From A7R4 to Leica SL2

[Mr.Q]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

22 minutes ago, uranage said:

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?

Yes, I'm very serious.

The GFX cameras would work too. I personally prefer the ergonomics, handling, lens lineup, and color science of Hasselblad. The Fuji cameras are much cheaper though. And they have more zoom lenses.

For landscapes, advantages of the mini-MF sensor are dynamic range, color depth/tonality, and S/N ratio. (very noticable in long exposure)

[Eclectic Man]

I don't know about the Panasonic lenses, but the full frame Leica L lenses seem to have excellently low levels of distortion.  The Leica CL lenses (APS-C), at least the zooms, I don't know about the primes, do seem to exhibit quite noticeable distortion at the shorter end.

If you are considering the Panasonic lenses, why not look at the S1-R.  It does have a tilting rear screen, the same size sensor, and also claims weather proofing?  It is heavier than the SL2, though.

[Advertisement]

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

[Speeding]

On 11/25/2020 at 4:15 PM, uranage said:

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? 

I assume this is to avoid camera shake from pressing the shutter button when initiating the bracket sequence?  The short answer is no, however, there is a remote release that might work for you as well as the FOTOS app can trigger the shutter (in addition to being able to position the phone/tablet where you please as you compose the scene).

On 11/25/2020 at 4:15 PM, uranage said:

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

Timelapse yes it's called "interval" mode and can record up to 9999 frames at up to 24hrs between frames with a countdown timer (prior to first frame) that avoids the problem of camera shake above.  There is not a way to bracket at the same time though.  Curious what effect this produces??

On 11/25/2020 at 4:15 PM, uranage said:

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

I suspect partly aesthetics but it also means less moving and extending parts to break.  My experience with Sony cameras have been underscored by the poor build quality. 

On 11/25/2020 at 4:15 PM, uranage said:

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

Battery life is worse on the SL/SL2 vs the Sony's with the newer "Z" battery.  Sony's use PDAF/CDAF which makes an improvement in autofocus and tracking over Leica's CDAF-only approach.  To what extent that affects the delivered results is another (longer) conversation entirely.

On 11/25/2020 at 4:15 PM, uranage said:

How are the Panasonic lenses? 

Coming from Sony, I would say the S-PRO lenses (red S on the barrel) are every bit as good as Sony GM.  The regular S (silver S on the barrel) are roughly like the Sony G lenses.  This is early observation as Sony has a much larger sample of each to compare/contrast but that appears to me how Panasonic are lining up so far.  Ultimately, I wouldn't have any issue jumping between S-PRO and GM lenses on both systems.  

Don't forget Sigma!  They offer a very compact 45/2.8 and are set to announce 3 additional compact primes next week.  LEAKED: First images of the new Sigma 24mm f/3.5, 35mm f/2.0 and 65mm f/2.0 DG DN L lenses! – L mount system camera rumors and news (l-rumors.com)

Plus sigma has very affordable options in L-mount just like E-mount.  Useful for types of lenses you don't use as often or difficult to find ranges (100-400 comes to mind).

Anyway, I shot various Sony's (A7R, A7R2, A7R3, A9) over the years but never liked them much.  I preferred the SL and used it more.  Now with the SL2 I have sold off the rest of my Sony stuff.  Their cameras are much too appliance like for my taste.  Capable yes, but just numb in use.  Never connected with any of them.

 

 

 

[Photoworks]

3 hours ago, Eclectic Man said:

I don't know about the Panasonic lenses, but the full frame Leica L lenses seem to have excellently low levels of distortion.  The Leica CL lenses (APS-C), at least the zooms, I don't know about the primes, do seem to exhibit quite noticeable distortion at the shorter end.

If you are considering the Panasonic lenses, why not look at the S1-R.  It does have a tilting rear screen, the same size sensor, and also claims weather proofing?  It is heavier than the SL2, though.

Because distortion is corrected in camera. 

If you take the 24-90 mm DNG file and opening without correction you can see how much distortion there is ;-)

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I have all the cameras being discussed in this thread, except the A7R4. I do have an A7R3 (and a 2) in a cupboard as well as an A9 for the AF.

Sony.

The tech is amazing. For shooting action or sports they're unbeatable as they have the focusing and the lenses to get the job done (like the 200-600). The primes range from good to very good. Some CA when pushed. The sensors are generally what other cameras are measured against. Horrible ergonomics. Tiny buttons. Questionable build quality and weather sealing. Great battery life. Poor balance and just awful menus. To me a computer with a lens attached.

SL2

Great single shot AF but terrible tracking (mostly the experience rather than the results which are OK but not stellar). Good sensor that's maybe a quarter/third stop behind the A7R3 when pushed. But a thinner cover glass allows more acutance (see S1R). Great high res mode and exposures to 30 minutes. Incredible build and weather proofing. Average battery life. Super expensive. Optics are class leading. Heavy relative system weight. Great menus and usability. Better video than Sony A7R3/4. No flippy screen. Best screen, joystick and shutter of the bunch. Has an X factor.

S1R

Same tech as SL2. Flippy screen (better than Sony). Great build (I have tested this by dropping one) and handling. High res mode like SL2. Average menus. Great button layout. Has extra layer of glass on sensor so *slightly* behind SL2 in acutance. Heaviest in group.

X1D

Slowest camera in group by some margin in start up and AF. Incredible files. Great DR. Sensational long exposure implementation up to an hour with no dark frame required. Stellar optics but only one zoom. Best handling and menus in group by some margin. Fabulous rear screen but not flippy. Not as versatile as others here. Leaf shutters. Super slow electronic shutter readout. Nikon flash protocols. Average battery life. Expensive. X factor. No IBIS. More a specialist camera than the swiss army knife cameras above. Stunning colour science.

No bad cameras here. Or lenses. Just pick the one that inspires you to get out and shoot.

Gordon

[Simone_DF]

I went the opposite way.

A7III > SL2 > A7rIV

I found the SL2 great, loved the results, but couldn't cope with the AF for my personal use and the heavy lenses and sold it after a month. Now issue #2 seems resolved thanks to Sigma and Panasonic, and probably issue #1 will be addressed soon, since people are enthusiastic about AF improvements on the Pana bodies, so who knows, I may actually sell the A7rIV, which is a good camera but I never loved, and go back to a SL2

[caissa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 11/26/2020 at 1:15 AM, uranage said:

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? 

 

 

 

 

 

Regarding your questions I get the impression that you are maybe better served with a S1R. The lens choice is the same. And if you plan to use mainly Lumix lenses then a Lumix camera is probably ideal.

If you do mainly landscape, then the AF of any camera is more than fast enough. But regarding being slow, the Hasselblad is really dead slow, not just for AF. And the lens choice is very small (for example there is no equivalent of a simple 28mm lens). Some like this slowness (ZEN), but then coming from a Sony this seems a bit odd. And it is very strange that several lenses have a really bad (octagonal) bokeh. This looks like an oversight to me - at least I have not found anybody who really loves that feature.

Edited November 28, 2020 by caissa

[FlashGordonPhotography]

2 hours ago, caissa said:

Regarding your questions I get the impression that you are maybe better served with a S1R. The lens choice is the same. And if you plan to use mainly Lumix lenses then a Lumix camera is probably ideal.

If you do mainly landscape, then the AF of any camera is more than fast enough. But regarding being slow, the Hasselblad is really dead slow, not just for AF. And the lens choice is very small (for example there is no equivalent of a simple 28mm lens). Some like this slowness (ZEN), but then coming from a Sony this seems a bit odd. And it is very strange that several lenses have a really bad (octagonal) bokeh. This looks like an oversight to me - at least I have not found anybody who really loves that feature.

In all fairness, the bokeh balls are round when the lens is wide open with the X1D and the hex isn't my favorite but rarely a deal breaker. Transitions from in to out of focus are lovely on the HB as well. The 80mm is just stunning wide open. Absolutely stunning.

The 35-75mm zoom is a 28mm to 60mm equiv and is as good as any zoom made. Basically a bag of primes.

Saying the X1D is slow is like saying an M is slow. Yup. But it is what it is. Until the GFX100 all medium format was slow. Even those with phase AF only have a single point so you spend that time focus and recomposing. Operationally the camera is fine. Changing settings is very fast. Playback is similar to the SL2. Startup is slow but also loads calibration data for every lens and then you just use the sleep function. AF is very pedestrian and the leaf shutter is like a mirror box on a medium format DSLR. Basically like every other medium format camera, except the GFX100.

I do like the idea of considering the S1R. Single point AF is exactly the same as the SL2 in speed and accuracy (excellent) and it's slightly better in CAF. Personally for the rare times I need tracking AF I also need longer lenses. So I'd tend to keep an A9 and 200-600 (or Z7 or R5 or....) for that purpose. Those combos are cheaper than a single Leica lens that you'd need anyway. The S1R may be big but it's a joy to use.

Gordon

[uranage]

On 11/27/2020 at 10:06 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I have all the cameras being discussed in this thread, except the A7R4. I do have an A7R3 (and a 2) in a cupboard as well as an A9 for the AF.

Sony.

The tech is amazing. For shooting action or sports they're unbeatable as they have the focusing and the lenses to get the job done (like the 200-600). The primes range from good to very good. Some CA when pushed. The sensors are generally what other cameras are measured against. Horrible ergonomics. Tiny buttons. Questionable build quality and weather sealing. Great battery life. Poor balance and just awful menus. To me a computer with a lens attached.

SL2

Great single shot AF but terrible tracking (mostly the experience rather than the results which are OK but not stellar). Good sensor that's maybe a quarter/third stop behind the A7R3 when pushed. But a thinner cover glass allows more acutance (see S1R). Great high res mode and exposures to 30 minutes. Incredible build and weather proofing. Average battery life. Super expensive. Optics are class leading. Heavy relative system weight. Great menus and usability. Better video than Sony A7R3/4. No flippy screen. Best screen, joystick and shutter of the bunch. Has an X factor.

S1R

Same tech as SL2. Flippy screen (better than Sony). Great build (I have tested this by dropping one) and handling. High res mode like SL2. Average menus. Great button layout. Has extra layer of glass on sensor so *slightly* behind SL2 in acutance. Heaviest in group.

X1D

Slowest camera in group by some margin in start up and AF. Incredible files. Great DR. Sensational long exposure implementation up to an hour with no dark frame required. Stellar optics but only one zoom. Best handling and menus in group by some margin. Fabulous rear screen but not flippy. Not as versatile as others here. Leaf shutters. Super slow electronic shutter readout. Nikon flash protocols. Average battery life. Expensive. X factor. No IBIS. More a specialist camera than the swiss army knife cameras above. Stunning colour science.

No bad cameras here. Or lenses. Just pick the one that inspires you to get out and shoot.

Gordon

Very informative! Thank you! 

I've actually been doing research on the X1D and the GFX. The X1D does seem very interesting, almost like a hidden gem in some ways. The mainstream photography media mostly ignored the mark 2, it seems. Maybe Hasselblad didn't market it properly. It feels unfair that all these specialist cameras are being compared to the Canon and Sony when they are clearly not intended to be like them.

BUT The Fuji has a flippy screen, 45-100mm with OIS and the long waited 80mm f1.7 should come out soon. 

Then again The SL would probably be more useful as a general photography tool.

And I have to say, I do like nice aesthetics. That's why I'm drawn towards brands like Leica and Hasselblad. 

 

[satijntje]

I had ordered the Panasonic 24MP S5, and after a short waiting time I received a phone call from my local shop that it arrived and that I could come to pick it up.

However......

while waiting in the shop to be served, I saw that the Canon R6 had arrived.
So I did a quick comparison between the S5 and the R6, and guess what happened,

Yes, I walked out with an R6 (with some amazing glass, being the 50mm 1.2 that is my favorite).
The R6 felt soo good in my hands, much better than the pana's S5.
Until now I have no regrets and together with my Leica M240 its a great combo for shooting.

 

John

[FlashGordonPhotography]

4 hours ago, uranage said:

Very informative! Thank you! 

I've actually been doing research on the X1D and the GFX. The X1D does seem very interesting, almost like a hidden gem in some ways. The mainstream photography media mostly ignored the mark 2, it seems. Maybe Hasselblad didn't market it properly. It feels unfair that all these specialist cameras are being compared to the Canon and Sony when they are clearly not intended to be like them.

BUT The Fuji has a flippy screen, 45-100mm with OIS and the long waited 80mm f1.7 should come out soon. 

Then again The SL would probably be more useful as a general photography tool.

And I have to say, I do like nice aesthetics. That's why I'm drawn towards brands like Leica and Hasselblad. 

 

I like a good looking camera too! And yes, it's part of my buying decisions.

The X1D2 is just a performance upgrade on the MK1. Not many hardware changes (internal GPS) and the same external body and controls. Mostly it was just the improved start up time and operation that changed. IQ is identical.

The GFX50R is a great camera. But only nice to hold with an optional third party grip. I is more "featured" and has MUCH better jpegs than the Hasselblad. Again IQ is similar to the X1D.

I use my SL2 about 60% of the time and the X1D about 15%. The rest is between my M and CL. Although I'm enjoying my M10R and M10M a lot at the moment for spontaneous shooting. The S1R is my second SL2 body and for when I need the flippy screen.

Sony's are in a cupboard.... I think cameras should be fun. Sony's are anything but for me.

Gordon

[Mr.Q]

4 hours ago, uranage said:

Very informative! Thank you! 

I've actually been doing research on the X1D and the GFX. The X1D does seem very interesting, almost like a hidden gem in some ways. The mainstream photography media mostly ignored the mark 2, it seems. Maybe Hasselblad didn't market it properly. It feels unfair that all these specialist cameras are being compared to the Canon and Sony when they are clearly not intended to be like them.

BUT The Fuji has a flippy screen, 45-100mm with OIS and the long waited 80mm f1.7 should come out soon. 

Then again The SL would probably be more useful as a general photography tool.

And I have to say, I do like nice aesthetics. That's why I'm drawn towards brands like Leica and Hasselblad. 

 

As for mini-MF, unless you buy the GFX100, you probably do need a complimentary camera for general photography.  Maybe you could keep some of your Sony lenses and downgrade to a A7C?

Though I have much fewer cameras than Gordon (M9-P, Q2, SL2, A9, X1DII) I find it impossible to commit to one system as they all have different strengths.

[Eclectic Man]

On 11/27/2020 at 7:11 PM, Photoworks said:

Because distortion is corrected in camera. 

If you take the 24-90 mm DNG file and opening without correction you can see how much distortion there is 😉

I have an old Leitz R 50mm f/1.4 which has far lower distortion than my much more recent Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens (viewed on film, so no correction possible).  I somehow doubt that Leitz has relaxed its attitude towards lens distortions.  How do the correction profiles for Panasonic Zooms compare with those of Leitz zooms?  Files opened with Preview on my computer are consistent with the lenses from Leitz being highly corrected.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

48 minutes ago, Eclectic Man said:

I have an old Leitz R 50mm f/1.4 which has far lower distortion than my much more recent Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens (viewed on film, so no correction possible).  I somehow doubt that Leitz has relaxed its attitude towards lens distortions.  How do the correction profiles for Panasonic Zooms compare with those of Leitz zooms?  Files opened with Preview on my computer are consistent with the lenses from Leitz being highly corrected.

Some, but not all, of the new AF Leica lenses for SL and TL systems have software distortion correction as part of the lens design. The 24-90 is particularly notable in this regard as are the Q and Q2. This is a deliberate decision on Leica's part and is also common amongst other high end lens manufacturers including Sony, Canon, Hasselblad and Fujifilm. Using software correction for some things allows flexibility in other areas of the lens design not before available to the designers. Leica haven't relaxed their standards. They're just using a new way of dealing with them as lenses are already big and heavy enough. Primarily, software distortion correction makes it easier to make lenses that are highly corrected for chromatic aberrations., while maintaining high sharpness across the frame.

If you load the file into software that reads Leicas codes or you shoot jpegs, these corrections you see are automatically applied and you never see them. Some software allows you to turn this off.

Some see this as taking shortcuts or a failing in the lens design. Some just see it as part of the process of modern AF lenses. A debate on that subject will last many pages with advocates on both sides, none of which have to make the decisions at Wetzlar.  One side say that you see more corner sharpness in the uncorrected file. The others maintain that a more optically corrected file would introduce other problems. Generational long feuds on the subject will ensue. You may as well start a thread on DoF or equivalence.....

Feel free to take which ever side you wish. Just realise that most people who disagree with you have already made up their minds and wont be swayed. But like it or not it's there and it's a deliberate decision not an after thought by Leica.

Gordon

[Chaemono]

Am 27.11.2020 um 04:18 schrieb Dr. G:

[...]
The Sony sensors do have the ability to pull from the shadows more.
[...]

With one exception, at base ISO.

[uranage]

Has anyone had any major technical issues with their SL2? This is something I haven't even thought about it as all my Sonys and Fujis have worked flawlessly. My interest in the X1D-II quickly faded when I read about its endless technical problems. Diglloyd wrote an article on its glitches and errors that made the user experience a nightmare. Maybe someone who has owned the camera can tell how bad it really is. 

[not12bhere]

4 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Some, but not all, of the new AF Leica lenses for SL and TL systems have software distortion correction as part of the lens design. The 24-90 is particularly notable in this regard as are the Q and Q2. This is a deliberate decision on Leica's part and is also common amongst other high end lens manufacturers including Sony, Canon, Hasselblad and Fujifilm. Using software correction for some things allows flexibility in other areas of the lens design not before available to the designers. Leica haven't relaxed their standards. They're just using a new way of dealing with them as lenses are already big and heavy enough. Primarily, software distortion correction makes it easier to make lenses that are highly corrected for chromatic aberrations., while maintaining high sharpness across the frame.

If you load the file into software that reads Leicas codes or you shoot jpegs, these corrections you see are automatically applied and you never see them. Some software allows you to turn this off.

Some see this as taking shortcuts or a failing in the lens design. Some just see it as part of the process of modern AF lenses. A debate on that subject will last many pages with advocates on both sides, none of which have to make the decisions at Wetzlar.  One side say that you see more corner sharpness in the uncorrected file. The others maintain that a more optically corrected file would introduce other problems. Generational long feuds on the subject will ensue. You may as well start a thread on DoF or equivalence.....

Feel free to take which ever side you wish. Just realise that most people who disagree with you have already made up their minds and wont be swayed. But like it or not it's there and it's a deliberate decision not an after thought by Leica.

Gordon

Gordon,

Thank you for this post. It really reflects well on how all of these issues run within Leica enthusiast forums. You are spot on about Leica making deliberate decisions on balancing attributes of a lens with software correction being a newer innovation/variable to be taken advantage of. Purists will dislike it, but I wonder if they would buy a 24-90 which costs another $1000+, weighs 1/3 more and has a slightly lower variable F value throughout the range to avoid software correction? I have my doubts . . .

[michali]

5 hours ago, uranage said:

Has anyone had any major technical issues with their SL2? This is something I haven't even thought about it as all my Sonys and Fujis have worked flawlessly. My interest in the X1D-II quickly faded when I read about its endless technical problems. Diglloyd wrote an article on its glitches and errors that made the user experience a nightmare. Maybe someone who has owned the camera can tell how bad it really is. 

Coming up to almost a year since I acquired the SL2. I've dragged it on several safaris around East & Southern Africa, so far (touch wood) absolutely no issues whatsoever. Along with the SL (now sold) it's probably the most reliable digital camera I've owned. It's well built and feels solid in hand.

 

 

[LocalHero1953]

Search through this forum and you will find reports of SL2 failings - mostly freezing, I think - but this is just normal background noise for any camera. Any genuine design/systematic failures would be much more obvious and reported more widely by now. I've had mine about six months with no problems. I had a SL since launch with no problems.   

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[FlashGordonPhotography]

8 hours ago, uranage said:

Has anyone had any major technical issues with their SL2? This is something I haven't even thought about it as all my Sonys and Fujis have worked flawlessly. My interest in the X1D-II quickly faded when I read about its endless technical problems. Diglloyd wrote an article on its glitches and errors that made the user experience a nightmare. Maybe someone who has owned the camera can tell how bad it really is. 

All cameras have a failure rate. Usually small. The SL2 is no exception. The original SL came out with huge bugs in its software. Drove me absolutely nuts. Most were resolved. After 6 months the camera was fantastic and it still is. The SL2 has been much much better. There appears to be an issue for some with video and third party lenses and a freezing issue I have yet to experience. But that's about it. I used the original commercially for three years and now the mk2. I have no hesitation using it as a work and play camera.

And maybe a bit less worrying about what Diglloyd, Tony and Chelsea etc and what they say after a few hours with a demo camera, or worse after never holding one. I've had the X1D and X1DII since launch day. The user experience is unparalleled. Nothing comes close. Not even the SL2 (SL was closer). If you expect a miniMF camera with CDAF to operate like an A9II you're bound to be disappointed. Not to mention several firmware updates. You want to know how a camera feels then rent one for a fortnight and do your own evaluations. People like Diglloyd are just in it for clicks, not accuracy.

Gordon