dancook Posted February 15, 2021 Share #1 Posted February 15, 2021 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm after a unicorn... and I suppose I want Leica to know, you know, just in case... I want a camera system with excellent image quality (microcontrast, ISO handling, colour, sharpness, tonality etc..), 'pro sports' capable AF and a very quiet shutter. The Sony A9 is my workhorse, but the lenses don't have character/micro contrast/life that I get from Leica. And when I think about colour - my X1D/X1DII/907X cameras have all produced beautiful raw files straight from camera - in contrast, it's taken me a couple of years to refine a working solution to the warm/magenta raw files of the A9. Either Sony/Canon/Nikon need to put some special glass out there, or Leica/(Panasonic?) improves tracking/AF.... I can dream.. Edited February 15, 2021 by dancook 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 15, 2021 Posted February 15, 2021 Hi dancook, Take a look here Leica SL - Workhorse / Sports. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
LD_50 Posted February 15, 2021 Share #2 Posted February 15, 2021 I’ve been pretty pleased with Nikon’s best lenses in the past. I’ve no experience with Canon but they seem to be introducing some interesting lenses for the RF mount. Sigma produces some pretty good lenses for multiple mounts as well. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mpi Posted February 15, 2021 Share #3 Posted February 15, 2021 I agree with @LD_50 that Nikkor Z lenses are amazing - especially their primes (I own multiple). I don't know enough about Sony and Canon to compare. That being said, the Leica lenses perform better. For portraits, the micro-contrast makes the eyes pop, fo landscape photography there's just more of a 3d effect. This is the reason I am in the process of switching from Nikon to Leica. (As a side-note: I wouldn't call the Leica "better" as there's also quite a price difference. My $850 Nikkor Z 35mm punches way above its weight class while my $5000 summicron 35mm is certainly not five times better). The only exception is the new Noct. It is clearly sharper (wide open) than the 50mm f/0.95 Leica Noctilux and significantly cheaper (the Noct is $8k and the Noctilux is ~$12k). The AF on the SL2 for photographs is good enough most of the time (and it is very precise!). For video the AF is useless (mostly because it is unpredictable). I think the big benefit of DFD vs phase detect is that you don't get any artifacts in from the phase detection pixels (and yes, in low light you can see those). I really hope Panasonic and Leica can fix the AF problems. If you ignore AF, Panasonic produces the best consumer video cameras and Leica the best photo cameras. I don't even want the best AF in the market, if it would be as reliable as a Nikon Z7 I already would be super happy!! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted February 16, 2021 Share #4 Posted February 16, 2021 When I mentioned Nikon glass I was thinking of lenses like the 200 f/2 and 58 f/1.4 that gave me results that I enjoyed as much as my Leica glass. The big telephoto lenses were good but I didn’t own them. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd Posted February 16, 2021 Share #5 Posted February 16, 2021 3 hours ago, dancook said: I want a camera system with... 'pro sports' capable AF ... I can dream.. What kind of sports and what are your expectations of Pro Sports Capable? Are you talking about Sony A9/Nikon D6/Canon 1DX? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajmarton1 Posted February 16, 2021 Share #6 Posted February 16, 2021 I tend to agree that each particular system has its strengths and weaknesses. I moved away from the SL because I thought the other mirrorless systems out there had caught up and had better AF/eye detection, IS and I was right. I really struggled with the SL in low light situations because the AF was so-so. No idea about the SL2 as I made the switch before it was available. I had the Nikon Z6 but now have the Sony ar7IV and the Canon R5 bodies - each with the traditional 28mm/35mm/55mm sub-f/2 primes and top tier 16mm-35mm, 24mm - 70mm and 70mm-200mm zooms (G-Master and Ls). I decided to move away from Nikon and go back and forth between the Sony and the Canon R5 for now. I shoot in manual mode and love the ease of the Canon menu system, LCD touch (and articulating) screen and exceptional AF/tracking of the Canon. Canon RF glass is also very well built, sharp and made in Japan. I also love the AF/eye detection of the Sony and the glass is almost as good as the Canon lineup in my opinion. But not as well built. So right now I bounce back and forth from the Sony and the Canon. It's easy because I shoot manual with AF. I also use the Leica M10P and M10 Mono for when I need a compact and small kit and have time to work the scene and get the right shot. I love the build quality glass and rendering of the Leica RFs but sometimes just need to nail the focus under pressure and with glasses and age - AF is the way for me. So I like being a free agent and using the kit that works best for the particular task at hand. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Cato Posted February 16, 2021 Share #7 Posted February 16, 2021 Advertisement (gone after registration) I use a pair of sl2's at weddings and I find the af adequate but am very much hoping they bring some eye af and better afc/tracking in general (maybe from the panasonic bodies) in a firmware update. The quality of the glass for me outweighs the odd AF issue - but yeah, if the sl2 suddenly could AF like a Sony a9 I'd be very happy! In the meantime I'll be plodding along with single point af. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancook Posted February 16, 2021 Author Share #8 Posted February 16, 2021 (edited) 9 hours ago, syd said: What kind of sports and what are your expectations of Pro Sports Capable? Are you talking about Sony A9/Nikon D6/Canon 1DX? Yes, the Sony A9 etc.. Professionally I shoot high school sports, weddings, concerts, theatre, fashion show. Sports AF + silent shooting make the A9 technically (Canon R5 unknown!) is the best option for me. Whilst a 1DX would be great for sport, I can't shoot a concerto competition with the shutter sound of a 1DX at several feet from a performer. The fashion show is a stream of models one after the other walking towards me - so AF/Buffer are essential there to get several shots of every model. It's not enough to get the odd good shot, I need volume and consistency. Edited February 16, 2021 by dancook Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancook Posted February 16, 2021 Author Share #9 Posted February 16, 2021 6 hours ago, Gavin Cato said: I use a pair of sl2's at weddings and I find the af adequate but am very much hoping they bring some eye af and better afc/tracking in general (maybe from the panasonic bodies) in a firmware update. The quality of the glass for me outweighs the odd AF issue - but yeah, if the sl2 suddenly could AF like a Sony a9 I'd be very happy! In the meantime I'll be plodding along with single point af. When I got the 50mm 1.4 for the SL (original) I used it at a wedding, loved the files - but AF was frustrating in low light for which you'd want the lens. As just one example, I photograph students walking from dim-lit tables to a stage to receive their award. The dim-lit walk is where you get a lot of the joy, AF in low light in necessary for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajmarton1 Posted February 16, 2021 Share #10 Posted February 16, 2021 7 hours ago, dancook said: Yes, the Sony A9 etc.. Professionally I shoot high school sports, weddings, concerts, theatre, fashion show. Sports AF + silent shooting make the A9 technically (Canon R5 unknown!) is the best option for me. Whilst a 1DX would be great for sport, I can't shoot a concerto competition with the shutter sound of a 1DX at several feet from a performer. The fashion show is a stream of models one after the other walking towards me - so AF/Buffer are essential there to get several shots of every model. It's not enough to get the odd good shot, I need volume and consistency. My buddy who does a lot of action/sports photography is waiting to get his Alpha 1. It is supposed to be a game changer. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancook Posted February 16, 2021 Author Share #11 Posted February 16, 2021 3 hours ago, ajmarton1 said: My buddy who does a lot of action/sports photography is waiting to get his Alpha 1. It is supposed to be a game changer. It'll be a nice step up from the A9 in many ways, the anti flicker (for theatre LEDS) and lack of AA filter are to things I'm quite interested in. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Cato Posted February 18, 2021 Share #12 Posted February 18, 2021 On 2/16/2021 at 8:43 PM, dancook said: When I got the 50mm 1.4 for the SL (original) I used it at a wedding, loved the files - but AF was frustrating in low light for which you'd want the lens. As just one example, I photograph students walking from dim-lit tables to a stage to receive their award. The dim-lit walk is where you get a lot of the joy, AF in low light in necessary for me. Yes, I wouldn't want to use the 50 1.4 in low light. It's a stunning lens for people work, but only in decent light to let the AF do it's thing. Must admit, in real low light the SL2 does cause me a bit of trouble. I either use the Q2 (typically for dancing shots). It's not bad, and the AF is pretty decent. Or I use the SL2 with the 35/2 at 1/60th or so (depending on subject) and let the iso get to 3200-4000 odd. The sony's are definitely the better tool here. I'd like to get the sigma 35 1.2 for the sl2 but it seems a bit silly to me to have 2 x 35mm lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick H Posted February 18, 2021 Share #13 Posted February 18, 2021 2 hours ago, Gavin Cato said: Yes, I wouldn't want to use the 50 1.4 in low light. It's a stunning lens for people work, but only in decent light to let the AF do it's thing. Must admit, in real low light the SL2 does cause me a bit of trouble. I either use the Q2 (typically for dancing shots). It's not bad, and the AF is pretty decent. Or I use the SL2 with the 35/2 at 1/60th or so (depending on subject) and let the iso get to 3200-4000 odd. The sony's are definitely the better tool here. I'd like to get the sigma 35 1.2 for the sl2 but it seems a bit silly to me to have 2 x 35mm lenses. I have the 35 1.2. In low light, the speed of the lens at f/1.2 dramatically illuminates the SL EVF which is useful. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.