SL System v. (All) — LONG READ

[Tom1234]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 3/3/2021 at 7:45 AM, Steven said:

Debatable. And vague. What do you include in the IQ? The colour science too? 

As many of us, I have many cameras and many camera systems. I am probably the first and only person on this forum to own the Leica SL2-S and the Sony A1. Besides build quality and joy of use, my A1 is far superior to my SL2-S in every single aspect, except ONE. The A1 can do everything that my SL2S can do, better, and faster. And it can do MANY things that my SL2S cannot even dream of considering to do. But there is one thing it cannot do: deliver the same IQ. 

By IQ, I mean everything that is involved in the final result that I see (on a computer screen): it cannot compete with the 3D depth and micro-contrast I get out of the Leica. It cannot compete with the colours that I get out of the Leica, neither SOOC, nor once edited in LR. And the lenses that I mount on the A1 cannot compete with the lenses I could mount on the SL2S. My two favourite sony lenses are the Zeiss 55 1.8 and the newest 35mm 1.4 GM. None of those come close, in IQ, to the SL 35 APO. 

Back to your statement. Yes, all cameras can deliver great IQ today. Even a 500 dollars camera. But all cameras are not equal in IQ. Leicas, with their lenses lineups, are in another league as Sonys, Canons, and even Fujis. This barely subjective, sorry. I know people will think I'm an extremist by saying that, but as always, I accept to be challenged on this statement, with a good old classic blindest. 

A1 + 35GM vs. SL2S + SL35APO. Throw anything you want at me, SOOC, and I'll get a perfect score. In every scenario, the SL2S combo will be superior in IQ

 

Many thanks for your input.  You get A+ obviously. Four out of four.  I am looking into a new SL2-S.

[Archiver]

On 3/3/2021 at 6:26 PM, Mr.Q said:

Well interpreting the word literally, extreme would mean "furthest from the centre or a given point"

Positive Extreme
1. Best in class EVF
2. Great image quality
3. Great build quality
4. Best platform to adapt Leica legacy lenses
5. Good ergonomics/haptics (subjective)

Negative Extreme
1. Expensive
2. Largest and heaviest
3. Slowest AF
4. Fewest selection of native lenses (as in Leica lenses, ie reason to buy into SL system)
5. Flash/strobe support
6. Lack of tilting screen (subjective)

Objectively, it's a polarizing camera.
If you don't agree, that may be the reason why you feel the discussions are polarizing.

You just summed up the reasons why I want to get into the SL system, and the reasons why I still hesitate! If you remove the 'Leica' from the equation, the same positives can be found in the Nikon Z6 and Z7, and many of the negatives aren't valid. The extra cost of XQD cards, which bugs me to all heck, is a drop in the bucket compared with the costs of buying a SL2/S and native L mount glass, Leica or otherwise. The main area that the Nikon Z system lacks is choice of native lenses, but more are on the horizon, and the FTZ adapter gives access to Nikon's best DSLR lenses. Not to make this all about Nikon, but if we're going on the positives and negatives of the SL system, there's much to recommend Nikon as a much lower cost alternative.

I would feel far more comfortable entering the SL system if it had autofocus like Canon or Sony. I am increasingly shooting more and more sports, and good AF is a must. TBH, a Sony A1 or A9 with just a 24-70, 70-200 and 50/1.4 would do everything I need from a photographic standpoint. As much as I love Panasonic, they lag significantly in AF, and the S1 is heavier than the Leica SL2. Canon is great, and shares many of the positives of the Nikon Z system.

For a fully hybrid system, I wouldn't shoot with Leica for the simple lack of any kind of tilting screen. It's useful when taking stills, and nearly mandatory when shooting video. The sheer relief of getting a camera with a swivel screen, after shooting video with the fixed screen 5D Mark II, was immense. While I could use a monitor with the SL2-S, I don't want to add even more bulk to what is already a large camera. I recently shot my Panasonic G9 alongside a guy with his rigged-out Panasonic EVA 1 cinema camera. His setup weighed almost three times what mine did. No way do I want anything like that.

[Advertisement]

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

[Tom1234]

Great analysis.  

Good to know about the importance of tilt screen. Yes on a tripod you need one to see the screen as you stand above the camera - all video cameras should have it… mandatory or you are forced to an external monitor-recorder. 

[LD_50]

39 minutes ago, Archiver said:

You just summed up the reasons why I want to get into the SL system, and the reasons why I still hesitate! If you remove the 'Leica' from the equation, the same positives can be found in the Nikon Z6 and Z7, and many of the negatives aren't valid. The extra cost of XQD cards, which bugs me to all heck, is a drop in the bucket compared with the costs of buying a SL2/S and native L mount glass, Leica or otherwise. The main area that the Nikon Z system lacks is choice of native lenses, but more are on the horizon, and the FTZ adapter gives access to Nikon's best DSLR lenses. Not to make this all about Nikon, but if we're going on the positives and negatives of the SL system, there's much to recommend Nikon as a much lower cost alternative.

I would feel far more comfortable entering the SL system if it had autofocus like Canon or Sony. I am increasingly shooting more and more sports, and good AF is a must. TBH, a Sony A1 or A9 with just a 24-70, 70-200 and 50/1.4 would do everything I need from a photographic standpoint. As much as I love Panasonic, they lag significantly in AF, and the S1 is heavier than the Leica SL2. Canon is great, and shares many of the positives of the Nikon Z system.

For a fully hybrid system, I wouldn't shoot with Leica for the simple lack of any kind of tilting screen. It's useful when taking stills, and nearly mandatory when shooting video. The sheer relief of getting a camera with a swivel screen, after shooting video with the fixed screen 5D Mark II, was immense. While I could use a monitor with the SL2-S, I don't want to add even more bulk to what is already a large camera. I recently shot my Panasonic G9 alongside a guy with his rigged-out Panasonic EVA 1 cinema camera. His setup weighed almost three times what mine did. No way do I want anything like that.

If you’ve found a system that works for you, go for it. The Leica name increases the price but doesn’t improve the camera’s capabilities. 

[Mr.Q]

32 minutes ago, Archiver said:

You just summed up the reasons why I want to get into the SL system, and the reasons why I still hesitate! If you remove the 'Leica' from the equation, the same positives can be found in the Nikon Z6 and Z7, and many of the negatives aren't valid. The extra cost of XQD cards, which bugs me to all heck, is a drop in the bucket compared with the costs of buying a SL2/S and native L mount glass, Leica or otherwise. The main area that the Nikon Z system lacks is choice of native lenses, but more are on the horizon, and the FTZ adapter gives access to Nikon's best DSLR lenses. Not to make this all about Nikon, but if we're going on the positives and negatives of the SL system, there's much to recommend Nikon as a much lower cost alternative.

I would feel far more comfortable entering the SL system if it had autofocus like Canon or Sony. I am increasingly shooting more and more sports, and good AF is a must. TBH, a Sony A1 or A9 with just a 24-70, 70-200 and 50/1.4 would do everything I need from a photographic standpoint. As much as I love Panasonic, they lag significantly in AF, and the S1 is heavier than the Leica SL2. Canon is great, and shares many of the positives of the Nikon Z system.

For a fully hybrid system, I wouldn't shoot with Leica for the simple lack of any kind of tilting screen. It's useful when taking stills, and nearly mandatory when shooting video. The sheer relief of getting a camera with a swivel screen, after shooting video with the fixed screen 5D Mark II, was immense. While I could use a monitor with the SL2-S, I don't want to add even more bulk to what is already a large camera. I recently shot my Panasonic G9 alongside a guy with his rigged-out Panasonic EVA 1 cinema camera. His setup weighed almost three times what mine did. No way do I want anything like that.

Unless you 1) really value it's haptics, or 2) own existing R and M lenses, I feel it's hard to justify purchasing the SL2 new in 2021.  The bottom line is that you need to shoot with SL lenses to maximize it's IQ.  If you plan on purchasing 3rd party L-mount lenses, there are better options --- you can get the same or similar quality lenses for other systems as well.  Quite frankly, the sensor and AF tech is 2 generations behind the current crop of FF cameras (worse than A7R III), so like I said, you need to really, really like the positives.

[Tom1234]

On 3/3/2021 at 7:50 AM, Steven said:

P.S. the ONLY things that my A1 can do that I wish my SL2S could do are: 

- Tilt screen (not flip out like the A7SIII, I hate that). 

- Brighter monitor in sunlight

- Good AFc performance with video 

- Option to close the GODDAMN shutter when changing lenses. 

If Leica can give me this, I swear in front of witnesses to not buy a new camera for one decade. 

Steve, how about battery life?  For stills and video?  There is a debate going about in this thread. Bet you know...

[Steven]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, Tom1234 said:

Steve, how about battery life?  For stills and video?  There is a debate going about in this thread. Bet you know...

I'm not in a good position to comment on battery life because I use my SL2S exclusively with M lenses and no AF, so it has been very good. 

The only moments when I would go out with two batteries is 1. if I plan to shoot a lot of video and leave the screen always on, or 2. if its a very hot place where I know the battery will burn faster, but that not only the case with the SL2S nor Leica in general. That's true for almost every camera. 

[Slender]

Ah, hot weather makes the battery perfom less well? For me that would be a "cold" scenario... interesting.

[Steven]

1 hour ago, Slender said:

Ah, hot weather makes the battery perfom less well? For me that would be a "cold" scenario... interesting.

I think it's both. 

In my experience hot weather provokes faster overheating which provokes faster battery drain. 
 

Same problem with my iPhone. 

[chris_tribble]

Maybe I’m missing a point somewhere, but isn’t the point of buying Leica that their lenses are good. I won’t say best, I won’t say superlative. But I know that they’re some of the best glass I’ve ever used (and I ran Canon L glass for decades). I have the SL because it gives me a platform for the Leica 24-90 and 90-280 plus APO 35 and 75, AND for a family of M glass. Nothing else does that so well and meets my needs for all photography. If I shot video maybe I’d make another choice. But I don’t - so end of story for me. 🙂

[Einst_Stein]

What would you compare SL vs. SL2, vs. SL2-S?  Is that easier to compare then Leica SL vs. (All)?

[LD_50]

42 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said:

What would you compare SL vs. SL2, vs. SL2-S?  Is that easier to compare then Leica SL vs. (All)?

I have no idea what that means. It’s not difficult to compare camera systems. To get to the SL I compared to what was available in 2015. To get to the SL2-S I compared to what’s available now. 

[Tom1234]

4 hours ago, chris_tribble said:

Maybe I’m missing a point somewhere, but isn’t the point of buying Leica that their lenses are good. I won’t say best, I won’t say superlative. But I know that they’re some of the best glass I’ve ever used (and I ran Canon L glass for decades). I have the SL because it gives me a platform for the Leica 24-90 and 90-280 plus APO 35 and 75, AND for a family of M glass. Nothing else does that so well and meets my needs for all photography. If I shot video maybe I’d make another choice. But I don’t - so end of story for me. 🙂

Me too.  Its the lenses that keep me into Leica…

The bodies have had better colors science (M8 M9 M9M) but until the SL2-S they did not have a high ISO camera (low light is Leica's way or used to be), and color science and, ease of focusing Leica-M glass due to better viewfinder at higher resolution.  Now old Leica-M glass has a new lease on life and the history of lens-craft can be seen.  It might be a new golden age for Leica.

A professional cinematographer friend of mine said that acceptance into the professional community is slow.  Too bad they did not have an articulating rear screen that video users love and need… yet in that professional environment maybe an external monitor-recorder is the way to go.  If I were Leica I would publish an article about a smallest-add-on-monitor that can be moved in 3 dimensions… there must be some ultra-small-rig approace to getting this without totally distroying the walk around convenience of the basic body? 

Edited March 11, 2021 by Tom1234
spelling

[hansvons]

18 minutes ago, Tom1234 said:

 

A professional cinematographer friend of mine said that acceptance into the professional community is slow.  Too bad they did not have an articulating rear screen that video users love and need… yet in that professional environment maybe an external monitor-recorder is the way to go.  If I were Leica I would publish an article about a smallest-add-on-monitor that can be moved in 3 dimensions… there must be some ultra-small-rig approace to getting this without totally distroying the walk around convenience of the basic body? 

Most cinematographers don’t own gear but recommend the producers what to rent. This is the market of Arri and the Sony Venice, or the top-tier Red. Within this market, there is no debate about whether the gear is costly or not. It must be able to take a beating and always deliver the best without fail. 

The SL2-S isn’t competing in this market, of course. It is a little mirror-less stills camera at first. Its competitors by specs are the Sony As and Canon Rs and the Nikon Zs, etc... They can do the same but also sport a flippy screen and have better AF. No one who is seriously buying a hybrid camera for making money will pay the premium for a Leica and get less. Their clients won’t see the difference and, even if they would, wouldn’t pay the premium. But some productions are shot on Arri, where the DOP or the director want a small kind of third unit camera to shoot along with the big guns. Or they want a camera with premium colour and lenses that match in many ways the best cinema glass and camera footage for their own much smaller projects. This is the SL2-S market.

Typical Leica in a way because it’s somewhat luxury-driven and somewhat professional. These people don’t need an articulating screen; they are used to trading convenience for endurance and shoot with an EVF anyway. Or they rig their Leica with an Atomos monitor for proper ProRes recording.

Like any other Leica, the SL2-S is very much a niche product too. 

[Tom1234]

Hansvons:

Myself, as someone who went to film school years ago, I am one of Leica's potential markets.  Their approach to issue new lenses that have something different from their old lenses is an artist's approach and I love that.  

From what you are saying and I am saying together, Leica is a strange bird, iconoclastic brand, a mix of market approaches, well pick you favorite name, yet always high end in some way and always delivering a unique user experience in some way.

The high lens prices have knocked me out of the new ASPH lenses, which is ok, since as all makers products approach perfect like the ASPH lenses do, they all produce pictures looking more the same and loose their differentiation. 

They are making a viable independent filmmaker camera in the SL2-S since it has so many of the needed features.  

Auto focus is secondary in film making so the discount there is not a problem.  

Lens focus adjustment, marked on the lens barrel to exact distances, is one of the biggest differences between professional and home-user lenses.  

The differences from professional to amateur could also be called a camera support issue:  tripod use (professional) verses walk around use (amateur) that affects so many features like the screen articulation need and remote focus or auto focus adjustments.  

Of course today more professionals walk with the camera then in the past (SteadiCam was the old way - replaced by today's internal camera stabilization systems), but I would say that the video they make is rather cheesy not professional looking, and that that poor video work has become acceptable do to the existence of youtube and selfies being so ubiquitous. 

Amateur is not a bad word.  It comes from the Latin "amator" meaning "lover of" something.  Those that love an avocation may outdo those doing the same for daily work.  Just look at the photos on this site and others where I see many stunning shots that seldom occur in the commercial world aimed mostly at selling something or copying someone else's work. 

[Einst_Stein]

5 hours ago, LD_50 said:

I have no idea what that means. It’s not difficult to compare camera systems. To get to the SL I compared to what was available in 2015. To get to the SL2-S I compared to what’s available now. 

I thought you were talking about the difference of SL system vs. all.  

[Archiver]

On 3/12/2021 at 11:43 AM, Tom1234 said:

They are making a viable independent filmmaker camera in the SL2-S since it has so many of the needed features.  

Auto focus is secondary in film making so the discount there is not a problem.  

Lens focus adjustment, marked on the lens barrel to exact distances, is one of the biggest differences between professional and home-user lenses.  

The differences from professional to amateur could also be called a camera support issue:  tripod use (professional) verses walk around use (amateur) that affects so many features like the screen articulation need and remote focus or auto focus adjustments.  

Of course today more professionals walk with the camera then in the past (SteadiCam was the old way - replaced by today's internal camera stabilization systems), but I would say that the video they make is rather cheesy not professional looking, and that that poor video work has become acceptable do to the existence of youtube and selfies being so ubiquitous.

I would say the distinction is less about professional vs amateur, and more about style and budget. 'Film making' is so broad that it is difficult to accurately assert that 'professionals use tripods and amateurs go hand held'. Of course, in large productions which involve high end cinema cameras like the Alexa, Venice or RED Epic, it will be more likely that the DoP will opt for rigging like tripods, cranes, dollies and full Steadicam rigs, because the budget allows the use of such rigging, it provides higher production value, and doesn't kill the camera operator with its weight. A production that has the budget for this kind of rigging should have the budget for a high end cinema camera, and the SL2-S isn't in that field.

It's fully acceptable to go handheld with an Alexa Mini and use a body mounted inflatable cushion for support. Many independent productions that use cinema cameras use shoulder rigs, gimbals, or the back-mounted EasyRig. Some combine a gimbal with the EasyRig to make things even smoother, and less hard on the operator. This reduces costs and physical footprint while maximizing image quality and camera robustness.

The SL2-S isn't alone in the world of high end video camera in mirrorless form factor. The Sony A7S III, the new FX3, and the Panasonic S1H have all the video features of the SL2-S and more. The Leica is a decent option for a mirrorless video camera, but there are other options with even more features. Even the Panasonic S5 is being touted as a mini-S1H, and it has the colour science of the Panasonic Varicam cinema camera for a tiny fraction of the cost.

[Tom1234]

1 hour ago, Archiver said:

Even the Panasonic S5 is being touted as a mini-S1H, and it has the colour science of the Panasonic Varicam cinema camera for a tiny fraction of the cost.

 

I am eager to see how the Panasonic S5 does in the market/user space.  its lower weight of .47 lb (7.6  oz) is said to really help toward a full day of hand holding.  And S5 has an articulating back screen. 

 

https://cameradecision.com/compare/Leica-SL2-S-vs-Panasonic-Lumix-DC-S5

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!

 

https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/leica-sl2-s-vs-panasonic-s5

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4540312

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/compare/Leica_SL2-S_vs_Panasonic_DC-S5/BHitems/1609644-REG_1583509-REG

I wish Leica would do their own version of the S5.

 

[LD_50]

1 hour ago, Tom1234 said:

 

I am eager to see how the Panasonic S5 does in the market/user space.  its lower weight of .47 lb (7.6  oz) is said to really help toward a full day of hand holding.  And S5 has an articulating back screen. 

 

https://cameradecision.com/compare/Leica-SL2-S-vs-Panasonic-Lumix-DC-S5

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!

 

https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/leica-sl2-s-vs-panasonic-s5

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4540312

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/compare/Leica_SL2-S_vs_Panasonic_DC-S5/BHitems/1609644-REG_1583509-REG

I wish Leica would do their own version of the S5.

 

To get to S5 weight and price there are sacrifices which would keep me from buying:

- EVF quality is significantly reduced

- no top screen

- thermal management is worse

- weather sealing is not as good as the S1, so much lower than SL2-S

Leica could surely make a smaller SL body, but it would eliminate a lot of what I like about the SL and would only save a couple hundred grams.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[billh]

On 3/3/2021 at 2:44 PM, Simone_DF said:

I had a Sony A7rIV and I too prefer the SL2 EVF

What is the image quality difference? I have a variety of M cameras, but the most recent digital is the M9P. I also have a Q2M which I love. I've been hearing the SL primes are better than the M lenses, and despite the size and weight I'm temped to try the SL2 instead of the M10R. However, I do have a Sony A7R IV, and I'd really like to know if the SL2 image quality is better than I get from the A7r IV. Thanks.