Leica SL2-S for Independent Low Budget Movie Making?

[Tom1234]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To Steve and all the rest on Leica Forum: 

Steve, what do you think?  You mentioned that you went the the Cannes film festival with some form of movie if I remember correctly.  

So could a person adapt the old Leica-M lenses and make a film using the SL2-S?  I don't care about super fast & easy professional lens and body use myself, only wondering if with a little extra effort could it be reasonably done?  I have to convince my cinematographer friend to do this so any comment you have will interest me.  

 

Generally, myself, as someone who went to film school years ago, I am one of Leica's potential SL2-S purchasers.  Their approach, to issue new lenses that have something different from their old lenses, is an artist's approach, and I love that.  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. 

Leica seems to be making a viable independent filmmaker camera in the SL2-S since it has so many of the needed features. Some comments on the needed features below:

Auto focus is secondary in movie making, since it is usually done by hand, 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.  Yet with a monitor attached and some tape to mark the lens focus positions, possibly focus can still be done by hand as I did in film school using 16mm equipment.    

The differences from professional to amateur could also be called a camera support issue:  tripod use (professional) verses walk around use (amateur) affects so many features like the movable 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 as professional looking, and that that poor video work has become acceptable do to the existence of youtube and selfies being so ubiquitous (found everywhere). 

Amateur is not a bad word.  It comes from the Latin "amator" meaning "lover of" something.  Those that love an avocation like photography may outdo those doing the same for daily work who are stuck with producing professional standards that may be boring.  France produced the "French New Wave" movie makers in the 1960's, who used 16mm equipment and also the new lighter Arri 35mm cameras, leaving behind the enormous Mitchel studio cameras that the USA film companies used.  Also, just look at the photos on this site and others where I see many stunning shots that seldom occur in the commercial world which is aimed mostly at selling something or copying someone else's work. 

Anyway, my professional Los Angles based cinematographer friend, says yes the new mirrorless cameras produce a good enough file for professional filmmaking and he only has qualms (concerns) about the work methods needed to hit focus and generally have a fluid effective efficient working environment. 

Comments please!

 

[Advertisement]

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

[frame-it]

might help, all shot with Leica SL:

https://www.leica-camera.blog/2018/10/29/leica-nocturnal-film/

 

leica ambassador richard seymour takes viewers on a never before seen journey behind the timeless leica M10. the four minute video was filmed with a leica SL and a summilux-C lens, and follows lab employees on their daily tasks at the factory. every single hand-made camera undergoes rigorous inspection, as shown in seymour’s short film.

>>

 

 

 

 

 

https://vimeo.com/144471541

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tom1234]

Frame-It:  Many thanks for the pertinent links.  Tom1234 

 

 

 

 

[Tom1234]

3 minutes ago, Steven said:

My film that went to Cannes (and Toronto, and won, and San Sebastian, and won, etc....) was shot on 35mm Kodak Film, with an ARRI camera, and we had a budget under 1M for this one.

Do you have a website for the film and DVD available?

[Tom1234]

4 minutes ago, Steven said:

1. Professional, hollywoodian or independent sets. I do not recommend the SL2S for those. I recommend a proper cinema camera, wether it's loaded with film or with hard drives. Rentals aren't expensive in 2021, so it's hard for me to hear the "budget issue" for a film that has at least 500k of budget.

What I hoped you would say is that the Leica-M old lenses have something special that would make it sensible to use the SL2-S.  

So I must ask.  Does the lens signature "look" show up in the SL2-S files so if a person wanted a particular lens's aesthetic then they might use the SL2-S to get it when making a movie?

[Tom1234]

Just now, Steven said:

All horrible. These videos dont defend the SL for film making at all. 

I was glad to seem them but they are kind of "glamor of the moment" videos not technical explanations. 

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, Steven said:

All horrible. These videos dont defend the SL for film making at all. 

well, that's your opinion.. personally i dont care..the OP was curious about short films so i posted a few links, whatever./😇

[Tom1234]

2 minutes ago, frame-it said:

well, that's your opinion.. personally i dont care..the OP was curious about short films so i posted a few links, whatever./😇

Don't feel bad, just keep posting.  The truth is, it is very hard to find "on concept" videos since the time to make video and thus personal or $ cost is just too high to expect them to show up for free on the net on target to what you want unless you pay for it. 

[frame-it]

Just now, Tom1234 said:

Don't feel bad, just keep posting.  The truth is, it is very hard to find "on concept" videos since the time to make video and thus personal or $ cost is just too high to expect them to show up for free on the net on target to what you want unless you pay for it. 

oh i dont feel bad at all...just amused.

I'm working in film and advertising Post production for the last 28 years..i know a lot of people using the SL for short films and tv commercials, public service films etc..they use M lenses, R lenses, Russian Jupiter and helios lenses..etc etc..and when the budget is higher some use Leica C lenses..with proper advance planning the camera, and its log footage is perfectly fine at least for television.

[Tom1234]

15 minutes ago, Steven said:

So where does that leave the SL2S? It leaves it to hobbyist or professional photographers who are keen on video too. I'll give you two examples: @Aaron Daniel, whom if I understand correctly uses his SL2S for wedding photography and filmmaking. I invite him to this thread to give his opinion. 

or the second example is me, a hobbyist photographer who loves to shoot occasional "travel videos" and "family videos" and is looking for a good hybrid solution. 

Is the SL2S a top prosumer video camera? It doesnt even enter the top 5 available today, objectively. Subjectively, its the best solution for me. 

So, to answer your question, yes, you can use an SL2S with M lenses to shoot a professional film. Does it make sense ? NOT AT ALL. 

This begs the question… so you must believe that you can get any "look" you want in post production, using the color and sharpness tools in the editing software, so you don't need Leica-M lenses to do it?  So maybe no system's lenses matter that much, which has been what people seem to say that in the professional environment, that post production does not solve all problems, but it does enough to make the camera used less important. 

[Tom1234]

2 minutes ago, frame-it said:

oh i dont feel bad at all...just amused.

I'm working in film and advertising Post production for the last 28 years..i know a lot of people using the SL for short films and tv commercials, public service films etc..they use M lenses, R lenses, Russian Jupiter and helios lenses..etc etc..and when the budget is higher some use Leica C lenses..with proper advance planning the camera, and its log footage is perfectly fine at least for television.

So in your experience do the Leica-M lenses, with their somewhat unique renditions, give an edge, or something special?

[frame-it]

Just now, Tom1234 said:

So in your experience do the Leica-M lenses, with their somewhat unique renditions, give an edge, or something special?

yes they do...at least the older lenses do,,the new ones are all too clean and clinical..and in some ways [for video] look a bit similar[ their rendering]

[Tom1234]

2 hours ago, frame-it said:

might help, all shot with Leica SL:

https://www.leica-camera.blog/2018/10/29/leica-nocturnal-film/

 

leica ambassador richard seymour takes viewers on a never before seen journey behind the timeless leica M10. the four minute video was filmed with a leica SL and a summilux-C lens, and follows lab employees on their daily tasks at the factory. every single hand-made camera undergoes rigorous inspection, as shown in seymour’s short film.

>>

 

 

 

https://vimeo.com/144471541

 

 

 

 

 

 

The three videos above show the otherworldly ASPH look that I find strange and unreal.  The camera sees better than the eye giving a too intimate presentation for the desires of many videos.  Now I am glad the engineers are designing such great lenses but the artists need to maybe modify it to be more human feeling.  

This is the same as some 30 frames per second video that looks strange, too real, and not artistic, so it was found that 24 frames per second with its slight blur and loss of sharpness gives a better overall presentation and sense of reality similar to what a person would experience if they were on location themselves.  The "audience as voyeur" and "audience dream state" are partially lost or totally lost with so much resolution.  

Of course I am not blaming this on the camera… it is in part an aesthetic choice of the makers.    

QUESTION: I wonder if the older Leica-M lenses on the SL2-S would give a softer rendition that would seem more natural? 

[Tom1234]

15 minutes ago, frame-it said:

yes they do...at least the older lenses do,,the new ones are all too clean and clinical..and in some ways [for video] look a bit similar[ their rendering]

I just posted on this… and commented on your posted videos… what you are saying is exactly what I suspected.  Thank you for the verification.  

[frame-it]

1 minute ago, Tom1234 said:

The three videos above show the otherworldly ASPH look that I find strange and unreal.  The camera sees better than the eye giving a too intimate presentation for the desires of many videos.  Now I am glad the engineers are designing such great lenses but the artists need to maybe modify it to be more human feeling.  

This is the same as some 30 frames per second video that looks strange, too real, and not artistic, so it was found that 24 frames per second with its slight blur and loss of sharpness gives a better overall presentation and sense of reality similar to what a person would experience if they were on location themselves.  The "audience as voyeur" and "audience dream state" are partially lost or totally lost with so much resolution.  

Of course I am not blaming this on the camera… it is in part an aesthetic choice of the makers.    

QUESTION: I wonder if the older Leica-M lenses on the SL2-S would give a softer rendition that would seem more natural? 

they would, and our minds are "trained" for 24fps, and a 180degree shutter angle..

[Tom1234]

6 minutes ago, Steven said:

They do give a unique look BUT

While I see a huge quality difference FOR STILLS when using an M lens on a Leica body as opposed to another brand, that difference is much less noticeable in video application. 

I have been using my M lenses with my Sony A1, and the image is sometimes far better than on the SL2S. Where we start having a problem is with color, where Leica is almost always better. And colourists can say what they want, but 10BIT 422 doesnt change anything. Some think that because they can record in log 10bit 422 you can match any camera to what you want. That's not true. There are some scenarios, especially in low light, where my A1 will never be able to match the colours of my SL2S, however much post production you put into it. 

My point earlier was that I dont see why pros would use an SL2S so much. Of course its possible and some do. But if you have to MF, you usually have a crew. If you have a crew, you have way better options (even to use with M lenses) than an SL2S. So why !!! And if you dont have a crew, you usually want AF, so not an SL2S.

You solved the problem by using real film.  This too is my choice.  Film had something perfected that video has not yet achieved.  To me better color.  And also the background grain texture is an added element.  Texture is a classic part of Architecture and Painting that I hate to loose to video's technical perfection.  Even the too perfect video special effects, all of which look contrived, thus do not convince me when watching a movie, that I am in a real world dream reality, instead video gives me a fake too perfect reality that immediately breaks the "suspension of disbelief" that an audience needs.  Here here!  Cheers! Bru Ha!

[Tom1234]

8 minutes ago, frame-it said:

they would, and our minds are "trained" for 24fps, and a 180degree shutter angle..

So true… it would be a different world if early film went from 18 fps silents to 30 fps sound but they choose 24fps which turned out to be a great artistic recording-playing speed.  Some other reasons in my other posts on audience dream state.

[Tom1234]

Well the video reviews are what they call a "mixed bag". 

https://www.newsshooter.com/2015/11/03/test-video-leica-sl-4k-camera-tested-by-tim-arasheban-and-cinoflex/

https://www.eoshd.com/news/leica-sl-hands-on-first-impressions-review-from-a-video-perspective/

Overall they might summarize to your view Steve.  

Apparently at a similar price the best Hollywood cameras are available also.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Tom1234]

9 minutes ago, Steven said:

If you only need video with no AF, the best price/quality you ration you can find on the market is the BPCCC 6K pro. Real cinema camera, amazing colors, best codecs, any lens can be adapted to it and it comes with Da vinci for free. If you need AF and occasional stills, the A7SIII is the next best thing. 

The SL2S is, in my opinion i précise, first and foremost a stills camera (an amazing one, better than the SL2, in my opinion) and the video side is bonus. It can take, in my opinion, amazing videos. 

Here’s one i shot while travelling around Colombia last month: 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CL4qncQphox/

Bet the BPCCC 6K pro does not handle the Leica-M lenses so well.  Last time I contacted Black Magic they only might have handled down to 50mm on a not full frame camera.  

I saw your video and like it and envy your ability to get people you don't know to stand still for a photograph.  The video looks a bit color thin to me, is that 8bit?  Think I read only 10 bit out the hdmi port.  Well this was my old irritation for film scanning… the higher bit rates make MUCH higher quality scans so I wouldn't even consider the 8bit limited crayon box of colors.  

Since the total cost of a Leica movie rig is the same as some of the best cameras on the market I expect the SL2-S will remain a really really great consumer camera but not capture the professionals who have already bought into a history of other cameras, lenses, and codec's. 

[Tom1234]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

Bet you're wrong about this ! at least if you remove the M off of your sentence. 

 

Thank you.  I am glad to be wrong about this. Appreciate you sharing your research with me.