Leica SL2 on Sports & Wildlife Photography

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

An example of image that would be very, very, very hard to get with the SL (for me), but that Nikon D850+Nikkor 400mm f2.8E nailed. The photo opportunity was over in a few (2-3) sec. Golden Eagle with details/vains to be seen in the eyes: https://helged.zenfolio.com/p359297810/ha492364f

[sillbeers15]

1 hour ago, helged said:

An example of image that would be very, very, very hard to get with the SL (for me), but that Nikon D850+Nikkor 400mm f2.8E nailed. The photo opportunity was over in a few (2-3) sec. Golden Eagle with details/vains to be seen in the eyes: https://helged.zenfolio.com/p359297810/ha492364f

Very nice BIF collection helged! With good light I honestly do not think the SL series cannot nail sharp & good BIF shots. Perhaps a logical explanation can help me to understand.

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[helged]

1 hour ago, sillbeers15 said:

Very nice BIF collection helged! With good light I honestly do not think the SL series cannot nail sharp & good BIF shots. Perhaps a logical explanation can help me to understand.

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!

I don't think we disagree, and perhaps half of the images on the zenfolio-page is made with SLx.

For static situations, Leica rules.

For situations where one can foresee what (may) happen, or if one can follow eg a bird over time, Leica works mostly fine (somewhat pending on the light conditions).

In situations where you get a few seconds to target the subject, focus on the subject and to freeze wings in pleasant positions, reliable AFc helps a lot. In these situations Leica is not king. Nor is Leica king on long lenses in L-mount. Actually, prior to one of the recent FW upgrades, accelerated focus made manual focus essentially unusable for BIF. We have now linear focus on the L-lenses, with is a must for manual focus on quickly moving subjects (and yes, I wrote e lengthly letter to Leica about accelerated vs linear focus on eg 90-280).

Despite the above, I'm a satisfied Leica M/SL/S-user. That being said, it would be lovely to have a somewhat better/more responsive AFc, also in sub-optimal light conditions. I havn't had the chance to stress-test SL2-S for BIF yet, but I'll do as soon as I get the opportunity...

Edited September 27, 2021 by helged

[sillbeers15]

10 minutes ago, helged said:

I don't think we disagree, and perhaps half of the images on the zenfolio-page is made with SLx.

For static situations, Leica rules.

For situations where one can foresee what (may) happen, or if one can follow eg a bird over time, Leica works mostly fine (somewhat pending on the light conditions).

In situations where you get a few seconds to target the subject, focus on the subject and to freeze wings in pleasant positions, reliable AFc helps a lot. In these situations Leica is not king. Nor is Lica king on long lenses in L-mount. Actually, prior to one of the recent FW upgrades, accelerated focus made manual focus essentially unusable for BIF. We have now linear focus on the L-lenses, with is a must for manual focus on quickly moving subjects (and yes, I wrote e lengthly letter to Leica about accelerated vs linear focus on eg 90-280).

Despite the above, I'm a satisfied Leica M/SL/S-user. That being said, it would be lovely to have a somewhat better/more responsive AFc, also in sub-optimal light conditions. I havn't had the chance to stress-test SL2-S for BIF yet, but I'll do as soon as I get the opportunity...

I'm not here to talk about which camera's got the best AF and I rightly say that the crown belongs to other maker than Leica.

The disagreement here is about possible vs impossible to get 'sharp' pics in BIF from SL series cameras.

There is two different things about continuous AF that we are talking about regarding 'sharp' pics. First is the ability to lock focus on BIF and the other is the 'sharpness' of the image on the required spot of the bird (I would say the eye of the bird). Some forum members just regard Leica AFC as useless and I would attribute the problem to 'unable to lock focus'. In your note above, you refer to the second case of 'sharpness' at the required spot. I think this is the challenge of all BIF photographers. And I think the success factor is more than AFC performance of camera. From my experience with the SL series cameras I am certain it can be done. Perhaps not the easiest way but surely not impossible.

[helged]

29 minutes ago, sillbeers15 said:

I'm not here to talk about which camera's got the best AF and I rightly say that the crown belongs to other maker than Leica.

The disagreement here is about possible vs impossible to get 'sharp' pics in BIF from SL series cameras.

There is two different things about continuous AF that we are talking about regarding 'sharp' pics. First is the ability to lock focus on BIF and the other is the 'sharpness' of the image on the required spot of the bird (I would say the eye of the bird). Some forum members just regard Leica AFC as useless and I would attribute the problem to 'unable to lock focus'. In your note above, you refer to the second case of 'sharpness' at the required spot. I think this is the challenge of all BIF photographers. And I think the success factor is more than AFC performance of camera. From my experience with the SL series cameras I am certain it can be done. Perhaps not the easiest way but surely not impossible.

Yes, sharpness at eg eyes for BIF is doable with the SL. But the percentage of succes is quite a bit higher with those systems that are made for sports, action and wildlife. At least based on my shooting technique and my ability to read wildlife. 

[Boojay]

To me a good BIF image needs retention of feather detail as well as a sharpish eye, I'm not seeing much of that, in my images or those of others.  Some beautiful ones of static birds.  I have been trying pretty hard with the SL2 and Sigma lens and even with latest firmware it's a struggle (for me anyway).  I'll post a couple of my better efforts but they are not great.  If I'm going somewhere special to shoot wildlife/birds and it matters it will be the R6, as much as I appreciate my SL2 it's not the tool.  I'm not saying it can't do it, but as the pro in the video, Rick May said, it's iAF is a bit "hit and miss"  I'm not getting consistent results with any settings for BIF yet, still happy to have the Sigma 150-600 and not blaming the lens for my failures.

 

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!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Michael Markey]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think that`s a fair summary , Jayne .

I took my SL2s  and 70 -200 /4 Panasonic out at weekend for some fast equestrian cross country action .

The focus and frame rate just couldn`t keep up.

Some ok shots but missed a bunch whilst it decided what to focus on . 

It`s a shame really .

More than happy with the outfit for the rest of my endeavors but if I want to save myself the frustration when things start moving fast I`m going to have to pick up another Sony cam .

Loathe to do so in part because I let a trio of very nice e mount Zeiss lenses go thinking that the CL and SL2S  would be "it" .

Right tool for the right job and all that .

Edited September 27, 2021 by Michael Markey

[frame-it]

7 hours ago, sillbeers15 said:

The fun is in the challenge as BIF is one of the most challenging aspects of photography. It has got nothing to do with SL series camera in terms of sharpness in pics. erhaps Perhaps you can enlighten us with your 'sharp' BIF pics?

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!

i knew you would say that i merely pointed out a fact that applies to what ive seen here.. i dont do bird photography..so please avoid confrontation and move on, you have the best tips for BIF pics and the settings involved.

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, Boojay said:

To me a good BIF image needs retention of feather detail as well as a sharpish eye, I'm not seeing much of that, in my images or those of others.  Some beautiful ones of static birds.  

exactly.

[sillbeers15]

1 hour ago, frame-it said:

i knew you would say that i merely pointed out a fact that applies to what ive seen here.. i dont do bird photography..so please avoid confrontation and move on, you have the best tips for BIF pics and the settings involved.

So you're just here to flame? 

[sillbeers15]

5 hours ago, helged said:

Yes, sharpness at eg eyes for BIF is doable with the SL. But the percentage of succes is quite a bit higher with those systems that are made for sports, action and wildlife. At least based on my shooting technique and my ability to read wildlife. 

Fair. I see it as half full and you see it as half empty.

You should be happier with the other systems. 

 

[helged]

17 minutes ago, sillbeers15 said:

Fair. I see it as half full and you see it as half empty.

You should be happier with the other systems. 

 

Everything taking into account, I am clearly most happy with Leica; I particularly love the feeling of having an instrument in my hands.

[sillbeers15]

16 minutes ago, helged said:

Everything taking into account, I am clearly most happy with Leica; I particularly love the feeling of having an instrument in my hands.

That is exactly my point.

Why dwell on the aspects of equipment limitation where clearly not one single equipment maker can deliver all requirements.

The fun of BIF photography is to acheive a good pics at the end of the day.

As you have commented that Rick May made comments of 'hit & miss', His delivery of pics IQ showed his acheivement even with equipment limitation.

Only little boys and girls cry over camera gear, and blame it for the cause of what they cannot deliver.

With enough experience shooting BIF,  both of us should clearly be beyond that.

I am not satasified with what I've acheived in BIF photography today. I want to be able to take a better shot the next time.

Cheers!

Edited September 28, 2021 by sillbeers15

[frame-it]

2 hours ago, sillbeers15 said:

So you're just here to flame? 

typical answer.

i simply commented on the sharpness of the photos..for you the SL series and the BIf pictures are perhaps acceptable, maybe not for others right?

Edited September 28, 2021 by frame-it

[Michael Markey]

6 hours ago, helged said:

Everything taking into account, I am clearly most happy with Leica; I particularly love the feeling of having an instrument in my hands.

So do I and have been using Leica since the early eighties .

Can`t beat the colours either .

Non of these things stand up though if it keeps missing the shot (not every shot obviously)

Back in the day I shot this cross country equestrian stuff with my double stroke M3 and probably still could but I`m one that thinks if the technology is available (and I`ll  find it useful ) I want to use it . 

Yes I can make compromises and take a more phlegmatic approach  but what erks me is that the technology is available ....practically mainstream ... so what on earth is a manufacturer doing not incorporating it into its products .

Obviously love Leica and been using Leica for over 40 years which is why I`m frustrated that they haven`t upped their game in this somewhat crucial area . 

 

[caissa]

I judge this thread by how much it helps me. And it is quite clear to me who tries to help and offer good advice, and shows interesting examples. And who does not much more than load off frustration to others and give the splendid “advice” to buy a Sony or Canon or Nikon. How limited do you have to be to believe others need this “advice”. How limited to think that this forum is the place to offer this “advice”.

I simply cannot understand and do not want to accept that this negativity fills the whole thread with complaints. So I suggest move on and enjoy your great “technology”. And if you have some achievements then talk about these to motivate users of the appropriate fora. But as you state they are actually the achievements of the technology and not of yours, so maybe not a reason to talk too much about it.

Edited September 28, 2021 by caissa

[Michael Markey]

1 hour ago, caissa said:

I judge this thread by how much it helps me. And it is quite clear to me who tries to help and offer good advice, and shows interesting examples. And who does not much more than load off frustration to others and give the splendid “advice” to buy a Sony or Canon or Nikon. How limited do you have to be to believe others need this “advice”. How limited to think that this forum is the place to offer this “advice”.

I simply cannot understand and do not want to accept that this negativity fills the whole thread with complaints. So I suggest move on and enjoy your great “technology”. And if you have some achievements then talk about these to motivate users of the appropriate fora. But as you state they are actually the achievements of the technology and not of yours, so maybe not a reason to talk too much about it.

Don`t quite understand your post unless it implies that there should be no circumstances were one can`t suggest that there might be improvements that would make a great camera better .

If so I find that a curious position if I may say so.

I enjoy my Leicas and have done for over 40 years but that doesn`t mean that they can`t evolve and offer similar technology currently enjoyed by other manufacturers.

I don`t think Leica think that either ,in fact they welcome customer feed back .

No body is being negative or indeed talking about "achievements" whatever that implies .

Simply saying that a jolly good camera with some of the best colour science on the market could be made a whole lot better with an improved AF system.

Leica have already done much to remedy this but ,in my humble opinion, there is still room for improvement. 

I`m sure that they think so as well .

[ajmarton1]

On 9/24/2021 at 8:53 AM, sillbeers15 said:

I have no doubts that Sony A bodies have better AF capabilities than SL bodies. My point is the SL bodies are indeed able to provide decent Wildlife and Sports application. More importantly the user skills and ability to optimize the gear is a greater factor than just the capabilities of the camera gear alone.

To me I'm not satasified with just documenting a picture. The color, image quality are equally important. The green color produced by Sony sensors are just dreadfully 'plastic' which I had a hard time altering in post processing. That is why I do not bother considering those Sony bodies. By the way my daughter is currently leaning photography with A7RIII.

If only I am satasified with the IQ from Sony, I would have saved lots on Sony G lenses over Leica glasses. It is just my preference.

Strange, I have never had that problem with the A1.  

[Michael Markey]

On 9/24/2021 at 4:53 PM, sillbeers15 said:

To me I'm not satasified with just documenting a picture. The color, image quality are equally important. The green color produced by Sony sensors are just dreadfully 'plastic' which I had a hard time altering in post processing. That is why I do not bother considering those Sony bodies. By the way my daughter is currently leaning photography with A7RIII.

If only I am satasified with the IQ from Sony, I would have saved lots on Sony G lenses over Leica glasses. It is just my preference.

That`s the dilemma.

Whilst I don`t object to the colour which came out of my Sony bodies I do (most of the time) prefer the SL2S files.

Didn`t notice a green caste though but yes it is different .... but I loved the Canon and Nikon files too.

So maybe although I prefer the SL2S colour files I`m not that bothered as long as I get the shot . 

Thing is seventy percent of my stuff I shoot for friends and my dissatisfaction with what I consider to be suboptimal AF performance , I guess , largely stems from that. 

"Did you get that  " .... "No ,but I did enjoy holding this camera ".

"Did you get that " ..... "No , but if I had the colours would have been fantastic".

This thread has been useful , at least to me , in helping me get some perspective and decide what I feel is important .

Tonight I`ve gone through 1,200 shots taken by two photographers at my daughters wedding last week.

One using two Sony cams and the other a Canon R5  (I ,when I could ,shot with my CL).

As you say ..... its just your preference.

I don`t seem to have that strong a preference other than getting an interesting shot. 

Ps Tonight I used the SL2S in Zone mode and it seemed much more accurate for my use case. 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[aksclix]

a lot of conversations about BIF here and I am yet to see an image that wows me.. I say this with NO disrespect to anyone whatsoever.. I am yet to see a single image that could be on par with the a9 or a1 or r5, r6... I have all the above mentioned gear and I could not get the 90-280 with my SL2 to give me one BIF image that blew my mind.. I have tried zone, tracking and wildlife AF profile, AFc, AFs, MF with BBF etc... nothing worked for me in the 4-5 times I have tried.. I have gotten some good images with the r5, a9 and the D4s I had long ago.. Sl2 and 90-280 are definitely not the tool for BIF.. some good shots may result accidentally with some skill but it definitely needs luck!!