otto.f Posted November 10, 2019 Share #101 Posted November 10, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) yes and if you work for clients, presence might even be a pre Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 10, 2019 Posted November 10, 2019 Hi otto.f, Take a look here Have you placed order on SL2?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jeff S Posted November 10, 2019 Share #102 Posted November 10, 2019 8 minutes ago, jaapv said: Not only that, but in real life camera size, or if you will, presence, makes a difference in the recording of subjects. It used to be one of the advantages of M cameras that they did not scream "professional", which the SL as opposed to the CL does. One reason why I’m considering it as a complement to my Ms, not a replacement. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted November 10, 2019 Share #103 Posted November 10, 2019 11 minutes ago, otto.f said: And still too heavy for a lot of people here. There’s some paradox in that, some M users getting older want something easier to focus than a rangefinder, so the AF and the EVF of the SL or 2 seduces them. And then they discover that deterioration of your eyes goes hand in hand with the capability or the willingness to carry weight. I agree completely. I couldn't manage carrying an SL with an L prime "care free" for most of the day. So, I'll see how I like the store model SL2 with an M lens. If IBIS is important (and it sometimes is) the best weight/IQ solution, if you can put up with its UI (a very distant 2nd best to Leica), is the Nikon Z (but not with wide angle M glass). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted November 10, 2019 Share #104 Posted November 10, 2019 2 minutes ago, bags27 said: its UI (a very distant 2nd best to Leica) Yes and I’m so simple! I have problems after so many years of M and sometimes SLR that the SL has already too many options for me, and I mean during the shooting. Switching between focuspeaking and spirit level is already a nuisance every time. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raid Amin Posted November 10, 2019 Share #105 Posted November 10, 2019 The more SL2 reviews I watch, the more I get convinced that L mount lenses are needed to get the ultimate results with the SL2. It is a package that has to be considered as one; SL2 with 2-3 L lenses. The cost gets out of hand quickly then. Maybe this is best anyways. It keeps me away from such a camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted November 10, 2019 Share #106 Posted November 10, 2019 I agree. Very frustrating to have to click through that button just to go back to the virtual horizon. Hopefully on the SL2 It has been moved to the screen that has all the other information. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted November 10, 2019 Share #107 Posted November 10, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 8 minutes ago, Raid Amin said: The more SL2 reviews I watch, the more I get convinced that L mount lenses are needed to get the ultimate results with the SL2. It is a package that has to be considered as one; SL2 with 2-3 L lenses. The cost gets out of hand quickly then. Maybe this is best anyways. It keeps me away from such a camera. 🙂 Well, certainly, the common wisdom is that any system is most fully optimized with the lenses designed for that body. But life (and art) is far more often about how well one does with compromise. For example, an awful lot of folks prefer the earlier Mandler lenses on their newest digital bodies, and many even use contemporary Karbe lenses on their older M film bodies. What is optimal? i believe it's whatever works for the photographer. If I can see myself clear (weight-wise and wallet-wise) to get the SL2, I'll be delighted to use TL, M, and R glass on it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted November 10, 2019 Share #108 Posted November 10, 2019 (edited) To look cold-bloodedly at the weight issue, with batteries: SL2 917 gr M10-P 680 gr CL 403 gr For those who see the SL2 desirable but forbiddingly heavy, using M glass is an option. Since the L 35 f/2 is now mentioned as the reference lens for this camera, its rough analogue acuity-wise is the M35 f/1.4 FLE. L 35 f/2 750 gr M 35 f/1.4 320 gr. or, for identical focal length: M 35 f/2 = 255 gr. There are pixel peepers in photography and weight weenies in cycling (we spent $1000s stripping grams off our bikes while carrying 3 pound water bottles!), and both are sort of fun and sort of stupid. But it's important to appreciate, as I am always reminded when I hold them together in either hand, that the M10 and SL(2) are not that far apart weight-wise. Edited November 10, 2019 by bags27 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 10, 2019 Share #109 Posted November 10, 2019 56 minutes ago, bags27 said: M10 and SL(2) are not that far apart weight-wise Far in lowercase then 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted November 10, 2019 Share #110 Posted November 10, 2019 3 hours ago, Raid Amin said: The more SL2 reviews I watch, the more I get convinced that L mount lenses are needed to get the ultimate results with the SL2. It is a package that has to be considered as one; SL2 with 2-3 L lenses. The cost gets out of hand quickly then. Maybe this is best anyways. It keeps me away from such a camera. .... which is why it was sensible to start 4 years ago and gradually accumulate lenses as they appeared ..... anyone coming late to the party needs very deep pockets indeed ..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 10, 2019 Share #111 Posted November 10, 2019 Just now, thighslapper said: .... which is why it was sensible to start 4 years ago and gradually accumulate lenses as they appeared ..... anyone coming late to the party needs very deep pockets indeed ..... Yes......I'm surprised though that they seem to have accumulated over the years since the SL launch, without me quite knowing how🤔. 1 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted November 10, 2019 Share #112 Posted November 10, 2019 I came relatively early to the party and swore that I would use only M lenses that I already had and R lenses that I could pick up for a song (and maybe a little dance). But eventually the 90-280, and 16-35 got by my guards, some CL lenses snuck in to join them, and now I see there are SL Summicron primes! And the one I really lust for (24 mm) is now stretched out to 2021, by which time the noisome 25% tariff might have gone away. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hillavoider Posted November 10, 2019 Share #113 Posted November 10, 2019 4 hours ago, otto.f said: And still too heavy for a lot of people here. There’s some paradox in that, some M users getting older want something easier to focus than a rangefinder, so the AF and the EVF of the SL or 2 seduces them. And then they discover that deterioration of your eyes goes hand in hand with the capability or the willingness to carry weight. I agree, where's the M10 with EVF Leica? Make it! ……………….please 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raid Amin Posted November 10, 2019 Share #114 Posted November 10, 2019 Maybe, the SL with 35mm or 50mm L mount Summicron will do? It is the SL and not the SL2. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted November 10, 2019 Share #115 Posted November 10, 2019 1 hour ago, hillavoider said: I agree, where's the M10 with EVF Leica? Make it! ……………….please As my numbers above indicate, the current M is a bit more than 7 ounces lighter than the SL2. I wonder if an EVF (in addition to, instead of?, the rangefinder mechanism) will likely add weight and require a larger battery. I'm not sure how much weight one saves.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J12 Posted November 11, 2019 Share #116 Posted November 11, 2019 I’m adopting a wait and see approach. I purchased an SL and 24-90 new mid-2017. I still find it great for stills. I’m somewhat cautious about jumping to 47mp as I’ve never encountered a situation where it was critical to have so many megapixles in a 35mm camera. I’ve yet to see enough images from the SL2 to judge, but when viewing images from other high megapixel 35mm cameras, I’ve always felt the artificial digital look was instantly noticeable and strongly pronounced. Particularly with portraits. Often resulting in images that were somewhat unsettling. I found portraits taken with lower megapixel cameras to be kinder and less abrasive. Perhaps the sensor and image processing in the SL2 will prove to be better than other high megapixel 35mm cameras in this regard? The SL2 video spec looks very good from what I’ve seen reported so far, and makes me wish it was better implemented in the original SL too. Would be great to see continued firmware efforts in this regard. I was an M user first and love those cameras, but I also appreciate the progressive direction taken by the company with the bold design of their T and SL mirrorless cameras. These cameras are clear about what they are and not pretending to be anything they’re not. I understand both the T series and original SL were very polarizing designs, and see why the company might have wanted to broaden appeal and cast a wider net with the SL2 by incorporating traditional SLR styling cues. This is strictly personal preference, but I appreciate the bold design philosophy that clearly identifies the type of camera for what they are; Rangefinder, SLR / DSLR or Mirrorless. Rather than mixing hints of heritage SLRs with mirrorless etc. If they were to release an SL2P at a later date and provide an alternate option closer in style to the original SL, I would be interested. Return of the all aluminum unibody, unlabeled 4 custom buttons and more solid construction for the door in place of the rubber flaps etc. Perhaps some of those who started with the original SL (or use S cameras) might appreciate such a thing? It takes time to familiarize oneself and become very accustomed to using a camera. I still have a lot more time to put in with the original SL, but when the time comes to change camera body I would like the experience to remain as familiar as possible for a seamless transition. Please note I write all of the above without actual hands on experience with the SL2. I’ll wait and see if that changes my thoughts before commenting again. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted November 11, 2019 Share #117 Posted November 11, 2019 2 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said: I came relatively early to the party and swore that I would use only M lenses that I already had and R lenses that I could pick up for a song (and maybe a little dance). But eventually the 90-280, and 16-35 got by my guards, some CL lenses snuck in to join them, and now I see there are SL Summicron primes! And the one I really lust for (24 mm) is now stretched out to 2021, by which time the noisome 25% tariff might have gone away. I appreciate that the proponents of this law may be malodorous, but I'm not sure the same can be said for the tariff itself ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted November 11, 2019 Share #118 Posted November 11, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, J12 said: I’ve yet to see enough images from the SL2 to judge, but when viewing images from other high megapixel 35mm cameras, I’ve always felt the artificial digital look was instantly noticeable and strongly pronounced. Particularly with portraits. Often resulting in images that were somewhat unsettling. I found portraits taken with lower megapixel cameras to be kinder and less abrasive. Perhaps the sensor and image processing in the SL2 will prove to be better than other high megapixel 35mm cameras in this regard? As a Q owner, this was somewhat my reaction to early Q2 photos, and remarked on as well by others on the Q thread. You use the word "unsettled"; I think on the thread I said of early Q2 portraits that I was "shocked." Of course, the Q2 has pretty much the same processor as the Q, while the SL2 has a new processor. So, we'll have to see. Edited November 11, 2019 by bags27 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 11, 2019 Share #119 Posted November 11, 2019 And the M9 was derided initially because of horrible colors, fringing, cracked sensors, card compatibility issues, etc. The Monochrom was likewise criticized for its flat, boring out of camera files. Time to relax. Jeff 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted November 11, 2019 Share #120 Posted November 11, 2019 54 minutes ago, Jeff S said: And the M9 was derided initially because of horrible colors, fringing, cracked sensors, card compatibility issues, etc. The Monochrom was likewise criticized for its flat, boring out of camera files. Time to relax. Jeff Indeed, Jono's and Sean Reid's photos look very nice, indeed. As do all the other reviews. But I'm taking my time for a number of reasons. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.