New Panasonic Full Frame with SL Mount?

[su25]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was looking for a camera for night sky photography with option to turn off LENR. Had I an option to buy a camera with L mount, I would have bought that, instead I bought Sony A series. For everything else, I continue using my SL. And, probably sell my Sony when Panasonic is available with L mount. 

 

If I am not mistaken, the partnership is only for L mount, while each (Leica, Panasonic & Sigma) will have their own strengths to attract buyers accordingly. Iberit already sells L mount lenses (any buyers?). It just takes away the need for an adapter to mix and match IMO.

[mdemeyer]

However, if the SL cover glass is designed to be M-friendly, wouldn’t it follow that the lenses for it are designed for that thinner cover stack? So any lenses designed for that mount should be optimized for a thinner stack. And, therefore, a new camera designed for that mount should also have a thinner stack or would be sub-optimized for the existing lenses.

 

Where’s the flaw in that logic?

 

I know nothing of Panasonic Martin, but I think this is extremely unlikely - there are plenty of advantages of thicker sensor glass cover and why would Panasonic give those up so you can use someone else’s lenses? I don’t think so!

 

The SL2 when it comes - that is a different matter!

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I was looking for a camera for night sky photography with option to turn off LENR. Had I an option to buy a camera with L mount, I would have bought that, instead I bought Sony A series. For everything else, I continue using my SL. And, probably sell my Sony when Panasonic is available with L mount. 

 

If I am not mistaken, the partnership is only for L mount, while each (Leica, Panasonic & Sigma) will have their own strengths to attract buyers accordingly. Iberit already sells L mount lenses (any buyers?). It just takes away the need for an adapter to mix and match IMO.

 

Agree with you completely and I have been down the same path. I will also probably sell my (extensive, now) Sony kit in favour of the Panasonic. I do hope the Sigma 150-600 and 100-400 get the L-mount treatment. I also hope the Sigmas are at least close to the brilliant Sony 100-400GM. I need 400+ rarely but when I do, I do. The Sigma 12-24 is much bigger than the Sony but performs well. I also have the CV12mm which might be used with the Leica 16-35.

 

The fast wide Sigmas might be the ticket for astro. I'll continue to use my Canon TS and specialty lenses.

 

Of course Leica might release the SL2 with no mandatory LENR. Then I'll get that. But if it has mandatory LENR I'll be in the Panasonic camp for sure.

 

Gordon

[Mr.Q]

What’s confusing? Pick a camera and you have a lot of lens options in the next few years.

 

If you want all Leica (as was available before the L-mount annoincement), stick with the Leica ones. I can’t see how more lenses or cameras available is confusing or convoluted.

 

You sure those are viable options? Are you sure which of the Sigma/Panny lenses works best with the SL? And vice-versa?

 

Like I said, I'll look back at the system in a couple of years when the dust has settled.

 

For now though, I know the M lenses on the M10 work better than the SL.

 

And I figure the GF 32-64 is a better performer than the SL 24-90.

 

The rest is just hoopla that I rather not be involved in, for the time being.

[lct]

Designing an FF sensor with L, R and M mounts in mind is an effort that neither Panasonic nor Sigma are expected to do IMHO. R users should be glad to use their legacy lenses on modern Panasonic or Foveon based Sigma FF bodies i guess but M users will still have to choose a Leica or a Kolari modded Sony i suspect. 

[Chaemono]

However, if the SL cover glass is designed to be M-friendly, wouldn’t it follow that the lenses for it are designed for that thinner cover stack? So any lenses designed for that mount should be optimized for a thinner stack. And, therefore, a new camera designed for that mount should also have a thinner stack or would be sub-optimized for the existing lenses.

 

Where’s the flaw in that logic?

 

 

The flaw in the logic is that according to Jono’s post #259 in this thread the SL lenses don’t need a thinner sensor stack to work well. If you don’t believe Jono, see link below for extensive tests between α7RII Stock vs. α7RII Kolari Mod with all kinds of lenses including Sony FE native lenses like the 35/2.8 or the 55/1.8 on both, the Stock and the Mod bodies.

 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1392833

 

Click on one of the links at the top like the one that says ‘A7RII Stock vs. Mod Section.’

 

Edit: I suspect there will be those who will try the SL lenses on both, the LUMIX S1R and the SL2, when they are out. I’m planning to be one of them. Will post the results here. Also, I doubt Panasonic would have chosen the Leica L-mount if degradation was noticeable. I presume they tested the SL lenses on their new FF bodies.

Edited September 26, 2018 by Chaemono

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm sure that Leica- and Panasonic and Sigma-  are  smart enough to have thought out a strategy of product differentiation before they entered into the alliance. 

 

We already have an example of an open mount - the M mount. Zeiss, Voigtländer and others offer very attractive lenses, in some cases indistinguishable in quality from Leica products or even (dare I say it?) better, at lower prices, yet it does not eat into Leica sales.

[-Lss-]

If these Panasonic bodies are not better than Sony for M lenses, there is significantly less incentive for many (Leica) users to make the switch to L mount.

[thighslapper]

I'm sure that Leica- and Panasonic and Sigma-  are  smart enough to have thought out a strategy of product differentiation before they entered into the alliance. 

 

We already have an example of an open mount - the M mount. Zeiss, Voigtländer and others offer very attractive lenses, in some cases indistinguishable in quality from Leica products or even (dare I say it?) better, at lower prices, yet it does not eat into Leica sales.

 

..... and which bits they can use in common without stepping too much on each others toes.......

 

I think the 'Eye-Res' EVF (or the next generation version that will feature in the SL2) will be in the Panasonic ...... on the videos it looks identical ...... and probably the same underlying sensor and processor will be used in the SL2. Interestingly the Panasonic has dual XQD and SD cards implying high frame rate video capability. No PDAF is slightly concerning ...... dual IS looks promising if Leica implements it as well......

 

Even with lots of basic sensor, processor and other components in common there is still plenty of room to create a unique product that is true to Leica philosophy. 

[jonoslack]

However, if the SL cover glass is designed to be M-friendly, wouldn’t it follow that the lenses for it are designed for that thinner cover stack? So any lenses designed for that mount should be optimized for a thinner stack. And, therefore, a new camera designed for that mount should also have a thinner stack or would be sub-optimized for the existing lenses.

 

Where’s the flaw in that logic?

 

 

 

Hi There

no - the SL lenses are not designed for a thinner cover stack - The thickness of the cover stack is irrelevant for tele-centric lenses (like most modern lenses), meaning those where the light hits the sensor more or less vertically.

 

Most M lenses are not tele-centric (ie the light hits the sensor at an oblique angle). Which is why they are affected by a thicker cover stack. 

 

So cover glass stack thickness is not likely to be part of the L mount specification.

 

All the best

[dkCambridgeshire]

Given the Lumix SIR's 47 MP FF sensor, what is the pixel count in APS-C mode?

 

Would it be 31.33MP? 

 

If so, that compares more than favourably with the CL's 24MP.

 

I'm thinking 11-23mm TL lens on the SIR would be a very usable combination i.e. FF equiv 17-35mm, 31 MP and an articulated screen 

 

dunk  

Edited September 26, 2018 by dkCambridgeshire

[mmradman]

Less:-

 

16 x 24 = 384

24 x 36 = 864

384 / 864 = 0.44

0.44 x 47 Mp = 20.68Mp

[jaapv]

Less:-

 

16 x 24 = 384

24 x 36 = 864

384 / 864 = 0.44

0.44 x 47 Mp = 20.68Mp

Which suggests that it doesn't have as high a pixel density as other Panasonic sensors, like the 20 MP MFT one.

[mmradman]

Which suggests that it doesn't have as high a pixel density as other Panasonic sensors, like the 20 MP MFT one.

Which is a good thing.  Assuming same technology applied in both M43 and FF sensors, bigger pixel means more light gathering and less noise.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Thank you … I was incorrectly using 1/1.5 = 0.666

 

47 x 0.66 = 31.33 

 

dunk 

Edited September 26, 2018 by dkCambridgeshire

[rjsphd]

My collection of M lenses represents a significant investment for me.  It is the tail that wags the camera dog in my camera purchasing decision.  I won't know if these new cameras handle M glass well until they are out and the capable contributors to this forum test the M glass.  So, til then, I will do my best to ignore the insatiable urge to speculate, read speculation or pull the trigger on a SL.  

 

I am already feeling withdrawn symptoms.

[Martin B]

 

 

We already have an example of an open mount - the M mount. Zeiss, Voigtländer and others offer very attractive lenses, in some cases indistinguishable in quality from Leica products or even (dare I say it?) better, at lower prices, yet it does not eat into Leica sales.

 

It already does - therefore the Panasonic alliance in the first place to counteract exactly this. 

[Martin B]

Hi There

no - the SL lenses are not designed for a thinner cover stack - The thickness of the cover stack is irrelevant for tele-centric lenses (like most modern lenses), meaning those where the light hits the sensor more or less vertically.

 

Most M lenses are not tele-centric (ie the light hits the sensor at an oblique angle). Which is why they are affected by a thicker cover stack. 

 

So cover glass stack thickness is not likely to be part of the L mount specification.

 

All the best

 

We have to wait until the first reviews come out online or on YouTube videos of the performance with Panasonic camera and M lenses. I still believe it is still the best non-Leica based camera option to be used with M glass of all the other MLC options out there currently. I suspect that there might be minor debits in comparison of using M glass on a dedicated Leica M camera, but it might very well depend again on the lens used and on the tolerance level of the user if this is good enough. I am using all kind of M lenses adapted to my A7R since several years now with excellent results (I don't even have an E-mount lens because of this!). Switching to a different MLC brand like Panasonic will be very easy for me if the sensor specs are good (high MP/high DR), price is right, and M lens performance is okay. 

[BernardC]

So cover glass stack thickness is not likely to be part of the L mount specification.

 

It affects the back-focus/lens register distance, so it should be part of the specification.

 

What wouldn't be part of the specification is any Leica microlens "special sauce," the depth of pixel wells (which is apparently much less for Leica sensors compared to competing sensors), and any software correction for M lenses.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jonoslack]

We have to wait until the first reviews come out online or on YouTube videos of the performance with Panasonic camera and M lenses. I still believe it is still the best non-Leica based camera option to be used with M glass of all the other MLC options out there currently. I suspect that there might be minor debits in comparison of using M glass on a dedicated Leica M camera, but it might very well depend again on the lens used and on the tolerance level of the user if this is good enough. I am using all kind of M lenses adapted to my A7R since several years now with excellent results (I don't even have an E-mount lens because of this!). Switching to a different MLC brand like Panasonic will be very easy for me if the sensor specs are good (high MP/high DR), price is right, and M lens performance is okay. 

 

If you've been happy using M lenses on a non Kolari A7r then I'm quite sure you'll be happy with them on a Panasonic S1