Jump to content

SL2 might be on it's way this year?


DanielJr

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In the past, I have been a vocal advocate for an M camera with built in EVF. The appeal is to have everything the M camera has to offer (okay, perhaps without the rather silly clinging to the baseplate) while offering an alternative to the OVF, without the clip-on EVF (allowing for focusing and framing accuracy and moveable magnification etc). It seems that Leica wants to leave the M where it is, which is fair enough. We can use our fabulous M lenses with the L mount cameras.

 

It has always been clear to my mind that, while Leica is content to leave the M system where it is (and to be honest, the M10 looks as good as it gets), the L mount is where future development lies.

 

So, where does it go? Leica has it’s view of the best all singing all dancing, universal platform full frame camera in the SL (and it’s as close to perfection for me as I can conceive), and the two APS-C cameras offering the choice of traditional form factor and more modernist form for what is, for all intents and purposes, the same camera. And it has two AF L mount lens options, full frame and APS-C, of which it is justifiably proud.

 

The best way to show its commitment will surely be to keep the existing cameras up to date and fresh and to flesh out the lenses and camera options it has in the current systems. One option could be a medium format EVF camera in L mount, but that would require new lenses. I have no doubt the mount itself would cope with a larger image area, but while it would cover the X1D and Fuji offerings, I’m not sure why Leica would go there - it would put them in direct competition with two other manufacturers with a healthy head start. It would be most unlike Leica to follow into a market sector where it had no pre-existing advantage.

 

Leica already has the S in “compact” medium format. I think that’s a fabulous system, but it’s just too much for me to buy into from every perspective. I don’t take enough pictures, and I’m not comfortable enough with my skills to go into that format. Full frame has enough for me, and it is very mature.

 

If there is a gap, it’s in an SL variant. A stripped back (almost to M levels of purity of thought) SL in a new, smaller (M sized?) more ergonomic form could draw more people into the L mount. Leica just needs to make something different from anything else, which has to cool factor.

 

They’re good at that.

Edited by IkarusJohn
Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a gap, it’s in an SL variant. A stripped back (almost to M levels of purity of thought) SL in a new, smaller (M sized?) more ergonomic form could draw more people into the L mount. 

 

And consequently also smaller full frame L-mount lenses which the SL also desperately needs...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you noticed something unusual about the SL? There have been no limited edition SL's, and this is the SL's third year on the market. 

 

The Leica Q was introduced in 2015 (only a few months before the SL), and there have already been a number of limited editions - Winter Olympics, Australia Edition, Safari, etc. 

 

The Leica Sofort was introduced in mid 2016, and there is already a limited edition (Limoland). 

 

At the same stage of its evolution, the M240 had already spawned a number of variants and many limited edition runs. 

 

If there is going to be a new SL coming, I am going to guess that it's going to be some kind of limited edition to move the last few SL's off the shelf before the SL2 comes out. 

 

The SL is aimed at professionals who really don't care for expensive limited editions that add nothing but bling and cost to their work flow.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we see two versions of the SL: One fast with a FF-sensor, essentially an extension of the existing SL601, and one slower with Leica's MF-sized sensor, the latter compatible with the use of the existing S-lenses (through the existing S-2-L adapter), plus a new line of mirror-less, MF lenses? And that the S-line continues with mirror and an optical view finder?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we see two versions of the SL: One fast with a FF-sensor, essentially an extension of the existing SL601, and one slower with Leica's MF-sized sensor, the latter compatible with the use of the existing S-lenses (through the existing S-2-L adapter), plus a new line of mirror-less, MF lenses? And that the S-line continues with mirror and an optical view finder?

 

Sounds good but is it commercially realistic for Leica to maintain 2 separate MF system lines?

 

Also as an existing SL and CL/TL2 customer I am afraid that more product differentiation will lead to an even slower development pace for the already existing systems...

 

And personally I don't feel the AP-C and FF L-mount are where they should be 4 respectively 3 years in their life cycle.

 

What there is is good but it is not enough, especially in the areas of lens line-up and image stabilization.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sounds good but is it commercially realistic for Leica to maintain 2 separate MF system lines?

 

Also as an existing SL and CL/TL2 customer I am afraid that more product differentiation will lead to an even slower development pace for the already existing systems...

 

And personally I don't feel the AP-C and FF L-mount are where they should be 4 respectively 3 years in their life cycle.

 

What there is is good but it is not enough, especially in the areas of lens line-up and image stabilization.  

We already have two separate FF and crop sensor lines, so l don't suppose that would hold them back.

 

The M system is Leica's legacy FF system and the DSLR S could fit into the same slot in the MF range. 

Edited by LocalHero1953
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good but is it commercially realistic for Leica to maintain 2 separate MF system lines?

 

Also as an existing SL and CL/TL2 customer I am afraid that more product differentiation will lead to an even slower development pace for the already existing systems...

 

And personally I don't feel the AP-C and FF L-mount are where they should be 4 respectively 3 years in their life cycle.

 

What there is is good but it is not enough, especially in the areas of lens line-up and image stabilization.  

 

 

Points taken. It seems for me that Leica has to do something to remain into the MF-business, and it also seems that the mirror-less route is the way to go (although I really enjoy using the brilliant optical VF of the current S-bodies). For a mirror-less route, it appears that the SL-line is an alternative; the L-mount should be sufficiently large, albeit smaller than the S-mount. June will tell, I guess...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could we see two versions of the SL: One fast with a FF-sensor, essentially an extension of the existing SL601, and one slower with Leica's MF-sized sensor, the latter compatible with the use of the existing S-lenses (through the existing S-2-L adapter), plus a new line of mirror-less, MF lenses? And that the S-line continues with mirror and an optical view finder?It

 

Isn't that more or less what we have already though? I mean the SL is basically a smaller sensor version of the S.

 

If (and it's a big if as we've already discussed) the existing SL lenses can indeed cover a MF sensor of some shape and size then switching the S cameras to L mount would be an ovbvious thing to do. There are so many benefits to this both in terms of cost, complexity and homogenity.

 

If you think about it, one way of enabling the image circle to be big enough is if you change the aspect ratio on the MF sensor. Currently in the 'S' it's still 2x3 or 1:1.5.The lower the ratio, the more of the image circle is utilised in covering the frame, the smaller the lenses can be and the more 'effecient' the image projection is. Covering a MF 2x3 sensor requires a bigger image circle compared to one covering say 4x5, 6x7 or even 6x6; (note thought that the X1d and GFX use a sensor that has a ratio of 1:1.3 rather than 1.16 - 6x7 or 1.25 - 4x5 suggesting that the size of the sensors available in the market will be the limiting factor).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that more or less what we have already though? I mean the SL is basically a smaller sensor version of the S.

 

If (and it's a big if as we've already discussed) the existing SL lenses can indeed cover a MF sensor of some shape and size then switching the S cameras to L mount would be an ovbvious thing to do. There are so many benefits to this both in terms of cost, complexity and homogenity.

 

If you think about it, one way of enabling the image circle to be big enough is if you change the aspect ratio on the MF sensor. Currently in the 'S' it's still 2x3 or 1:1.5.The lower the ratio, the more of the image circle is utilised in covering the frame, the smaller the lenses can be and the more 'effecient' the image projection is. Covering a MF 2x3 sensor requires a bigger image circle compared to one covering say 4x5, 6x7 or even 6x6; (note thought that the X1d and GFX use a sensor that has a ratio of 1:1.3 rather than 1.16 - 6x7 or 1.25 - 4x5 suggesting that the size of the sensors available in the market will be the limiting factor).

Stretching it a bit IMO: the S is a DSLR, so it has mirror, pentaprism etc and OVF. 

 

I'd be surprised if the SL lenses could cover the S's sensor. But even so, we have separate ranges of L-mount lenses for APS-C and FF, so it would be logical for S lenses to be converted/adapted/redesigned for the L-mount as well.

 

The S is Leica's problem child: a DSLR in a world that is moving away from DSLRs. They might decide to keep it alive like the M rangefinders in FF, while putting all their development money into an EVF alternative. Converting S lenses to L-mount as a temporary measure while using S designs for new L-Mount lenses for MF might keep down the cost of a new MF system, for customers and Leica.

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that more or less what we have already though? I mean the SL is basically a smaller sensor version of the S.

 

If (and it's a big if as we've already discussed) the existing SL lenses can indeed cover a MF sensor of some shape and size then switching the S cameras to L mount would be an ovbvious thing to do. There are so many benefits to this both in terms of cost, complexity and homogenity.

 

If you think about it, one way of enabling the image circle to be big enough is if you change the aspect ratio on the MF sensor. Currently in the 'S' it's still 2x3 or 1:1.5.The lower the ratio, the more of the image circle is utilised in covering the frame, the smaller the lenses can be and the more 'effecient' the image projection is. Covering a MF 2x3 sensor requires a bigger image circle compared to one covering say 4x5, 6x7 or even 6x6; (note thought that the X1d and GFX use a sensor that has a ratio of 1:1.3 rather than 1.16 - 6x7 or 1.25 - 4x5 suggesting that the size of the sensors available in the market will be the limiting factor).

 

 

Yes, many possibilities! Whether Leica departs from the 2:3 format ratio remains to be seen, but a more squarish format is a possibility.

 

What I particularly appreciate with the M and L-systems is that you can use an (almost) endless number of lenses. It would be great to have a larger flexibility on a larger sensor - a la Leica's S sensor - as well. This will be the case if/when Leica introduces a mirror-less MF body.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TL lenses work in crop mode on the SL, so SL lenses could work in crop mode on the Medium Format body.

 

L mount Mirrorless Medium format would make sense in the Leica portfolio, it would explain a ew other things, and it seems right given what's going on elsewhere with Fuji and Hasselblad.

 

A unified mirrorless platform sharing one mount, APS, FF and Medium format, would be a first, a sort of universal camera, futuristic and very forward thinking. It just seems like something Leica would do.

 

The S has been rumoured to be have it's development stalled for a while now. It's fun to speculate but it really just might happen.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have two separate FF and crop sensor lines, so l don't suppose that would hold them back.

 

The M system is Leica's legacy FF system and the DSLR S could fit into the same slot in the MF range. 

 

The M user base is huge though, the S user base not so much, IMO a legacy DSLR S line would die quickly especially if the new MF system were to get all the innovation.

 

With regards to APS-C and the two system lines, how much longer is the TL-line going to stick around?  The fact that its AF has not yet been upgraded to the level of the CL does not exactly predict much good for the future...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

A unified mirrorless platform sharing one mount, APS, FF and Medium format, would be a first, a sort of universal camera, futuristic and very forward thinking. It just seems like something Leica would do.

 

It would be a fantastic concept but why would you want to shoot APS-C and FF lenses on a medium format camera?  Honestly, it would be cool that you could do it but why would you even want to do that?  

 

And secondly if you buy in early, how long is it going to take Leica to deliver on that promise?  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a fantastic concept but why would you want to shoot APS-C and FF lenses on a medium format camera?  Honestly, it would be cool that you could do it but why would you even want to do that?  

 

And secondly if you buy in early, how long is it going to take Leica to deliver on that promise?

Seems crazy but will bring users to Leica for the uniformity of their cameras. I think they jumped the gun on the S, tried to attack Phase One and Hasselblad but failed to me. Now if they came out with an mirrorless S that uses the same L mount as TL2/SL, that would be game changer.

Edited by oudmazing
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The M user base is huge though, the S user base not so much, IMO a legacy DSLR S line would die quickly especially if the new MF system were to get all the innovation.

 

With regards to APS-C and the two system lines, how much longer is the TL-line going to stick around?  The fact that its AF has not yet been upgraded to the level of the CL does not exactly predict much good for the future...

 

 

There have been predictions of doom for the S system since it was launched, but my recollection is that it has sold more than anticipated, at least at the start.  I guess a quick play with the search function would reveal the answer.  For most cameras, the tricky cost is R&D - once that cost has been recovered, Leica can just keep producing the cameras and lenses as required.  There's no shelf life or end-game until they produce a successor.  It will be interesting to see if the S008, or something else, is released this year.  My guess is they'll stick with the dSLR format for that camera - I was truly amazed at the quality of the OVF when I picked up the S007 in the shop, and the reports on the lenses (except the zoom?) are exceptional.

 

My pick is the S will remain at the top of the tree, with limited appeal and fabulous lenses (albeit slow to the supermarket shelves).  A new sensor must be on the cards, I guess - not sure Leica will produce S lenses in L mount, with an L mount EVF MF camera as an entry to the system.  Anything's possible I guess.

 

Why keep beating up on the TL2?  I don't get it?  It's a new camera, and a complement to the CL.  I can't think why a TL2 user would use the camera and say - gee, I wish I had a CL, or AF as fast as the CL.  It's easy enough to own one, if they did.  They're different cameras in more ways than just AF.  As above, so long as people buy them, Leica will make them.  It's just another L mount camera.  Or do you know something the rest of us don't ...

Edited by IkarusJohn
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the recent Leica interviews on LuLa with Kevin Raber involved Toni Felsner, the S system Product Manager.  Toni stated that the OVF is "one of the USP's" (unique selling points) of the S system and that he sees no reason to change that.  I wouldn't be surprised at a mirrorless MF Leica product, but I think the S will remain as a DSLR.  Of course Leica can be full of surprises.  The R system comes to mind as far as DSLR commitments.

 

Jeff

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As image quality produced by full-frame sensors has improved it seems to me that any medium format system has to go big or go home.  A 50 or even 75 mp sensor on the S will soon be obsolete unless it can somehow distinguish itself far apart from other MF systems with features that make it relevant.  I swapped my S for an X1D but I held on to my 120 which I use on the SL.  If the next SL is a little lighter and a little more ergonomic, i.e. "elegant" as Dr. Kauffman said, that would be close enough to perfection, for me.

 

I have a 2 x 4 foot wide print from a SL file I made in low light, hand held that is outrageously sharp.  It held highlights and allowed me to pull up the shadows.  No need for luminosity masks or HDR software.  I am very pleased with what my SL produces.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As image quality produced by full-frame sensors has improved it seems to me that any medium format system has to go big or go home. ...

 

I have a 2 x 4 foot wide print from a SL file I made in low light, hand held that is outrageously sharp.  It held highlights and allowed me to pull up the shadows.  No need for luminosity masks or HDR software.  I am very pleased with what my SL produces.  

 

 

The challenge of physics in the chase of the numbers is that as MP increases, the real estate of the sensor should increase as well, if you wish to avoid the technique and discipline required for smaller pixels.  There's no way to retain the physical dimensions of a sensor (FF or whatever MF size takes your fancy) and increase pixel count without significant blur and heat issues with larger sensors.  Solving this with IS, either in the lens or in the body, sounds unappealing to me (not sure I can explain, I just assume there are compromises I don't like).

 

As I understand it, that is why Leica has stopped at 24MP, in full frame.  A larger sensor almost certainly won't fit into an M body.  Possibly an SL?  I suspect there's room in the S body for a larger sensor, when one comes that Leica likes.  75MP, without compromising sharpness from photographer movement (A7r) and shutter slap (A7r and d800e), complications from heat and battery management and a sensor fast enough not to require a cup of tea between shots, and I'll be in ... well, maybe I'll be cheering from the sidelines.

 

Curiously, the TL2, with its 24MP APS-C sensor, doesn't suffer from the same issues my d800e did.  It may be that I am more conservative with the TL2 than I am with the SL ... or maybe not.  I have limited interest in testing, save for my own purposes (M lens and camera calibration).

 

Cheers

John

 

PS - sorry for the multiple edits.  Distracted by my daughter's cello lesson.

Edited by IkarusJohn
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

..........................................

 

Why keep beating up on the TL2?  I don't get it?  It's a new camera, and a complement to the CL.  I can't think why a TL2 user would use the camera and say - gee, I wish I had a CL, or AF as fast as the CL.  It's easy enough to own one, if they did.  They're different cameras in more ways than just AF.  As above, so long as people buy them, Leica will make them.  It's just another L mount camera.  Or do you know something the rest of us don't ...

As a former TL2 owner, now a CL owner, I don't get the anti comments about the TL2 either. I still deeply regret the loss of the TL2's fast and intuitive interface and cool modern design. My head says CL (for the built-in EVF and faster AF) but my heart still says TL2. 

 

I can well understand the continued attraction of the TL2 and I hope Leica continue to make it as a statement that they can be forward looking, not just retro. If they redesigned the CL with the style philosophy of the TL2 and added the TL2's interface, then the TL2 would be in trouble.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...