Do I have realistic expectations of the SL?

[Jim B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 8/26/2022 at 9:08 PM, MJB said:

I have not used the SL2 or SL2-S, but I'm sure the EVF is better - I acknowledged as much.  But your rather dramatic assessment of the SL's EVF was that it was basically unusable, could not be relied upon for manual focusing, and suffered for lack of IBIS even when using a 50mm prime lens - all rather laughable claims.

And you may think the SL2-S is worth the price differential, but at 2x the cost of a used SL the difference is staggering.  Maybe you have no problem spending $4k for a used camera, which is fine, but that's much more than I'm personally willing to spend for any camera.

Honestly, if that’s all you are willing to spend then you are looking at the wrong camera brand.  What @hdmesa is saying is true, the technological changes have made a big difference in ease of use, processing powers, and image quality. 

[Jim B]

On 8/26/2022 at 9:52 PM, MJB said:

I really don't understand the dependance that people have on IBIS.  You absolutely can get excellent results without it, most especially with a fast lens like that.  I don't mean to be argumentative - I just honestly don't understand what all of the fuss is about.  I've used IBIS on some cameras and could frankly take it or leave it.  It's kind of cool in some low light situations, or I guess with long telephotos (which I don't use), but it's almost become a crutch that people think they can't do without these days.

Well as you go up in camera resolution (for me it’s 50mp range), you begin to see the effects of camera shake and the image is not as sharp as it could be. You then have to start using higher shutter speeds, higher iso….  The image degrades..

With Ibis all these problems go away, and enables you to shoot hand held with much better image results, not only at lower shutter speeds, but also at higher f stops…. For example, I had been out landscape shooting with (non- Ibis camera) and my tripod having a great time of it.  And then I was changing to a different location and didn’t want to set it all up to make one quick panorama.  So I grabbed my camera with the ibis and was able to make the multiple image panorama with the aperature I wanted to use, and the ibis did it’s job! Voila, perfect and no tripod!

[Jim B]

On 8/26/2022 at 10:30 PM, ravinj said:

Every shooting situation is specific. Eye-AF is also useless and so on. And yes, 1/10, 1/30 is my usual use case, esp at dawn. I would stop worrying about the OP - there is enough data here to make a determination what works best.

Well that’s true it was useless until they updated the firmware to make it work on the eye! LoL  Buy my gawd, all those boxes all the face makes it a little hard to see the subjects expression. I felt like after all those customers complained about it not working well, we kind of got a we’ll give it to with attitude update…. A little nutty and overboard. I mean why couldn’t be one small box flickering between eyes like every other camera manufacturer???? LoL I have a square around the head and a square around each eye! Wth….

[MJB]

3 hours ago, Jim B said:

Honestly, if that’s all you are willing to spend then you are looking at the wrong camera brand. 

Not really. I own 3 Leicas and not one of them has cost over $2000. I certainly don’t buy them new, but I don’t buy any photo gear new. 

[MJB]

3 hours ago, Jim B said:

Well as you go up in camera resolution (for me it’s 50mp range), you begin to see the effects of camera shake and the image is not as sharp as it could be. You then have to start using higher shutter speeds, higher iso….  The image degrades..

With Ibis all these problems go away, and enables you to shoot hand held with much better image results, not only at lower shutter speeds, but also at higher f stops…. For example, I had been out landscape shooting with (non- Ibis camera) and my tripod having a great time of it.  And then I was changing to a different location and didn’t want to set it all up to make one quick panorama.  So I grabbed my camera with the ibis and was able to make the multiple image panorama with the aperature I wanted to use, and the ibis did it’s job! Voila, perfect and no tripod!

No argument that there are use cases where IBIS becomes more important. But for me personally it’s just not a make or break feature. I also actually prefer fixed screens. Go figure. We all have our preferences and list of no compromise features, informed no doubt by our shooting styles. 

[BernardC]

10 hours ago, Jim B said:

With Ibis all these problems go away, and enables you to shoot hand held with much better image results, not only at lower shutter speeds, but also at higher f stops

That only works with static subjects. Humans, animals, and even landscapes don't stay absolutely still for more than a fraction of a second. People breathe, birds fly, hedgerows bustle. As astrophotographers know all too well, even the stars in the sky don't stand still!

That's why it's not a critical feature for many photographers. Stabilization has a sweet spot that doesn't extend far beyond what many photographers can achieve without stab. It's best in situations where camera movement is greater than subject movement, or where you are deliberately going for a sharp/blur effect (similar to slow-shutter flash).

As with all other aspects of photography, some photographers spend a lot of time in the "stabilization sweet spot," while others hardly ever go there at all.

[laowai_]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a SL (601) with a few Zeiss classic lenses (via Novoflex adapter) as well as a few Summicron-M. I shoot mostly videos for social media, occasional stills (landscape, nature, travel type of subjects), occasional a payed or pro-bono gig. A Lumix GH4 as second camera and as backup. The hardest thing is to find time to go out and shoot. Most of the time the SL is mounted on a tripod. For some reasons I mostly reach for the Zeiss lenses. Maybe it's the large focus throw on the Makro-Planars that makes focussing positive and precise. 

Occasionally I think it's time to upgrade but I always came to the conclusion that I am working with some mighty fine equipment that far exceeds my skills. 

If I had to buy it today would I go with the same setup? I'd spend more time thinking about lighting, the content, the story and what I want to tell my audience to deserve their attention. rather than agonizing over minor differences in equipment that will not be relevant in 3-4 years anyhow.

You got a good deal on a used Leica and some fine Otus glass? Go for it, get to know the gear, work with it, stick with it for a while and produce some spectacular work that's worth talking about.

[BernardC]

9 hours ago, laowai_ said:

Occasionally I think it's time to upgrade but I always came to the conclusion that I am working with some mighty fine equipment that far exceeds my skills. 

It wouldn't be an upgrade, just a different look.

I also have a set of Zeiss lenses that I accumulated in the days of film. They are my "vintage" set and they have a wonderful and consistent look that can't be replicated. On the other hand I also have a set of 21st century lenses that have a completely different look. I don't mix the two sets in a single project unless it's motivated by the narrative.