GFX100S vs SL2/X1D

[Mr.Q]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, LD_50 said:

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. 

Right, like I said, I rather manual focus than rely on slow and unreliable AF.  Fortunately I don't need to make that choice anymore.  The AF of my Fuji and Sony gear is more than adequate.

[Leicaiste]

If AF is the criteria, try the EOS R5. 

[Mr.Q]

Just now, frame-it said:

ive tried both, the 100s blows away the SL series.

Yes it's not even in the same tier.

[frame-it]

1 minute ago, Mr.Q said:

Yes it's not even in the same tier.

YES 😇

but unfortunately, there are too many people on this forum who have never tried the camera but keep inaccurately commenting on its features/specs.

seems to mostly happen on the SL forum of the site

Edited March 2, 2021 by frame-it

[Mr.Q]

I suppose it's hard to imagine a medium format camera that focuses faster than most FF cameras.

[LocalHero1953]

15 minutes ago, Mr.Q said:

I suppose it's hard to imagine a medium format camera that focuses faster than most FF cameras.

Why should medium focus be slower? I'm not arguing either way, just curious. I know MF cameras have had a reputation for being slower, but assumed that was because they weren't designed to be used for high speed activity. Is it to do with the size of lens and power demand? Focusing element inertia?

[Mr.Q]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I believe larger sensors take a longer time to readout. And bigger lenses play a factor too.

 

[Succisa75]

8 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

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

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. 

What gripes am I transferring? I’m relaying customer usage, posts I see on various FB groups and pages etc. There is no negativity in that sentence at all. 

Additionally this is not about right or wrong, we are here expressing opinions and having a discussion. If it was a right and wrong scenario this forum topic would have been over many pages ago. 

You might not choose and SL for those applications but others that want AF and and EVF might. How you use a camera might be different from someone else and that’s the beauty of it all. We use cameras we like to capture moments that mean something to us.  Some people will use a 1DX to  take portraits. Is that wrong? No. It’s their personal preference. 
 

 

[Succisa75]

3 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

I suppose it's hard to imagine a medium format camera that focuses faster than most FF cameras.

What makes the 100S and GFX 100 so appealing is you are now getting full frame performance in medium format. One reason is phase detect AF, another is maximising the potential in the sensor. 
 

I think why the SL2 is being compared here is mainly due to price and perceived value. 
 

[LocalHero1953]

8 minutes ago, Succisa75 said:

What gripes am I transferring? I’m relaying customer usage, posts I see on various FB groups and pages etc. There is no negativity in that sentence at all. 

Additionally this is not about right or wrong, we are here expressing opinions and having a discussion. If it was a right and wrong scenario this forum topic would have been over many pages ago. 

You might not choose and SL for those applications but others that want AF and and EVF might. How you use a camera might be different from someone else and that’s the beauty of it all. We use cameras we like to capture moments that mean something to us.  Some people will use a 1DX to  take portraits. Is that wrong? No. It’s their personal preference. 
 

"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." 

A more balanced statement would acknowledge that there are many photographic uses other than lifestyle and family, including documentary, portrait, street, stage/music, photo journalism, wildlife & natural world other than BIF, conceptual story-telling and landscape for which the SL series and its AF can be fine - as demonstrated on social media and on this forum. If that's what you were actually implying, then I have no further argument!

I fully agree with your second and third paras.

[BernardC]

16 hours ago, LeonS said:

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

Leon,

The SL system is Leica's mirrorless AF offering. It offers most of what you want, but not 100 mp (yet), or a larger sensor.

Maybe you need to sit-out this round, and wait for each company to bring-out new models. My guess is that Hasselblad is the most likely to tick all your boxes, but Fuji (and possibly Leica) may surprise us.

I am surprised that you specify Sony when listing your IBIS and multi-shot wants, given that the Panasonic/Leica implementations are generally considered to be much more effective.

[tom0511]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb LocalHero1953:

Why should medium focus be slower? I'm not arguing either way, just curious. I know MF cameras have had a reputation for being slower, but assumed that was because they weren't designed to be used for high speed activity. Is it to do with the size of lens and power demand? Focusing element inertia?

Bigger lenses and heavier glass to move. I also expect there are no MF sensors available which offer AF speed comparable to Nikon or Canon sports cameras.

Also...I guess fast AF is mainly important for longer focal length. And medium format cameras are no the typical cameras for mong focal length. I wonder how big and heavy a Lens for medium format would look like, which offers the reach of the 90-280/2.8-40 Leica SL lens. 

And...I guess if you want fast AF you also want fast frames/Sec., and the size of 100MP-files doesnt really help here.

I still think medium format cameras do not have the goal to be action cameras, eventhough I do sometimes use them myself for images of kids, dog etc.

 

Edited March 2, 2021 by tom0511

[tom0511]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Succisa75:

What makes the 100S and GFX 100 so appealing is you are now getting full frame performance in medium format. One reason is phase detect AF, another is maximising the potential in the sensor. 
 

I think why the SL2 is being compared here is mainly due to price and perceived value. 
 

I assume one reason why the SL2 is compared to some medium format cameras is that the SL lenses are so good and Leica color and IQ that the SL2 is one of the few cameras which reduces the gap between between FF and MF.

FF get better in IQ and MF cameras get faster, so they get closer together in the last 2 years.

IMO the Leica S2 was one if not the first camera system which started this. 

[hillavoider]

10 hours ago, Flou said:

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.

i read this and i'm in the exact same situation, love the lenses but hate the camera, however i stupidly went ahead and blew 10k on a SL2 which is just hopeless for kids or anything moving. I have a 4 year old and my 10 year old DSLR canon 5D2 is better at getting him in focus. So my advice don't blow all that money on a SL2. Maybe look at a Lumix S5 so you can keep using leica glass ? 

Edited March 2, 2021 by hillavoider

[Succisa75]

6 hours ago, LocalHero1953 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." 

A more balanced statement would acknowledge that there are many photographic uses other than lifestyle and family, including documentary, portrait, street, stage/music, photo journalism, wildlife & natural world other than BIF, conceptual story-telling and landscape for which the SL series and its AF can be fine - as demonstrated on social media and on this forum. If that's what you were actually implying, then I have no further argument!

I fully agree with your second and third paras.

Hmm... if you read what you wrote and I wrote, it’s the same thing. I condensed it as I had more points to address. 
 

Let’s not overly dissect something for the sake of doing so. You clearly understood my point and no one else here had any issue, so no need to bring out the grammar police  

Cheers 

[tom0511]

One question here. Do you use S-AF or C-AF for "chasing" the kids?

In my experience with mirrorless/contrast AF cams very often S-AF works better, faster and more precise than C-AF, even for moving subjects.

If you really want a near perfect AF for moving subjects, check out a Nikon D500. The optical viewfinder also helps to catch action, because it does not have a time lag compared to EVFs. 

[JMorro]

Focus stacking is essential to pin-sharp foreground and background in my landscape photography.  I love the SL2 ergonomics, color science etc. but I won't adopt the system until focus stacking is added to the functions.  Touching or handling the camera between shots in a focus stack is not acceptable as it causes ghosting.  

[Sjz]

1 hour ago, JMorro said:

Focus stacking is essential to pin-sharp foreground and background in my landscape photography.  I love the SL2 ergonomics, color science etc. but I won't adopt the system until focus stacking is added to the functions.  Touching or handling the camera between shots in a focus stack is not acceptable as it causes ghosting.  

Hi, I believe you can achieve refocus and shoot without touching the camera using fotos app.

[LD_50]

1 hour ago, JMorro said:

Focus stacking is essential to pin-sharp foreground and background in my landscape photography.  I love the SL2 ergonomics, color science etc. but I won't adopt the system until focus stacking is added to the functions.  Touching or handling the camera between shots in a focus stack is not acceptable as it causes ghosting.  

I would love to see focus stacking added as well to ease the process.

That said, given few cameras have this feature and you said working without it is unacceptable, what have you been doing to get acceptable results? 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 3/3/2021 at 7:19 AM, tom0511 said:

Bigger lenses and heavier glass to move. I also expect there are no MF sensors available which offer AF speed comparable to Nikon or Canon sports cameras.

Also...I guess fast AF is mainly important for longer focal length. And medium format cameras are no the typical cameras for mong focal length. I wonder how big and heavy a Lens for medium format would look like, which offers the reach of the 90-280/2.8-40 Leica SL lens. 

And...I guess if you want fast AF you also want fast frames/Sec., and the size of 100MP-files doesnt really help here.

I still think medium format cameras do not have the goal to be action cameras, eventhough I do sometimes use them myself for images of kids, dog etc.

 

There's an enormous gulf between the CAF speed of the SL2 and a true *sports* camera. plenty of room to have something much much better than any Leica. The GFX 100 sensor has about the same capabilities as the Fuji APSC line. Maybe 80% of the way to sports camera from a Leica SL2.

Fuji make a 250mm with a dedicated teleconverter. HB make a 210 that can be adapted to the X1D with a 1.7x and maintain AF (I have this combo). So there are lenses which are as long as Leica longest offering. The 210 with adaptor and TC is about the same size as the 90-280 but lighter. No IS though.

Fast on sensor AF isn't there for action shooters. It's there because apparently we're all going to need cinema quality video and don't want to learn how to focus when shooting video. So sensors are getting faster AF regardless. Probably due more to the bleeting and whinging of Youtubers, who are all video people really. Same reason we get stupid fully articulating rear screens on some cameras instead of the panasonic Tri-flip system. Real videographers already use an external recorder and know the cables block those screens anyway. But we're stuck with Jordan having more infuence on a camera than a real photographer.

I have no idea how people end up with an SL2 and not know it's CAF is lousy. Do people just not research before  they spend 10K on a camera/lens? The same people then stick it on CAF like a Sony and expect miracles. Next thing they're on here complaining up a storm. Bizarre.... They don't explore the cameras settings either, so they don't work out that SAF is vastly better than CAF, even for moving subjects. Technique trumps gear, every time. Most of my favourite kids shots were taken on an M. 95% are sharp. The rest are art. 

Now they're looking a a 100MP camera to get photos of their kids? The SL2 is overkill!! Personally I can imagine little more droll than scanning through bulging hard drive packed with thousands of 100MP, nearly identical, perfectly sharp and exposed boring photos of my kids. Patience, technique and a couple of well timed exposures is all I ever needed. These people don't need a 100S. They need a video camera because that's what they're really doing. Slow video. The lack of craft is depressing.....

Gordon