GFX100S vs SL2/X1D

[P1505]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’d still have the SL2 over the alternatives. The feel of the camera is huge to me. We’re at a point where image quality is amazing across the board. If I used auto everything and gave myself over to being a tripod made of meat I’d go with a Sony but as I prefer to frame, focus, and set exposure myself I have no need for more. Hell, I’m looking into a 5Ds!

I do often think we’re too obsessed with stats. It’s addictive and easier than photographing interesting things well.

But! I will say this thread is making me crave an X1D or 907x. Don’t need one but damn if I don’t keep thinking I’d like to print bigger. Ya know, for that future show in a gallery when Covid is done and I’ve photographed something anyone else would care about.

If I was a pro however, with demanding clients - I’d buy whatever got me paid.

 

[Succisa75]

7 hours ago, SJH said:

I think you've hit the nail on the head, 14 months ago the SL2 didn't look too far behind outside its core strengths, today we now have the R5, R6 and A1. Nikon should soon release their Z1 and Canon an R1, Panasonic must be having to make major decision on where to take the S2 and S2R re AF as the S1 and S1R can't really be selling very well now. Panasonic's decisions will of course have a significant impact on Leica's approach.

If the S2 and S2R come later this year I think Panasonic know there have to be major AF enhancements, it then looks like a long way out to the SL3 and will Leica really want to play here give the new camera's from Fuji, Canon, Sony and Nikon if Panasonic can't cut it?

The value to performance ration is getting worse by the month unfortunately for the SL2.

Agree with you. By the time the update for the SL2-S comes along there are probably even more cameras that will be released. 

There are rumours that Panasonic might update the S line again to some extent. Will we see a mark II version? I know sales aren’t doing well at all. The best sellers are the S5 and S1H. This is unfortunate because they are really nice cameras to use. 
IMHO all they need to do is improve the AF and ISO for the S1R. A BSI sensor will help in this regard.  
Valid point about the SL2 if this happens. Will Leica come out with another camera right away? Will they wait four years? I think the former is more realistic. Waiting four years in the full frame mirrorless market is challenging. 
Now for the SL2-S this is interesting. It’s a BSI sensor. Who makes this sensor? Sony. Are Sony sensors contrast based only? Not for a while. This leads me to think perhaps the update coming to the SL2-S for AF perhaps will include phase detect. That would change the game considerably and also make sense why they didn’t have it at launch so it wouldn’t impede on SL2 sales even more. Again this is just a hypothesis and I could be completely wrong. 
Regardless, the longer they wait the harder it is to compete in this fast moving camera market. 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Succisa75

[setuporg]

10 hours ago, SJH said:

The value to performance ration is getting worse by the month unfortunately for the SL2.

I think it's an entirely wrong approach to consider the SL series.  AF is much faster than any other Leica, and absolutely sufficient for the majority of use cases.  SL2 takes Leica glass and is fine-tuned to create the Leica look.  Same with Q2.  It shoots great video using Leica glass.  It accepts M glass and with the Leica adapter it also knows which M lens it is, if coded.

I don't give a flying saucer for AF speed improvements in other cameras.  Those who think they've now somehow ended up with a lemon should not have bothered with Leica in the first place.  With SL series, Leica provides an AF+video alternative to those who want it in addition to M, and/or because of Leica glass.  But it is interesting that even mentioning 100s ferreted out such fears!:). It surely is a sad world where if you got an SL2 last year you are suddenly unhappy because of what Fuji/Sony/etc are doing...  Probably another reason to stick with M.  Or M-P and film.  I'm enjoying my new old Contarex and Bessamatic cameras too.:)

[beewee]

As far as AF goes, if you’re shooting stationary objects which actually includes a lot of wildlife, then the AF from just about any camera, including Leica is sufficient.

The only instance where better continuous AF is needed for moving subjects like sports, vehicles, and birds in flight. For that, you’d be better off with Canon, Nikon, or Sony and this have been the case for decades. Not only is the AF better, there are also more lens options in the super telephoto range which Leica does not even offer. This is telling in that Leica knows that it would not make sense to offer such lenses unless it has an AF system that can keep up for such use cases. Same goes for Panasonic.

Also, for street shooting, many Leica users coming from the M system use zone focus so once again continuous AF is not needed. Either MF or AFs for prefocusing is needed.

[aksclix]

☝️☝️Very good and valid points.. makes sense too.. when the first SL came out, I already had a D810 and it was great!! I took the SL for a test drive.. Leica had that wonderful program back then.. I’ve always wanted it since then and when the SL2 came out I just HAD to get it!! Been resisting it for too long! Then one thing lead to another and now I have a 24-90 and a 90-280.. 

got the Sony a9 for BIF, GFX for some fine details and big prints in the future, x1d+45p just for walkabouts and a canon R6+28-70 f2 for portraits and indoor events.. (although there have been none since lockdown) I am happy with different systems for different purposes. For someone who doesn’t like switching lenses on the job, this works for me.. 

while I like the SL2’s grip.. it’s not quite comfortable with longer lenses like the Sigma 150-600.. the 90-280 feels good! like what’s said above, the AF is sufficient for most purposes except BIF I guess.. and the occasional struggle in low light

that said, if Leica could produce some mean and heavy lenses for R system why not the SL2 is my question

Edited February 5, 2021 by aksclix

[Jeff S]

19 minutes ago, aksclix said:

that said, if Leica could produce some mean and heavy lenses for R system why not the SL2 is my question

R lenses work well on the SL2.

Three ‘P’s’ also come to mind: profits (market assessment); priorities; and/or partnerships (L mount alliance options).

Jeff

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

26 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

R lenses work well on the SL2.

Three ‘P’s’ also come to mind: profits (market assessment); priorities; and/or partnerships (L mount alliance options).

Jeff

I’ve tried the 350 and a couple other lenses.. they’re too heavy for my wrist, lifting a heavy lens and turning it for manual focusing is just too hard for me.. and after getting focus, the image in the viewfinder is shaking like crazy at that focal length.. I would love the 180 f2.. 

my wrists are weak from a fall decade ago

[frame-it]

2 hours ago, aksclix said:

that said, if Leica could produce some mean and heavy lenses for R system why not the SL2 is my question

 

1 hour ago, aksclix said:

my wrists are weak from a fall decade ago

so you want a 400+ mm lens that's heavy or not heavy?  with Autofocus..maybe the Sigma ?

[setuporg]

10 hours ago, P1505 said:

a tripod made of meat

I feel that my participation here was worth it just for that!:)

[aksclix]

25 minutes ago, frame-it said:

 

so you want a 400+ mm lens that's heavy or not heavy?  with Autofocus..maybe the Sigma ?

Big lenses are definitely a challenge for me.. I can manage with some degree of discomfort in my wrists but sometimes it hurts more.. I have this carpal boss thing growing which must be operated I guess.. 
Anyway, manual focus will never work for me at that focal length.. AF makes it doable even with my wrist condition.. I can handhold my Sony 200-600 for about 15 mins actively before needing a break.. it weighs a tad over 2kg... 

the sigma 150-600 is just about the same as 90-280 in weight... I can handhold it but again only for 15-20 mins before having any discomfort.. sometimes even with 24-90 I can feel my wrist begging for rest

Edited February 5, 2021 by aksclix

[SJH]

I t

3 hours ago, setuporg said:

I think it's an entirely wrong approach to consider the SL series.  AF is much faster than any other Leica, and absolutely sufficient for the majority of use cases.  SL2 takes Leica glass and is fine-tuned to create the Leica look.  Same with Q2.  It shoots great video using Leica glass.  It accepts M glass and with the Leica adapter it also knows which M lens it is, if coded.

I don't give a flying saucer for AF speed improvements in other cameras.  Those who think they've now somehow ended up with a lemon should not have bothered with Leica in the first place.  With SL series, Leica provides an AF+video alternative to those who want it in addition to M, and/or because of Leica glass.  But it is interesting that even mentioning 100s ferreted out such fears!:). It surely is a sad world where if you got an SL2 last year you are suddenly unhappy because of what Fuji/Sony/etc are doing...  Probably another reason to stick with M.  Or M-P and film.  I'm enjoying my new old Contarex and Bessamatic cameras too.:)

I think you are misunderstanding me and I do understand your points, however, this board is of course representative of a tiny fraction of the people using the SL range and the other camera’s mentioned. In other words if the SL2 met your needs 12 months ago and today, as well as allowing you to get the shots you want, well of course everything is great of course.

Unlike many reviewers on YouTube I very rarely flip my gear and over time I’ve ended up being all in with Leica as I really like their approach. I’m merely endeavouring to point out the commercial issues of the FF sector in that whatever we think when it comes to AF performance the SL2 is actually at the bottom of the list now; high ISO shooting also has some issues with this sensor. Naturally if you bought it exclusively for BIF of course I get your points  !!

I didn’t buy the first SL so the SL2 was my first purchase and I’ve subsequently acquired an SL2-S and added a number the SL lenses to my M glass as well. I want Leica to be successful therefore with the SL2 and SL2-S but with just about every sensible reviewer giving Panasonic a hard time about their FF AF performance in general, as opposed to extreme user cases (with justifiable cause), then it makes it hard going for them and potentially Leica. In my view Leica are very reliant on Panasonic so clearly success leads to success here. Look at the mess Nikon have got themselves into with the Z range initially for example where you fall behind in some areas.

So no I’m not unhappy because the R5 and the A1 have appeared but I would like to push Leica to at least get it’s AF (and high ISO performance potentially) on the SL2 off the bottom so that more people will buy these superb camera’s. For example I’m delighted with the enhancements that Leica made when they introduced the M10R and M10M but I would hate to see the SL range perception reduced to ‘old Panasonic tech in Leica clothing, for very niche fanboys, who like to flail themselves with getting round all the idiosyncrasies’ and for sales to fall off a cliff. I suspect Panasonic are beginning to see a significant decline in S1 and S1R sales and whilst they are not Leica this must also be a concern for Leica as they don’t want a repeat of the M5 albeit for very different reasons!!

 

[beewee]

1 hour ago, aksclix said:

Big lenses are definitely a challenge for me.. I can manage with some degree of discomfort in my wrists but sometimes it hurts more..

Monopods are your friend.

Although I do shoot my Canon 300mm 2.8 IS v1 handheld, it is much more pleasant with a monopod for support. RRS makes some really nice tilting monopod heads which is much easier to use than a ball head.

[BernardC]

20 hours ago, SJH said:

The value to performance ration is getting worse by the month unfortunately for the SL2.

I think that recent releases from Sony and Canon prove otherwise. There is definitely a market in that price range.

We can (and do) argue forever about whether Leica should "react" to Sony's 50MP, when they only offer 47... The truth is that things have not changed with the latest round of releases: choose Sony if your main concern is speed, at the expense of colours (especially skin tones) and user interface. Choose Canon for their unique look and large ecosystem. Choose Leica for their outstanding lenses, great UI, and colour science. Choose Panasonic if you want professional-quality video. It really is that simple.

[BernardC]

I should have continued: choose a medium format system if you value ultimate image quality above speed/practicality.

Of course, all of these are compromises and varying degrees of performance.

• You can get "high resolution imaging" from smaller formats, just like we used to with slow film. It's harder to do, compared to starting-out with a larger format.
• You can get great video from any of these cameras, but only the S1H has all the tools you need built-in (and is Netflix-certified, which only matters if you are working on a Netflix-funded production).
• You can, to a certain extent, fix colour "in post."
• You can learn a difficult UI.
• You can get sharp images with slower AF.

Also, let's not fool ourselves into thinking that Leica (or anybody other company) is "doing nothing." Leica released an astounding number of new cameras last year, in the Q, SL, M, and S lines. They have not been standing still. They have access to all the same new gadgets as every other camera company, from the same sub-contractors (by the way, Sony Semi, who make sensors, are not the same company as Sony consumer products). They know what's out there, and aren't afraid to use it.

[Mr.Q]

What if the medium format system offers more speed over the FF system it's replacing 😆

[setuporg]

2 hours ago, Priaptor said:

The Q2 is great, however, every single time I shoot with the SL2 and compare to my Q2 I say to myself, why? The SL2 is just that good. 

I wonder, why?  The sensor is supposed to be the same and the color science is Leica and the 28/1.7 lens is great.  The EVF is much better on the SL2 but it only matters when shooting, and you can take Q2 anywhere.

[Jeff S]

IBIS on the SL2 (with OIS depending on lens choice) might potentially provide better handheld performance vs Q2 (with OIS), depending on user technique, shooting circumstances, etc.

Jeff

[Succisa75]

7 hours ago, BernardC said:

I think that recent releases from Sony and Canon prove otherwise. There is definitely a market in that price range.

We can (and do) argue forever about whether Leica should "react" to Sony's 50MP, when they only offer 47... The truth is that things have not changed with the latest round of releases: choose Sony if your main concern is speed, at the expense of colours (especially skin tones) and user interface. Choose Canon for their unique look and large ecosystem. Choose Leica for their outstanding lenses, great UI, and colour science. Choose Panasonic if you want professional-quality video. It really is that simple.

If I read your post correctly, I think your simplifying it just down to megapixels on a  sensor mainly and color science. 
it’s far more than that. Performance is the issue.

AF speeds that weren’t good at launch haven’t gotten any better, ISO performance, battery life issues, 4K video recording issues with anything than less than a 90% battery, buffering issues. 
 

Yes you are getting a beautiful camera, and prestige and yes you can use your M lenses ( that’s a secondary use for a camera designed for AF lenses) but you have to admit that for the price your paying for an SL2, there are now even more alternatives that out perform it by a large margin and the competition’s lenses have caught up in terms of image quality. 
 

We all want Leica to succeed, but to succeed they need to realise in this market segment competition is fierce and many customers and would be customers expect more. 

[Mr.Q]

10 hours ago, Jeff S said:

IBIS on the SL2 (with OIS depending on lens choice) might potentially provide better handheld performance vs Q2 (with OIS), depending on user technique, shooting circumstances, etc.

Jeff

Yes, OIS on the Q2 realistically provides maybe 2 stops of stabilization. IBIS on the SL2 is at least double as effective.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[hillavoider]

12 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

If I read your post correctly, I think your simplifying it just down to megapixels on a  sensor mainly and color science. 
it’s far more than that. Performance is the issue.

AF speeds that weren’t good at launch haven’t gotten any better, ISO performance, battery life issues, 4K video recording issues with anything than less than a 90% battery, buffering issues. 
 

Yes you are getting a beautiful camera, and prestige and yes you can use your M lenses ( that’s a secondary use for a camera designed for AF lenses) but you have to admit that for the price your paying for an SL2, there are now even more alternatives that out perform it by a large margin and the competition’s lenses have caught up in terms of image quality. 
 

We all want Leica to succeed, but to succeed they need to realise in this market segment competition is fierce and many customers and would be customers expect more. 

Well said, hopefully they’re listening, but I doubt it