Confessions of a defector to Sony

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, pgk said:

We shouldn't really live in isolation and assuming that Leica lenses are 'better' than everything else, or should we? I like my Leica lenses but I'm not blind to the fact that Sony build some lenses that are as good as you can get too.

Did i say the opposite? 

[Advertisement]

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

[MJB]

Just curious, what was the impetus for getting rid of the CL and all your TL lenses?  I mean, I get that the Sony has a number of advantages on the spec sheet, but what did you feel like you were missing I guess with the CL?  The a7R IV is, in some ways, the polar opposite of the CL (eg, in terms of philosophy and design), so I'm just wondering what really drove the decision - certainly there is access to some cutting edge technology with the Sony, but why buy the CL in the first place if that is your draw?  I also understand that at some point we want to try something new for any number of reasons, so maybe it's as simple as that.

For me, I guess I don't demand a lot of my cameras in terms of technologic wizardry, and maybe that's why I'm so happy with the CL.  I shoot RAW, either with single-point autofocus or manually focus, spot meter, typically use aperture priority and auto ISO, and make liberal use of the exposure compensation dial.  I don't need or want much else.  And I'll admit, I want my cameras to look good and be impeccably built.  My film experience peaked with ownership of a couple different Contax SLR bodies, and the CL is the first (and so far only) digital camera that I've had the same kind of connection with.  I'm not sure where I'll go after the CL, with no successor on the horizon, but I suspect Leica has something in the cards that will work out.  I mean, if they could shrink down the SL at all I think I could be really happy with that, especially if it offered a crop mode at least as good as the CL's 24MP.  It would be nice to be able to continue to use the small and light (and much cheaper than SL!) TL lenses for AF, and then get the advantage of FF for adaptation of vintage MF lenses originally designed for the 135 format.

Fuji is a logical alternative to the CL given the same APS-C format and their sort of cross-over appeal as the "poor man's Leica," but like someone else said, I've never really gotten on with their UI.  I've owned an X100, X70, XF10, and X-Pro 3, and still own an X-E3.  The X-E3 is nowhere near as well-built or nice in the hand as the CL.  The X-Pro 3 comes closer but still falls somewhat short, and frankly when I had both cameras side-by-side, the CL was just so much nicer to use.  I especially preferred the EVF (the CL has a lower res EVF than the X-Pro 3, but higher magnification).  From a design perspective, I feel like Fujis are a little too focused on creating digital replicas of film cameras (which I thought I would like!) but I actually find the unconventional design decisions of the CL bold and refreshing.

Sorry to go off on a tangential rant.  If you're enjoying the Sony kit (and it sounds like you are), then you made the right choice.  Really at this point, digital cameras and lenses are so good it's hard to make a "wrong" choice.

Edited July 21, 2022 by MJB

[rob_w]

2 hours ago, MJB said:

Just curious, what was the impetus for getting rid of the CL and all your TL lenses?

Hi MJB.  Somebody asked me this back in March when I first sold the kit.  It wasn't the "spec sheet" at all.  There are always spec sheets and, there is always the next best thing.  In my situation, the key things were:

• my eyesight is no longer good enough for accurate manual focus.  I need a good autofocus system
• I take lots of candid pictures of people on the move, so the AF has to be fast and reliable
• my camera holding is not as steady as it used to be, so IBIS has become important.  Once, I could reliably take M pictures at 1/8 second but those days are gone, alas
• I wanted to get back to the sort of IQ I used to obtain from the Leica M.  The CL did not always deliver that
• Leica's decision to provide no future improvements was probably a factor too: sensors do evolve, EVFs evolve etc. and all-round improvements add up to significant benefits over time.  Perhaps I could have kept, variously, my M8, M9, M240 and still made good pictures with them, but most of us would prefer an M11 today
• when I wanted to add another lens or two for specific purposes, there were no new lenses available.  In desperation I added an SL lens which turned out to be a disappointment
• trying out other systems, it became apparent to me that Leica's dominant position producing the very best lenses has been eroded and the competition can do the same

I could go on but I think that shows it was very much to do with my own situation.  Like you I shoot raw and I would have been fine with single-point AF if the single point had stayed in one place!

I checked the Fuji range but it did not seem to offer the APS-C advantages of the CL size and weight.  Fuji's latest release is actually slightly heavier than the Sony A7.

To be clear, I do not want to knock the CL or Leica in any way.  There were thread discussions at the time with people wondering what to do next.  I promised to report back on one person's experience of what to do.

Cheers

PS what you  suggest Leica might possibly develop, to shrink down the SL, is already here in the A7 range and indeed in the Panny S5.  Philosophically, the Sony approach of providing compact and light equipment is actually more consistent with Leica's historical philosophy than what Leica themselves have been doing in recent years.  To get to where Sony are today, Leica needs a couple of new bodies and six or seven new lenses, i.e. to repeat the last seven years' effort.

Edited July 21, 2022 by rob_w

[Archiver]

17 hours ago, rob_w said:

Absolutely get it.  If you are running two kits it makes a lot of sense.  I searched quite hard for lenses which would meet my needs while keeping the total weight light.  The A7 with any of  the 24, 45 or 55 lenses is basically the same carry everyday I used to do with the CL.

I doubt I do enough photography to justify owning two kits.  In the past, for example, I owned a Canon 30D outfit and a Leica M8 (this was acquired back when Leica doubted they could make a digital M).  Once I owned the M8 the Canon sat in the cupboard unused for months, before I sent it off to a new home.

I still have my 30D, and began using it again after a hiatus of Leica-filled years because I bought the Sigma 18-35, which has proved wonderful on that old camera. Because the lens mounts natively to the 30D, there is none of the slight perception of fragility that comes from adapting the Sigma to the Panasonic G9 with Speedbooster, or S5 with Sigma MC21 adapter. But I digress.

The draw to the Sony system is entirely understandable. They produce high quality lenses which are faster and smaller than any of the equivalents from Canon, Nikon or Panasonic at this time, and the autofocus is next level and class leading.

There are a few reasons why I stayed with Panasonic and went to the S5, and didn't migrate to Sony:

1. M lenses tend to work better on the S5 than any Sony mirrorless body.

2. The S5 has video specs which are better than any Sony other than the A7S III or FX3, and those are only 10mp sensors, which cuts down their use for stills photography.

3. I'm very, very used to the Panasonic menu system and love it. Sony doesn't have the best reputation for menus.

4. This is entirely emotional, but I prefer using gear that others do not. In freelance video/hybrid shooting, many people use the Sony A7 III, and I want to avoid being like everyone else. I can put up with slightly lesser AF if it means having better video specs, a menu system that works for me, and a camera system that not many others use. I avoided the GH5 for the same reason, going with the G9 instead. Heck, I shoot sports with the M9, which hardly anyone does.

If I was primarily a stills shooter, particularly for sports, I would probably use a Sony A9 and learn to live with the menu system. That camera looks like exactly what the doctor ordered in that area. A Sony kit that would work for stills and video would be the A9 and FX3, giving high quality stills from one camera and high quality video from the other, and the ability to use native lenses across both.

[jaapv]

On 7/21/2022 at 11:31 AM, Archiver said:

I still have my 30D, and began using it again after a hiatus of Leica-filled years because I bought the Sigma 18-35, which has proved wonderful on that old camera. Because the lens mounts natively to the 30D, there is none of the slight perception of fragility that comes from adapting the Sigma to the Panasonic G9 with Speedbooster, or S5 with Sigma MC21 adapter. But I digress.

The draw to the Sony system is entirely understandable. They produce high quality lenses which are faster and smaller than any of the equivalents from Canon, Nikon or Panasonic at this time, and the autofocus is next level and class leading.

There are a few reasons why I stayed with Panasonic and went to the S5, and didn't migrate to Sony:

1. M lenses tend to work better on the S5 than any Sony mirrorless body.

2. The S5 has video specs which are better than any Sony other than the A7S III or FX3, and those are only 10mp sensors, which cuts down their use for stills photography.

3. I'm very, very used to the Panasonic menu system and love it. Sony doesn't have the best reputation for menus.

4. This is entirely emotional, but I prefer using gear that others do not. In freelance video/hybrid shooting, many people use the Sony A7 III, and I want to avoid being like everyone else. I can put up with slightly lesser AF if it means having better video specs, a menu system that works for me, and a camera system that not many others use. I avoided the GH5 for the same reason, going with the G9 instead. Heck, I shoot sports with the M9, which hardly anyone does.

If I was primarily a stills shooter, particularly for sports, I would probably use a Sony A9 and learn to live with the menu system. That camera looks like exactly what the doctor ordered in that area. A Sony kit that would work for stills and video would be the A9 and FX3, giving high quality stills from one camera and high quality video from the other, and the ability to use native lenses across both.

I could have written most of this. The S5 is my “do-everything” camera and I have set it up to give a near-analog experience. However my all time favorite is my M9M and M9 duo and my carry-everywhere the CL. I do not believe in committing to one brand; they all have their strong points and uses. 

[geoffreyg]

Before CL, small camera of choice was Sony RX1. Superb Zeiss lens, great quality. Poor haptics, and terrible menu tho. CL seemed more simple, and allowed use of some M lenses. Still like the CL, but don't like APS-C. Not enough if you crop. Certainly an A7R system has lots of advantages - including great sensors, and as you say, good lenses are out there. But learning another menu is not high on the list. 

[Enrique Santa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 7/18/2022 at 4:33 PM, rob_w said:

Caveat:  What I say here is not intended to detract from Leica, the CL or the many photographers and friends on this forum who are happy to continue using their CL and take wonderful photos.  After all, I owned a CL system myself and probably would have continued if the CL2 had come along.  My needs are particular to me and have driven my choices, for my situation.

In March this year I packed up my entire CL outfit and sold it.  For the first time in 40 years there was no Leica in the house – a shock to me and even to my family, who wondered out loud if I was doing the right thing.  I promised to report back to friends on this forum re what happened next.  This is my report.

Before I sold the CL I had intended to stay with the L mount, perhaps a Panasonic S5, but when I investigated further, I decided on a complete change to Sony instead.  Sony has a history of compact, light digital cameras, it is in their DNA so to speak.  Their sales lagged Canon and Nikon until, around five years ago, their early adoption of mirrorless technology started to pay off.  Now Sony has caught up with and perhaps overtaken their Japanese rivals, and is arguably the mainstream camera system of choice in 2022.

Enclosed inside my Leica world, I had not realised these changes were taking place.  I thought of Sony as a purveyor of tired Minolta lenses that never made first rank and a flotilla of point-and-shoot cameras for the masses.  I was by no means ready to consider them a serious alternative.  Fast-forward to now: after a lot of research and persuasion I purchased a Sony A7R4 and a set of lenses.  It has been used for several thousand pictures taken during outings, events and overseas trips. 

Here are the key points from that experience:

The camera.  The A7R4 is relatively small and compact at 660gm – a little less than the S5 and considerably less than the SL range.  My CL + handgrip was slightly lighter at 550gm.  I love: the 61Mp BSI sensor, the 5.76Mp OLED viewfinder, IBIS, tilt screen, eye-detect autofocus.  The AF is in another league: remarkably fast and accurate, easy to adjust for specific focusing intentions and to combine with manual focusing.  (No more ‘wandering focus point’!)  All the features I wanted in a “CL2” and more.

The lenses.  I started with the Sony 24G/2.8 and the Sigma 45/2.8, at 183gm and 215gm respectively.  I chose the Sigma since it is popular with SL users and was well reviewed by Sean Reid, but have since replaced it with the Zeiss 55ZA/1.8 which is a better lens in every respect: sharp at full aperture, superior micro-contrast and better colour rendition.  This Zeiss lens weighs 280gm and is 70mm long.  It has been around for 10 years and is the sort of lens Leica should have been designing when they embarked on their SL primes.  In real life usage, its performance easily matches the SL50/2.0 Summicron which I have also owned and used extensively. 

Perhaps the biggest surprise is what an open standard the Sony E mount is.  There is a huge range of lenses from which to choose.  Sigma, Tamron, Voigtlander and others are all available in native E mount with the right electronic contacts for AF, IBIS and EXIF data.  Sony’s own lens designs have moved to the front of the pack.  I own the Sony 35GM/1.4 which is simply stunning from wide open onwards -- IMHO the best lens I have ever owned.

The buttons.  This was the part I dreaded.  There are indeed a lot of buttons and the menu system is unnecessarily confusing.  Nothing for it but to wrap a cold towel around my head and slog through the manual and videos for several difficult days.  That done, I now have the camera set up the way I want and don’t make any changes other than operational ones.  On the other hand, the lenses have physical aperture rings, which I like, a visible exposure compensation dial which I use all the time, and each control continues to do the same thing even when I change mode.  None of the buttons do double duty so the camera is not confusing when you are actually shooting.

The brand.  Sony is a consumer electronics company not a boutique luxury goods manufacturer, so there is no ‘white glove’ experience.  Styling is utilitarian but at least not offensive.  Products come in printed cardboard boxes and bubble wrap.  Not many will fetishise owning an A7 as a desirable object (although some do).  Prices, of course, are laughable for anyone who has lived in Leica land for 40 years.  My entire 5 lens set including a couple of premium objectives cost about the same as one Leica SL prime.

The results.  The ‘proof of the pudding’ is that the pictures variously please and amaze.  So much so that when editing it’s hard to choose the rejects.  The AF is a big factor in that.  No matter how good a lens, you only see its quality if the picture itself is in focus.  And every picture is sharp at the point of focus even in demanding conditions.

For holidays and outings, I can fit the camera and one or two lenses into the same camera bags I used for the CL and before that for the M240.  The weight difference is negligible.  I can crop any lens to 26Mp in APS-C and see the effect in the viewfinder, giving me four effective focal lengths with a two-prime day kit.  Or I can take my trusty Sigma 18-50 APS-C zoom which delivers excellent results, as many here already know. 

So I have my “CL2” with everything I wanted, and with full frame as a bonus.  Oh yes, and there is an A7R5 rumoured for release later this year, which we do expect Sony to deliver.

Hi Rob and thank you very much for your post. I've been a Leica user also, the second Dlux , XVario and finally the Superb CL and several lenses. I have tried to keep my CL kit , but I have lost my ilusion in it. There is no more love for Leica and CL too. In fact all my CL kit is now on their boxes ready to go . In the last months I have'nt touch my CL , it produce me bad feelings. 

I was searching the web for months looking for a new cam and lenses and to my surprise I have got the same conclusion: Sony. I have never thought before in owning a Sony.

At this moment my fab is the a7r IV also , but the a7 IV and even the ac are under study.

What I have learned in my web search is that most of the reviewers are'nt credibles , since they are vlogers and their reviews are video oriented in first place. Is really dificult to find good "stills only" photographers and reviewer. The second is that I need to spend some time in configure the cam to my taste and asing 2 dial to speed and Iso and with the lens aperture ring I've again my "CL".

So Rob what was your decisions to choose the A7R IV over the A7 IV?, it was only resolution? . Can you recognice an A7 IV pic from an A7R IV?. I hate to pay for an hibrid cam, since I NEVER use video, but with the exception of resolution the A7 IV seems to me a more equilibrated choice , with moderate sized files.

I wiil be glad if you could share your thoughts an decisions to choose your cam , sure it will help me a lot.

So thanks again.

Edited July 30, 2022 by Enrique Santa
Corrections

[MJB]

I think the Sony a7C is an interesting camera, especially as an alternative to the CL, and indeed shows what Leica could do with a CL2 - full frame, IBIS, weather sealing, tilting screen (although I actually prefer a fixed screen myself), and with only a very marginal increase in size and weight (even less of an increase once you add the handgrip to the CL, which is already built-in to the a7C body).  I'm afraid that I wouldn't be very happy with the loss of viewfinder magnification (x0.74 to x0.59), especially because my primary interest in obtaining a full frame camera is to adapt vintage manual focus lenses, which is where a good EVF really shines.

Where Sony really loses me, and I know this is shallow, is in their uninspired industrial design and user interface, not to mention their lack of any real legacy in the camera world.  I know this is dumb, and they are still very capable cameras, but for me cameras are at least partially an emotional purchase and the Sonys just don't scratch that itch for me.  I wish  when they had acquired Minolta they would've just produced cameras under that brand, especially since they're intent on re-using the "alpha 7" trademark.  If these cameras were styled like a Minolta X-E or Maxxum they would be so much more appealing.  Or, even better, given Sony's close relationship to Zeiss they could've licensed the Contax name and resurrected that marque (again, biased here, as the Porsche-designed Contax cameras are my personal high watermark of camera industrial design). But alas, they decided to slap "Sony" on the front of their cameras along with a million fiddly buttons and labels and I can't help but think of a TV, VCR, or a Walkman.  I mean, granted, Sony is a top tier electronics company and generally make products at the top of their segment, but I really think they missed an opportunity in terms of branding here.  Of course at this point they've more than made a name for themselves as a camera maker, but I don't think they've fully shaken their "appliance-like" reputation, in terms of design and user interface.

Anyway, I'm not attempting to argue with anyone or criticize their choices.  I think the Sonys generally make a lot of sense, and I will be the first to admit that the reasons they don't make sense for me are generally vague, irrational, and illogical - but the heart wants what the heart wants, lol!

Edited July 31, 2022 by MJB

[lct]

My Kolari mod Sony A7s and A7r2 are excellent cameras that work fine with most M lenses but their sensor stack is too thick to avoid soft corners on WA and UWA lenses w/o Kolari modification. Same issue on current Sony cameras AFAIK. As for SL and TL Leica lenses, they don't work on Sony cameras anyway. Hardly a solution for CL owners then, unless they used their CL body as digital back for M lenses essentially. In such a case be aware that colors are changed by the Kolari modification so it is not a solution for jpeg shooters. Not a big deal for raw shooters though.

[jaapv]

20 hours ago, Enrique Santa said:

Superb CL

 

20 hours ago, Enrique Santa said:

I have tried to keep my CL kit , but I have lost my ilusion in it.

A strange contradiction. Losing confidence in a "superb" camera because there is no successor (yet? - we don't know Leica's road plan).  Has the camera somehow turned into a pumpkin?

[Enrique Santa]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

 

A strange contradiction. Losing confidence in a "superb" camera because there is no successor (yet? - we don't know Leica's road plan).  Has the camera somehow turned into a pumpkin?

So leica's supposed response was not such? Since when? .I would be very grateful if you could clarify this point for me.
You see, I have all the right to be deeply disappointed with Leica, as good as the CL is, it gives me a bad vibe, which makes me not use this camera
 and its lenses and look for another brand. I mean Leica is able to produce great cams and in the same time treat their customers badly, this is the reason why 
I don´t want to own any more Leica product, I´m to old to accept been treated badly.
I am afraid that classifying this as a CONTRADICTION is something that NO real moderator should ask to a user of a forum, unless 
he is not a moderator anymore and is just one more member. For this reason I would be glad if you let Rob answer me without your prior judgement.

Cheers.

[Le Chef]

The contradiction is simple to understand: the CL is still a superb camera, and unless it materially disintegrates before your very eyes, it will stay the same.

If you are disillusioned then it is with Leica the company which has poorly communicated with owners, and not properly supported the marketing of the CL.

[pegelli]

Even though I've started my photography adventures with Leica (first a IIIf and later exchanged for an M2 and then added a R3) I have defected to a few other brands along the way.

First after the R3 was stolen and my insurance didn't even give me 50% of the value back I went to Canon (a dreadful T90 that I quickly sold) and then was for many years I was a happy user of an Olympus OM system. The M2 was mainly used for B&W, the Olympus for colour slides. Both systems have their strong and weak points.

Then came digital where I went for KonicaMinolta, mainly for IBIS and so slowly (10-12 years) migrated towards the Sony A7x series. On these bodies I still use my M-mount lenses via a manual adapter. The M2 still got occasional use for B&W film.

But the Leica itch started to come back so a month ago I finally added an M246 mono to my arsenal. Will it repace my Sony A7's, no way, AF and plenty prime and zoom lenses still make it my most used system and like others I have found that once the camera is set up the only reason to go to the menu is formatting an SD card. Bot the M246 mono is I think a tremendous asset and having a digital rangefinder is just too much fun that I now question why I didn't take that step any sooner.

I've never shot a T, CL or SL so can't comment on those, but I wouldn't call using my non-leica stuff "defecting" but more "diversifying" to make use of the different strong points of the systems that are available on the market. Leica is great and has some unique products but for me it's not the only game in town.

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, Enrique Santa said:

So leica's supposed response was not such? Since when? .I would be very grateful if you could clarify this point for me.
You see, I have all the right to be deeply disappointed with Leica, as good as the CL is, it gives me a bad vibe, which makes me not use this camera
 and its lenses and look for another brand. I mean Leica is able to produce great cams and in the same time treat their customers badly, this is the reason why 
I don´t want to own any more Leica product, I´m to old to accept been treated badly.
I am afraid that classifying this as a CONTRADICTION is something that NO real moderator should ask to a user of a forum, unless 
he is not a moderator anymore and is just one more member. For this reason I would be glad if you let Rob answer me without your prior judgement.

Cheers.

There is no response by Leica ( yet). Just conclusions jumped to on the Internet. 

On this forum moderators have as much right to an opinion as any member. As for your disappointment, Leica is a company that makes business decisions and sells products that the customers like or don’t like, and not a football club with supporters. Personally I rate my tools by their quality and usefulness, not by their label. And yes, I think it contradictory to judge a product by its brand and dismiss it despite liking it. 

[Enrique Santa]

15 minutes ago, jaapv said:

There is no response by Leica yet. Just conclusions jumped to on the Internet. 

On this forum moderators have as much right to an opinion as any member. As for your disappointment, Leica is a company that makes business decisions and sells products that the customers like or don’t like, and not a football club with supporters. 

First pumkin and now the football club. As a moderator have you ever consider the option to response me in a polite way?.

For the response of Leica , you have a thread full of post from you, where you could been clearer, or perhaps , do you know something now  than the rest of us don't know?.

 

Edited July 31, 2022 by Enrique Santa
Corrections

[jaapv]

Yes, a statement that tells us nothing about Leica's plans, except "continuing confidence in the high performance [...]".  And no, I know  nothing more than the next person. What I do know is that a hypothetical next model -a lack thereof-  does not diminish the previous one.

[rob_w]

On 7/30/2022 at 3:41 PM, Enrique Santa said:

What I have learned in my web search is that most of the reviewers are'nt credibles , since they are vlogers and their reviews are video oriented in first place. Is really dificult to find good "stills only" photographers and reviewer.

Hi Enrique.  As we have all discovered - the web is full of 'experts' and opinions strengthened by the echo effect.  Finding good lenses is harder than with Leica.  One of Leica's advantages is that (nearly) every product is excellent.  For E-mount (and L-mount) I have a small collection of credible reviewers -- Dustin Abbott for example who I first came across on this forum.  For Sony, Mark Galer is exceptional, and his general observations on photography would be interesting to many Leica photographers here, too.

I chose the A7R4 because of the very high resolution viewfinder (5.76Mp vs 3.68Mp).  When I tried them both in the shop it was clearly better.  There are various other pros and cons but the viewfinder was the clincher for me.  Seems like either would be an excellent choice, however.

Please feel free to PM me with any further questions!  Happy to help.  And good luck with your journey.

 

Edited August 1, 2022 by rob_w

[rob_w]

The criticisms from Jaap and Le Chef apply to me, too.  And I completely accept their validity -- my CL continued to work as well as it did on the day I bought it. 

The basis of my decision was being unable to invest for the future, and wanting to do so.  Leica may well come up with something in due course (I hope for their sake they do) but it is not known today and no  products are available today. 

I quite appreciate not everyone is in the same position or considering the same factors that were important to me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[rob_w]

On 7/31/2022 at 2:42 AM, MJB said:

Where Sony really loses me, and I know this is shallow, is in their uninspired industrial design and user interface, not to mention their lack of any real legacy in the camera world.  I know this is dumb, and they are still very capable cameras, but for me cameras are at least partially an emotional purchase and the Sonys just don't scratch that itch for me.  I wish  when they had acquired Minolta they would've just produced cameras under that brand, especially since they're intent on re-using the "alpha 7" trademark.  If these cameras were styled like a Minolta X-E or Maxxum they would be so much more appealing.  Or, even better, given Sony's close relationship to Zeiss they could've licensed the Contax name and resurrected that marque (again, biased here, as the Porsche-designed Contax cameras are my personal high watermark of camera industrial design).

Agree 100%  If only camera companies would do what we users actually want them to do.  🙄  

Even DPReview, in a recent series on the strengths and weaknesses of current market leaders, pointed to the plain-jane Sony designs as underwhelming.  That said, I have come to really like my A7.  It is just the right size and weight, the viewfinder is terrific, and I am becoming familiar with the various interactions to use it -- it falls to hand easily.  Also, with all due respect to DPReview, I am not sure Canon, Nikon, Fuji et. al. do any better.  No doubt Leica could design something much more attractive, as they have done with the Leica Q series and the continued M11 evolution, but as it stands today I actually do not like the SL compared to the A7.

[gotium]

21 hours ago, jaapv said:

And yes, I think it contradictory to judge a product by its brand and dismiss it despite liking it. 

Well this is something I struggle with - I really like Leica products but, having dealt mostly with Leica USA, it is a company I do not trust and really want nothing to do with.

I also dislike their transition to a luxury-goods brand, however successful it may be. Just not my thing.