Jump to content

Leica SL2 reviews


scott kirkpatrick

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mr.Q said:

Honestly I don't have a dog in this fight as I'm considering this camera as a X1D replacement for landscapes/travel, so the AF performance will be much improved regardless. And for reliable AF-C I have the A9 with the 100-400 and 200-600 which is just incredible for tracking. I'm just not sure you are buying the right camera if AF-C performance is a priority. Here's another review mentioning the limitations of the AF system. Misses focus on fast moving subjects and AF-C in video seems unusable. 
 


I'm not sure how I'm going to answer your PDAF vs CDAF argument. Your faith in the Maestro III processor is starting to make you sound delusional. They aren't going to sprinkle some voodoo magic in their chips. I know the benefits/limitations of both AF systems and have no misconceptions. I've used cameras with both AF systems since the days when processing was archaic compared to a current day Maestro/Venus/Bionz/etc processor. The advantages of PDAF was evident then and still is today.

I’m not interested to fight over which is a better AF system based on sweeping statements with no grounds (same for the video you shared, the reviewer just made sweeping statements and showed a few out of focus shots. How do you know if he had the settings correct? Most of them are indeed not familiar with Leica SL to start off with. It took me time to figure out with repeated trials for what I’m trying to say. You can choose to ignore me, it is a free world! I do not work for Leica and I have nothing to gain). I’m not favouring CDAF over PDAF as I see merits of both, just both are different.

However the old statement on PDAF is faster needs to be relook again unless you have a logic or technical reason to offer.

If you still insist that PDAF is always the reason for faster AF. Take a look at the video below. How can it be that when the video taking reduces in resolution improve S1’s CDAF AF focusing speed compared side by side with PDAF camera? Voodoo?

Just plain logic of processing speed offered by the CPU freed up due to lower resolution and external recording.

 Richard Wong’s Panasonic Lumix S1 Autofocus Test vs Sony A7III (firmware 1.2) found on the following YouTube channel below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k3a7LNe0Mw

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mr.Q said:

So the camera costs $5,950 plus a $49.99 yearly subscription fee. And for Android users another additional $xxx for an iOS device.

Android tablets are dead. Google stop supporting tablet version for years. 

Only Samsung tried to make a decent job for adapting Android OS in tablet format. But guess what ? no app developer bother to support that job. 


If you need a tablet, there is only one option : the iPad.
Apple killed the competition. Just like with smart watches. Only Apple Watch worth it. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr.Q said:

So the camera costs $5,950 plus a $49.99 yearly subscription fee. And for Android users another additional $xxx for an iOS device.

The currently available Leica FOTOS app continues to be free and developed. Subscribing to the new app is optional.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sillbeers15 said:

I’m not interested to fight over which is a better AF system based on sweeping statements with no grounds (same for the video you shared, the reviewer just made sweeping statements and showed a few out of focus shots. How do you know if he had the settings correct? Most of them are indeed not familiar with Leica SL to start off with. It took me time to figure out with repeated trials for what I’m trying to say. You can choose to ignore me, it is a free world! I do not work for Leica and I have nothing to gain). I’m not favouring CDAF over PDAF as I see merits of both, just both are different.

However the old statement on PDAF is faster needs to be relook again unless you have a logic or technical reason to offer.

If you still insist that PDAF is always the reason for faster AF. Take a look at the video below. How can it be that when the video taking reduces in resolution improve S1’s CDAF AF focusing speed compared side by side with PDAF camera? Voodoo?

Just plain logic of processing speed offered by the CPU freed up due to lower resolution and external recording.

 Richard Wong’s Panasonic Lumix S1 Autofocus Test vs Sony A7III (firmware 1.2) found on the following YouTube channel below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k3a7LNe0Mw


No grounds? How about real-world evidence that all the fastest focusing cameras come with PDAF? What more evidence do you need?

You are the one talking about Leica breaking new grounds here, not me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only the pro version is paid subscription. 
It seems to offer only Lightroom CC for iPad direct connection. Another paid subscription.
And if you need 1TB of Adobe cloud. It is  another paid subscription. 
😔

Edited by nicci78
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, MarkP said:

That’s very rude

Don’t we pay enough already?

And is it guaranteed that this PRO  version works less flawless than what we have seen from Leica and Wifi thus far, which is a laugh? 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Only the pro version is paid subscription. 
It seems to offer only Lightroom CC for iPad direct connection. Another paid subscription.
And if you need 1TB of Adobe cloud. It is  another paid subscription. 
😔

Don't forget the warehouse to store the huge SL lenses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

Honestly I don't have a dog in this fight as I'm considering this camera as a X1D replacement for landscapes/travel, so the AF performance will be much improved regardless. And for reliable AF-C I have the A9 with the 100-400 and 200-600 which is just incredible for tracking. I'm just not sure you are buying the right camera if AF-C performance is a priority. Here's another review mentioning the limitations of the AF system. Misses focus on fast moving subjects and AF-C in video seems unusable. 
 


I'm not sure how I'm going to answer your PDAF vs CDAF argument. Your faith in the Maestro III processor is starting to make you sound delusional. They aren't going to sprinkle some voodoo magic in their chips. I know the benefits/limitations of both AF systems and have no misconceptions. I've used cameras with both AF systems since the days when processing was archaic compared to a current day Maestro/Venus/Bionz/etc processor. The advantages of PDAF was evident then and still is today.

That 'reviewer' has absolutely no idea about Leica or its lenses eg he said that Leica lenses don't have image stabilisation. This makes me think that his 'opinion' based on no knowledge of the SL or its lenses is just that " a one hr walk around and a posted video with some 'impressions' - clickbait for his youtube channel - meh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PeterGA said:

That 'reviewer' has absolutely no idea about Leica or its lenses eg he said that Leica lenses don't have image stabilisation. This makes me think that his 'opinion' based on no knowledge of the SL or its lenses is just that " a one hr walk around and a posted video with some 'impressions' - clickbait for his youtube channel - meh.

To be fair, most of these reviewers are new to Leica, but it doesn't take a Leica aficionado or a rocket scientist to figure out if a camera focuses well or not. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr.Q said:


No grounds? How about real-world evidence that all the fastest focusing cameras come with PDAF? What more evidence do you need?

You are the one talking about Leica breaking new grounds here, not me.

PDAF started as photosensor based AF sensor for SLR/DSLR. 

CDAF started as AF screen based sensor for point & shoot camera.

CDAF was slow to reach focal point because it cannot determine direction except by comparing contrast. So the problem of overshooting occurs.

Majority of mirrorless camera used a hybrid of PDAF then CDAF because they employ PDAF for fast but non accurate focusing and switch over to CDAF for fine focusing. The PDAF sensors today are screen base.

Panasonic use data and algorithms for CDAF to speed up the course focusing which they call DFD. It worked very well in micro four third cameras with smaller image sensor and pixel count but less so in FF sensor ( more time to fine tune and more power processor are required). I am pretty sure it takes up more processor capacity comparing to PDAF. But there are other merits such as less banding.

The above are the little I know and you are welcome to tell me that I am wrong but kindly provide me your rational if you are Keen to discuss and please don’t giving sweeping statements like why the fastest camera is PDAF based.

By the way, Sony alpha nine II is PDAF/ CDAF hybrid AF and not PDAF alone. It is fast AF because it’s processor can do 60 times per Sec calculation to support AF focusing and it remained as a 24MPx ( which only takes up half the processing memory comparing to 47MPx image sensors). Of course Sony Engineers also design the firmware for AF speed optimisation as the camera is geared for wildlife and sports application. These are the reasons behind A9II’s fast AF and not PDAF alone. 

Tell me which camera is PDAF only today?

Edited by sillbeers15
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr.Q said:

To be fair, most of these reviewers are new to Leica, but it doesn't take a Leica aficionado or a rocket scientist to figure out if a camera focuses well or not. 

I agree with you on most reviewers have no idea about Leica - it seems that autofocus is the #1 question mark over this camera and the answer may well be that it all depends on uses. For example I don't use my SL for sports/wildlife or fast moving objects or video, and can say that I have never ever used continuous anything or video on my SL  - I use the SL  as a stills camera in studio and outside so a lot of the 'criticisms' of autofocus capability V so called best practice are meaningless to me and my intended uses.

Other people may have different expectations and needs though - I can understand someone who uses continuous autofocus and would like to use 10/20 second bursts with a high hit ratio on focussed eye to not be happy.

I will be testing the camera in a month or so when I get some time -with a couple of the new Summicrons  - pity they still haven't fixed the studio lighting issue and don't have a bottom grip ready for sale with camera.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sillbeers15 said:

PDAF started as photosensor based AF sensor for SLR/DSLR. 

CDAF started as AF screen based sensor for point & shoot camera.

CDAF was slow to reach focal point because it cannot determine direction except by comparing contrast. So the problem of overshooting occurs.

Majority of mirrorless camera used a hybrid of PDAF then CDAF because they employ PDAF for fast but non accurate focusing and switch over to CDAF for fine focusing. The PDAF sensors today are screen base.

Panasonic use data and algorithms for CDAF to speed up the course focusing. It worked very well in micro four third cameras but less so in FF sensor. I am pretty sure it takes up more processor capacity comparing to PDAF.

The above are the little I know and you are welcome to tell me that I am wrong but kindly provide me your rational if you are Keen to discuss and please don’t giving sweeping statements like why the fastest camera is PDAF based. By the way, Sony alpha nine II is PDAF/ CDAF hybrid AF and not PDAF alone. It is fast AF because it’s processor can do 60 times per Sec calculation to support AF focusing and it remained as a 24MPx ( which only takes up half the processing memory comparing to 47MPx image sensors). Of course Sony Engineers also design the firmware for AF speed optimisation as the camera is geared for wildlife and sports application. These are the reasons behind A9II’s fast AF and not PDAF alone. 

Tell me which camera is PDAF only today?

You are grasping at straws now. I never said there are cameras that have PDAF only. Of course they are all hybrid and need both to be both fast and accurate. No CDAF-only camera has been able to keep up with the likes of pro-DSLR's except for the latest MILC offerings with PDAF. I'm not going to be arguing this point any longer as your argument is based on your theory and assumptions.

And I own the A9. I do know more than you how it works, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PeterGA said:

 

I will be testing the camera in a month or so when I get some time -with a couple of the new Summicrons  - pity they still haven't fixed the studio lighting issue and don't have a bottom grip ready for sale with camera.

Handgrip ready for order. I’ve just ordered one handgrip and 2 additional batteries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sillbeers15 said:

Handgrip ready for order. I’ve just ordered one handgrip and 2 additional batteries.

Thanks - good to know I hadn't noticed any review using one so I assumed they weren't yet ready - two extra batteries is always a good idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr.Q said:

You are grasping at straws now. I never said there are cameras that have PDAF only. Of course they are all hybrid and need both to be both fast and accurate. No CDAF-only camera has been able to keep up with the likes of pro-DSLR's except for the latest MILC offerings with PDAF. I'm not going to be arguing this point any longer as your argument is based on your theory and assumptions.

And I own the A9. I do know more than you how it works, thanks.

I’ve made myself very clear from the start that I’m not comparing SL2 against A9II. And I have no interest in any Sony camera, else I would already own it. You were the one who keep dragging A9 into the picture.

I’m not keen in Sony because I cannot use my Leica SL lenses on them. Else it would be a marriage made in heaven. 

I am only keen in SL2 as I can use my SL lenses on it. I yet to know the camera well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PeterGA said:

I agree with you on most reviewers have no idea about Leica - it seems that autofocus is the #1 question mark over this camera and the answer may well be that it all depends on uses. For example I don't use my SL for sports/wildlife or fast moving objects or video, and can say that I have never ever used continuous anything or video on my SL  - I use the SL  as a stills camera in studio and outside so a lot of the 'criticisms' of autofocus capability V so called best practice are meaningless to me and my intended uses.

Other people may have different expectations and needs though - I can understand someone who uses continuous autofocus and would like to use 10/20 second bursts with a high hit ratio on focussed eye to not be happy.

I will be testing the camera in a month or so when I get some time -with a couple of the new Summicrons  - pity they still haven't fixed the studio lighting issue and don't have a bottom grip ready for sale with camera.

I agree that it depends on use cases, and I'd have no issues with the AF performance of the SL2 with how I intend to use it. I shoot with the X1D II which probably has the slowest AF of any camera on the market LOL.

The reviewers need to base their assessment on how it compares to the competition. In this case, the competition is the other FF MILC's on the market. And as far as AF performance goes, they probably rank...... Sony ---> Nikon/Canon ---> Panasonic/Leica.... So if Sony is good, and Canikon is fair, the SL2 will be poor.  That is all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PeterGA said:

Thanks - good to know I hadn't noticed any review using one so I assumed they weren't yet ready - two extra batteries is always a good idea.

I had the same combination on my SL. If you do not mind the weight and bulk, you get the piece of mind of two batteries supporting your need (more often more than my daily power needs). In the SL, the TOP screen shows the power level of both batteries. I normally keep the first battery in the camera and only remove and charge the battery in the handgrip while my handgrip is attached to my SL permanently.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr.Q said:

I agree that it depends on use cases, and I'd have no issues with the AF performance of the SL2 with how I intend to use it. I shoot with the X1D II which probably has the slowest AF of any camera on the market LOL.

The reviewers need to base their assessment on how it compares to the competition. In this case, the competition is the other FF MILC's on the market. And as far as AF performance goes, they probably rank...... Sony ---> Nikon/Canon ---> Panasonic/Leica.... So if Sony is good, and Canikon is fair, the SL2 will be poor.  That is all.

Yes that is exactly how a lot of non photographer internet personality types would go about ranking things - and of course these rankings have zero significance for people that are photographers and have a clue about the right tool for the right job. The underlying premise is that there is this mythical camera that is the best at everything and manufacturers are all trying to make it - which is of course absolute nonsense.

If I got interested in serious sport or wildlife I wouldn't even look at Leica ( as an example ) there is no native Leica telephoto glass that can compete with Sony.

As an aside ( since I used to shoot with an XID) again I don't see the SL2 as a substitute for the X1 or X11D - I sold mine and bought a GFX100 to do a better job than the X series blad - but I do miss the size and form factor of the Hasselblad - lovely cameras and lenses. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sillbeers15 said:

I’ve made myself very clear from the start that I’m not comparing SL2 against A9II. And I have no interest in any Sony camera, else I would already own it. You were the one who keep dragging A9 into the picture.

I’m not keen in Sony because I cannot use my Leica SL lenses on them. Else it would be a marriage made in heaven. 

I am only keen in SL2 as I can use my SL lenses on it. I yet to know the camera well. 

I understand. The AF performance is due to improve a bit via firmware so your concerns and not as sober as mine.... the weight is not going to change any time soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • jaapv unpinned this topic

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...