - I accept it isn't for you. As one of Leica's customers, the more of us that think the same way, the bigger the problem it is for Leica. Among those who consider long exposures, I suspect you're in a minority on this judging by posts on the forum (though I doubt that's a reliable indicator). Some amateurs have cash to burn, some don't. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 17, 2018 Share #179 Posted April 17, 2018 Vieri, from your signature you appear to be Leica ambassador. Diplomacy works both ways, rather than telling us what you think is good for us please convey to your masters that plebs would appreciate LNER being made user option rather than mandated. We had similar argument a while back about need to have Auto ISO enabled and few professional bloggers close to Leica were arguing that Auto ISO is not in Leica spirit. Leica is not religion but camera brand. Mladen, if you read my blog and my messages here you can see that I am anything BUT a religious Leica zealot. I always say what I mean and what I believe in. I never told anyone what I think is good for anyone - please point me to where you think I did that. I said that "whether we like it or not, this is just a different philosophy behind the choice of features to be included or not in a product" rather than a "problem to be solved". Believe me, making LENR switchable is a request that has been covered to Leica already. Whether they decide to implement it or not, is not up to me: if it were, we had it already, even if I wouldn't use it personally Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vieri Posted April 17, 2018 Share #180 Posted April 17, 2018 This is just terminology. You may not like it, but LENR IS a problem for me and for plenty of others - I accept it isn't for you. As one of Leica's customers, the more of us that think the same way, the bigger the problem it is for Leica. Among those who consider long exposures, I suspect you're in a minority on this judging by posts on the forum (though I doubt that's a reliable indicator). Some amateurs have cash to burn, some don't. Words are I important, Paul. Nothing is ever "just terminology" About minority / majority on forum, I would think exactly the opposite - generally, people are vocal in forum only when they don't like something, and just keep silent otherwise. Anyway, once more it is not my call to decide what to implement or not. I wouldn't mind having the feature switchable off - but, just for fun, imagine what would happen if you could turn it off and you would then get files with noise and artefacts: these same people who now want LENR switchable off, will be the first in line here to vocally complain that their files are noisy, bad or whatever. You can't have it both ways, and I think Leica is not going to take that risk, at least until they are sure that they can have clean files up to 30 minutes even without LENR - and when that will be the case, they will probably just take LENR away altogether. At least, this is my understanding of the way Leica operates, judging from past history in their camera's development. So, if I am right, I think we'll not see "LENR on / off" in a future FW update - perhaps in a future body with a different sensor. But then again, I might be very wrong - it wouldn't be the first time Best regards, Vieri Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now