From A7R4 to Leica SL2

[uranage]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm almost ready to pull the trigger and switch my existing Sony A7R4 system to Leica. But there are a few things that still bother me, perhaps you might be able to help me.

I'm mostly using my camera to take landscape photos and I did a bit of research on the SL2 and some things I thought was a bit strange to me.

- So it is impossible to use self timer with bracketing? Has this been updated? 

- Is there a timelapse mode? If so, can you use bracketing AND timelapse mode together? To be fair the Sony doesnt have this either.

- The lack is flip screen is the biggest turn off. I dont understand why The SL doesn't have this.

Any other annoyances or missing features I should be aware of coming from the Sony? 

 

Also,

How are the Panasonic lenses? 

Any particular reason why The SL doesn't have faster f1.4 primes? 

 

 

 

 

 

[ajmarton1]

Interesting.  I went from the SL (w/ 24-90, 90-280 and 50mm lenses) to the Sony a7rIV with every fast G lens I would want (prime, wide angle and telephoto) and have not looked back.  I also have an M lens adaptor for it as well.  I must say that I love the Sony as a full frame mirrorless system and the AF / eye tracking can't be beat.  I love the compactness of the body with prime lenses.  I don't know about the SL2 but I found the SL too heavy and the AF slow and finicky in low light situations.  It also suffered moisture related issues after using it in Bali for 3 weeks in a wet humid environment.  I would strongly suggest getting a loaner SL2 and trying it out for a day.  But when it comes to range finders I love my M10P and M10 Monochrom and M film bodies.  I also think if you are going with an SL2 you should try to stick with the Leica glass. That is what has always set Leica apart from other modern systems.  

Edited November 26, 2020 by ajmarton1

[Photoworks]

- So it is impossible to use self timer with bracketing? Has this been updated? 

NO it basically does continuous shooting.

- Is there a timelapse mode? If so, can you use bracketing AND timelapse mode together? To be fair the Sony doesnt have this either.

single photos

 

- The lack is flip screen is the biggest turn off. I dont understand why The SL doesn't have this.

It is more durable, and rain proof.

there is a 3rd party 90 degree finder.

 

Any other annoyances or missing features I should be aware of coming from the Sony? 

187MP multi shot is fantastic. you can use self-timer on this.  There is Movement warning that can be annoying when framing.

Sensor Stabilization is better on the Leica .

 

Also,

How are the Panasonic lenses? 

The Pro series is good.

 

Any particular reason why The SL doesn't have faster f1.4 primes? 

there is a 50mm and some M lenses. It takes 4 years to develop a Leica lens. they have started with zoom and now going with summicrons.

 

Flash photography is now great on the Leica.

[uranage]

Thank you everyone for replying. I know the Sony is perhaps objectively speaking the better camera. But I think the SL2 could be more enjoyable camera to use. To me photography is about the overall experience. But of course the results are the most important thing at the end of the day, so I dont want to make too many compromises there.

Do you feel Leica actually listens to their customers? I think that was one of the best things about Sony. Not being able to use self timer and bracketing together seems like a very easy thing to fix but I wonder why they haven't bothered to do it. The A7R2 also missed it but Sony kept taking feedback and eventually fixed it in the A7R3. 

Have there been any proper comparisons between the Panasonic and the Leica lenses?

[Photoworks]

26 minutes ago, uranage said:

Thank you everyone for replying. I know the Sony is perhaps objectively speaking the better camera. But I think the SL2 could be more enjoyable camera to use. To me photography is about the overall experience. But of course the results are the most important thing at the end of the day, so I dont want to make too many compromises there.

Do you feel Leica actually listens to their customers? I think that was one of the best things about Sony. Not being able to use self timer and bracketing together seems like a very easy thing to fix but I wonder why they haven't bothered to do it. The A7R2 also missed it but Sony kept taking feedback and eventually fixed it in the A7R3. 

Have there been any proper comparisons between the Panasonic and the Leica lenses?

they do listen! if it fits into the Leica mentality they probably implement it. They are relative a small company and changes take a long time to roll out.

Historically Leica firmware updates offers often new features, what is great.

I do a variety of photography. I have Sony A7r3 A7r4 and SL2. The Leica SL2 is a pleasure to use most of the time and  in this year I only used the A7r4 to scan negatives.

the only bracketing mode is in continuous shooting. Unlike Sony where you can shoot it in single mode. Doing interior photography and mixing Daylight and flash it was important to wait for the flash to recharge before shooting again. So I was doing bracket manually true the iPad app. I didn't want to touch the camera so that I can stock the photos in post.

On the Sony I was using an iPad app called "Cascable". it has a recipes editor where you can program brackets and pauses and just shoot with one click.

 

The sensor of the SL2 is different than Panasonic. Leica did a new micro-lens sensor that is thinner then others. The result is that you get better performance from center all the way to the corner. This was done to improve performance of M lenses on the SL. the consequences are that many Panasonic lenses perform better on the Leica  then other camera.

Even adapted Canon lenses perform much better on Leica Sl2 than Sony A7r4.

the Panasonic S pro line is comparable to Leica lenses. AF and micro detail have little differences. You need to look at reviews where they use the lens both on SL2, because the sensor differences addressed before.

Panasonic has an S line that more affordable, but does not compare to Leica lenses at all. 

[AphotoBerlin]

I use both cameras. 

The Sony has the better Sensor. Better Dynamic Range (about half a stop), less noise at higher settings, way better AF. 

The Leica has the way better handling, better buttons, way better menu system, better touch display, better EVF, better grip, better video settings, way better image stabilization, more joy to use.  

The Sony GM lenses are fine (16-35 very good, 24-70 & 70-200 good, 100-400 great), but I have the feeling, that about <=60MP is the sweet spot for them. The Leica lenses should be enough for 100 Megapixel sensors. 

Sonys Base-ISO is 100, Leicas ISO 50 (behaving more like ISO 70)

[AphotoBerlin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

oh, and the multi shot mode is horrible with the A7r4, and great with the Leica 

[uranage]

33 minutes ago, AphotoBerlin said:

I use both cameras. 

The Sony has the better Sensor. Better Dynamic Range (about half a stop), less noise at higher settings, way better AF. 

The Leica has the way better handling, better buttons, way better menu system, better touch display, better EVF, better grip, better video settings, way better image stabilization, more joy to use.  

The Sony GM lenses are fine (16-35 very good, 24-70 & 70-200 good, 100-400 great), but I have the feeling, that about <=60MP is the sweet spot for them. The Leica lenses should be enough for 100 Megapixel sensors. 

Sonys Base-ISO is 100, Leicas ISO 50 (behaving more like ISO 70)

Very helpful! Thank you! 

I find it very interesting that you think Sony has less noise at higher ISO. I thought the R3 was very good and I was actually quite disappointed in the R4. I think the sweet spot (detail vs noise) is somewhere at 45mp. But 61mp is definitely too much. Bigger filesize, worse ISO performance without actual benefits.

I used to own Fuji before Sony and i thought I'd never go back to variable aperture zooms again and here I am.

[uranage]

38 minutes ago, AphotoBerlin said:

oh, and the multi shot mode is horrible with the A7r4, and great with the Leica 

Yeah I agree, the pixel shift is totally useless with the Sony. 

[uranage]

1 hour ago, Photoworks said:

they do listen! if it fits into the Leica mentality they probably implement it. They are relative a small company and changes take a long time to roll out.

Historically Leica firmware updates offers often new features, what is great.

I do a variety of photography. I have Sony A7r3 A7r4 and SL2. The Leica SL2 is a pleasure to use most of the time and  in this year I only used the A7r4 to scan negatives.

the only bracketing mode is in continuous shooting. Unlike Sony where you can shoot it in single mode. Doing interior photography and mixing Daylight and flash it was important to wait for the flash to recharge before shooting again. So I was doing bracket manually true the iPad app. I didn't want to touch the camera so that I can stock the photos in post.

On the Sony I was using an iPad app called "Cascable". it has a recipes editor where you can program brackets and pauses and just shoot with one click.

 

The sensor of the SL2 is different than Panasonic. Leica did a new micro-lens sensor that is thinner then others. The result is that you get better performance from center all the way to the corner. This was done to improve performance of M lenses on the SL. the consequences are that many Panasonic lenses perform better on the Leica  then other camera.

Even adapted Canon lenses perform much better on Leica Sl2 than Sony A7r4.

the Panasonic S pro line is comparable to Leica lenses. AF and micro detail have little differences. You need to look at reviews where they use the lens both on SL2, because the sensor differences addressed before.

Panasonic has an S line that more affordable, but does not compare to Leica lenses at all. 

Very interesting! That's good to know that they are indeed listening. 

 

Does the Leica app work well? Sony's own iPhone app seems to be very unreliable and cannot be used with any serious work as it can disconnect at any time, takes ages to connect and is generally rather unstable. 

[snooper]

3 minutes ago, uranage said:

Sony's own iPhone app seems to be very unreliable and cannot be used with any serious work as it can disconnect at any time, takes ages to connect and is generally rather unstable. 

Perfect description of the Leica Fotos app 😩

[Photoworks]

the Fotos app is ok, probably similar then the Sony. there is room for lots of improvement. But wifi is always the problem I think. I have tried so many apps and none are great.

Benefit of Leica is that you can download a RAW files to phone and iPad , and been it a DMG you can open it in many mobile editing apps.

The noise is less on the sony A7r3 at 640 iso and UP, I would think many shoot landscapes at 100 ISO and there is no issue.

But Noise consideration is always in compare to output size, so don't think about it too much.

I have tested the Dynamic range and color of A7r4 and SL2 side by side using Canon tilt shift 24mm. Processed in Capture one Pro. The result where identical. Same color, Same recovery of lights and shadows . Sl2 had better detail in the corners of the frame.

Sony lenses have variation in quality. Leica lenses go true much better testing and certification. at the end they are better lenses on SL system.

 

[uranage]

4 hours ago, Photoworks said:

the Fotos app is ok, probably similar then the Sony. there is room for lots of improvement. But wifi is always the problem I think. I have tried so many apps and none are great.

Benefit of Leica is that you can download a RAW files to phone and iPad , and been it a DMG you can open it in many mobile editing apps.

The noise is less on the sony A7r3 at 640 iso and UP, I would think many shoot landscapes at 100 ISO and there is no issue.

But Noise consideration is always in compare to output size, so don't think about it too much.

I have tested the Dynamic range and color of A7r4 and SL2 side by side using Canon tilt shift 24mm. Processed in Capture one Pro. The result where identical. Same color, Same recovery of lights and shadows . Sl2 had better detail in the corners of the frame.

Sony lenses have variation in quality. Leica lenses go true much better testing and certification. at the end they are better lenses on SL system.

 

Yes, wifi will always be the problem, I agree. 

I think the newer Sony lenses are quite good and they seem to have solved at least some of their QC-related issues. The first batch of lenses were absolutely horrible. 

 

[uranage]

What do you think about the future of the L-mount? There were rumors that Panasonic was thinking about selling their camera business. Leica did create the first SL without Panasonic's help, but as they aren't a software company, how could they possible keep up with Sony and Canon and their ai-based auto focus systems?

Is there a possibility that they might give up on making modern af cameras and concentrate on the M cameras only?

[caissa]

I think Panasonic is on a long term strategy. They are still at the beginning of their FF offerings. 

Both Sigma and Pana bring a lot of new lenses for L , there are currently more than 35 lenses, soon more than 40. Even a lot of small inexpensive lenses are coming now. (The missing entry lenses were a problem for about 5 years.) The choice in cameras and lenses has never been richer, not even close.

With all this going on, I feel L was never as well established as now.

If you are a reader of rumors ...   well, this is then your personal problem.  (In the US many millions believe the old president was re-elected. Even the president himself believes it, does he ? Is this now fact or rumor ?).  😎🤔

When I was a child Sony had a lot of brands and added more every year. In the meantime they have given up many brands. Experience has shown, that if they are not growing anymore and starting to shrink they are probably the first to give up the business.

Edited November 27, 2020 by caissa

[Dr. G]

I went from the original SL to the a7r iii, then the a7r iv and the a9 ii - then sold the a7r iv to get the SL2.   
 

FWIW, I still own the a9ii, Sony 100-400 GM, 200-600G and 1.4x & 2.0x teleconverters.  For wildlife and BIF the a9ii still works for me.

I am primarily a prime lens user for general shooting.  When I had the a7r iii and iv I was using the following lenses:

Sigma 35mm f/1.2, Zeiss Sony 50mm f/1.4 ZA, Sony 85mm GM, Sony 100mm STF GM, and Sigma 105mm f/1.4.

All of those lenses in combination with the a7r iii and iv were stellar performers.  So why did I switch?  After using the Q2 I realized that the colors were much easier to manage in post and that my monochrome conversions looked far better than with the Sony.  When I looked at my old SL images (at the time I was using the 50mm Summilux SL and 24-90) they always were far more interesting looking than my Sony files.  More depth and microcontrast. In many ways they had a more organic feel to them.  I don’t know if was the camera, the lenses or both.  
 

When I recently switched to the SL2, I had both the 50mm Summilux SL and the 50mm APO Summicron SL.  I ended up keeping the Summicron and have subsequently picked up the 35 and 90mm Summicron SLs.  
 

The Sony sensors do have the ability to pull from the shadows more.  If you get your metering g and exposure correct with the SL2 it’s a non issue.  Low light performance of the SL2 vs the a7r iv is a toss up.  There maybe slightly more noise in my SL2 files, but I was already using Topaz Denoise AI so my workflow didn’t change and the results I get are comparable.  Neither one will compare to the Panasonic S1 (which I tried) and even the a9ii has better low light performance than the SL2 and the a7r iv.  The SL2-S is soon to be announced and, if speculation is correct, it will have a lower resolution and most likely better high ISO performance (the Panasonic S1 is remarkable in this regard).

the articulating screen I do miss at times, but I’m not opposed to kneeling down or getting on the floor to take a shot.  Overhead shots are, of course, more difficult with the SL2.

All in all, I enjoy the process of photography more with the SL2 and the images I’m getting are more pleasing (to me) than with the a7r iv.  Because I still own the a9 ii, I can’t be accused of being a fan boy in one direction or the other.  
 

There is one thing to keep in mind with the Sl2.  As you shoot mostly landscape it may not be an issue, but using strobes isn’t as simple as with the Sony, as I’m still unaware of a high-powered solution that can do TTL and HSS.  I’m trying out the Westcott system but everything will have to be done in manual mode regarding power.  
 

Ultimately you’ll have a great system whichever you end up going with.  

Edited November 27, 2020 by Dr. G

[Mr.Q]

You mention that you prioritize user experience and bracketing functionality for landscapes. And you feel the result is the most important.

I would look no further than the X1D II.  That camera is a landscape photographer's dream.

[AphotoBerlin]

vor 18 Stunden schrieb uranage:

Very helpful! Thank you! 

I find it very interesting that you think Sony has less noise at higher ISO. I thought the R3 was very good and I was actually quite disappointed in the R4. I think the sweet spot (detail vs noise) is somewhere at 45mp. But 61mp is definitely too much. Bigger filesize, worse ISO performance without actual benefits.

I used to own Fuji before Sony and i thought I'd never go back to variable aperture zooms again and here I am.

I had the A7r3, too, and, yes,  it was at 1:1/100% a bit cleaner at higher ISO than the A7r4. But, when I downsize the A7r4s pictures from 61MP to 42 MP, the finer grain / detail of the A7r4 looks a tiny bit better than the one of the A7r3. So the advantage of the A7r4 is more resolution at ISO100 and about similar noise at higher ISO (when compared at the same print-size). Same applies to the SL2. In my experience, it is not a high ISO monster. 

[uranage]

7 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

You mention that you prioritize user experience and bracketing functionality for landscapes. And you feel the result is the most important.

I would look no further than the X1D II.  That camera is a landscape photographer's dream.

Now you got me thinking.... X1D II... seriously??

 

But why not the Fuji GFX 50R then? Aren't they very similar? 

 

What is so good about the Hasselblad in terms of landscape photography?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[paul.bridges.3388]

11 hours ago, Dr. G said:

I went from the original SL to the a7r iii, then the a7r iv and the a9 ii - then sold the a7r iv to get the SL2.   
 

FWIW, I still own the a9ii, Sony 100-400 GM, 200-600G and 1.4x & 2.0x teleconverters.  For wildlife and BIF the a9ii still works for me.

I am primarily a prime lens user for general shooting.  When I had the a7r iii and iv I was using the following lenses:

Sigma 35mm f/1.2, Zeiss Sony 50mm f/1.4 ZA, Sony 85mm GM, Sony 100mm STF GM, and Sigma 105mm f/1.4.

All of those lenses in combination with the a7r iii and iv were stellar performers.  So why did I switch?  After using the Q2 I realized that the colors were much easier to manage in post and that my monochrome conversions looked far better than with the Sony.  When I looked at my old SL images (at the time I was using the 50mm Summilux SL and 24-90) they always were far more interesting looking than my Sony files.  More depth and microcontrast. In many ways they had a more organic feel to them.  I don’t know if was the camera, the lenses or both.  

The Sony sensors do have the ability to pull from the shadows more.  If you get your metering g and exposure correct with the SL2 it’s a non issue.  Low light performance of the SL2 vs the a7r iv is a toss up.  There maybe slightly more noise in my SL2 files, but I was already using Topaz Denoise AI so my workflow didn’t change and the results I get are comparable.  Neither one will compare to the Panasonic S1 (which I tried) and even the a9ii has better low light performance than the SL2 and the a7r iv.  The SL2-S is soon to be announced and, if speculation is correct, it will have a lower resolution and most likely better high ISO performance

All in all, I enjoy the process of photography more with the SL2 and the images I’m getting are more pleasing (to me)  

Great post.

I bought the Q2 when my SL (and Summilux 35 M) was stolen...and as a stopgap to them unreleased SL2. But, I’m now torn...because I think the eye AF on the Sony is amazing (even on my aged RX1RII...) and so I’m “making do” with the Q2. 

But, like you, there are some available light portraits I took with the SL / Summilux 35 M that I consider peerless. I’m a novice....but attribute it to beautiful colour and micro-contrast.

Hence I’m waiting on a possible SL2-S with great interest.