Is the Hasselblad X2D a threat to Leica’s SL series?

[Patrickfoley@mac.com]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have owned at SL2 since it was first announced in 2019, and I had the SL before that. I’ve enjoyed both cameras, and the zoom and Summicron lenses. But I am now very tempted to switch to the X2D. The image quality is superior. Dynamic range is better. Low light performance is better.  The X2D’s  handling seems better that the SL2, even though that is better than anything else out there in my opinion.

Do others feel the same? Can Leica  deliver enough improvement with the SL3 next year? 

[Advertisement]

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

[helged]

There is always something greener on the other side. And SL3 will come, likely next year. But if longer focal length are used, and if (single) af is of importance, X2D is not at top. See hands-on experience (post #203). 

 

[Jeff S]

Hasselblad can’t replace the SL 24-90 and 90-280, the only two lenses I use on the SL2. The X2D also lacks some useful features like joystick and LV histogram, and has a relatively poor sales and service network in the US. And it costs a lot more.  A 100 MP sensor is also wasted for my modestly sized prints, most of which are black and white. A fine camera, no doubt, but no GAS pangs here.

Jeff

 

[Photoworks]

21 hours ago, Patrickfoley@mac.com said:

I have owned at SL2 since it was first announced in 2019, and I had the SL before that. I’ve enjoyed both cameras, and the zoom and Summicron lenses. But I am now very tempted to switch to the X2D. The image quality is superior. Dynamic range is better. Low light performance is better.  The X2D’s  handling seems better that the SL2, even though that is better than anything else out there in my opinion.

Do others feel the same? Can Leica  deliver enough improvement with the SL3 next year? 

well you can get the camera with the 3 new lenses, I am sure it is a good kit. 3rd party lenses are only an option with electronic shutter what is a non starter on anything the is just a little in motion.

I don't find it practical for most uses even if I would want one... I would use it for portraits in the studio.
 

[LocalHero1953]

If you only photograph landscapes and static subjects, I can see the attraction. If you're photographing moving people, then the SL2/SL2-S would be better (based on accounts I have read - I have not tried the X2D). I remain content with 24mp (my photography is not limited by resolution), and I want video.

Edited September 15, 2022 by LocalHero1953

[smcmason]

As a user of the GFX50R, GFX100S, SL 601, and Panasonic S1R (same sensor as the SL2, I believe), I say the X2D is absolutely not a direct competitor. I do expect it to siphon off some GFX sales, though. The experience of these big 100MP cameras is so much different. The resolution is such that the slightest bit of movement can be transmitted in the final image. For me, the GFX 100S is a tripod only camera unless bright daylight is present. I don't like carrying it in a backpack, and there just isn't much available at the extreme wide or long focal lengths. The image quality is outrageously good, it's just a bit more work than it is with an SL type camera. 

If I wanted fast action, I'd get a Sony or Canon. If I wanted a studio camera, I would go with the 100S or X2D. I like the SL/L Mount system for excellent all-rounders that I don't mind carrying around, even if they are not as portable as a Sony. I still find a bit of uniqueness to the images I get with the gear I use that I can't seem to replicate in Lightroom using Sony equipment. Switching to these 100MP sensor cameras is much more involved than having the same process with a bigger sensor. I'll probably consider an X2D after a year or two, but it would be in addition to my full frame gear, not instead of. 

[Malabito]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To me, it will all depend in how is the autofocus. SL autofocus is quite bad for a full frame mirrorless... If X2D comes close to the sl autofocus I would highly consider changing. You can't shoot spots nor running things, or low light with the Sl system, (I have a sl2s), Therefore if autofocus is close to the sl i will consider it. You will continue with a lagging autofocus system but gain in image quality. 

The only lenses i see missing are long zooms which i don't use. 

 

 

Edited September 15, 2022 by Malabito

[acg69]

On 9/15/2022 at 9:11 PM, Malabito said:

To me, it will all depend in how is the autofocus. SL autofocus is quite bad for a full frame mirrorless... If X2D comes close to the sl autofocus I would highly consider changing. You can't shoot spots nor running things, or low light with the Sl system, (I have a sl2s), Therefore if autofocus is close to the sl i will consider it. You will continue with a lagging autofocus system but gain in image quality. 

The only lenses i see missing are long zooms which i don't use. 

 

 

Hi, are you saying that you CAN'T shoot in low light with the SL2-S? I was under the impression that low light shooting is an advantage of this camera specifically. I am considering getting one especially for this reason!

[tom0511]

I am user of SL2(and S) and had x1dII.

YES, the color and overall IQ of the larger sensor of the Hassy has been even a little better than the SL2.

But then the Leica lenses are slightly better than (some) of their Hassy counterparts. For example IMO the 35 and 50 SL primes beat the Hassy xcd lenses in regards of vignetting and bokeh.

The x1dII felt much slower in use than the SL2/SL, so lets see how much faster the x2d has beceome. AF is one thing, start up another, shutter delay a third thing.

The other question are lenses. The 35-75 Hassy is a very good zoom, but slow aparture, and limited range compared to 2470/2.8 or 24-90/2.8-4.0.

Also there are several f1.4 lenses (some from Leica SL, some Leica M) you can use in lower light, so even if the sensor of the x2d is a little better at high ISO (is it?) you need to remember that you have slower lenses and/or have to stop down little further to have the same DOF.

I can not imagine the x2d would beat the SL2-S in regards of low noise.

IMO the x1d will still be a specialist camera for landscape or slow pace portrait/ subjects (with the goal of max IQ), while the SL system is a much more flexible and reactive system. You gain a lot of flexibility and speed compared to Hassy, and you do not loose much (depending on the focal length and lens maybe nothing at all) in regards of IQ.

 

[tom0511]

Am 15.9.2022 um 16:37 schrieb smcmason:

As a user of the GFX50R, GFX100S, SL 601, and Panasonic S1R (same sensor as the SL2, I believe), I say the X2D is absolutely not a direct competitor. I do expect it to siphon off some GFX sales, though. The experience of these big 100MP cameras is so much different. The resolution is such that the slightest bit of movement can be transmitted in the final image. For me, the GFX 100S is a tripod only camera unless bright daylight is present. I don't like carrying it in a backpack, and there just isn't much available at the extreme wide or long focal lengths. The image quality is outrageously good, it's just a bit more work than it is with an SL type camera. 

If I wanted fast action, I'd get a Sony or Canon. If I wanted a studio camera, I would go with the 100S or X2D. I like the SL/L Mount system for excellent all-rounders that I don't mind carrying around, even if they are not as portable as a Sony. I still find a bit of uniqueness to the images I get with the gear I use that I can't seem to replicate in Lightroom using Sony equipment. Switching to these 100MP sensor cameras is much more involved than having the same process with a bigger sensor. I'll probably consider an X2D after a year or two, but it would be in addition to my full frame gear, not instead of. 

fully agree here - Medium format for max IQ, Nikon/Son or Canon (in my case R5) for action and sports, the SL2 in the middle with a lot of flexibility a big overlap in both directions.

[Malabito]

4 hours ago, acg69 said:

Hi, are you saying that you CAN'T shoot in low light with the SL2-S? I was under the impression that low light shooting is an advantage of this camera specifically. I am considering getting one especially for this reason!

Image quality wised yes ,it's has great low light capabilities.

But autofocus is none existent in afc, and in afs is far from good. If you don't have contrast which in low light is an issue forget about autofocus.

[Jon Warwick]

7 hours ago, tom0511 said:

 

IMO the x1d will still be a specialist camera for landscape or slow pace portrait/ subjects (with the goal of max IQ), while the SL system is a much more flexible and reactive system. You gain a lot of flexibility and speed compared to Hassy, and you do not loose much (depending on the focal length and lens maybe nothing at all) in regards of IQ.

 

It’s a nice summary. I have a GFX100S, and it’s very useable handheld indeed given IBIS, but it feels more like a tripod & landscape camera compared to the SL2.  I more think of the GFX as a replacement of my 5x4 film for landscapes where I want max resolution for massive prints, where 100mp is useful.

That said, for non-landscapes, in terms of image quality, if I resize the SL2 files to the near 40” wide files (the native size off the 100mp camera), I often don’t feel there is much lacking at all, such is the excellence of the SL primes.

Where I do (currently*) see a difference is often “rendering”, there is a look of the Leica files that I find hard to mimic in post with the GFX / GF lenses. I don’t quite know what it is. There is tons of detail off the 100mp sensor, but the content in the GFX image to my eyes has more etched-in appearance, almost a little like a graphical picture  …..whereas prints from the SL2 sensor & SL primes seem to arguably record the subject’s depth and textures more realistically.

* maybe in the future I figure out in post what might better match the 2 cameras’ renderings, but I haven’t discovered it yet.

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by Jon Warwick

[jrp]

Does the Hasselblad have continuous AF? Or, for bonus points, Eye AF?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I have my X2D. Had it for just over a week now, with both the new lenses. the new 90 arrives next week, I hope. I also have the GFX100S and the X1DII (and S007). I've had my SL2 since launch and it *replaced* my S1R's, mostly.

The answer to whether it threatens the SL2 is a resounding, *sort of*......

The SL2 is generally faster, especially in SAF, where it matches most systems. The X2D doesn't yet have CAF or face/eye detect. That's next year according to HB. Someone above said the SL2 low light AF isn't good. Not my experience as a working wedding photographer. Camera focuses down to EV -6. That's plenty dark. Some adjustment is required to get the best out of the contrast system but it works well in a dim wedding reception. But basically the SL2 is between somewhat and a lot faster in AF depending on the lens. I have Nikons and Sony's so it's not like I have no reference. SAF on the SL2 is good. Better than the GFX which is *slightly* better than the X2D which is much better than the X1D.

The SL2 is much more flexible. Lots more lenses to choose from especially zooms. Fully native lenses from 14mm to 600mm. The HB has nothing close to the 16-35 or 90-280. It has one, stunning, zoom. The GFX is much closer but the SL system is still far more flexible and faster over all.

The HB wins easily on ultimate image quality. You can close the gap with the SL2's high res shot which is only second to Olympus. But ultimately the X system files are just vastly more robust when pushed and prodded in Lightroom. Mind you there's no HB support in C1. I would say that for most people, they're probably not really at the edge of what their current camera can do. The 33x44mm sensor may have all these goodies but do you really need/use them when 90% of your output is to Instagram? To most of us some better technique would be a bigger upgrade than a new camera. Yes, pixel peeping is fun but really that doesn't translate to the real world unless you print big yourself or work closely with a proper fine art printer.

There is a crossover point. If you shoot with a few selected primes then things get very close indeed. The lenses are a wash. The XCD lenses are sensational, especially ones like the 80, 21 and 135. The 120 macro is one of the sharpest lenses I've ever seen and the 80 1.9 is my favourite all round portrait lens ever. At the same time the SL50's are both special and the Summicrons are sublime. The X2D at least has a flip up screen and its EVF is slightly better than the SL2. It has the best handling and menus and the AF is still behind the SL2 but it's now completely usable, most of the time. For most people, most of the time the Sl2 is way more than you need.

If you want to compare a SL2 with a 50 Summicron and the X2D with the 55V, things look really good for the Hasselblad. But if you have a bag of zooms the the SL is miles ahead.

The GFX100S has become far more flexible and usable as an only system but even with the new 20-35 it's not going to replace the absolute utility of a smaller sensor camera because the *system* will still be much bigger overall to achieve the same flexibility. So it's still a specialty camera system, to an extent. And the X2D is still a smaller subset of that niche. If you fit it's criteria then yes. And if you want to and can afford it, then why not? But most people would be better off with the SL2. Mind you this is a Leica forum. Most of us would be just fine with any other camera. We choose Leica because we want a scalpel and not a swiss army knife......

Leica might lose a few sales. Some people have the money and want whatever they perceive as the *best*. Their money, their choice. It's the same mindset that has some choose Leica over Sony or Canikon. We still choose the Sl2 when clearly there are technically stronger systems out there. It'd could be the menus, handling, lenses etc. Some will use the same process and come up with an X2D.

Personally I don't think the X2D is the camera to worry about. They'll get compared because of price. The real disruptor is going to be the Fujifilm XH2 and XH2S. And not just for Leica either.

Gordon

[Olaf_ZG]

I have a gfx50, and it is up for sale, though I am not sure yet if it is a wise decision.

The camera is great in long exposure (4-15 minutes) which the SL can’t do yet. As it is said that the m11 is capable, I hope a SL3 will be capable as well. 
 

so for me the choice will be between the hasselblad, gfx100s or SL3. As all are rather expensive, I still need to save up, so I have some time to think….

[pgh]

15 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

There is a crossover point. If you shoot with a few selected primes then things get very close indeed.

For me, the x2d is definitely a competitor. 

Besides my M and my SL2, my other camera is a 907x50c. So I have a couple of x lenses. I usually shoot with a 50 (or 65mm xcd) - sometimes a 35 (45mm hassy) and occasionally a longer lens. I tend to work more slowly, but am primarily a handheld shooter. I mostly use M lenses on my SL2 but do own one sigma AF lens - a good deal for what it is.

The SL2 is plenty good for larger prints, but the x2d will be better - and - someone said the GFX 100 is tripod only because of the resolution. I disagree - I know plenty of people that use it as a walkaround. IBIS has opened up new possibilities. The main reason I didn't get an X1DII (and opted for an SL2) was the IBIS and generally slower response time. It seems the x2d has addressed these. I'm actually a bit ambivalent about the 100 mp - I would probably take a 50mp version if everything else was improved. I think the ergonomics of the X series are better also, the SL2 is just a little bit of an awkward (if beautiful) camera body. For me, 40-50 mp is the sweet spot - no matter 35 mm or 33x44 sensor. The leaf shutter and better flash options (nikon), are another selling point - for me. I use a lot of on camera flash outdoors - Leica is more limited here even with the new options, in part because of the focal plane shutter. I used to use an Rx1RII specifically for this reason. The other tempting thing - when I shot pentax, the 55mm focal length was perfect for 33x44 - now that hassy has finally made one of those, the x2d plus that lens would be what I've been wanting for years. My pics won't get any better of course. 

I'm still on the fence - and will probably sit on it for a few years as I still mostly use the M and the 907x for projects I am working on right now. By then I'm sure an SL3 will be in the mix...but great as it may be it won't give images quite as good as the hassy. 

Edited September 24, 2022 by pgh

[BernardC]

16 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Leica might lose a few sales. Some people have the money and want whatever they perceive as the *best*. Their money, their choice.

Those are ideal consumers! They provide a steady supply of high-quality barely-used items, and they keep photo dealers in business.

[caissa]

What kind of improvement could the Fuji offer ?

Resolution ? Yes, but mainly for landscape or portrait (still life). At a much higher price and limited flexibility (lens choice). Multi shot is just as good for this.

AF ? very unlikely better.

Sensitivity ? In the Leica I get f 1.4, so typically I have the “same” light situation as in medium format.

Way of handling ? Probably still a tripod camera.

So I think the SL2/S is still better for me. (I am mainly a zoom user and Fuji is not offering anything interesting for this case.)

Actually I prefer the colors of the SL2, but this is just personal choice. (More natural)

Flash ?  Yes ? But with the new adapter from Godox flash with SL2 is probably improved (have not tried it yet).

Edited September 24, 2022 by caissa

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[FlashGordonPhotography]

5 hours ago, caissa said:

What kind of improvement could the Fuji offer ?

Resolution ? Yes, but mainly for landscape or portrait (still life). At a much higher price and limited flexibility (lens choice). Multi shot is just as good for this.

AF ? very unlikely better.

Sensitivity ? In the Leica I get f 1.4, so typically I have the “same” light situation as in medium format.

Way of handling ? Probably still a tripod camera.

So I think the SL2/S is still better for me. (I am mainly a zoom user and Fuji is not offering anything interesting for this case.)

Actually I prefer the colors of the SL2, but this is just personal choice. (More natural)

Flash ?  Yes ? But with the new adapter from Godox flash with SL2 is probably improved (have not tried it yet).

Depends on which Fuji?

For the XH2 and XH2S.. Smaller system size. F1.2 lenses. Native zooms to 900mm equivalent. Better tracking autofocus. Fully articulated rear screen. 1/4 the price.

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

8 hours ago, pgh said:

For me, the x2d is definitely a competitor. 

Besides my M and my SL2, my other camera is a 907x50c. So I have a couple of x lenses. I usually shoot with a 50 (or 65mm xcd) - sometimes a 35 (45mm hassy) and occasionally a longer lens. I tend to work more slowly, but am primarily a handheld shooter. I mostly use M lenses on my SL2 but do own one sigma AF lens - a good deal for what it is.

The SL2 is plenty good for larger prints, but the x2d will be better - and - someone said the GFX 100 is tripod only because of the resolution. I disagree - I know plenty of people that use it as a walkaround. IBIS has opened up new possibilities. The main reason I didn't get an X1DII (and opted for an SL2) was the IBIS and generally slower response time. It seems the x2d has addressed these. I'm actually a bit ambivalent about the 100 mp - I would probably take a 50mp version if everything else was improved. I think the ergonomics of the X series are better also, the SL2 is just a little bit of an awkward (if beautiful) camera body. For me, 40-50 mp is the sweet spot - no matter 35 mm or 33x44 sensor. The leaf shutter and better flash options (nikon), are another selling point - for me. I use a lot of on camera flash outdoors - Leica is more limited here even with the new options, in part because of the focal plane shutter. I used to use an Rx1RII specifically for this reason. The other tempting thing - when I shot pentax, the 55mm focal length was perfect for 33x44 - now that hassy has finally made one of those, the x2d plus that lens would be what I've been wanting for years. My pics won't get any better of course. 

I'm still on the fence - and will probably sit on it for a few years as I still mostly use the M and the 907x for projects I am working on right now. By then I'm sure an SL3 will be in the mix...but great as it may be it won't give images quite as good as the hassy. 

90% of my shots on the GFX are handheld, so yes, I agree with you. The IBIS is fab. In early testing I think the X2D might actually be better. Hard to test claims of 7 stops but it's good. One thing is the auto ISO is capped at 1/f as the slowest auto speed setting or you can set a shutter speed that ignores focal length. The 1/f isn't nearly slow enough. I want a 1/2 f or even 1/4 f to try out. With the 55 I'm finding 1/10th doable with good results most of the time.

I hadn't had a 43mm equiv before. I really like it. And the 38 is fantastic on the 907x as you get the extra control ring on the lens. Camera firmware needs a tweak to make it perfect but it's already massively improved with a new lens on the 907x.

Gordon