Farewell Leica...

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, thighslapper said:

Ah ..... the hoary old chestnuts of 'image quality' again and what is 'better', 'significantly better' and 'unsurpassed' ...... all part subjective and part measurable in variable proportions depending on your viewpoint and brand loyalty.

There are some incontrovertible truths ....... bigger pixels catch more light, more pixels capture more detail and better lenses yield cleaner, more detailed images. 

Whether you need all or any of these three depends entirely on the subject matter and what you intend to do with it. Vieri has made a rational choice based on his needs as a professional landscape photographer. For him the change makes a significant difference. To others it may be marginal or hardly worth it. No-one is wrong and no-one is right. 

For my needs the SL is fine ..... and if they could only get rid of LNER I would happily get an SL2 . As an amateur I have too much invested in Leica to jump completely to a new system unless the changes are genuine quantum leaps in sensor and processing technology. 

I currently have G.A.S. under control ..... but as a reformed addict I am constantly aware of the dangers of the 'dealers' on forums like this preying on the weak and vulnerable.....

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[caissa]

This is meant as a reply to the “re-ignited GAS” (before another reply was put in)

 

Well maybe for some. But I am now over 50 and GAS is definitely loosing it’s grip on me.

And from older times I know the 2.0/110 lens from Hasselblad, or 2.8/180 for Rollei on 6x6 cameras, so shallow depth of field of a 1.9/80 for 33x44 is definitely no temptation for me, but only a shallow (!) copy - well actually not shallow enough.😂

Edited January 26, 2019 by caissa

[caissa]

To Vieri.

When you use electronic shutter with the 15mm, is the X1D then quicker, because there is no need to use the slow shutter in the XD lenses and no AF ? So is electronic shutter improving the usability (reaction time) ?

Edited January 26, 2019 by caissa

[Vieri]

10 hours ago, thighslapper said:

[...]

Vieri has made a rational choice based on his needs as a professional landscape photographer. For him the change makes a significant difference. To others it may be marginal or hardly worth it. No-one is wrong and no-one is right. 

For my needs the SL is fine ..... and if they could only get rid of LNER I would happily get an SL2 . As an amateur I have too much invested in Leica to jump completely to a new system unless the changes are genuine quantum leaps in sensor and processing technology. 

I currently have G.A.S. under control ..... but as a reformed addict I am constantly aware of the dangers of the 'dealers' on forums like this preying on the weak and vulnerable.....

As a professional photographer, no matter how much I like gear (and, GAS works on professionals as much as on the next person!) I need to make choices that make sense to me and my work. I tried the Hasselblad X1D side-by-side with the Leica SL for about two months of daily shooting, plus I did some testing at home, and I finally decided that the X1D made more sense. When I had two SL bodies, I used to think that LENR wasn't such a big deal - I used to swap bodies during NR and vice-versa... However, now that I don't have LENR, I most definitely appreciate the advantage of not having to swap bodies at all  I hope the next iteration of the SL will, at least, allow you to switch LENR off, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

5 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

The X1D sure is tempting. The XCD lenses are much smaller and lighter than the SL primes, albeit slower. One can travel lighter with the X1D system than a SL system, and that's mind-boggling.  No zoom, no problem.  Just carry the 21, 45, and 90 and crop for in-between focal lengths. I'm sure you get more than 24 MP at most focal lengths.

And finally, the 80/1.9 is a game-changer, as it provides a fast prime to the lineup and also boasts a shallower DOF than the 50SL. GAS is re-ignited.

IMHO, obviously, the X1D is the best system out there for landscape photography. However, I do landscape ONLY, and I definitely appreciate it how the X1D is not the fastest camera on the planet (so to speak) and how this might create limitations to other kind of photography, limitations that you might or might not be ready to live with.

1 hour ago, caissa said:

To Vieri.

When you use electronic shutter with the 15mm, is the X1D then quicker, because there is no need to use the slow shutter in the XD lenses and no AF ? So is electronic shutter improving the usability (reaction time) ?

In short:

1. Quicker: yes, it is slightly quicker since you don't have to wait for the leaf shutter's various opening and closing. Personally, I never found the leaf shutter to be a problem for my work at all. But again, I do landscape ONLY, and the click-click-click of the LS never bothered me, and never made me miss a shot.

2. Electronic shutter has nothing to do with auto-focus, of course, nor is limited to adapted lenses: you can use ES with native XCD lenses as well, if you wish, and you can mix-and-match ES/LS and AF/MF any way you like.

About speeding the camera up, I think that since ES doesn't really work great for faster shutter speeds than, say, 1/30 or 1/60 (will publish more precise findings in my X1D review, probably in April), and since I only use it with the camera on a tripod, I don't see ES as a way to make the camera faster - which, incidentally, is something I don't really need - but only as a way to make use of adapted lenses.

Hope this helps! Best regards,

Vieri

[Agent M10]

17 hours ago, thighslapper said:

Ah ..... the hoary old chestnuts of 'image quality' again and what is 'better', 'significantly better' and 'unsurpassed' ...... all part subjective and part measurable in variable proportions depending on your viewpoint and brand loyalty.

There are some incontrovertible truths ....... bigger pixels catch more light, more pixels capture more detail and better lenses yield cleaner, more detailed images. 

The pixel pitch of the SL is 6µm; the Fuji's is 5.3µm. Articles show that Leica has designed its sensors with unique micro-lenses. I don't know about Fuji, Nikon, etc. who use Sony sensors. In any case, it appears that Leica had the foresight to see that sensor technology would plateau in terms of making any material difference in image quality. That's why we see a marriage of sorts in the L mount. As I wrote earlier, who can tell any image-quality difference between two 24x36-inch prints taken with an SL and GXR or GXS? That's why I think the whole mini-MF-image-quality-sensor talk is what I tongue-in-cheek called "hooey." 

With sensor technology where it is, image-quality differences lie in look and lenses, and color science to a certain degree. A larger sensor might give you a the ability to print larger and some additional details, but the real difference it lends is its look, not "surpassing image quality." Print an S and SL photograph at 24x36 and compare them. You'd be hard pressed to say that the SL image was in any way inferior, but you would probably notice a different "look" to it from the S's photo. And, needless to say, many might prefer the SL's look more than the S's in that comparison. Color science is how the respective manufacturers approach color. Some might like Fuji's colors over Leica's or vice versa. That really doesn't involve image quality as much, but it does inform the "look." I think that might be why the new S3 is touted as having a new color array. Just a bump in megapixels would be a much tougher sale. 

Hopefully professional photographers will get past all the sensor talk, and start conversations about look, lenses, and color. 

[caissa]

Hello Vieri,

thanks for your reply and the clarification about ES with the X1D.

I was also looking to the X1D, because I still have some older Zeiss and Schneider lenses for 6x6 (mostly for Rollei), that are laying around and waiting to be used again. And a 33x44 camera with ES looks like an interesting idea for using them. Maybe the next generation of cameras will be "quicker" and ES better.

But after your reply (too bad that you have no time to test ES now already) I actually set my hope more on the Panasonic S1R. Especially with the new high resolution mode that they announced in Las Vegas. With this I also expect an improvement in IQ. (similar to the Pentax K1). Maybe I can use some of these lenses with tilt-shift adapter (Rollei to Canon and Canon to L-mount) or anything similar...  

Looking forward to April (to your report and the S1R).     👍

Edited January 26, 2019 by caissa

[Bob Andersson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

18 hours ago, Agent M10 said:

The pixel pitch of the SL is 6µm; the Fuji's is 5.3µm .. ..  it appears that Leica had the foresight to see that sensor technology would plateau in terms of making any material difference in image quality.

..

Hopefully professional photographers will get past all the sensor talk, and start conversations about look, lenses, and color. 

From what I read many professional photographers laud the GFX/X1D sensor for its dynamic range and in that respect, despite its larger pixels, it seems the sensor in the SL hasn't quite reached the plateau you refer to. This DXOMARK comparison with the X1D puts some numbers to this and is especially obvious if you select the Dynamic Range chart from the Measurements tab.

Just how far, or how little, the SL sensor's dynamic range is trailing will become a lot clearer when the Panasonic S1 is out in the wild in the next weeks and those lucky few with access to both it and the SL can compare dynamic apples with dynamic apples (I can visualise Newton ducking dynamic apples now! 🤣 ) regarding sensor size and pixel count.

It's only a consideration for those whose subject matter does sometimes require both highlight and shadow recovery in post and for many the SL sensor is still plenty good enough.  So I agree, it will be nice to get past all this sensor talk but I fear that won't happen until we can stop speculating about the SL2. 😀

I'm certainly looking forward to following Vieri's journey with the X1D, a camera system I'd love to own but which doesn't quite tick enough boxes for me to justify purchasing.

[frame-it]

53 minutes ago, Bob Andersson said:

From what I read many professional photographers laud the GFX/X1D sensor for its dynamic range and in that respect, despite its larger pixels, it seems the sensor in the SL hasn't quite reached the plateau you refer to. This DXOMARK comparison with the X1D puts some numbers to this and is especially obvious if you select the Dynamic Range chart from the Measurements tab.

Just how far, or how little, the SL sensor's dynamic range is trailing will become a lot clearer when the Panasonic S1 is out in the wild in the next weeks and those lucky few with access to both it and the SL can compare dynamic apples with dynamic apples (I can visualise Newton ducking dynamic apples now! 🤣 ) regarding sensor size and pixel count.

It's only a consideration for those whose subject matter does sometimes require both highlight and shadow recovery in post and for many the SL sensor is still plenty good enough.  So I agree, it will be nice to get past all this sensor talk but I fear that won't happen until we can stop speculating about the SL2. 😀

I'm certainly looking forward to following Vieri's journey with the X1D, a camera system I'd love to own but which doesn't quite tick enough boxes for me to justify purchasing.

this chart might be a better comparison:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#FujiFilm GFX 50S,Hasselblad X1D-50c,Leica S (Typ 007),Leica SL (Typ 601)

 

[Bob Andersson]

10 minutes ago, frame-it said:

this chart might be a better comparison:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#FujiFilm GFX 50S,Hasselblad X1D-50c,Leica S (Typ 007),Leica SL (Typ 601)

 

I have a problem with that chart as it uses the camera's ISO setting rather than the camera's measured ISO, something that is usually minor but for a while I got mightily confused when I used the site to compare the DR of the OM-D E-M1 Mark II - link. 🤣

But yes, it does illustrate the point.

Edited January 27, 2019 by Bob Andersson

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, frame-it said:

this chart might be a better comparison:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#FujiFilm GFX 50S,Hasselblad X1D-50c,Leica S (Typ 007),Leica SL (Typ 601)

That's the problem with "DR." It's become an obsession for equipment geeks, and yet nobody agrees on what it means, or how to measure it.

We all remember the Sony DR scandal of a few years ago. They figured-out that maximizing DR numbers was so important that the sacrificed "the in-between bits," literally. It took a while for pundits to cotton-on to the fact that their 12-stops of DR only contained 6 stops of data!

What the linked chart makes clear is that both Sony-sensored medium format cameras use a DR-optimization strategy starting at ISO 1600 (Fuji) or 3200 (Hasselblad). Beyond that point, DR remains constant, which likely means that they are deliberately under-exposing. In other words, the magical DR number/incantation stays the same, but all of that DR is on the highlight side, and none in the shadows! That's useless for photographic purposes, but it sure makes their numbers look great!

[frame-it]

41 minutes ago, BernardC said:

That's the problem with "DR." It's become an obsession for equipment geeks, and yet nobody agrees on what it means, or how to measure it.

We all remember the Sony DR scandal of a few years ago. They figured-out that maximizing DR numbers was so important that the sacrificed "the in-between bits," literally. It took a while for pundits to cotton-on to the fact that their 12-stops of DR only contained 6 stops of data!

What the linked chart makes clear is that both Sony-sensored medium format cameras use a DR-optimization strategy starting at ISO 1600 (Fuji) or 3200 (Hasselblad). Beyond that point, DR remains constant, which likely means that they are deliberately under-exposing. In other words, the magical DR number/incantation stays the same, but all of that DR is on the highlight side, and none in the shadows! That's useless for photographic purposes, but it sure makes their numbers look great!

you're right but i posted it for general info....i prefer to just take photos, print them and sell some.

[Mr.Q]

OK so I rented the X1D along with the XCD 21/4 and 45/3.5. I also purchased a Kipon adapter to try out my M lenses.

I'm mindblown by the IQ. The detail, tonality and colors are on a totally different level from anything I've seen on my computer screen. Highlight and shadow recover in post seem limitless. The XCD 21/4 might possibly be sharper than my 21 sem. I like the 45/3.4 a lot for it's compactness, albeit a bit loud. I'm also surprised how well the 50/1.4 asph (my favorite lens) performs adapted to the X1D. I've never had luck adapting this lens with other cameras, which includes the A7RII, X-T2, and Leica SL. Always seemed to lose clarity when adapted. Well, the X1D + 50 lux files, after removing the slight vignetting, look better than the M10P + 50 lux files. All of my other M lenses (21 sem, 28 elmarit, 35 cron asph, 35 fle, and 90 mem) however, have a hard vignette and do not work.

Working with the e-shutter is not bad at all. I shoot mostly static subjects so I have to try hard to induce rolling shutter. Shooting in multiples of 1/50s eliminates banding indoors. A small price to pay for such incredible results.

I could sell my M system (minus the 50 lux) to fund a X1D + 21/4 + 45/3.5 + 80/1.9. The Q will remain as my walk-around camera and the Hassy will be my travel kit. This will be hard to resist.

[Vieri]

1 hour ago, Mr.Q said:

OK so I rented the X1D along with the XCD 21/4 and 45/3.5. I also purchased a Kipon adapter to try out my M lenses.

I'm mindblown by the IQ. The detail, tonality and colors are on a totally different level from anything I've seen on my computer screen. Highlight and shadow recover in post seem limitless. The XCD 21/4 might possibly be sharper than my 21 sem. I like the 45/3.4 a lot for it's compactness, albeit a bit loud. I'm also surprised how well the 50/1.4 asph (my favorite lens) performs adapted to the X1D. I've never had luck adapting this lens with other cameras, which includes the A7RII, X-T2, and Leica SL. Always seemed to lose clarity when adapted. Well, the X1D + 50 lux files, after removing the slight vignetting, look better than the M10P + 50 lux files. All of my other M lenses (21 sem, 28 elmarit, 35 cron asph, 35 fle, and 90 mem) however, have a hard vignette and do not work.

Working with the e-shutter is not bad at all. I shoot mostly static subjects so I have to try hard to induce rolling shutter. Shooting in multiples of 1/50s eliminates banding indoors. A small price to pay for such incredible results.

I could sell my M system (minus the 50 lux) to fund a X1D + 21/4 + 45/3.5 + 80/1.9. The Q will remain as my walk-around camera and the Hassy will be my travel kit. This will be hard to resist.

Makes a lot of sense I also am happy with my Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4, and I am loving the Voigtlander 15mm - it's truly crazy wide, but performs very well (albeit vignetting)!!

Best regards,

Vieri

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, Mr.Q said:

I'm also surprised how well the 50/1.4 asph (my favorite lens) performs adapted to the X1D. 

Ming discovered the same a year ago...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.mingthein.com/2018/03/17/leica-m-mount-lenses-on-the-x1d/amp/

Jeff

[caissa]

For lovers of the 50mm this is probably great news. But for me this is still a bit disappointing, as I know currently only two adapted lenses (Leica M 1.4/50 and CV 15mm) that provide consistent results. So for me not really a replacement for the SL, where almost any adapted lens works great. I am actually more interested in the behavior of macro lenses. Maybe somebody has already tested any with the X1D ?

Of course the big question is, how will the behavior of the Panasonic S1R be in this regard. Will it be similar to the SL or just as difficult to use as some alpha sensors. Will Panasonic regard this sort of compatibility as a valid design goal, or rather as a obstacle to reach the best performance with their own lenses...  😎

This (usability of all M and R lenses, etc.) will be an important point, if the S1R is a “valid” camera of the SL system for me, or if only a future SL2 is a useful upgrade path. To me it is now not completely clear how far the compatibility with L-mount stretches.

Edited January 29, 2019 by caissa

[roofus]

Why am I reading this? 

I have a life!!!

I think I will move on!!!!

Edited January 29, 2019 by roofus

[ropo54]

9 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

OK so I rented the X1D along with the XCD 21/4 and 45/3.5. I also purchased a Kipon adapter to try out my M lenses.

I'm mindblown by the IQ. The detail, tonality and colors are on a totally different level from anything I've seen on my computer screen. Highlight and shadow recover in post seem limitless. The XCD 21/4 might possibly be sharper than my 21 sem. I like the 45/3.4 a lot for it's compactness, albeit a bit loud. I'm also surprised how well the 50/1.4 asph (my favorite lens) performs adapted to the X1D. I've never had luck adapting this lens with other cameras, which includes the A7RII, X-T2, and Leica SL. Always seemed to lose clarity when adapted. Well, the X1D + 50 lux files, after removing the slight vignetting, look better than the M10P + 50 lux files. All of my other M lenses (21 sem, 28 elmarit, 35 cron asph, 35 fle, and 90 mem) however, have a hard vignette and do not work.

Working with the e-shutter is not bad at all. I shoot mostly static subjects so I have to try hard to induce rolling shutter. Shooting in multiples of 1/50s eliminates banding indoors. A small price to pay for such incredible results.

I could sell my M system (minus the 50 lux) to fund a X1D + 21/4 + 45/3.5 + 80/1.9. The Q will remain as my walk-around camera and the Hassy will be my travel kit. This will be hard to resist.

The first two shots were taken with the Hb X1D and the Leica R 80 1.4. There was little to no vignetting. The 3rd was taken with the Noctilux 0.95 and was cropped approximately 50%.  I thought the X1D files were stunning, but I was put off by the shutter black out times.  I'm thinking of moving away now from the SL to the Fuji GFX system.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited January 29, 2019 by ropo54

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, caissa said:

But for me this is still a bit disappointing, as I know currently only two adapted lenses (Leica M 1.4/50 and CV 15mm) that provide consistent results.

 

Did you read the full article from Ming that I linked?  [Results may have also changed in the year since he tested (new lenses, FW updates, etc).]

There are several threads on macro lenses on the SL, some with satisfying results...

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/285780-any-desire-for-a-macro-lens-for-the-sl/

Jeff

Edited January 30, 2019 by Jeff S

[jonoslack]

Well, Like Roofus I'm not sure why I've read this whole thread. Maybe as an antidote to the Brexit fiasco in Parliament!

I can completely understand Vieri's choice here. If you're shooting landscape, stopped down, with long exposures, on a tripod . . then the Hassy seems to me to be a no brainer. . . . . If you ain't, then I'm not so sure. Of course, the SL (I love my SL) . . but I've just checked in my library, and my first SL shot was in January 2015 - that's 4 years ago - and it still has the best EVF out there. Leica were truly visionary with the camera. 

Which isn't enough - except we have just had the L mount consortium decision (announced in September). Panasonic might not be to your taste ergonomically, but from almost every other aspect they've nailed it with µ43 and video, there will be suddenly a huge lens library to suit all tastes  . . . and finally there will be an SL2 later on this year, and more than that, Leica are (rather slowly) introducing what might really be the VERY BEST lens line in the SL Summicrons (the 90 and 75 are just tasters of what is to come). 

So - back to Vieri - for his work - of course (and as he says, it's a business decision, not just based on IQ). But for the rest of us who want versatile all-rounders, the SL already provides great results, and with the L-mount consortium, the SL summicrons, and the upcoming SL2 it seems a very strange time to jump ship. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[frame-it]

6 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

and finally there will be an SL2 later on this year,

that's great looking forward to your detailed review