Jump to content

IS the SL still worth buying in 2018?


NDTPHOTOGRAPHY

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all and please don't shoot me for starting this thread.

 

First of all I own an M9 and a M10 along with 35 and 50 Luxs, a 50 APO a 90 tele-elmaritt and a Noctilux so I clearly love the M system.   However I have found that I need an autofocus camera for some of my projects.

 

Now to the point of my question - with the advent of the new Sony (I know.. I know) a7III and a7rIII along with the ability to use a Techart Pro M to E adapter, does the SL start to feel a bit long in the tooth?

 

I have read and re-read the specs ad nauseam but am more interested in real world experience or advice. 

 

I've read that Techart may be developing an M to SL adapter which would solve everything.  I also know the Sonys are way smaller and lighter and that the SL lenses, though excellent, are huge.  But even as I write this post, I'm sure you can feel my state of confusion. 

 

Price-wise the decision is obvious, a used SL goes for about €4400-€4900 (I'm in Europe) while a new a7rII goes for €2700-€3200 but there's that "Leica look" and the fact that M lenses don't play so well with Sony sensors (I know 1st hand as I used to own an a7rII and tried M lenses with techart adapter).  

 

But now that Sony has upped their game etc, I am lost.

 

So, I thank you in advance for your input and guidance 

 

P.S. My question is honest so please keep the snarky replies to yourselves.

 

All my best,

 

Nick

Edited by NDTPHOTOGRAPHY
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Try a Sony and SL system.

 

The SL is better today than when it was announced. There are more lenses and it has improved firmware.

 

Value is subjective and only you can decide if a system is worth the cost. I personally would not buy an SL camera to only use with M lenses.

 

I don’t see how a Techart adapter would solve everything. I still do not see how moving the lens back and forth to focus works with FLE lenses, where lens elements move during focusing. You may as well not use those lenses because they won’t function as designed.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Try a Sony and SL system.

 

The SL is better today than when it was announced. There are more lenses and it has improved firmware.

 

Value is subjective and only you can decide if a system is worth the cost. I personally would not buy an SL camera to only use with M lenses.

 

I don’t see how a Techart adapter would solve everything. I still do not see how moving the lens back and forth to focus works with FLE lenses, where lens elements move during focusing. You may as well not use those lenses because they won’t function as designed.

LD_50

Thanks for your reply.  

 

I've used the Techart / M combination with the Sony a7rII and the focus was fine, just not the IQ.  As far as FLE I didn't know that all M lenses were - one learns something new every day - thanks for this.

 

By "solve everything" I mean I could use Leica  M lenses on a Leica which - unless I'm wrong (and may be) - is by far preferable to using them on any other camera.  So IMHO a solution to make the manual M lense work on the SL would be great - but that's just my humble opinion.

 

Though I wasn't looking for a cost analysis of the SL but for a more subjective / personal one, I thank you for your "try it" solution.  

 

All my best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2017/6/22/sony-a9-vs-techart-adapter-vs-leica-sl-autofocus-comparison-part-iv

 

 

yes a G-master... i don't think an SL can do this >

 

 

 

Thanks,  possibly a G Master 24-70 or G 24-105...  The alternative - keep my M lenses plus one autofocus prime - likely the APO 90SL

Edited by frame-it
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The M lenses work well on the SL without autofocus. The Techart works by moving the entire lens back and forth to achieve focus. It does not make use of the floating elements. Not all M lenses have floating elements but the 35, 50 Lux, 50 APO, and the Noctilux do. I’m not sure about the 90 you mentioned.

 

As far as the actual quality on a Sony camera I can’t weigh in because I’ve not tried this. Most tests I’ve seen show good quality for longer lenses, with corner issues at 50 and wider. The Techart may make this worse for FLE lenses but I’ve seen no tests that address this.

 

I would recommend you try the SL and the new Summicrons to see what the native AF has to offer in smaller lenses. I’ve found that I don’t shoot the 50 Summilux M ASPH on my SL after buying the 50 Summilux-SL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be wrong, but you're not going to shoot L lenses on a Sony. The 24-90mm is a gorgeous lens with outstanding usability. I rarely want to change lenses when the 24-90mm is mounted.That for me is a major dissuasion for a Sony

 

In the SL's favor, after a short period of getting used to the camera, the SL gets out of the way of taking pictures and stays out. It just grabs focus quickly, sets exposure per your direction, shows you the info you need simply. I don't think the Sony can't match the SL evf, especially with glasses. And of course it takes beautiful pictures with generally Leica leanings to their look.

 

The Sony weighs less, and costs less. But, if you purchased the Sony you'd have to shoot with it and its lens choices. Nah. Not for me.

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

Wow, almost a new record.....but still less than 24 hours later....

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/283779-when-the-leica-s-isnt-enough/page-1?do=findComment&comment=3503127

 

The buying won’t stop.... but might be wise to finally stop the declarations. As predictable as sunrise.

 

Jeff

I don't understand. This isn't Neil who's asking here.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mixing systems is a potentially expensive and frustrating exercise.

 

Your best and least expensive option is a CL + 18-55,  L-M adapter, dump one of the M bodies and then you would have a good AF system.....  and could use the M lenses to their full potential as the quality of the EVF (even without magnification) would make manual focussing simple and accurate. CL image quality is close to SL and M10 and the lenses are as good as anything Leica has produced. 

 

If you were intending to migrate to mostly AF in the future,  want Leica compatibility and the best image quality and camera ergonomics then an SL + 24-90 would still be a great choice. 

 

...... but ...... you do not specify what the 'projects requiring AF' are ...... and how critical accurate or fast AF is ....... or the image quality required ..... or how often you will be using AF. 

 

Otherwise you are looking at an A7 or A9 if you want quality imagery, plus some Leica incompatible lenses and possibly sub-optimal use of your existing Leica glass. Love or loathe the interface and ergonomics .... the Sonys certainly produce the goods. 

Edited by thighslapper
Link to post
Share on other sites

It kinda depends on what you plan to shoot with your AF camera. If the shot can be obtained with decently good AF performance, than the SL and even CL is a consideration. But if you intend to shoot subjects where top level AF performance is a must, the new crop of Sony's is where it's at.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand. This isn't Neil who's asking here.

I believe he's referring to the fashion catwalk video.  I'm not looking for video but rather stills. 

 

I have taken the SL (thanks to Leica Berlin) & the Sony a7rIII and a7III out for a spin but am still not convinced either way. 

 

I come from Sony (via Canon, via Nikon) - having sold all of my Sony/Zeiss glass to switch to the M system because of it's more deliberate operation. 

Now I find myself in need of autofocus for lifestyle and product shoots. 

I have tried the 24-90 and though I was impressed by its IQ, I was not by its size which is HUGE.  The SL's EVF is remarkable - allowing me to focus the Noctilux with ease.   

 

All of your post are very helpful - even the shameless plug for the a9 :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, almost a new record.....but still less than 24 hours later....

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/283779-when-the-leica-s-isnt-enough/page-1?do=findComment&comment=3503127

 

The buying won’t stop.... but might be wise to finally stop the declarations. As predictable as sunrise.

 

Jeff

 

You know the sun doesn't rise, right.

 

It's the earth turning.

 

The world isn't flat anymore.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO if you choose the SL you have some benefits:

you can use your M lenses as an addition to the SL AF lenses.

1) For example I have the 24-90 and 90-280 and 50/1.4, but dont see a need for a 21mm AF lens, I just use the 21/3.4 on the SL in case I find 24 not wide enough.

2) While the SL user interface is not as simple as the M UI, it is under the same logic (for example auto iso implementation etc.)

3) color tweaking is Leica style, so also here you dont have to adapt to post process files from 2 differen brands

 

A disadvantage of the SL is that there are only very few lenses available at the moment. So you have to check if they offer what you need. In my case I really like the 24-90 range, but I wish Leica offered some more smaller lenses as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

<...> Your best and least expensive option is a CL + 18-55,  L-M adapter, dump one of the M bodies and then you would have a good AF system.....  and could use the M lenses to their full potential as the quality of the EVF (even without magnification) would make manual focussing simple and accurate. CL image quality is close to SL and M10 and the lenses are as good as anything Leica has produced. <...>

 

I just took the SL out yesterday, it having been shelved for the CL for quite some time. Shees - that thing with the 24-90mm is superb to shoot. Big amazing evf, and the 24-90mm with IS and quick rock-solid auto focus. (Yes, and heavy as heck though.)

 

The look of the shots are different between the two, a slight tendency toward the natural (SL) versus precise (CL). Yes, that's likely lenses to a large degree, but there's something else there too - which I attribute to full frame.

 

If you're looking for a full-frame feel and full-frame angle-of-view for given lenses, the SL is still the camera you want.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me put it this way, I am so pleased with my SL that I will almost certainly not upgrade when the SL2 is released. However, from a financial standpoint, it might make sense to wait for the SL2, and then buy an SL at a reduced price. When will that be? No one outside of Leica knows. Today's cameras are all so good, that incremental improvements don't have a great impact on image output. It's far wiser, IMO, to put expendable cash into lenses than camera bodies.

Edited by robgo2
  • 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...