Jump to content

Leica gear for media coverage


hansvons

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The following is a lengthy post. But perhaps there are others out there who are in my shoes, so please bear with me.

I’m a newbie to this forum, and I’m a newbie to Leica in the digital age. However, I own an R4 with a Summicron 50mm that I bought in 1990. The camera is dead, but the lens works still nicely. By profession, I work in the advertising and media industry, mostly as a director and writer. The first half of my career, I have spent with lensing commercials. The brands back then were Arri, Kodak, Zeiss, Cooke and Angenieux. Today, Kodak is dead, Arri is still leading the pack, the traditional cine lens manufacturers are still around but facing intense competition from Japan and now from China.
What’s more, the market itself has changed immensely too. There’s still the high-budget production with expensive talent requiring all the bells and whistles on set, but the projects, which a small and dedicated team can accomplish, grow more and more these days. And they can be more interesting and challenging in good ways.


I’ve owned cinema orientated gear for ten years (Red cameras, set of Zeiss Super Speeds) but sold most of it right in time before the full-format hype in cinema land kicked in badly and before COVID-19 killed the market altogether. Thus, lucky me, I have some funds to invest in new gear after re-orientating and re-evaluating what I need — no GAS here ;)
After investing a year of thought into this, with COVID-19 sending me into a not so much welcomed hiatus (the industry is coming back slowly now), I concluded that economically I don’t need cinema-orientated gear anymore since these jobs are in decline; I can rent whenever I have to. But, as it seems, jobs that require both video and photos, what I call media coverage because it’s not genuine filmmaking, are on the rise.  


I have professional relations to Canon and have test-driven some of their offerings, albeit not yet the R5 but their recent cinema products. I’m stunned what their tech can do. AF is a sensation, and some RF lenses are impressive. I also use every here and then a Nikon Z6, mostly for wildlife and people. Plus I own a Fuji EX3 for private usage on travels. In a nutshell: while they all make great images possible none of these cameras create skin tones comparable to Arri or Red cameras, plus their lenses mostly don’t reach the levels of dimensionality I’m used to. 

I then read articles in the FD Times about the Leica SL2 and the new SL2-S, and about the L-log video gamma which seems to be fully compatible with Arri Log-C; that would make the Leica’s footage fitting seamlessly into my postproduction workflow. Now, catching my attention, I’ve searched the web. With the sparse video footage that I found on the web but the many great pictures I see on this forum, and the accumulation of very likeable skin tones, I assumed that the SL2-S with its video capabilities quite likely could be my next camera.


Ok. From now on I’m in uncharted territory because I have no experience with digital Leicas whatsoever. I figure that I get an SL2-S as the primary hybrid camera. To make it fully video compatible I’m thinking of getting a Vocas L- to PL-mount adaptor with 15 mm rods. That way I could make use of my trusty Angenieux 16-42 S-35 mm zoom in S-35 mm mode. I also might want a cage - or not. I own an Atomos Ninja for monitoring which can record ProRes in various flavours via HDMI. 


I’m also thinking of getting me a 35 mm APO SL prime as my go-to setup for AF-based photography and videography. But when I cross that bridge, I surely want a 50 mm or/and a 75 mm APO SL prime too. Why these and not explicitly cheaper offerings from Sigma, for instance? I’ve shot a few projects with the superb Canon RF 50mm 1.2. It’s an excellent lens for sure. But it lacks a creamy focus fall-off and some dimensionality, plus it renders people’s faces more rounded in the opposite to comparable Leica lenses which tend to render people more on the slimmer side. I know that Sigma is not Canon, but they are very similar in their aim: sharp as hell, excellent at specs and offering decent build quality. But personality is not their aim. On the other hand, Leica lenses provide plenty of character and thus push my motivation to accomplish better imagery.


I’ve also tried the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 zoom, and its colleague from Canon and find them both flat and uninspiring. I assume that’s the case with the well-acclaimed Sigma 24-70 zoom too. The Leica 24-90 is probably the best zoom out there. But do I want a zoom for photography, I’m shooting mostly people in landscapes, streets and other environments? Not really. 


Then the question of light travel and fall-back camera. I find the Q2 intriguing, to say the least. Its concept seems to make it an ideal travel companion. Its fast and wide 28 mm lens, the possibility to crop the sensor to S-35 mm/APS-C without scarifying much resolution (25-27 mm in S-35 mm is my pet focal length), and its sturdiness would make it a great addition in the bag. 


From time to time, I’m shooting wildlife. For that, I might purchase the Sigma 100-400. I know that 400 mm isn’t long enough for birds, and I know that the Leica’s AF will be frustrating with flying birds. For the time being, I’m probably leaving this task to a Nikon Z6 with a 500mm lens, but perhaps there are hopes for a CL-2 with a much improved AF sporting an animal eye detection (one can dream). The Sigma 100-400 would be long enough for proper wildlife photography or even videography on the CL. That’d be making a lightweight hiking/wildlife combo. We’ll see.

If anyone here in the forum can chime in with valuable information or interesting insights, I’d be more than grateful.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your post.
On behalf of the wildlife photographers on this forum I can tell you that the CL+ Sigma 100-400 is an exceedingly capable wildlife combination with the advantage of (relatively) low weight and small size. The image quality might not reach 100% of the SL + 90-280, but it is close enough. The reach and handholdability are far better. In general, for wildlife, except for small and shy  birds, bush skills will get you far better images than a very long lens... 
For furry creatures, in my experience, a 400 mm on 135 format will suffice in 90% of cases. For the majority of birds too. So the Sigma 600 mm equivalent is a bonus. The SL2, obviously, will allow quite drastic cropping.
Having said that, the CL does have a video capability, but it is quite limited and intended for incidental "travel notebook" use.

In general, the CL married with (Leica) M primes is hard to beat, notwithstanding an excellent line of TL lenses zooms and primes plus offerings from the L alliance.

For Video use with the SL2/SLs, I cede to the experts. ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jappv, thanks for your answers! I like this part most:  In general, for wildlife, except for small and shy birds, bush skills will get you far better images than a very long lens... 

I can absolutely confirm your statement. This is also true with people, beauty, social issues, news, food, sports, and whatnot. If you are not comfortable in a specific area, if people or sports are not yours, you won't come home with convincing footage regardless of your gear's specs.

I like to give a second thought on the CL. As I mentioned above, I own a little Fuji EX3 which is somewhat Fuji's take on a CL-like camera: APS-C sensor, rangefinder-style EVF, interchangeable lenses. I use it with the Fuji 35mm f2 lens, which shows a distinct personality despite being fly-by-wire and heavily corrected in-camera. Size matters, especially when you are on a hike or travelling. The best camera is the one you are holding in your hand when things happen. For me, a DSLR-like or even film camera-like camera body works well when on a dedicated job, not so much when serendipity is your best friend.

That being said, I'm wondering whether to skip the idea of a Q2 and get a CL instead. With the 23mm prime (the 18mm is too much a wide-angle lens) this will make a great combination, similar to my little Fuji (and then Q2) but with an L-mount with all the great possibilities like interchangeability with SL lenses and the Sigma 100-400 for wildlife.

Have you on-hand experiences with the CL, the 10-400 and birds?

How likely are the odds that a CL2 will come out the next months?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the video side, you should have a look at the Panasonic S1H. It provides every feature of a digital cine camera, in a mirrorless form factor. V-Log should fit-in to any post workflow. The lens selection is the same, obviously. One not-insignificant advantage is that you don't really need a cage. The screen flips, so you don't need an external monitor, and you can get a shoe-mount accessory to attach XLR mics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great input, thanks!


If I considered the Panasonic S1H I'd be back at square one. Canon's C70 is a great little video camera, so is the C300MK3 or the C500MK2. I've shot with the latter one a few projects. And if I were not looking for a hybrid camera but for a grown-up video/cinema camera it might be the right horse. But even then Canon C500MK2 skin tones are not what I'm looking for. The same applies for Panasonic, Nikon, Sony for that matter. Skin tones are a very personal thing. 


A flippy screen is convenient for sure. But I'm an old school viewfinder user. When taking photos, I switch off the back screen all the time, same with video. I don't want to hold the camera in the distance to my body. I like to embrace it, to make it a part of me. 


Sound is a problem with hybrid cameras. For a perfect sound, a sound man is mandatory. Can't see myself shooting unrepeatable interviews without knowing what to expect. For lower profile interviews, I'm thinking of getting Tentacle devices. That way, I'm not relying on the camera's tech or wireless mics. However, the problem of proper monitoring remains.


Which brings me to this: a hybrid camera is a hybrid camera. It can be wonderful in certain areas and close to unusable in other areas. It surely isn't a Swiss Army knife. But it can be great for documentary work and even staged work if a point-and-shoot kind of style is the way to go. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since you mention the Q2 as a travel camera option, I can recommend it highly if you are ok with the 28mm "limitation". Small, tough, take anywhere camera with no compromise IQ even when compared to SL2 with SL lenses (within Q2's FL limit of course). 

Q2 with any of SL2/S also makes sense if one wants to minimize dealing with different batteries and chargers. A big deal for me while traveling, but may be a non-issue for others.

Even the original Q with only 24MP punches far above its weight, literally and figuratively.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/9/2021 at 11:42 AM, hansvons said:

Jappv, thanks for your answers! I like this part most:  In general, for wildlife, except for small and shy birds, bush skills will get you far better images than a very long lens... 

I can absolutely confirm your statement. This is also true with people, beauty, social issues, news, food, sports, and whatnot. If you are not comfortable in a specific area, if people or sports are not yours, you won't come home with convincing footage regardless of your gear's specs.

I like to give a second thought on the CL. As I mentioned above, I own a little Fuji EX3 which is somewhat Fuji's take on a CL-like camera: APS-C sensor, rangefinder-style EVF, interchangeable lenses. I use it with the Fuji 35mm f2 lens, which shows a distinct personality despite being fly-by-wire and heavily corrected in-camera. Size matters, especially when you are on a hike or travelling. The best camera is the one you are holding in your hand when things happen. For me, a DSLR-like or even film camera-like camera body works well when on a dedicated job, not so much when serendipity is your best friend.

That being said, I'm wondering whether to skip the idea of a Q2 and get a CL instead. With the 23mm prime (the 18mm is too much a wide-angle lens) this will make a great combination, similar to my little Fuji (and then Q2) but with an L-mount with all the great possibilities like interchangeability with SL lenses and the Sigma 100-400 for wildlife.

Have you on-hand experiences with the CL, the 10-400 and birds?

How likely are the odds that a CL2 will come out the next months?

Yes - I like to use the Sigma on the CL, not too much presently due to travel restrictions unfortunately. If you go to the CL forum you will find plenty of examples. (*) It is said that a CL2 will come out towards the end of this year. Previously I used a Panasonic GX8 and (Pana)Leica Vario-Elmar 100-400, and a Vario-Elmar 105-280 R with extenders on all my cameras. Although Panasonic was better stabilized (but the smaller sensor took its toll, unlike the CL) and the Vario-Elmar (or Vario-Elmar SL ;) ) beats the Sigma marginally in image quality, the CL with Sigma hits the sweet spot for me.

(*)

It is also well worth looking through this thread (warning: 537 pages) 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hansvons said:

Sound is a problem with hybrid cameras. For a perfect sound, a sound man is mandatory. Can't see myself shooting unrepeatable interviews without knowing what to expect. For lower profile interviews, I'm thinking of getting Tentacle devices. That way, I'm not relying on the camera's tech or wireless mics. However, the problem of proper monitoring remains.

Few people realize how much sound contributes to a video. Nobody wants to watch something with bad sound, but they will bear fuzzy images if the sound is good.

My usual solution for personal work is to record a guide audio track on-camera, and higher quality tracks using standalone recorders. It's easy enough to sync in post, most NVEs have a function that matches the sound waves automatically. The tentacle solution is ingenious, since it combines timecode with external recording. 32-bit float should handle most sources, as long a the mic placement is correct, and the batteries are good, and everything is plugged-in correctly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting topic this, and one I have been wrangling with as well. There is plenty written on the suitability of the SL2/S for video but something you may not realise is that neither the Q2 nor CL offer 25p (PAL) nor Log gamma profiles. Which may or may not be an issue for you as a 2nd camera. If your use case would be more as travel stills camera then it’s a moot point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2021 at 4:29 PM, hansvons said:

Zeiss Super Speeds) but sold most of it

Apart from never selling Leica M lenses, you never sell these either.

Do not jump into the SL system  before thoroughly testing whether this is for you. Forget anything Leica (except their Cine 'lux and 'cron lenses) for filming. Trust me, been there, done that. I own the ARRI Amira and RED Pro Primes... Leica bodies for professional cinema use are not the droids you are looking for, speaking strictly as a director to a director. But do give the SL2 a try for everything else. I settled with the M system (a long and ongoing passion since I was 11) and sold all my Canon and Sony gear. Bought a BMPCC4K to add to ARRI and now have two separate ecosystems to work with - both German, both amazing (ARRI & Leica). Had there not been the portability of M, I would jump to the Q2 in a heartbeat for travel. A new Leica Q2 Daniel Craig x Greg Williams limited edition just leaked online. Only 750 units will be produced worldwide. It must be one of the most beautiful fixed lens digital cameras ever made.
Sorry to be unhelpful on wildlife.

Just my two cents.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Al, I've been exactly thinking like you. Never sell your Super Speeds.

I bought the Super Speeds Mk2 in 2009 in pristine conditions from a Munich based lens shop for roughly the third of what I sold them in 2019. Back then, I bought them because they were the cheapest alternative of a proper cinema prime set. I literally grew up with Super Speeds as my go-to everyday lenses when renting an Arri package (mostly BL-4/535, 435) the decade before. With the Master Primes' advent, the Super Speeds became rapidly old glass, and it needed another decade to mature them to icons of vintage glass. This is, in my humble opinion, not justified.

Frankly, they render neither particular dimensional pictures nor are they gentle to colours (magenta tint, very pronounced open rose) or distinct sharp. They flare very nicely and render skin cosmetically when wide open. But at T 1.4 they are soft glass, to an extent which some might be thinking of being unacceptable. Back then, when 35mm was the format of choice, all these flaws weren't as visible due to the low resolution of cinema projection or TV (625p PAL). Today, this situation is very different. However, an analogue, vintage-like rendition is preferred by many. For instance, Canon created in 2019 the Sumire Primes being modified CNE Cinema primes with a distinctly vintage feeling at T 1.4-T2 that turns in modern, sharp glass from T 2.8 onwards. Unfortunately, some focal lengths are prone to CA as I found out in several projects, and breathing can be bad. But, nevertheless, they can be very versatile and the right choice for many projects. 


The other lens I was using in the 90ies regularly was the Cooke 18-100. This is a fabulous lens. It renders the most dimensional pictures I've ever seen, by a large margin. The flares are second to none. The bokeh can be somewhat busy and creates very vintage hexagonal orbs/shapes. On a digital camera, the lens can show some CA. I own such a lens and will never sell it because it has all the virtues the Super Speeds are missing: warm colour rendition, tons of pop and dimensionality.


I also own the above mentioned Angenieux 16-42. I like it because it does everything I need without adding special sauces. But it's not a soulless glass like the Tokina Vistas or the Master Primes (they do have some kind of soul though, you have to dig deep to find it). It has all the classic virtues we all want from a cinema lens: parfocal behaviour, controlled breathing, CA and spheric aberrations, some pop, lovely bokeh and likeable flares.


With this all said, I'm rethinking lens choices. Perhaps the Leica 24-90 is an excellent choice for video, however, due to its versatility and stabilisation. But I also want a fast prime. When shooting S-35mm sensors, the 35mm has always been my favourite focal length, translating to the 50mm in full-format. The 50mm SL APO could be a great choice. It looks like having similar virtues like the Arri Supreme Primes, which are the most creamy albeit tack sharp lenses I've ever used with no CA at all. Plus, maybe, the Sigma 100-400 for wildlife. 


For soul and vintage, there are many options out there on a budget, from Vogtländer to rehoused Russian Vintage Glas (Iron Glass) which I might evaluate later in this endeavour.
Adding a used CL with a 23mm to the mix as a pocketable camera-lens combo would round out the toolbox.

Thanks for the valuable input!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/10/2021 at 8:32 PM, ruskkyle said:

Very interesting topic this, and one I have been wrangling with as well. There is plenty written on the suitability of the SL2/S for video but something you may not realise is that neither the Q2 nor CL offer 25p (PAL) nor Log gamma profiles. Which may or may not be an issue for you as a 2nd camera. If your use case would be more as travel stills camera then it’s a moot point.

I've realised that as well. For sure, the only Leica with video capabilities that go further than the occasional family video is the SL2, even more so the SL2-S. 

Edited by hansvons
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...