Leica SL2-S for Independent Low Budget Movie Making?

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Catching-up on this thread rather late. The short answer is: yes, you can do professional work with an SL or SL2-S. But you wouldn't want to for anything other than personal work. Professional video cameras from Panasonic, Red, Canon, Blackmagic, Sony, and others, don't cost much more than an SL2-S, and they have lots of features that will make you much more efficient, like built-in ND filters and XLR audio connectors. Most long-form projects rent instead of buying, and you can get deals or Arri packages as well.

That being said, the SL and SL2/S are great cameras for M lenses. They hold colour and sharpness right to the corner of the frame, which others don't do, even in Super-35 (crop).

The other problem with M lenses is that they don't adapt to gears very well because of their focus tabs. It seems like the kind of thing that could be 3D-printed, but I don't know of anybody who offers that specific product. Leica sells "M 0.8" lenses, of course, but they are even more expensive than regular M lenses, and the set is limited to a few modern optics. What that means is that you, or your operator, will find that M lenses are very fiddly to focus on a cine camera. That's not the end of the world, most classic cine lenses worked the same way, but it's an extra bother.

So the answer is: you can do it, but it's more suited to a "labour of love" personal project than it is to a bigger production. I've certainly dealt with harsher technical constraints on projects, and they were worth it in the end. Film is funny that way, people will do amazing things in order to tell their story in the right way.

[Advertisement]

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

[Tom1234]

13 minutes ago, BernardC said:

Catching-up on this thread rather late. The short answer is: yes, you can do professional work with an SL or SL2-S. But you wouldn't want to for anything other than personal work. Professional video cameras from Panasonic, Red, Canon, Blackmagic, Sony, and others, don't cost much more than an SL2-S, and they have lots of features that will make you much more efficient, like built-in ND filters and XLR audio connectors. Most long-form projects rent instead of buying, and you can get deals or Arri packages as well.

That being said, the SL and SL2/S are great cameras for M lenses. They hold colour and sharpness right to the corner of the frame, which others don't do, even in Super-35 (crop).

The other problem with M lenses is that they don't adapt to gears very well because of their focus tabs. It seems like the kind of thing that could be 3D-printed, but I don't know of anybody who offers that specific product. Leica sells "M 0.8" lenses, of course, but they are even more expensive than regular M lenses, and the set is limited to a few modern optics. What that means is that you, or your operator, will find that M lenses are very fiddly to focus on a cine camera. That's not the end of the world, most classic cine lenses worked the same way, but it's an extra bother.

So the answer is: you can do it, but it's more suited to a "labour of love" personal project than it is to a bigger production. I've certainly dealt with harsher technical constraints on projects, and they were worth it in the end. Film is funny that way, people will do amazing things in order to tell their story in the right way.

Thank you, thank you, thank you, for the perspective and completeness.  I needed a vote of confidence to get me to try this someday... M lenses for a film - I have a nearly complete historical set of M Lenses. 

I had decided the same as you say, that it is a possible as labor of love, and given the other problems of production it is not that bad as an additional element to deal with for the sake of art, instead of just creating the latest industry standard.  

I have no interest in all the new too-sharp lenses from any maker - they have lost track of lens art, that is the lens's characteristic visual rendition.

As for focusing... as a 1st assistant cameraperson in film school, using 16mm film, all the focus was done by hand with gaffer tape and markings placed on the lens for start and stop points. It can be done... I've done it myself.  

In particular the advertisement I worked on in film school was the best focused of ALL the work done that year since I so carefully went by the depth-of-field book and lens markings.  Today that might have to be done on an external monitor.  When we projected about 1/3 size on a full size movie screen the focus was stunningly good on our project while the other 30 or so projects looked soft.

I appreciate your viewpoint that helps me have confidence that I understand the parameters. 

[Slender]

Just saw that the latest film from the guys behind the last two "avengers" movie features lots of scenes shot with M0.8 lenses. This movie howver is an "indie" type script on monies steroids. I'll check it out.

 

https://www.leitz-cine.com/product?no_cache=1&tx_zoatproduction_pi1[action]=ajax&tx_zoatproduction_pi1[contentUid]=4045&tx_zoatproduction_pi1[controller]=Production&type=7763828466&cHash=c459dab7d8543fc5121d8516765d0884

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2021 by Slender

[Slender]

A blend of Venice+Monstro... and Anamorphic+Vintage spherical + tilt shift.... some sigma too.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9130508/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

 

[Tom1234]

42 minutes ago, Slender said:

A blend of Venice+Monstro... and Anamorphic+Vintage spherical + tilt shift.... some sigma too.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9130508/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

 

A stew...

[Tom1234]

46 minutes ago, Slender said:

A blend of Venice+Monstro... and Anamorphic+Vintage spherical + tilt shift.... some sigma too.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9130508/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec

 

As a practical matter can they really normalize the color balance for all those different lenses in post?  Inter-cutting closeups, Med Shots, and wider shots might be a nightmare.... what do you think?

[Guest JMF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 minutes ago, Tom1234 said:

A stew...

Well , a feature film has various sequences and possibly various moods to be conveyed . 

[Guest JMF]

30 minutes ago, Tom1234 said:

As a practical matter can they really normalize the color balance for all those different lenses in post?  Inter-cutting closeups, Med Shots, and wider shots might be a nightmare.... what do you think?

 

Renting gear from a known camera rental house  helps choose the good sets with matching focal lengths  .

Then most likely, there will be a couple of weeks of color grading in a dedicated suite .

 

Edited March 20, 2021 by JMF

[Slender]

According to critics, the movie intently plays with varying aspects ratios and so on according to desired mood for multiple stages of the story. Regarding means those two directors have pretty much all doors (all) open in hollywood so they can litterally do the heck they want.

[Matvertiser]

Am 12.3.2021 um 09:50 schrieb Steven:

Yes. Leica M lenses are perfectly fine in my view for professional film making work. If you'd have said SL lenses, as good as they are for stills, the answer would have been a firm NO. 

 

Yes, sure. And the the same time, no, of course not. I'm not sure how to answer this question other than with the most cliché answer: you can make a film with an iPhone. Soderbegh did it, along with other great film makers. You can make a film with an A7S2. You can make a film with any camera, including an SL2S. Would I recommend an SL2S for serious filmmaking, of course not. Firstly, because the SL2S, to me, is a stills camera first, with the added bonus of shooting great videos. As a comparison, the A7SIII is a video camera first, and it can shoot great stills as a bonus. 

There are two kinds main categories of films, the way I see it. 

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. 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. So dont tell me you need to buy a Leica cause you're tight on money. BS! 

2. The real low budget films. There are two main sub categories: student/hobbyist film making and documentary film making. 

Documentary film making: let's get the SL2S out of the way. You need XLRs, you need reliable AF. Most (awarded) documentary film making these days go for a Canon cinema line, such a C300, or C500 for full frame. You can see this by studying the Sundance line up. You could completely shoot an Oscar worthy documentary on a A7SIII. At least, that would be my choice if I wanted to shoot a documentary. Which I do. Which I will. 

Student and Hobbyist film making: they have 0 budget, most of the time. So they cant shoot an ARRI cam, or anything too complicated. But it's not because they are expensive. It's because they don't have the money for the crew around. Meaning that most of them will go for an AF solution. Canon or Sony. For those who really want to try MF, I would recommend an BMPCC 6K PRO instead of an SL2S. And for those who really want L mount lenses (I cant see why), I would recommend an S1H instead of an SL2S. 

 

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. 

I love to sometimes find someone who knows it all and has seen everything. Especially if these experiences and pieces of wisdom so fundamentally correct everything I learned in my life. Now I finally found out, that my struggle to film a single beautyful frame was completely in vain, that I am a plucky amateur and that my SL2 s is mearly a toy. Thank you for all the good information you provided to us, the clueless, let me now disappear into my closet and cry for the rest of the day. Oh no, it is full of fellow and equally sad sl2 s filmmakers. I have to find an other place to shed my tears.

[Coverageum]

Tbh, every filmmaker starts somewhere, and even the most experienced have had their "toy" phase. I’ve been there too! I remember feeling that way when I first started out, using basic gear and struggling to get the perfect shot. It was humbling, but it also pushed me to learn more.

[Coverageum]

On 1/2/2025 at 7:33 AM, Coverageum said:

Tbh, every filmmaker starts somewhere, and even the most experienced have had their "toy" phase. I’ve been there too! I remember feeling that way when I first started out, using basic gear and struggling to get the perfect shot. It was humbling, but it also pushed me to learn more.

I ended up studying at the Prague Film School and it was a game-changer. They really helped me understand that it’s not about the gear but the vision behind the shot. We all start somewhere, and the more you keep at it, the better you’ll get.

 

Edited January 6 by Coverageum