"Vader" Certainly Isn't Any Prettier

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 6 Stunden schrieb Tailwagger:

[...] One thing I will say in favor of the HB is that even under relatively difficult circumstances the files require the least amount of fiddling I've yet to encounter. The color rendition is indeed spectacular.

+1. Agree with all your other points above on the X1D, too. That's why I gave it back and kept the M10. A couple more weeks of patience and you can still decide whether to expand your XCD lens kit or go with the SL2. Let's see what "Q2 sensor modified" means.

[Advertisement]

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

[nicci78]

While we are moaning about SL2 having too many pixels. m4/3 folks seem to be stuck in the past with same old 20MP sensor and same everything else E-M5 III.

A smaller E-M1 II ? Do you need really such thing 4 years later ? 

 

I think that we should celebrate Leica embracing the future with the best tech available now, and not the one release half a decade ago. 

SL2 has to stay relevant for the next 4  years at least. 

Edited October 18, 2019 by nicci78

[Bob Andersson]

44 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

While we are moaning about SL2 having too many pixels. m4/3 folks seem to be stuck in the past with same old 20MP sensor and same everything else E-M5 III.

A smaller E-M1 II ? Do you need really such thing 4 years later ?

As a m4/3rds owner I'm reminded of the Monty Python song Always Look on the Bright Side of Life. 🤣

I doubt Olympus  would have launched such a direct competitor to the E-M1 II unless they had imminent plans for an E-M1 III with a new sensor, maybe the rumoured Sony 36 MP. Early next year possibly? Yes, I'm a dreamer!

Following this thread, albeit in a somewhat baffled state of mind at the certainty which some posts ascribe to the specifications, the demand for the Leica SL2 is clear and if they'd launched at the beginning of the year I'd have happily converted my "pre-order" with Leica Mayfair and bought in. As it is I'll have to make do with my original E-M1, while waiting for the E-M1 III, for those days when quick response or longer lenses are called for and my X1D II for ultimate IQ. A bit like owning a supercar and a daily driver although which is which is debatable. Definitely a first world problem. 🤔😀

[nicci78]

Actually I don’t care about m4/3 whereabouts. I left that ship 6 years ago and never looked back. 
 

Edited October 18, 2019 by nicci78

[tom0511]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb Chaemono:

+1. Agree with all your other points above on the X1D, too. That's why I gave it back and kept the M10. A couple more weeks of patience and you can still decide whether to expand your XCD lens kit or go with the SL2. Let's see what "Q2 sensor modified" means.

IMO with lenses as good as the new Sl-Summicrons, progress in sensor technology, the IQ-gap between FF and medium format gets smaller.

Between the x1d and SL-system there is a huge difference in flexibility and operating speed. Even the x1dII takes very long to switch on for example. There are workarounds and for landscape photography it might not matter. But the idea I had once to use a x1d for allround use instead of a FF-camera has not been successfull for me. If the x1d(II) was faster and had a better viewfinder than it might be another story.

[Mr.Q]

There are trade-offs for each system.

With the X1DII you get a smaller overall system, better IQ, the best grip ever, amazing UI, lens shutter for strobes, and no LENR.  With the SL2 you get faster operational speed, better versatility with zooms, adaptability with M lenses, and presumably IBIS and great video features.

And if you shoot with multiple systems, comparing these cameras head-to-head becomes a bit more complicated. It's like cross-shopping between a Bentley vs Ferrari. Your decision may be swayed depending on whether your other car is a luxury sedan or a sports car.

For me, I only have room for 2 systems. I currently shoot with the X1D II for max IQ-portability ratio, and the Sony A9 for max speed/versatility. If I had to shoot with one system, the SL2 would probably be a better choice.

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've made my choice and put my money (credit card) down in a preorder.

For a Sigma fp 🙂

[Chaemono]

Sigma fp with flip screen and selfie stick would sell like hot cakes. I’d use it with the 18/2.8 TL. Here’s a review on the lens: https://joerivanderkloet.com/leica-elmarit-tl-182-8-apsh-review/

[tom0511]

vor 21 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q:

There are trade-offs for each system.

With the X1DII you get a smaller overall system, better IQ, the best grip ever, amazing UI, lens shutter for strobes, and no LENR.  With the SL2 you get faster operational speed, better versatility with zooms, adaptability with M lenses, and presumably IBIS and great video features.

And if you shoot with multiple systems, comparing these cameras head-to-head becomes a bit more complicated. It's like cross-shopping between a Bentley vs Ferrari. Your decision may be swayed depending on whether your other car is a luxury sedan or a sports car.

For me, I only have room for 2 systems. I currently shoot with the X1D II for max IQ-portability ratio, and the Sony A9 for max speed/versatility. If I had to shoot with one system, the SL2 would probably be a better choice.

 I agree with all your points. What I also like about the SL is the 16-35 - it is like a 21/30/45 mm prime for the x1d but all in one lens - but of course it is not 100% of the IQ you get with the x1d and any of the primes. If I have time I should shoot some comparisons though to see how big differences in IQ are, as I said before I think they are getting smaller. x1d+A9 sounds like best of both worlds, speed and IQ

[Jeff S]

8 hours ago, Chaemono said:

+1. Agree with all your other points above on the X1D, too. That's why I gave it back and kept the M10. A couple more weeks of patience and you can still decide whether to expand your XCD lens kit or go with the SL2. Let's see what "Q2 sensor modified" means.

One will also need to assess the apparently new UI for the SL2 (removal of 4 unlabeled buttons), as the complaints cited are all about user control preferences.

Jeff

[bags27]

I don't own either the SL or the Hassy. But I don't think there are many complaints about the SL's excellent UI; rather it is deserved praise for the Hassy's incredible UI.

But I have to say that as fantastic as are the photos I study coming out of the SL taken with L lenses, the Hassy's photos are simply "better". There is no substitute for larger sensors, IMO. And, if the IQ comparison between the Q and Q2 is any measure, I very much doubt that the IQ of the SL2's photos will be so much better than the SL's as to make them equal to those of the Hassy. And I say that as one who only fantasizes and likely will not own a Hassy digital (though I may soon buy a 503 on ebay).

[Jeff S]

11 minutes ago, bags27 said:

I don't own either the SL or the Hassy. But I don't think there are many complaints about the SL's excellent UI; rather it is deserved praise for the Hassy's incredible UI.

 

If this is in response to my post, you’ve misunderstood.  I was referring to Tailwagger’s complaints about X1D user control issues... peeves for him personally. While the SL has received high praise for its UI, the SL2 pics and rumors suggest that Leica has changed the UI by removing the four unlabeled button interface. Only personal use will determine whether that’s good or bad news for any given individual.

Jeff

[nicci78]

Should be about the same. SL2 has the exact same button counts as SL. Even better Video button is now optional. For video haters, it will be one more button. 

[Chaemono]

vor 37 Minuten schrieb bags27:

But I have to say that as fantastic as are the photos I study coming out of the SL taken with L lenses, the Hassy's photos are simply "better". There is no substitute for larger sensors, IMO. 

Keep in mind that the X1D sensor has about 67 percent more surface area than the SL sensor.   But the SL sensor has about 2.2-2.5x the surface area of APS-C format. 

[Mr.Q]

36 minutes ago, tom0511 said:

 I agree with all your points. What I also like about the SL is the 16-35 - it is like a 21/30/45 mm prime for the x1d but all in one lens - but of course it is not 100% of the IQ you get with the x1d and any of the primes. If I have time I should shoot some comparisons though to see how big differences in IQ are, as I said before I think they are getting smaller. x1d+A9 sounds like best of both worlds, speed and IQ

Yeah, I'm not too sure about the 16-35 matching the 21 and 30... two of the better lenses of the XCD lenses, both with incredible clarity and detail.

The difference is smaller against the 5 year-old 50MP sensor, but it's back to square one against if Hassy releases a camera with a 100MP sensor or perhaps a 75MP BSI sensor. It's just a matter of comparing sensors with different release cycles. Medium format will always have the edge, just like FF vs APS-C.

[bags27]

2 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

Keep in mind that the X1D sensor has about 67 percent more surface area than the SL sensor.   But the SL sensor has about 2.2-2.5x the surface area of APS-C format. 

That's a really good point. I do believe the SL's IQ to be superior to my CL's, but not significantly so. Mathematically, the gap in IQ between the Hassy and SL should be even less. And that may be. Maybe when evaluating such expensive and best-of-best equipment, flaws become psychologically magnified.

[Mr.Q]

I think the closer you get to a true medium format sensor (53.4 x 40) the tonality and depth to give images the "medium format look" is magnified. To me, images captured with a APS-C sensor look flat. Precisely why we never hear folks praise images for having an "APS-C look" 😂

[Chaemono]

vor 13 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q:

I think the closer you get to a true medium format sensor (53.4 x 40) the tonality and depth to give images the "medium format look" is magnified. To me, images captured with a APS-C sensor look flat. Precisely why we never hear folks praise images for having an "APS-C look" 😂

I’m not sure why the improvement should be exponential and not linear.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Jeff S]

It’s hard to discuss format size distinctions without also discussing output goals.... screen vs print, print size (and cropping flexibility), viewing distance, etc. Plus the often more important  differences in user technique and execution. Potential differences in gear don’t always translate to real differences in print. But all else equal, when done well, larger formats do provide more opportunity to optimize color and tonal gradations.  But it’s not a mere mathematical assessment. 

Jeff

[bags27]

In defense of the APS-C, the CL with the best of the TL lenses, not to mention the Ls, Ms, and Rs, can indeed produce exceptional photos. Just, we're talking about pretty rarified competition here.