SL2?

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

New firmware happens all of the time. I wouldn’t bet your house on 24MP and the same body though

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[paul.bridges.3388]

27 minutes ago, hoppyman said:

New firmware happens all of the time. I wouldn’t bet your house on 24MP and the same body though

Love the SL but a 4 year newer sensor has to matter, right?

[dkCambridgeshire]

But has Leica planned just ONE SL 601 replacement? Can just ONE body, i.e. just one new sensor, satisfy both stills photographers' and videographers' needs … especially when Panasonic has more bases covered? Is the rumoured SL2 gonna be an 'also ran' given Panasonic's lead? Leica needs to deliver a competitive product(s) and not rely on just its 'name' … otherwise many users could be happier to spend their hard earned FF mirrorless $£€ funds on Panasonic L mount bodies … as is already happening. 

Leica has likely learned its lesson from 'going it alone' with the original Leicaflex / Leicaflex SL and R8/R9 … which were not competitive and too expensive to manufacture. Co-operation with Panasonic to 'badge engineer' FF mirrorless makes more 'economies of scale' $£€sense. Relatively easy to 'tweak' existing FF Panasonic designs for e.g. Leica R and Leica M lens recognition. 

And don't rule out an SL variant with a Foveon sensor when Sigma is ready to enter the FF L mount camera market.

I can't imagine Leica Camera AG deciding three? years ago to 'go it alone' with an SL2 … it has to have Panasonic DNA … in which case there could be more than one SL 601 replacement. 

At the end of the year it's 'the bottom line' which counts. 

When the SL601 was announced in 2015, the only other FF mirrorless competitor was Sony … but now, Nikon, Canon, and Panasonic have joined the race for FF mirrorless sales … with Sigma waiting in the wings … and in a declining 'dog eat dog' market for ICL cameras. Economies in both manufacture and design are necessary to remain competitive … sharing resources to achieve same is the way ahead … which is one reason the L Mount Alliance was formulated.  

dunk 

Edited June 2, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire

[BernardC]

22 hours ago, Bob Andersson said:

With modern BSI sensors, where the signal conditioning electronics doesn't block photons in the way it does with non-BSI sensors, is there any reason why a BSI sensor can't excel at both video and stills?

I never understood the fascination with BSI sensors. It's great for smartphone cameras with tiny lenses and even tinier sensors, but those advantages don't scale to ILC sensors.

Even when it comes to low-light sensitivity (something which is increasingly irrelevant now that all sensors are clean at 6,400+ ISO), the "best" sensor is usually the latest to come out. It may be Sony's one year, but the next year it will be Panasonic's, or Canon's.

The other alleged advantage of BSI branding is the ability to capture light from acute angles. Isn't it strange that the cameras that have this quality don't use BSI sensors?

I don't mean to knock the technology, I'm sure it's very important and impressive to chip designers. It just doesn't seem to make a difference for photographers. That's especially obvious right now, as Sony's sensors are currently third in the "low light competition," behind Canon's amazing 4-million ISO motion picture camera, and behind Panasonic's recent sensors.

[Chaemono]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb BernardC:

I never understood the fascination with BSI sensors. It's great for smartphone cameras with tiny lenses and even tinier sensors, but those advantages don't scale to ILC sensors.

Yes, Thom Hogan says that the DR advantage of BSI sensors declines with sensor size. On larger sensors, the DR improvement is only about one third a stop. 😲 See here: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/nikon-2015-news/june-2015-nikon-news/re-bsi-and-stacked-sensors.html. But one thing is for sure, the noise level of 47 MPx FF non-BSI sensors at ISO 3200 simply sucks. 

vor 5 Stunden schrieb BernardC:

The other alleged advantage of BSI branding is the ability to capture light from acute angles. Isn't it strange that the cameras that have this quality don't use BSI sensors?

Please, elaborate. 

If Leica doesn’t use a BSI sensor in the SL2, then let’s hope that they’ll use some of the S3 sensor pixel technology. 

[Jeff S]

13 hours ago, frame-it said:

would be funny if its still 24MP, in the same styled body, with a new firmware and a new processor

As discussed many times, Dr. Kaufmann said last year that next SL body would be ‘more elegant, less brutal like cut from an axe’.  In the same LuLa interview he talked about new potential for the L mount, which in retrospect was a hint about the since announced alliance.  So he’s been accurate so far.

Jeff

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

As discussed many times, Dr. Kaufmann said last year that next SL body would be ‘more elegant, less brutal like cut from an axe’.  In the same LuLa interview he talked about new potential for the L mount, which in retrospect was a hint about the since announced alliance.  So he’s been accurate so far.

Jeff

The LuLa video was made in 2017 … when Dr Kaufmann hinted we'd hear something in June 2018 … but there was no June announcement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_29tvJbm1M&list=PLZJ_7OkjIqRQo263YQD0xB1JitY4m_afe&index=13&t=0s   … scroll forward to 23mins 20 seconds for Dr. Kaufmann's  'June' hint.

We waited until September 2018 to hear about the L mount alliance.

 

Hugh Brownstone's September 2018 Stephan Schulz interview reveals more about the L mount history which was originally designed as a FF mount: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1EESyw50ws  … note from 12mins 30sec,  SS mentions a 3 to 4 year life cycle for Leica camera models … which equates to an SL 601 replacement in 2018 or 2019 … thus the SL2 release is likely imminent ... and late.   

 

dunk 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2019 by dkCambridgeshire
typo

[Chaemono]

vor 15 Minuten schrieb dkCambridgeshire:

The LuLa video was made in 2017 … when Dr Kaufmann hinted we'd hear something in June 2018 … but there was no June announcement:

There was, the watches. 

vor 15 Minuten schrieb dkCambridgeshire:

The LuLa video was made in 2017 … when Dr Kaufmann hinted we'd hear something in June 2018 … but there was no June announcement:

We waited until September 2018 to hear about the L mount alliance.

You’re being totally unfair now. September is like June in the Leica calendar. Heck, I’d say December is like June. Besides, the prediction was made a year earlier, so Dr. Kaufmann’s timing was pretty accurate IMO. 

vor 16 Minuten schrieb dkCambridgeshire:

...which equates to an SL 601 replacement in 2018 or 2019 … thus the SL2 release is likely imminent ... and late.

Late or imminent? It seems you’re contradicting yourself here. If it’s late, it’s not imminent because June 2019 is more like December 2018 in the Leica calendar. To be late, the SL2 has to become available only late 2019 and this is my bet. It could be announced earlier, of course, but available it won’t be before year end.

 

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Chaemono said:

Please, elaborate. 

If Leica doesn’t use a BSI sensor in the SL2, then let’s hope that they’ll use some of the S3 sensor pixel technology. 

I'm sure we will find out soon enough. My point is that I wouldn't get fixated with acronyms. Sony has their "BSI," and it's very good, but the other sensor manufacturers have their own solutions. The latest round of tests and reviews show that there isn't that much real-world difference between the main players.

Whatever sensor ends-up in the next SL, it will be at least 4 years newer than the sensor in the current SL, and that one's already great. I am not worried at all.

[Jeff S]

35 minutes ago, dkCambridgeshire said:

The LuLa video was made in 2017 … when Dr Kaufmann hinted we'd hear something in June 2018 … but there was no June announcement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_29tvJbm1M&list=PLZJ_7OkjIqRQo263YQD0xB1JitY4m_afe&index=13&t=0s   … scroll forward to 23mins 20 seconds for Dr. Kaufmann's  'June' hint.

We waited until September 2018 to hear about the L mount alliance.

 

Hugh Brownstone's September 2018 Stephan Schulz interview reveals more about the L mount history which was originally designed as a FF mount: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1EESyw50ws  … note from 12mins 30sec,  SS mentions a 3 to 4 year life cycle for Leica camera models … which equates to an SL 601 replacement in 2018 or 2019 … thus the SL2 release is likely imminent ... and late.   

 

dunk 

 

 

I’m aware of both. Kaufmann was right in principle, even if slightly off timing.  Schulz said it could be on the longer end, or more, depending how ambitious they were.  The M, S have been on 4 year  cycles as well.

Jeff

 

Edited June 2, 2019 by Jeff S

[Chaemono]

vor 19 Minuten schrieb Jeff S:

I’m aware of both. Kaufmann was right in principle, even if slightly off timing.  Schulz said it could be on the longer end, or more, depending how ambitious they were.  The M, S have been on 4 year  cycles as well.

Jeff

 

That ‘ambitious’ statement is what gives me hope that they will use a customized sensor, they have to for reasons discussed in another thread and incorporate IBIS, of course. The latter is pretty much certain IMO. The sensor thing, let’s see. They could use a FF derivative of the S3 sensor. Why not leverage the R&D? It makes perfect sense. This would equate to 41 MPx assuming same pixel pitch. Riddle solved. I can’t help it, it’s fun to speculate. 😁

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, Chaemono said:

That ‘ambitious’ statement is what gives me hope that they will use a customized sensor, they have to for reasons discussed in another thread and incorporate IBIS, of course. The latter is pretty much certain IMO. The sensor thing, let’s see. They could use a FF derivative of the S3 sensor. Why not leverage the R&D? It makes perfect sense. This would equate to 41 MPx assuming same pixel pitch. Riddle solved. I can’t help it, it’s fun to speculate. 😁

That’s Leica certainty.

The only statement we have from Leica (albeit some years ago), was that IBIS was an issue for Leica (I think it was in relation to the M camera) - size was one issue, and something to do with sensor durability?  I can’t recall.  They also said that lens stabilisation was something they were more focused on.

But then, you read it here, so it must be true ...

[Bob Andersson]

On the topic of back-illuminated (BSI) sensors I think the MF sensor (OK Fuji, large sensor 😀) in the GFX 100 has finally put to rest the suggestion that this tech is only relevant to phone cameras. Back in 2015 when some of the folklore surrounding BSI was penned I doubt that those authors were factoring in the pixel densities we are seeing on full-frame sensors today. It certainly costs more to produce a BSI sensor and the acronym BSI doesn't exactly carry the same cachet in the marketplace as the red dot so that extra cost has to earn its keep. Not that Leica's don't earn their keep, I hasten to add. 🙂

As to whether the SL2 will use such a sensor, obviously Leica will have to pick a commercially available sensor best suited to its needs and I doubt if back-illumination is in the "must have" column. It'll be fun to see although the suspense, as with the X1D Mk 2, is killing me... 🤣

[thighslapper]

4 years is a long time to UPDATE a camera body. 

Quite what Leica have been going for all this time beats me ..... particularly if it is just an incremental improvement. That would have been fine a year or two ago, so my optimistic side tells me that there will be some radical innovative changes and not just an S1R squeezed into a Leica body. 

.... but SL lens development and release appears to be on a go-slow ..... so my pessimistic side wonders whether Leica's priorities lie elsewhere, beyond the FF race to extinction, and that they might indeed just hang onto Panasonic and Sigmas coat tails and stuff the SL2 full of other companies technology to reduce R&D costs.

My hope, though, is that Leica still view the SL as a flagship product and make an SL2 that is sufficiently different from other FF cameras to make it worth the price....

[Jeff S]

30 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

4 years is a long time to UPDATE a camera body. 

 

That’s been the norm for Leica recently; for last couple of Ms, the S3, and now possibly the SL.

Jeff

[Chaemono]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb IkarusJohn:

But then, you read it here, so it must be true ...

If the SL2 sensor is non-BSI which is highly likely the case, then it has to come with IBIS because the noise at ISO 3200 and above starts to become annoying. Besides, I talked to someone who talked to someone who thinks the SL2 will have IBIS. 😂

People seem a bit coy about the sensor, though, which could mean it’s either really the S1R/Q2 sensor modified, or truly a customized, from the S3 derived FF sensor. I sure hope for the latter.

[BernardC]

2 hours ago, Chaemono said:

If the SL2 sensor is non-BSI which is highly likely the case, then it has to come with IBIS because the noise at ISO 3200 and above starts to become annoying.

Here's what I don't understand.

1. The latest Sony sensors are "BSI."
2. The latest Panasonic sensors aren't. They use other technologies to increase the fill factor, as has been the case for every sensor generation since the dawn of digital photography.
3. Tests show that either approach delivers results that are barely distinguishable in terms of noise performance, with Panasonic's non-BSI approach being slightly better at this time (Summer 2019), probably because their sensors are slightly newer.
4. People seem to be curiously enamoured of BSI sensors, while dismissing competing technology that achieves the exact same end-result.

Is there something that I am missing? Why is BSI such a huge deal, when other technologies that achieve the same thing aren't?

[Chaemono]

I don’t know what the charts show and I don’t have access to the S1R but I do play around with the α7R III occasionally (only when I do comparisons to the M10 😁) and noise at ISO 6400 of the Sony is really acceptable, DR, and malleability of files impressive. Based on ISO 6400 S1R RAW files on DPReview I downloaded, I find that they show tons of noise. I don’t know about DR, though, of the Panasonic and I don’t necessarily equate ISO noise with DR. 

BTW, the M10 is my favorite sensor for ISO 200 to 640 which is where I shoot most of the time. The α7R III and the S1 are really good at ISO 1600 to 6400, the S1 clearly better in terms of noise but, except at base ISO 100, the S1 files aren’t as malleable as the Sony files. The S1, of course, is only 24 MPx.

Maybe it’s not the BSI sensor technology in the α7R III that leads to the best compromise between high MPx count, acceptable noise at high ISO, DR, and malleability of files, but the fact Sony applies some clever processing to its RAW files.

If there are technologies out there that result in better DR and clean Highlights up to ISO 3200, I don’t care about BSI. But I’m convinced that a high MPx, non-BSI sensor can’t match the results of the α7R III at ISO 6400 and above. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Chaemono]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Chaemono:

But I’m convinced that a high MPx, non-BSI sensor can’t match the results of the α7R III at ISO 6400 and above. 

Edit - it depends on how much the RAW files are cooked, I suppose. 😁 I just checked out some S1R ISO 3200, 4000, and 6400 RAW images with the final firmware and the noise levels look good. I guess, those I had looked at before were with a pre-production model. 

[IkarusJohn]

I'll wait with curiosity at most, and not that much interest.