SL2 AFc...

[Dr. G]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was asked to help a friend who is a chef in NYC with a project this past weekend as he is launching his own caviar line.  It was a location session and was mostly for photos that would be used for press and social medial.  I brought three cameras with me - the SL2, Sony a7r iii and the a9ii.  I keep wanting the AF of the SL2 to be on par with at least the a7r iii and the iv (which I used to own).  I know the a9ii AF will always be superior for tracking - eye-AF in particular.  

A few of my SL2 photos were completely out of focus and many of them had soft focus using either spot, field or face/body detect in AFc.  The ones that hit though are fantastic.  Using the Summicron-SL primes (35, 50 and 90) those photos with focus hits are far better than either the a9ii or the a7r iii.  The color using AWB is always spot on, skin tones are as close to correct as I've seen and detail and microcontrast are way ahead of the Sony - and I was using G Master lenses with that system.

I'm hoping the AF updates the Panasonic cameras received will soon be made available to the SL2 because I would much prefer to use the SL2 for everything as I find I have little need for doing much in post when the images are in focus.  Truth be told, 24Mp is enough for most of what I photograph, so if the SL2-S really is the Leica equivalent of the Panasonic S5 I will probably pre-order it as soon as it is announced as I find that, even with Sony, 24Mp gives me slightly better perceived sharpness and better low light performance when shooting moving subjects hand held.

[sillbeers15]

9 hours ago, Dr. G said:

I was asked to help a friend who is a chef in NYC with a project this past weekend as he is launching his own caviar line.  It was a location session and was mostly for photos that would be used for press and social medial.  I brought three cameras with me - the SL2, Sony a7r iii and the a9ii.  I keep wanting the AF of the SL2 to be on par with at least the a7r iii and the iv (which I used to own).  I know the a9ii AF will always be superior for tracking - eye-AF in particular.  

A few of my SL2 photos were completely out of focus and many of them had soft focus using either spot, field or face/body detect in AFc.  The ones that hit though are fantastic.  Using the Summicron-SL primes (35, 50 and 90) those photos with focus hits are far better than either the a9ii or the a7r iii.  The color using AWB is always spot on, skin tones are as close to correct as I've seen and detail and microcontrast are way ahead of the Sony - and I was using G Master lenses with that system.

I'm hoping the AF updates the Panasonic cameras received will soon be made available to the SL2 because I would much prefer to use the SL2 for everything as I find I have little need for doing much in post when the images are in focus.  Truth be told, 24Mp is enough for most of what I photograph, so if the SL2-S really is the Leica equivalent of the Panasonic S5 I will probably pre-order it as soon as it is announced as I find that, even with Sony, 24Mp gives me slightly better perceived sharpness and better low light performance when shooting moving subjects hand held.

If you get inconsistent AFC results, fine tuning in focus profile should improve results. That is I assume you’ve gotten focus tracking spot on subject on the first frame and you’re not using drive speed of higher than ‘medium drive’. Good light source to provide more contrast on subject helps a lot.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

10 hours ago, Dr. G said:

I was asked to help a friend who is a chef in NYC with a project this past weekend as he is launching his own caviar line.  It was a location session and was mostly for photos that would be used for press and social medial.  I brought three cameras with me - the SL2, Sony a7r iii and the a9ii.  I keep wanting the AF of the SL2 to be on par with at least the a7r iii and the iv (which I used to own).  I know the a9ii AF will always be superior for tracking - eye-AF in particular.  

A few of my SL2 photos were completely out of focus and many of them had soft focus using either spot, field or face/body detect in AFc.  The ones that hit though are fantastic.  Using the Summicron-SL primes (35, 50 and 90) those photos with focus hits are far better than either the a9ii or the a7r iii.  The color using AWB is always spot on, skin tones are as close to correct as I've seen and detail and microcontrast are way ahead of the Sony - and I was using G Master lenses with that system.

I'm hoping the AF updates the Panasonic cameras received will soon be made available to the SL2 because I would much prefer to use the SL2 for everything as I find I have little need for doing much in post when the images are in focus.  Truth be told, 24Mp is enough for most of what I photograph, so if the SL2-S really is the Leica equivalent of the Panasonic S5 I will probably pre-order it as soon as it is announced as I find that, even with Sony, 24Mp gives me slightly better perceived sharpness and better low light performance when shooting moving subjects hand held.

The SL2 will NEVER do tracking focus as good as the Sony A7R3/4. Never. Not going to happen. Time to move on. That ship has sailed. Horse beaten to death. The Panasonic S5 is a great little camera. It's nowhere near the AFC of the Sonys. I tried one out. Sorry, no miracles. Neither is my upgraded to latest firmware, S1Rs. If you need a camera that's not a Sony that focuses like a Sony, get a Canon. EVERYTHING ELSE is below that. The SL and S line are way below that. Their strengths lie in other areas. However they are entirely usable as event photography cameras.

I don't understand how people eating caviar can move so fast. It must be frightening with them all at speeds that requires the AF of a Sony A9II. I'm surprised there were no injuries........

Why did you not use the vastly superior single shot AF on the SL2? It's significantly faster and works better in low light (EV -6) than the A7R3 if set up correctly. Face detect works better there as well than in AFC. When I shot weddings with the original SL (about 150 in three years) I'd have maybe half a dozen shots not in critical focus over a 12 hour day. The SL2 is vastly better than the original. Heck, with a pair of M9's I was tracking brides walking up the aisle with a 90mm @ f2.  COVID has slowed things down somewhat and I've not shot any events since getting my SL2 but I did with my S1Rs and achieved near perfect focus success.

I kind of wish Leica would just remove CAF entirely in the next firmware update so every second thread wasn't a rehash of the simple fact that the SL cameras don't do Sony tracking focus. So much air is wasted repeating this over and over and over thinking it's going to change. It isn't. It also steers shooters away from the excellent single shot AF that would work better in many of the situations that people push the CAF button.

It is widely established that AFC for the SL2 is average in good light and poor in low light. Might be time to either leave the SL2 at home or re-evaluate how you set up the camera for event shooting.

Gordon

 

[LocalHero1953]

Totally agree. I shoot theatre and other stage productions, and always used AFs with the SL, with no real problems. I got the SL2 since covid struck so I've only used it for one, outdoor, drama since, but I found it greatly improved in AFs over the SL, snapping onto faces very quickly, and selecting good alternative focus points when faces are not visible. I have never used a Sony, but losing focus is a problem I just haven't had to solve.

Edited December 1, 2020 by LocalHero1953

[caissa]

15 hours ago, Dr. G said:

I was asked to help a friend who is a chef in NYC with a project this past weekend as he is launching his own caviar line.  It was a location session and was mostly for photos that would be used for press and social medial.  I brought three cameras with me - the SL2, Sony a7r iii and the a9ii.  I keep wanting the AF of the SL2 to be on par with at least the a7r iii and the iv (which I used to own).  I know the a9ii AF will always be superior for tracking - eye-AF in particular.  

A few of my SL2 photos were completely out of focus and many of them had soft focus using either spot, field or face/body detect in AFc.  The ones that hit though are fantastic.  Using the Summicron-SL primes (35, 50 and 90) those photos with focus hits are far better than either the a9ii or the a7r iii.  The color using AWB is always spot on, skin tones are as close to correct as I've seen and detail and microcontrast are way ahead of the Sony - and I was using G Master lenses with that system.

I'm hoping the AF updates the Panasonic cameras received will soon be made available to the SL2 because I would much prefer to use the SL2 for everything as I find I have little need for doing much in post when the images are in focus.  Truth be told, 24Mp is enough for most of what I photograph, so if the SL2-S really is the Leica equivalent of the Panasonic S5 I will probably pre-order it as soon as it is announced as I find that, even with Sony, 24Mp gives me slightly better perceived sharpness and better low light performance when shooting moving subjects hand held.

I am bit astonished by this description, even if I am used to complaints about AFc.

To me it sounds like a user coming from Sony who has over the years learned how to use a Sony and has maybe even read the Sony manual and has decided for himself that he will never read another manual again. And will expect that all photographic devices have to work exactly like a Sony. A strange decision.

I have no problems with AF with the SL2. Yes agreed I am coming from an even harder experience, I have been using the SL for the last 4 years. After that the SL2 AF is extremely fast and almost fool proof. And it also works in very low light situations.

Why is my experience so completely different ? Because I use by default almost always AFs. The SL2 is an excellent camera because AFs is working excellently.

So what about AFc ? The Sony users use about 100% AFc . This is perfect for a Sony, maybe also for a Canon. But for a SL2 this is asking for trouble and ignoring the way the camera works. It is even a bit stupid to insist on AFc if it is obvious that it is not working “as expected”. (This is obvious after only very few shots.) It is not the same algorithm as in a Sony, so it will always be different. The name is the same, but the functionality is different.

Simple conclusion: If you insist on AFc avoid the SL2 (or wait a while, maybe the algorithm will be changed so that it resembles the Sony more.) If you use the SL2 don’t forget to check if AFs is selected (put it into your default profile).  If you need AFc under some circumstances, then set it up carefully, and do some “practice” to see if you get what you expect. It needs some training, some preparation, it is not fool-proof. (I would say it is like playing tennis.)

IT IS A DIFFERENT CAMERA. This can be good or bad, it depends on what you make of it.   (Maybe It is also a question of attitude. I always made many mistakes, never had 100% keepers and had no ambition for it. I expect to throw away 20 pics just to have in the end 2 good images. Even more if the object is unpredictable or fast moving. I don’t mind the waste, it is now just data that can easily be removed, it costs almost nothing, not like in film times. My “hero” is Ernst Haas. Often his best works are photos that others would throw away.)

A last remark regarding eye-AF. I am able to get perfect portraits with AFs. (AFAIK the SL2 has no eye-AF, just face detect, I think the S5 now has it). Not every single shot is perfect, but so what ? But usually many (it depends on the person, how nervous he/she is). But I am no paparazzo. And have cooperating objects.

Edited December 1, 2020 by caissa

[bsmith]

OMG, that's like saying "my country love it or leave it!"  The AFC on the SL2 sucks, it's unacceptable in a pro camera for a multitude shooting environments not just sports action. Everyone dissatisfied with it should complain often and loudly.  That's what pushes technology improvements.   It works for your limited situations so we should just accept mediocracy?   

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, bsmith said:

OMG, that's like saying "my country love it or leave it!"  The AFC on the SL2 sucks, it's unacceptable in a pro camera for a multitude shooting environments not just sports action. Everyone dissatisfied with it should complain often and loudly.  That's what pushes technology improvements.   It works for your limited situations so we should just accept mediocracy?   

It's quite a new phenomenon that all cameras need to be all things to all (wo)men. Historically cameras have been more specialised and working photographers chose the right tool for the job. Studio photographers chose different gear to sports photographers. Landscape photographers chose different gear to journalists. You don't see working studio photographers carrying on about their cameras not being suitable because they don't shoot at 10fps or that they're lacking a 600mm option. It's like saying that medium format cameras are mediocre. They don't have great AFC either.

Secondly, no camera is perfect. Those Sonys may have great AFC but are bested thoroughly by the SL2 in many areas that could also be considered useful for working photographers. The Sony's have the worst menus on the market. They also have the worst implementation of the touch interface. The joystick is rubbish to use. The buttons are tiny and difficult to find. Build quality is dead average and weather sealing is questionable at best. Ergonomics are poor and the cameras are unbalanced for many of the lenses they use. The grip is too close to the lens mount. Playback and zooming in are painfully slow. The fact is that the Son'y are plain average or worst in every category except AFC, battery life and lens selection. And they get a pass while Leica is mediocre? I don't think so. Yes the SL2s AFC is not brilliant but the AFS is fantastic and close, if not best in class (focus down to EV-6 and quick). The touch interface and menus are only bested by the X1DII. The build and weather sealing are best in class. As are the lenses. Long exposure implementation is unparalleled in a 135 format camera. The EVF of the SL601 took other companies 4 years to equal but still haven't bested the SL2. The SL2 shutter is sublime.

The SL2 has two weaknesses. One is AFC. The more serious one is poor flash implementation. Other than that it's an incredibly strong camera. But because of that you think it's mediocre compared to a Sony? The SL2 bests the Sony in far more areas than the Sony bests the SL2.

And finally, the SL2 is a fabulous event camera. The OP was using it wrong.

Gordon

[sillbeers15]

19 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

The SL2 will NEVER do tracking focus as good as the Sony A7R3/4. Never. Not going to happen. Time to move on. That ship has sailed. Horse beaten to death. The Panasonic S5 is a great little camera. It's nowhere near the AFC of the Sonys. I tried one out. Sorry, no miracles. Neither is my upgraded to latest firmware, S1Rs. If you need a camera that's not a Sony that focuses like a Sony, get a Canon. EVERYTHING ELSE is below that. The SL and S line are way below that. Their strengths lie in other areas. However they are entirely usable as event photography cameras.

I don't understand how people eating caviar can move so fast. It must be frightening with them all at speeds that requires the AF of a Sony A9II. I'm surprised there were no injuries........

Why did you not use the vastly superior single shot AF on the SL2? It's significantly faster and works better in low light (EV -6) than the A7R3 if set up correctly. Face detect works better there as well than in AFC. When I shot weddings with the original SL (about 150 in three years) I'd have maybe half a dozen shots not in critical focus over a 12 hour day. The SL2 is vastly better than the original. Heck, with a pair of M9's I was tracking brides walking up the aisle with a 90mm @ f2.  COVID has slowed things down somewhat and I've not shot any events since getting my SL2 but I did with my S1Rs and achieved near perfect focus success.

I kind of wish Leica would just remove CAF entirely in the next firmware update so every second thread wasn't a rehash of the simple fact that the SL cameras don't do Sony tracking focus. So much air is wasted repeating this over and over and over thinking it's going to change. It isn't. It also steers shooters away from the excellent single shot AF that would work better in many of the situations that people push the CAF button.

It is widely established that AFC for the SL2 is average in good light and poor in low light. Might be time to either leave the SL2 at home or re-evaluate how you set up the camera for event shooting.

Gordon

 

Wow. The way you sound over AFC tells me either you are God or nothing.

Assuming you are right. I just witness a fellow amateur photographer I met over tracking BIF. He was using Nikon D850, his shots over the subject were completely out of focus. I however got my shots with the Good for nothing (AFC) SL2. In his disappointment, he was checking out my gear and said, if only I had gotten your camera and I would have gotten my shots!

Sounds all familiar? Except your complaint is on SL2?

Half of the problem on AFC is always from the user. I can believe you more if you are a seasoned user on SL2’s AFC. 
 

Below is my shot on AFC setting:

stork billed kingfisher-1010052-6 by sillbeers15

Edited December 2, 2020 by sillbeers15
Added

[FlashGordonPhotography]

1 hour ago, sillbeers15 said:

Wow. The way you sound over AFC tells me either you are God or nothing.

Assuming you are right. I just witness a fellow amateur photographer I met over tracking BIF. He was using Nikon D850, his shots over the subject were completely out of focus. I however got my shots with the Good for nothing (AFC) SL2. In his disappointment, he was checking out my gear and said, if only I had gotten your camera and I would have gotten my shots!

Sounds all familiar? Except your complaint is on SL2?

Half of the problem on AFC is always from the user. I can believe you more if you are a seasoned user on SL2’s AFC. 
 

Below is my shot on AFC setting:

stork billed kingfisher-1010052-6 by sillbeers15

I don't believe that I said anywhere that AFC was impossible with the SL2. I said it's average in good light and no where near as good as the Sonys. As I do have both cameras I think I can compare them. I also directly mentioned that maybe  it wasnt the cameras fault.

The God, no. A god, possibly........

Gordon

[Michael Markey]

Don`t have an SL but I do bounce around between three Systems .

Have for six or seven years .

Leica , Sony and Canon .

They`re all different .

I`f I`m trudging across muddy fields shooting horses jumping over hedges I take the Canon (although I have to say that the CL does a remarkably good job too ).

I sometimes take the Sony of course but I`ve never really enjoyed using them although I do like the Zeiss Batis lens .

Leica is for the slower and more discreet shots .

You have to make a choice I`m afraid , technology will not solve every problem and there are work arounds for everything .

[caissa]

13 hours ago, bsmith said:

OMG, that's like saying "my country love it or leave it!"  The AFC on the SL2 sucks, it's unacceptable in a pro camera for a multitude shooting environments not just sports action. Everyone dissatisfied with it should complain often and loudly.  That's what pushes technology improvements.   It works for your limited situations so we should just accept mediocracy?   

OMG, adapt your methods a little to the tool (the SL2). And don’t expect that Leica adapts to your methods. (RTFM)

It is a coincidence how Sony AFc currently works, it has evolved over time. The a9 has made a lot of progress over the years. And the algorithm is proprietary, so others cannot simply copy the code. So use it (enjoy it) if it suits your needs and avoid cameras that you cannot cope with.

For me it is a difference similar to the difference of driving a modern car with all technical support systems (no need for talent) and a racing car that you cannot really drive well without a lot of training and motivation. (F1 Needs a talented driver). Yes, the Sony is an easy tool, but this will not automatically make the results better (even though it produces more “sharp” pictures under certain circumstances).

As others have said, use the right tool. You should know what you can expect from a MF camera and will probably not use it in a tennis match. You should also in the meantime know when a Sony and when a Leica is “the right tool”. I have different cameras for different uses. Many others, too.

There are people who do everything with the mobile phone. And time will give them right. As fast as progress is, they will probably produce better results in 10 years than any other technology around. (Even Sony or other camera manufacturers are on a much slower growing curve, so will be overtaken sooner or later.)  But probably there will still be some people around using the “inferior” cameras, with a technology that “sucks”. (And it makes little sense to complain about this.)

 

 

Edited December 2, 2020 by caissa

[Simone_DF]

8 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I don't believe that I said anywhere that AFC was impossible with the SL2. I said it's average in good light and no where near as good as the Sonys.

I think that currently it's below what can be considered average. But, at least from what I can see on youtube videos, with the new firmware the Panasonics have greatly improved. Of course it won't be Sony level, but very very acceptable. Eye, Face and Body recognition seems greatly improved too. Next sensor iteration should close the gap even more. I'm very optimistic and I'm just waiting for the SL2-S or a very good deal on a SL2 to pull the trigger again on the L mount.

[sillbeers15]

9 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I don't believe that I said anywhere that AFC was impossible with the SL2. I said it's average in good light and no where near as good as the Sonys. As I do have both cameras I think I can compare them. I also directly mentioned that maybe  it wasnt the cameras fault.

The God, no. A god, possibly........

Gordon

It will be useful to share objective information and not generalise personal opinion. I’m certain that reader who do not use the SL2’s AFC sufficiently cannot differentiate facts over personal opinion.

My usage experience on the SL2’s AFC tells me that when the AFC tracking locks on the subject in good light, it does pretty hell of a good job. Most of the time, my struggle is to keep the subject within the frame. Yes the SL2’s AFC starts to get inconsistent in poor light or strong back light. I am certain Sony will start to go weak as well and certainly does Nikon & Canon. Again if you look at all the epic BIF shots shared by experience photographers, which shot has poor light on subject?

With more experience on tracking moving subjects, I do not bother to shoot when the light on the subject is less ideal. Even if you get the shot perfectly focused but the poor light cannot deliver the required IQ, I would rather not snap rubbish.

Yes, there is a level of differentiation on AFC between SL2 & A9. And A9 is class leading in AFC. But both cameras are not with perfect AFC. Personally my compliant on SL2 & S1/R’s AFC is on the slow ‘medium drive’ frame rate more than AFC successful hit rate that bothers me why can’t the L mount cameras offer industry average frame rate of 10 fps than the current 6.

[laowai_]

On 11/30/2020 at 1:28 PM, Dr. G said:

I was asked to help a friend who is a chef in NYC with a project this past weekend as he is launching his own caviar line.  It was a location session and was mostly for photos that would be used for press and social medial.  I brought three cameras with me - the SL2, Sony a7r iii and the a9ii.  I keep wanting the AF of the SL2 to be on par with at least the a7r iii and the iv (which I used to own).  I know the a9ii AF will always be superior for tracking - eye-AF in particular.  

What photographer do you want to be? The one who shoots a phenomenal image once in a while or the one who cranks out average shots consistently?

Choose your gigs, clients and tools accordingly.

[Dr. G]

As the OP, let me reiterate that, for the most part, I'm very happy with the SL2.  Most of the photography I do is more creative/artistic/location based.  For event photography I have always used my Sony system.  To be fair, I didn't have the SL2 until after the pandemic began - I haven't had the opportunity to use it for shooting people as subjects.  As I love the rendering of the camera and Summicron-SL lenses I thought the images I would get with when asked to help with this particular shoot would have been fantastic.  It was short-sighted to go into it without understanding the limitations of AFc and should have taken the time to familiarize myself more with the shortcomings of using the camera in AFc mode.  

I'll be the first to admit that I made a poor choice in how to use the camera and should not have assumed that just because AFc/tracking AF works well with the a9ii that it would have been the same situation with the SL2.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

8 hours ago, sillbeers15 said:

It will be useful to share objective information and not generalise personal opinion. I’m certain that reader who do not use the SL2’s AFC sufficiently cannot differentiate facts over personal opinion.

My usage experience on the SL2’s AFC tells me that when the AFC tracking locks on the subject in good light, it does pretty hell of a good job. Most of the time, my struggle is to keep the subject within the frame. Yes the SL2’s AFC starts to get inconsistent in poor light or strong back light. I am certain Sony will start to go weak as well and certainly does Nikon & Canon. Again if you look at all the epic BIF shots shared by experience photographers, which shot has poor light on subject?

With more experience on tracking moving subjects, I do not bother to shoot when the light on the subject is less ideal. Even if you get the shot perfectly focused but the poor light cannot deliver the required IQ, I would rather not snap rubbish.

Yes, there is a level of differentiation on AFC between SL2 & A9. And A9 is class leading in AFC. But both cameras are not with perfect AFC. Personally my compliant on SL2 & S1/R’s AFC is on the slow ‘medium drive’ frame rate more than AFC successful hit rate that bothers me why can’t the L mount cameras offer industry average frame rate of 10 fps than the current 6.

I don't think we're actually seeing different results. I have said in other posts that the hit rate is OK in good light but the experience (the focus flutter) is poor and that in low light AFC is poor but AFS is excellent. I'm not bagging out the SL2. I do think it's one of the best overall packages available. My Sony's collect dust except when I loan them to someone.

OTOH the Sony's CAF and especially eye detect (we're talking event photography here) hangs on like a rabid dog. It's quite a stark difference. Sony did something remarkable when the cracked the code for AFC and eye detect. It's basically at the point you don't use SAF when there are people in the frame. The Canon's are the same and Fuji and Nikon somewhere behind. Then Panasonic and Leica at the rear. Objectively, the SL2 has the worst AFC of the bunch. That doesn't mean it can't be useful. It does mean thread after thread complaining about it. I do get tired of that when its performance is well known. The SL2's strengths lie elsewhere.

I too hope for an improvement with firmware. Currently the SL2 doesn't even match the old S1R firmware in that the S1R has eye detect and the SL2 has face detect. Performance though is roughly the same. I have 2x S1Rs, one with the old firmware and one with the new. I also have an Z7, A9 and A7R3 to compare. The new firmware for the Panasonics is definitely an improvement and I hope it flows on to the SL2 but it's still not up to the competition, unfortunately. Usable yes. But not even middle of the pack. DFD relies so heavily on the processing power of the camera. That means battery as well. It's hard to see them catching a constantly improving Sony and Canon. That doesn't mean it can't be useful. Just not for event photography or when the light is poor.

Gordon

[bsmith]

On 12/1/2020 at 3:21 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

It's quite a new phenomenon that all cameras need to be all things to all (wo)men. Historically cameras have been more specialised and working photographers chose the right tool for the job. Studio photographers chose different gear to sports photographers. Landscape photographers chose different gear to journalists. You don't see working studio photographers carrying on about their cameras not being suitable because they don't shoot at 10fps or that they're lacking a 600mm option. It's like saying that medium format cameras are mediocre. They don't have great AFC either.

Secondly, no camera is perfect. Those Sonys may have great AFC but are bested thoroughly by the SL2 in many areas that could also be considered useful for working photographers. The Sony's have the worst menus on the market. They also have the worst implementation of the touch interface. The joystick is rubbish to use. The buttons are tiny and difficult to find. Build quality is dead average and weather sealing is questionable at best. Ergonomics are poor and the cameras are unbalanced for many of the lenses they use. The grip is too close to the lens mount. Playback and zooming in are painfully slow. The fact is that the Son'y are plain average or worst in every category except AFC, battery life and lens selection. And they get a pass while Leica is mediocre? I don't think so. Yes the SL2s AFC is not brilliant but the AFS is fantastic and close, if not best in class (focus down to EV-6 and quick). The touch interface and menus are only bested by the X1DII. The build and weather sealing are best in class. As are the lenses. Long exposure implementation is unparalleled in a 135 format camera. The EVF of the SL601 took other companies 4 years to equal but still haven't bested the SL2. The SL2 shutter is sublime.

The SL2 has two weaknesses. One is AFC. The more serious one is poor flash implementation. Other than that it's an incredibly strong camera. But because of that you think it's mediocre compared to a Sony? The SL2 bests the Sony in far more areas than the Sony bests the SL2.

And finally, the SL2 is a fabulous event camera. The OP was using it wrong.

Gordon

I wrote the AFC CAF sucks for many more situations then just sports action. And it does!!!  You apparently haven't had to use it in a non static commercial or photojournalistic environment ! I also never said the AFS was poor ( or sucked). You seem to only care about your limited experience and opinions. Like about flash implementation. I personally think the Profoto A1 is perfect on the SLs.  Maybe learn how to use manual flash instead of criticizing my and others opinions. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

4 hours ago, bsmith said:

I wrote the AFC CAF sucks for many more situations then just sports action. And it does!!!  You apparently haven't had to use it in a non static commercial or photojournalistic environment ! I also never said the AFS was poor ( or sucked). You seem to only care about your limited experience and opinions. Like about flash implementation. I personally think the Profoto A1 is perfect on the SLs.  Maybe learn how to use manual flash instead of criticizing my and others opinions. 

Wow! Sensitive are we? This is a discussion forum. Differences of opinion kind of go with the territory, although I managed to keep the personal assumptions out of mine. I think I have been consistent that the AFC on the SL2 is worst in class. Not unusable in some situations but far behind Canon and Sony's efforts. I'm not arguing against that. Never have. Useless? Not entirely. But almost any thing else is better in the current market. Am I wrong?

The failings of DFD focus are well known and have been for years. If someone chooses a DFD camera for tracking focus they chose the wrong equipment. And if a working photographer chose an SL2 expecting class leading AFC then they are a fool. They should have chosen a different system. Simple as that. No amount of tantrums will make DFD focusing work as well as a good PDAF system. Feel free to jump up and down. It isn't going to make the SL2 focus like the R5.

In you post you wrote.. "OMG, that's like saying "my country love it or leave it!".". And unfortunately, yep, that's exactly it. Leica's whole business model is *our way or the highway*. Leica don't play in the same sandpit as Canon, Nikon or Sony. Arguments about whether they compete, or don't perform or that they're too expensive are pointless. Leica don't want to compete in that way. Secondly it is what it is. If you don't like the AFC in the SL2 then you need to look elsewhere. There are plenty of alternatives.

I'm just pointing out that a poor performance metric in one area doesn't make a poor camera. Different systems have different strengths and weaknesses. Dozens of posts slamming the SL2 because AFC is worst in class. Meanwhile far less emphasis on other features, good and bad that are just as important to MANY photographers.

Thanks for the tip on learning manual flash. But as I've been a working commercial photographer for 35 years I think I have that sorted. While you and I may like manual flash others don't. I'm not small minded enough to ignore the potential needs of other shooters. And really. The lack of high speed sync isn't an issue for a serious flash photographer? Riiiight.... You're welcome to prioritise AFC over HSS and others are free to do the opposite. But I am pretty sure more SL users would benefit more from a more robust flash implementation than Sony like tracking focus. Honestly, I don't really have a horse in the flash issue with Leica. I use leaf shutter systems in my studio mostly. For the rest the SL2 is more than fine.

As a working photographer I have a variety of gear to solve a variety of issues and different gear with different strengths. A carpenter has more than one chisel. I don't think any single camera can do it all. Or system or brand. Some systems offer more flexibility than others. Some do that in different ways. Just as I wouldn't choose a Leica for sports I wouldn't choose a Sony for portraits because I don't like Sony's skin tones. I don't spend all day bitching about it. I choose a different chisel and move on.

Maybe you should choose the right gear for the job and do a bit of pre-purchase research before buying instead of whinging about a performance metric that is widely known in the SL2? Maybe you did. But I thought you'd appreciate the same trite commentary as you gave me about manual flash and limited experience.

Gordon

Edited December 3, 2020 by FlashGordonPhotography

[FlashGordonPhotography]

10 hours ago, laowai_ said:

What photographer do you want to be? The one who shoots a phenomenal image once in a while or the one who cranks out average shots consistently?

Choose your gigs, clients and tools accordingly.

Sorry, I'm not sure about this one. A working photographer doesn't often get the option of either. Consistency is more important than perfection but we don't get to choose just our top 1% of images. Certainly not if you shoot weddings, journalism or events.

I do agree on choosing the right tools though. As a generalist (someone who's shot a bit of everything over the years) I do feel that often more than one system is needed to cover everything that comes up. Some can rent to fill the gaps but not all. No gear is the best at everything.

Gordon

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[bherman01545]

As a side note, what did we, (as photographers or image-makers) do back in the analog days, when we didn't have a 'computer with a lens out in front'? 

We had to know our equipment inside and out, pre-focus, use hyperfocal techniques and generally know the limitations of our equipment. There has never been, nor will there ever be the perfect camera for each and every situation. We buy what will excel for say, 80-90% of what we do and either accept the results or acquire the proper tool for a particular use case.

For over 20 years, I used Rolleis, Hasselblads and Leicas for all sorts of events in all sorts of conditions. I never once had someone tell me that my image was unsharp, improperly exposed or technically not up to standards. It has always been about "how" the image makes someone feel - its emotional impact.  It is what is behind the camera that counts, regardless of which hardware is selected.

For me at least, I chose Leica partially for what it is, but also for what it isn't - no overly-complex menus, fiddly button/dials or features that you would use only 5% of the time. Just what you need to take care of the task at hand (taking great photos and enjoying the art of photography)

 This is why the M Series has enjoyed such a huge success over the years.

-Brad