mirrorless competition

[northernlights]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have been busy with work, family and other commitments and have not been following cam developments except probably Leica and L mount alliance. I used to shoot Nikon D2H and Canon 1Dmk2 years ago. 
I saw a FB friend (videographer) handling a Canon R3 and when i went into Dpreview to look at a preview, i was like floored. Canon (likely Nikon as well) was like really late into the mirrorless game. But looking at the specs and tech, wow, my Leica SL is really dwarfed. The point is Leica’s (mirrorless cam bodies and lenses) are not cheap and how does Leica really fight in this space? The positive thing is Panasonic is collaborating in the mirrorless tech space with Leica. But at the rate the Sonys, now Canon and Nikons are developing. Leica obviously still “monopolises” the RF space as there is just this number interested in RF (which i will return to when M11P comes and M10P is affordable). 

 

Just to qualify i am not a troll:

I am an SL(601) hobbyist user. I mainly own M-mount lenses (Canon 50 f1.4 LTM, Zeiss 21mm f2.8 biogon ZM, Leica 50 APO M) and the 24-90 vario elmarit. Occasionally, i take on small paid assignments like actual wedding day shoot, wedding solemnisations, etc. I shoot street most of the time and very occasional landscape (not much in Singapore). Sports, birding, action photography is not my interest. 
 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[hansvons]

4 hours ago, northernlights said:

But looking at the specs and tech, wow, my Leica SL is really dwarfed.

A new tool rarely uplifts the craftsmanship. 

The technology race can never be won by Leica, due to their missing R&D resources in electronics and IT compared to the big Japanese manufacturers. But Leica is exceptionally good at soft facts such as colour. The R3 won't give you better colour, on the contrary. But colour is THE camera's virtue, at least for me, and the reason why I bought the SL2-S. And because you don't to sports and other journalistic stuff that deals with fast moving objects,  the R3 isn't for you anyway. IMHO, there's nothing to see for Leica folks.

[mike3996]

6 hours ago, northernlights said:

But looking at the specs and tech, wow, my Leica SL is really dwarfed. The point is Leica’s (mirrorless cam bodies and lenses) are not cheap and how does Leica really fight in this space?

Whether a camera dwarves another comes down to the requirements its user has for the camera. Leica doesn't have to fight the big ones one to one, it's enough that they make products that earn them a profit. They carve a niche for themselves, an area that the Japs aren't interested competing and there you are. Capitalism isn't just about being the best-selling and most-profitable, it can also be about making a unique thing that earns you a stable living.

[Slender]

8 hours ago, northernlights said:

 But looking at the specs and tech, wow, my Leica SL is really dwarfed.

Well, you have to remember that back then the SL was the only camera able to shoot 4K10 bits, or even 11fps mechanical.... that was really something (in addtion to the EVF) that left the competition in the dust back then, also for memory it was the most expensive Leica FF you could buy.

But so what about the R3? I am sure the SL601 paired with SL glass can still provide an equal or superior image quality to this at everyday ISO and use case for what you describe as a hobbyist. I am sure your SL601 remains unbeatten in what really matters, at least to me: out of the box IQ, sheer durability and construction quality, and most importantly if you manage to get great images w/o all the bells and whistle the competition may offer 6 years after your SL came out, it's so many things you don't have to worry about learning/setting/mastering....etc Ultimately it makes you a better photographer, more dependable. I mean it's especially true if you know your way around a Leica M. To a lesser extent the SL is also very stripped back.

Did we also mention your old DNG raw files will also look better and better as times goes by, retrospectively as your editing skills get better, and the software themselves deal better with noise, DR, hilghts recovery....etc? I swear to god it's easier now than ever to make an old Leica M9 DNG fils shot at high iso look much better than it used to be possible. Same will apply to your SL601 dng. It's crazy to think we still edit and view 14 bits files (16 even for the old M9, can you imagine?) on 8 bits monitors (10bits for the advanced ones) for the vast majority... we can't even fully see what our cameras see/saw/will see for a long time....

In many ways you could argue the SL2, the A1, the R3 are all outclassed by an iPhone in terms of camera computing wizardry anyway. You basically have your editing suite strapped to a pocket camera. Still I grew tired of all those wide open portraits of cool looking kids that makes up for 50% of the advertising about the thing... Up close they look like crap, but they hire good looking people, smart outfits, terrific art directors to make up for the fact all you really looking at is a widely distorted wide angle shot, with mushy 12mp on a tiny tiny sensor...

Anything goes. Just relax and keep ignoring the crowds.

Edited September 15, 2021 by Slender

[Slender]

.

Edited September 15, 2021 by Slender

[LocalHero1953]

I had a Canon EOS 550D back in 2011 and thought it a great camera and I could handle it well. Then I borrowed a M9 for the weekend, stuck my v4 Summicron-M 35 on it (I still had a M2) and realised I was holding a camera that was capable of taking far better pictures than I was. Ever since then I've been playing catchup. It will be a long time before I am limited by my camera equipment (in truth, I never will be). I am honest with myself that I change cameras because I like how they work or they have features I would like to try, not because my photography is held back.

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, northernlights said:

I saw a FB friend (videographer) handling a Canon R3 and when i went into Dpreview to look at a preview, i was like floored. Canon (likely Nikon as well) was like really late into the mirrorless game. But looking at the specs and tech, wow, my Leica SL is really dwarfed.

You are comparing a yet-to-be-released camera with one that's two generations old. The newer camera has newer tech.

Even then, I don't think the SL2-S is dwarfed, or even the SL. Obviously the R3 is better at what Canon does best: sports and other high-speed AF assignments. Leicas will be better at what they do best: lenses, interface, colour, etc. The SL has proven to be extremely solid and reliable, so there's no clear winner in the "toughness" category.

In the end, we all need to figure-out what suits us best. Contrary to what bloggers and vloggers want you to believe, it makes absolutely no sense to switch systems every time there's a new model (click on our affiliate links!).

[jrp]

Different camera manufacturers have different development cycles. As soon as Leica deploys the next generation of sensor and processor, its capabilities will be enhanced too. Nikon has made a step forward by using dual processors. Apple is bing enough to be able to design and upgrade its processors annually.

Whether you need the latest processor if you are not shooting sports or wildlife only you can decide. 30fps?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Leica doesn’t play in the same sandbox as Canon. If you want an SL, you get one regardless of what Canikony is doing. It’s lees about tech and more about usability and to some extent, prestige. I would NEVER choose an R3 over an SL2. The tech, while interesting, will have zero impact on my ability to make the images I do.

The reality is most photographers don’t need what an R3 or A1 can do. They just need to get better.

Gordon

Edited September 18, 2021 by FlashGordonPhotography

[Mr.Q]

I think the SL system only really makes sense if you enjoy the usability and build quality. The latest cameras from the major brands will produce equal or better images with more versatility. They offer basic and useful features that are omitted from the SL --- most notably a flip screen, battery life, black-out free e-shutter, and support for flashes/strobes.  And more importantly, even with the L-mount alliance, the lens lineup is lacking. As for OOC color science, 3rd party presets and profiles are so good these days, I'm not sure it even matters anymore.

[IkarusJohn]

As the saying goes, the best camera is the one you have with you, and 90% of an image (if not more) is made by the equipment two inches behind the viewfinder.

I use my SL(601) because it works with my 24-90 SL zoom, my M lenses and its the camera I own and like using.  None of that changes because another manufacturer, whose lenses I don't have, produces a camera which may (or may not) be better.  Having tried a Canon (G10), Nikons (FE, FE2, FM, FM2, F5 & D800e), Sonys (NEX-7, A7r) and Hasselblads (503cx, SWC & X1D II), the latest Canon R3 could make me coffee, and I couldn't care less.  I still love my SL.

I'm sure the R3 is a fabulous camera - if it floats your boat, you should get one.  But for me, the SL does everything I need and more - and I have tried my fair share of the other manufacturers products - specs do not images make!

👍

Edited September 16, 2021 by IkarusJohn

[beewee]

The biggest flaw with the Canikonys is that it cannot take APO SL lenses. 🙂 

[LocalHero1953]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

specs do not images make

This deserves to be printed on every camera and lens box, engraved on the back of a camera next to the viewfinder, and in the banner of every photographic website.

[BernardC]

8 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

And more importantly, even with the L-mount alliance, the lens lineup is lacking.

The L-Mount partners have released many more high-quality lenses than either Canon or Nikon. Sony offers more lenses in total, but they only have a small number of "G Master" and Zeiss high-quality lenses in their lineup.

The only real lack in the L-Mount lineup are high-speed super-telephotos. Those lenses cost over $10K from either Canon or Nikon, so they are the kind of thing that most of us would rent as needed (with a body attached).

Each system has its own marquee lenses of course, which are "lacking" in the other systems.

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

The L-Mount partners have released many more high-quality lenses than either Canon or Nikon. Sony offers more lenses in total, but they only have a small number of "G Master" and Zeiss high-quality lenses in their lineup.

All the Sigma lenses available in L mount are also available for Sony. That leaves only the Panasonics and of course the Leica APO out.

Voigtlander has also released quite a lot of native Sony mount lenses, including their APO line and some exclusive lenses like the 110 Macro APO and a 65 Macro APO, both of which I'd love to see in L mount.

As of now, nothing beats the Leica SL APO lenses, but it's only 4 of them, 6 if we want to include the 24-90 and 90-280 in the list. I think at the moment Sony has the strongest lineup if variety + quality is what you're looking for. The G Master lenses lineup is comprised of 14 lenses, and the Zeiss Batis are 5. 

[Mr.Q]

For starters

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

The L-Mount partners have released many more high-quality lenses than either Canon or Nikon. Sony offers more lenses in total, but they only have a small number of "G Master" and Zeiss high-quality lenses in their lineup.

The only real lack in the L-Mount lineup are high-speed super-telephotos. Those lenses cost over $10K from either Canon or Nikon, so they are the kind of thing that most of us would rent as needed (with a body attached).

Each system has its own marquee lenses of course, which are "lacking" in the other systems.

For starters, the Canon RF lenses are epic. Not only are the latest GM offerings excellent, a couple of the E-mount Voigtlander APO-Lanthars are considered reference lenses. And yes, the offerings for telephoto and macro lenses are lacking in L-mount, as are fast prime wide-angle lenses.

 

Btw it seems Sigma secretly formed an E-mount alliance without an annoucement because they offer the exact same lenses for Sony as well.

[Mr.Q]

Simone_DF beat me to it 😉

 

[BernardC]

4 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

Btw it seems Sigma secretly formed an E-mount alliance without an annoucement because they offer the exact same lenses for Sony as well.

Sony's mount is either "open", or it's very easy to figure-out. Canon and Nikon's mirrorless mounts aren't open (nor is the L-Mount).

I still think that L-mount has more standout lenses. Obviously no single mount works with every lens, so there will always be a "what about...". As I wrote earlier, if there's a specific lens that you need, you'll have to get the specific body that it fits on.

The L-Mount is especially strong in the "bread and butter" focal lengths. We have high-quality lenses for every common focal length, plus a bunch of high-quality zooms.

I'm not sure which fast wide lens is missing. It seems to me like every possible combination is covered by either Sigma or Laowa (not to mention M-Mount options). Again, it could be that your style of photography absolutely requires a specific lens model, in which case your choice is clear.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Simone_DF]

11 hours ago, BernardC said:

Sony's mount is either "open", or it's very easy to figure-out. Canon and Nikon's mirrorless mounts aren't open (nor is the L-Mount).

I still think that L-mount has more standout lenses. Obviously no single mount works with every lens, so there will always be a "what about...". As I wrote earlier, if there's a specific lens that you need, you'll have to get the specific body that it fits on.

The L-Mount is especially strong in the "bread and butter" focal lengths. We have high-quality lenses for every common focal length, plus a bunch of high-quality zooms.

I'm not sure which fast wide lens is missing. It seems to me like every possible combination is covered by either Sigma or Laowa (not to mention M-Mount options). Again, it could be that your style of photography absolutely requires a specific lens model, in which case your choice is clear.

Sony's mount is open, it was a clever move that paved the road for an excellent and diverse lens lineup. The L-mount, Canon and Nikon should learn from that.

What are these standouts lenses in L-mount? I count only 4, the Leica APO primes. Everything else is excellent, but you can find same or better quality in both Canon and Sony mount.

For the wides, there's no native 21mm and no 18mm prime at all in L mount. No, Laowa doesn't have these, nor does Sigma. 

The only fast wide zoom is the Sigma, which is good but big and clunky, not to mention that doesn't support normal filters and it's "limited" to f2.8.

I'd buy a ultrafast 1.4 wide in the 18-24 range 

[IkarusJohn]

The 21 & 24 Summicrons are in the pipeline, and the 16-35 is very good, though not particularly fast.  The 90-280 is also very good.