GFX100S vs SL2/X1D

[Alistairm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 minutes ago, ravinj said:

SL2 was never known as the king of AF. Not in 2019 not in 2020, certainly not in 2021. Not sure why suddenly people are calling this as a showstopper. I am just glad that SL2 can actually AF. If I need to catch birds in flight or eye AF on an eagle, there are better bodies and lenses for that use case. 

This hits the nail on the head for me. To each their own, but in almost all scenarios that I shoot where AF gets strained (mostly birding), the lack of any native L mount long lenses has me reaching for an SLR and a 600 f/4 anyway. 

I shot around 70,000 frames of soccer and netball photos with the first generation SL and 90-280 and the AF handled that easily. That said, with sport anticipation and pre-focusing is more important than blazing fast continuous tracking. 

[Advertisement]

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

[aksclix]

57 minutes ago, ravinj said:

Agree, get both - SL2 for cats and GFX 100S for flowers.

next time, try growing up instead of resorting to snarky comments based on assumptions.. 

[tom0511]

I have a D500 for subjects, where I am not satisfied by SL2 AF. I use it for sports (soccer and handball), fast action of the dog and things like this.For 95% of my photography the SL2 AF is fast enough and I prefer the IQ from the Leica Camera over the Nikon.

I am a bit more concerned about AF "speed" of the x1dII.

[ravinj]

1 hour ago, aksclix said:

next time, try growing up instead of resorting to snarky comments based on assumptions.. 

Next time, you don't have to comment. Try using the SL2 and don't be nasty.

[ravinj]

2 hours ago, Alistairm said:

This hits the nail on the head for me. To each their own, but in almost all scenarios that I shoot where AF gets strained (mostly birding), the lack of any native L mount long lenses has me reaching for an SLR and a 600 f/4 anyway. 

I shot around 70,000 frames of soccer and netball photos with the first generation SL and 90-280 and the AF handled that easily. That said, with sport anticipation and pre-focusing is more important than blazing fast continuous tracking. 

Exactly. If I need long lenses, I reach out for other systems that have ben in this game for a while now.

[ravinj]

2 hours ago, aksclix said:

Nice.. I see what you did there.. super clever!

You got it.

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, ravinj said:

Agree, get both - SL2 for cats and GFX 100S for flowers.

What did you mean by this? I have shared a handful of images of cats and one image of a flower too.. Even if this wasn't a comment directed at me, how is this not a snarky comment? It seems you were trying to look down on those who photograph flowers and cats.. Do you seriously think they would just capture images of cats and flowers with their cameras? 

30 minutes ago, ravinj said:

Next time, you don't have to comment. Try using the SL2 and don't be nasty.

Oh I do use my SL2 and I have posted images of other subjects too. If I don't share it here, that doesn't mean I don't use it.. 

And, I don't believe I said something nasty.. 

 

In general the attitude towards other members should be polite irrespective of what the other person's skill level is.. 

[ravinj]

Yes, it would be good to be polite and not ask others to grow up and pass snarky comments like "$4 cheaper" or even comment at all if you don't like the comment. We can call it a day and move on.

Edited March 1, 2021 by ravinj

[aksclix]

2 minutes ago, ravinj said:

Yes, it would be good to be polite and not ask others to grow up. We can call it a day and move on.

Alright.. my apologies for saying that! I could’ve avoided it

[SJH]

5 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I can well understand that there are scenarios where better AF than Leica can offer could be vital for a particular type of photography - I wouldn't argue with that. But it's a big step, with big assumptions along the way, to conclude from that that for others AF is not important.

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding here, my comments aren’t so much orientated as such to specific people or that AF isn’t important perhaps for them. What I’m endeavouring to articulate is that whilst we all bought our SL2’s or SL2-S with a pretty good understanding of where they were positioned and why we therefore liked it we are but a handful of Leica supporters in this forum.

My concern is that all over the internet and YouTube Panasonic’s FF AF gets a bit of a panning now and by default to a certain extent so does Leica, given the the range of camera’s now available at a similar price point. Whether we think this or that about it within here isn’t really what I’m getting at, ultimately I have a concern that the timing of the SL2 launch was stretching the Panasonic AF system to it’s maximum and therefore it potentially limits it’s success to a wider audience of photographers only a year on. My fear is that Leica must know this now we’re in 2021 so commercially they’d most likely would want to to do as much as they possibly can to ‘draw level’ and strive for continuous improvement. It appears they’re struggling with this given the time frame so far in launching new firmware.

All companies make mistakes (Leica has some of course) so I’m just hoping that the SL line and lenses really can have a great future ahead that’s all but I’m slightly concerned that commercially their market for the SL2 has narrowed somewhat. The AF side of things is pretty reasonable already but with just a few tweaks it could convince more buyers who might have bought an R5 or perhaps a GFXs that’s all. Ultimately we in here are mostly very happy with what we do and what we use our SL’s for but what’s not to like say in having R5 AF performance in the SL2 today at broadly the same price point? I’m sure we’d all be delighted whether we used it to the full or not and welcomed many more people to this forum

[Succisa75]

Hopefully the SL line doesn’t go the way of the R series.
 

Many Leica enthusiasts appreciated the R line and the lenses, but the masses went to Canon, Nikon etc. End result Leica had to make a financial decision to carry on or to focus on what they knew drew customers and numbers. 

For some here, the SL2/ -S is a great camera for what they need. Lifestyle photos, pics with the family,  photography that doesn’t require state of the art AF and speed. 
For others they want more performance for photos and Video: Fast action photography, sports, wildlife, all day battery life, better buffering, decent AF for video etc.  
They wanted the one Leica that could essentially do it all. Unfortunately the SL2/ -S isn’t designed internally to maximise these needs. Body yes, internals no.  
Why some are upset here Is Leica essentially promised this type of performance with the SL2. Told many that making the investment into the system would be good and used the original SL’s many updates as an example. Unfortunately we are in Q1 of 2021 and they haven’t delivered on that, but we did get multishot....

Additionally this whole L Mount alliance isn’t being maximised by Leica. The average buyer doesn’t understand it and they don’t see the lenses to know how much potential there is in the system. Leica doesn’t promote this in their stores, even YouTube channels like Red Dot Forum all but ignore it in their ongoing live series.  How is this going to help sell cameras and lenses??

In my opinion I think Leica does a few things really well: branding, lenses, camera build and design.  

When it comes to technology, and really understanding the needs of potential new buyers to the SL Pro mirrorless system, they seem to fall back to “Its a Leica” mindset and expect new buyers to accept their slower timeline, extremely expensive lenses and lack of technology vs competitors for the sake of prestige and build quality. 

This works for the M and Q but it won’t work for the SL line, and one could argue it didn’t work for the R line either. 

The truth is the competition has caught up with lenses. With technology being the main factor,  companies can produce as good or even better lenses at a fraction of the price.  Sure the build quality of the lens is different, but optically you would be hard pressed to see a difference and at the end of the day, the images we show are what matter for most. 

From my discussion with a number of camera shops sales for the SL line aren’t great.  Lenses are arguably too expensive for even a number of Leica fans with extremely slow roll out. If it wasn’t for Panasonic and Sigma, the take up would be even slower. 
Numbers don’t lie and I believe they know or I hope they know the issues at hand, but are they ready to change course and fix them? Only time will tell.  
 

I for one love the SL2/-S design and potential, but I feel Leica’s direction with these cameras needs to be reassessed. 
 

 

 

Edited March 2, 2021 by Succisa75

[LeonS]

If someone from leica is reading this, what I want is a mirrorless medium format with 

100mp

ibis with Sony like multishot with 400-600mp. 

sl like handling

sl like software

leaf and focal plane shutter

world class optics offering with one very big fast portrait lens

Best ever evf

good colour

fast enough AF with different mode unlike x1d

maybe a secondary modular model like 907x for my professional view camera system

and most importantly leica red dot and leica pricing.

everything is within leica’s mean to do it. If this happens (especially with the 907x equivalent), I am more than happy to sell my hasselblad (or Fuji depends on when it arrives) and pay my leica tax

Or please hire me as a consultant for product research

[Mr.Q]

13 hours ago, LD_50 said:

The AF is not slow and unreliable for anything I would shoot with manual focus on my M. 

It’s not great at tracking with shallow DOF. I wouldn’t rely on manual focus for this, I would choose an AF system that prioritizes it. I definitely would not use an M. My Nikon system did this very well.  

It’s not a reliable eye AF system with very shallow DOF. It’s only very recent that any cameras do this reliably. Most still seem to miss slightly, focusing on eyelashes or cheeks or noses, if resolution is high enough to see this. I’ve never owned a system that does this well and I’ve been fine. The M was okay for this purpose with a lot of practice but only with shorter lenses and my hit rate is still better with AF. 

AF is adequate for casual stuff. For action it's poor.  Video AF is horrendous with pulsing and fluttering. I would choose a M for speed/accuracy with moderate DOF.

[LD_50]

17 minutes ago, Mr.Q said:

AF is adequate for casual stuff. For action it's poor.  Video AF is horrendous with pulsing and fluttering. I would choose a M for speed/accuracy with moderate DOF.

We definitely shoot differently. I am probably in line with more shooters for action. I wouldn’t use an M for it. I would rather use an SL, SL2, SL2-S, or a completely different system like Nikon or Canon or Sony. 

I also wouldn’t choose an M for video. 

[LocalHero1953]

6 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

For some here, the SL2/ -S is a great camera for what they need. Lifestyle photos, pics with the family,  photography that doesn’t require state of the art AF and speed. 

Once again, you're transferring your gripes with the SL series into incorrect assumptions about those who don't agree with you. 

6 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

For others they want more performance for photos and Video: Fast action photography, sports, wildlife, all day battery life, better buffering, decent AF for video etc.  

This is a particular use scenario of photography for which I would not pick the SL series, and where Leica has never had a market to lose. If you think the only alternatives where good AF is needed is lifestyle and family photography then you might want to lift your horizons. 

[Zeleifa]

For what I do, accurate AF is important however,   being fast is not that critical. SL2 build quality and physical & functional ergonomics are superb. Therefore, beside lenses’ options and quality’s superiority, bottom-line defining factor is IQ.

I believe, ultimately it would be interesting to compare GFX 100S’ IQ against SL2 and GFX100.

[hamey]

9 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

Hopefully the SL line doesn’t go the way of the R series.
 

Many Leica enthusiasts appreciated the R line and the lenses, but the masses went to Canon, Nikon etc. End result Leica had to make a financial decision to carry on or to focus on what they knew drew customers and numbers. 

For some here, the SL2/ -S is a great camera for what they need. Lifestyle photos, pics with the family,  photography that doesn’t require state of the art AF and speed. 
For others they want more performance for photos and Video: Fast action photography, sports, wildlife, all day battery life, better buffering, decent AF for video etc.  
They wanted the one Leica that could essentially do it all. Unfortunately the SL2/ -S isn’t designed internally to maximise these needs. Body yes, internals no.  
Why some are upset here Is Leica essentially promised this type of performance with the SL2. Told many that making the investment into the system would be good and used the original SL’s many updates as an example. Unfortunately we are in Q1 of 2021 and they haven’t delivered on that, but we did get multishot....

Additionally this whole L Mount alliance isn’t being maximised by Leica. The average buyer doesn’t understand it and they don’t see the lenses to know how much potential there is in the system. Leica doesn’t promote this in their stores, even YouTube channels like Red Dot Forum all but ignore it in their ongoing live series.  How is this going to help sell cameras and lenses??

In my opinion I think Leica does a few things really well: branding, lenses, camera build and design.  

When it comes to technology, and really understanding the needs of potential new buyers to the SL Pro mirrorless system, they seem to fall back to “Its a Leica” mindset and expect new buyers to accept their slower timeline, extremely expensive lenses and lack of technology vs competitors for the sake of prestige and build quality. 

This works for the M and Q but it won’t work for the SL line, and one could argue it didn’t work for the R line either. 

The truth is the competition has caught up with lenses. With technology being the main factor,  companies can produce as good or even better lenses at a fraction of the price.  Sure the build quality of the lens is different, but optically you would be hard pressed to see a difference and at the end of the day, the images we show are what matter for most. 

From my discussion with a number of camera shops sales for the SL line aren’t great.  Lenses are arguably too expensive for even a number of Leica fans with extremely slow roll out. If it wasn’t for Panasonic and Sigma, the take up would be even slower. 
Numbers don’t lie and I believe they know or I hope they know the issues at hand, but are they ready to change course and fix them? Only time will tell.  
 

I for one love the SL2/-S design and potential, but I feel Leica’s direction with these cameras needs to be reassessed. 
 

 

Some very interesting points.

Now for my point of view, as a long time user of Leica cameras, since 1973 with the Leicaflex SL to which I still have and since then others that I bought over the years mainly the R system to which I loved more so then the M line.

Personally I wouldn't be surprised if the R system will outlast the SL system. I can use my R lenses on Canon EOS bodies as well other mirrorless  bodies such Nikon, Sony, Canon and Fuji etc, so the future for R lenses is good.

Remember the R system was in production for over 40 years until it was discontinued by the present owners, how much money was spent on developing the S and the SL system,

so whats the future for the S system will it reach the same faith as the R system, I cannot see it lasting 40 years.

As for the SL system, that depends on how long Panasonic is prepared  to part with it's technology to Leica.

So would I buy another Leica, well first I would have to get my head examined, and if deemed normal, I certainly would only go for the M or Q system.

The Japanese are the masters in electronics, poor Leica can only sit and wait for the crumbs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Flou]

I still have a SL (Version 1)-Body and the AF is so annoying. My 75mm Apo-Summicron renders so beautifully, but my little kids are moving all the time and it happens often, that the focus is not spot on. I love the built quality, the userinterface, the wonderful APO SL-lenses...but AF is so bad, that I am considering to buy a SL2-s or change to the Fuji GFX100s. I don't take photos of running or flying animals but when I invest so much money in a system, I want to have the opportunity to take pictures of my little kids walking in the garden and still get perfect pictures. And this is not given with the SL. 

I am afraid, that even the better AF of the SL2-s is still not good enough. I am no sports-photographer, but I want to take pictures of my children playing and running und moving. If a Leica is not able to do that, I will be moving to another system. The Fuji GFX100s is also not the best AF-camera on the market, but I think it is a better package of IQ, AF and ergonomics than the Leica SL2-s is. 

At the moment the only reason why I am still having my Leica-gear is: I love Leica since being an M9-shooter...for me Leica has something magical. But an AF-camera with a bad AF is not the way I want to go any further.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Leicaiste]

I would try both the SL2 and the GFX100 before making any decision. 

I’m not sure the Fuji AF is better. 

[frame-it]

Just now, Leicaiste said:

I would try both the SL2 and the GFX100 before making any decision. 

I’m not sure the Fuji AF is better. 

ive tried both, the GFX100s blows away the SL series.

Edited March 2, 2021 by frame-it