Jump to content

Thinking of going back to SL2 from GFX100S


pmendelson

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had an SL2 and SL 50 Summicron, and sold the lot and moved to a GFX100S. In terms of the beauty and construction of the camera, I prefer the SL2. For image quality at very large prints (I do 60” wide prints) there is nothing that makes me think I’d want to give up the 100mp medium format sensor, not just for resolution but also especially colours and tonal gradation. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Darthaddie said:

For me it’s the 85/1.4. Bad contrast...

Sigma 85/1.4 is great for kids, and the videos you get are amazing, much closer than a Q2.  I've not found a dramatic lacking vs SL APO 50 for instance.  

1 hour ago, thighslapper said:

I'll never have another M as the rangefinder system

I think it highly correlates with SL preference: M shooters like SL as it's thoroughly compatible with Ms.  Outside of a pancake, you can't pack an MF system small.  With the SL, you can if you stick to M lenses with some Sigmas, such as 24/3.5 and the latest 28-70 zoom.  I'd take at least one prime too...  The culprit is usually the 16-35 zoom, so great for landscapes but rather weighty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Darthaddie said:

I understand I’ll get a lot of hate for this, but having to process thousands of images from a wedding is a tedious process in itself and the sigma adds nothing but pain to that. 

Are you using Capture one? I shoot weddings as well with 2 x sl2's, a Q2 and a few leica lenses with a sigma 14-24.

I can tell the Sigma isn't as good as the leica lenses, but in terms of colour in C1 the sigma lenses render pretty much the same. Put it this way, they don't look out of place.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/13/2021 at 12:39 AM, pmendelson said:

The cons of going back to the SL2 for me?  1) The SL lenses are crazy expensive compared to the GF lenses (and the SL zooms are also big and heavy). 2) IMHO the SL2 sensor clips highlights more easily and isn't nearly as good at high ISO as the Fuji (although I prefer the colors that come out of the SL2). 3) Less ability to crop and maintain resolution. 4) No flip LCD (this is the one thing I really really wish the SL2 had).

I recently tried a gfx 100 - fully expecting to buy it for personal landscapes.

I really didn't like it. It felt so bloody clunky. 

There's no doubt the sensor is better than the sl2's but I just didn't enjoy using it. Great files though.

I've decided that for personal landscapes the SL2 with the 35/2 is still quite a potent combo, especially in multishot mode when that's possible. I might think differently if I printed for gallery/sales.

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2021 at 9:04 AM, pmendelson said:

Well, I went ahead and traded the GFX and some lenses for the SL2, 28mm SL and 50mm SL Summilux (I know that lens is a beast but I've always wanted to try it and I have smaller M lenses to use when I want).  I think it comes down mainly to the enjoyment of using the equipment and the lenses, and the GFX for some reason just didn't inspire me to pick it up and go out shooting like the Leicas do....

Good for you my issue with the gfx series is I can't get past the way the camera and (mainly ) lenses look. This is personal but  if the gfx series looked more like the Hasselblad x1d series I'd probably seriously consider adding it to my kit. I've looked at the gfx lenses quite a few times and I just can't get past the aesthetics 🙈😅

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, cheekz4dayz said:

I've looked at the gfx lenses quite a few times and I just can't get past the aesthetics

I have the GF63mm lens on my GFX100S. IMHO, I much much prefer the aesthetics of the SL Summicron APOs, not just the very solid feel and dense weight but especially the ultra smooth and quiet focusing. In comparison, I find the GF63mm lens is quite jerky when focusing, and hollow feeling, in my view.  That said, I really cannot fault at all the image quality of my copy of the Fuji lens in terms of rendering or sharpness .....I've taken the same distant image at the same mid-aperture with the GF63mm lens on the GFX100S, and compared it to one I took with the SL 50 APO on my SL2, and in that specific image I took I'm surprised that edge sharpness was even better to my eyes with my Fuji.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2021 at 12:02 AM, Gavin Cato said:

Are you using Capture one? I shoot weddings as well with 2 x sl2's, a Q2 and a few leica lenses with a sigma 14-24.

I can tell the Sigma isn't as good as the leica lenses, but in terms of colour in C1 the sigma lenses render pretty much the same. Put it this way, they don't look out of place.

 

I Use capture one and you’re right for the other sigma lenses. They are close in color to the Leica lenses. Not the 85. Same edits produce wildly different colors. Frankly, I’ll have given up on the lens and just waiting to trade it for another Leica. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

I have the GF63mm lens on my GFX100S. IMHO, I much much prefer the aesthetics of the SL Summicron APOs, not just the very solid feel and dense weight but especially the ultra smooth and quiet focusing. In comparison, I find the GF63mm lens is quite jerky when focusing, and hollow feeling, in my view.  That said, I really cannot fault at all the image quality of my copy of the Fuji lens in terms of rendering or sharpness .....I've taken the same distant image at the same mid-aperture with the GF63mm lens on the GFX100S, and compared it to one I took with the SL 50 APO on my SL2, and in that specific image I took I'm surprised that edge sharpness was even better to my eyes with my Fuji.

I think if you look at threads about the GF 63mm you will find it is one of the worst GF lenses in terms of AF speed/smoothness ..... there is a basic design fault with the AF mechanism having to move a large lens element near the front of the lens ..... the early versions were prone to failing. It was the first lens in the GF line up and it shows. It's apparently more reliable now but is not that popular with long time GF users because of it's past reputation. The latest lenses are quicker and quieter ..... except perhaps the 80/1.7, but that's because a biggish chunk of glass is being moved about rather than any design failings. All the lenses are optically very good, although there is the occasional dud due to poor centring when assembled. Fuji are quite forgiving when it comes to customer support and will replace most things if you find any issues..... unlike Leica where even mint unused equipment is reported as 'shows signs of wear and heavy use' (or the equivalent phraseology) when anything is sent in to be looked at. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Darthaddie said:

I Use capture one and you’re right for the other sigma lenses. They are close in color to the Leica lenses. Not the 85. Same edits produce wildly different colors. Frankly, I’ll have given up on the lens and just waiting to trade it for another Leica. 

Bugger hey. Well when the day comes you can get the sl 90. It's truly incredible. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sigma 45mm f2.8 v 50mm SL Summicron both at f4.

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!

Edited by jrp
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 6/17/2021 at 1:28 PM, thighslapper said:

I think if you look at threads about the GF 63mm you will find it is one of the worst GF lenses in terms of AF speed/smoothness ..... there is a basic design fault with the AF mechanism having to move a large lens element near the front of the lens ..... the early versions were prone to failing. It was the first lens in the GF line up and it shows. It's apparently more reliable now but is not that popular with long time GF users because of it's past reputation. The latest lenses are quicker and quieter ..... except perhaps the 80/1.7, but that's because a biggish chunk of glass is being moved about rather than any design failings. All the lenses are optically very good, although there is the occasional dud due to poor centring when assembled. Fuji are quite forgiving when it comes to customer support and will replace most things if you find any issues..... unlike Leica where even mint unused equipment is reported as 'shows signs of wear and heavy use' (or the equivalent phraseology) when anything is sent in to be looked at. 

Gee, my Gf 63 works just fine. The issue is with my  SL apo Lenses that scrape and grind away. Every time I use it I think I can’t believe I paid >5K for this ! Here’s a copy of the noise file.

90 Apo lens noise.m4a

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2021 at 5:33 AM, Darthaddie said:

I sold my GFX 50R along with the 110, 65, last year and moved to the Leica SL2. I had the SL and M10 for 3 years before that. At first I was seriously disappointed, I didn’t like the colors coming out of the SL2. What I did wrong was buy into the Sigma lenses. I hate to say this and please treat it as my VERY personal opinion. Sigma lenses are garbage. (There I said it) 

 

 

it all comes down to getting the right lenses. 

My very short experience with the Sigma 85 Art was also disappointing.

A Sigma lens on an SL doesn't produce images comparable to Leica lenses.

They may be better than some Japanese branded systems, but they are not Leica.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2021 at 6:29 AM, Darthaddie said:


For me it’s the 85/1.4. Bad contrast (except very ideal conditions), can’t shoot against the sun no matter what as it totally washes out (to the point of unrecoverable). The subject separation is muddy. Compared that to a rental 90 sumi or my earlier gfx 110 and the difference is night and day. the colors off the lens are too muted and I have to go an extra mile to correct those. I had 2 replacements but they are all the same  

For the price it’s good but that doesn’t mean it’s good for a Leica experience. Then there’s the sigma 35 f2. Very convenient to use but AF in the night is a nightmare. We run a wedding photography business and having ideal conditions is not a choice always. In my experience the sigma lenses on l Mount are less than ideal for professional work. I understand I’ll get a lot of hate for this, but having to process thousands of images from a wedding is a tedious process in itself and the sigma adds nothing but pain to that. 

and you’re absolutely right, they are perfectly usable but that’s about it. A great experience they are not and that’s fine. I didn’t have the budget for a Leica lens earlier and these helped me get a start on the system while I slowly move up to better lenses. What I don’t like is the rave reviews youtubers give to these lenses and give false assumptions to photographers. 

My experience exactly. The YouTubers never show un-retouched or unedited shots. So the colors in the video are not true "out of camera" renderings.

BUT, the target market for those lenses is not the true Leica enthusiast. Their target market buy Leica cameras but would rather have a Sigma with AF instead of an M lens. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2021 at 9:51 AM, jaapv said:

Hmmm. Looking at the OP, the Sigma shot is considerably better.

Are you referring to post #3?

There is a huge loss of clarity in the Sigma image. Look at the stucco on the right, the Mamiya has much more detail. Looking at the top right, in the Mamiya image you can see the screen mesh above the chimney the Sigma doesn't show it. Top left, looking at the leaves in the trees, the Sigma again has no detail, just a blur.

look at the windows, the Sigma is blue.....ish

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Original poster here.  Not only did I go back to the SL2, I traded some gear for a S007, and got a SL2-S for low light.  Using a combination of M, S and SL lenses on the SL2 cameras is pretty awesome - M for small and light, SL for optical perfection or reach/zoom (24-90 and 90-280), and S lenses for a different look.  SL2-S came in handy shooting the orange moon here in CT last night with the 90-280 handheld.  My favorite combo right now may be the S007 and 24mm S (18mm equivalent), although it's one heavy beast.

No regrets on giving up the GFX system.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I too delved into the XID realm and Fuji GFX100 system, selling my M10  in the process.  While I loved the system and the output, the 100mp output really had not advantage to me and the system clogging, hard drive eating nature of the files did not make sense.  Plus to edit 100mp video files my computer had a number of heart attacks.  I finally came to my sense and sold it all off and picked up a gorgeous low count, new sensor M9 Monochrom and new M10P, with a few lens choices thrown into the mix.  24mp is really all I need and am buying back into a SL system for that reason (albeit a SL1 for a fraction of the cost of SL2 or SL2s).  I have plenty of M lenses to choose from and I feel I finally have a cohesive and sensible system.  If I want autofocus, I will probably look at the Sigma 85mm.  I shoot predominately boudoir and portraits so this system makes a lot of sense.

 

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...