SL3 Rumors

[BernardC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Anyway, it's Leica themselves that likes to position its brand as luxury / lifestyle, they even have a dedicated section on their official Amsterdam website.

That lifestyle section has some t-shirts, a hat, and a few books/magazines. Do the t-shirts even count as "luxury?" They aren't all that expensive for medium weight organic cotton. Granted, you can get a 6-pack of super-thin t-shirts at Walmart for less, but these are not €400 Armani-branded t-shirts. The hat seems to be of decent quality. I have a similar one which has a car brand on it. It was displayed at a similar price, but I asked and got it for free when I had my car serviced. It shades my eyes on sunny days, and keeps raindrops off of my spectacles on rainy days. I guess everyone's definition of "luxury" is different!

Let's not discuss books. It's a photography store, they have photo books.

The whole discussion is based on old-fashioned notions. Leica may have been an elite brand 40 years ago (when they were nearly bankrupt), and maybe it still is for the M line. The current SL line is priced similarly to its competition. I don't agree that a $6000 Sony is "salt of the Earth," but a $5000 Leica purchased from the same store is elitist luxury. The SL is actually a far more usable and durable camera in my mind.

Maybe this is about special editions? What else can Leica do to get publicity? Canon just sponsored the Rugby World Cup, maybe Leica should spend millions on a similar "partnership?" Sony's logo is everywhere. That's Playstation dosh, but you can't help but see it. Leica gets PR value from fancy neck straps, or from a few dozen Lenny Kravitz cameras. It's great marketing, people still talk about it half a decade later. The ROI is out of this world, plus they sold the cameras! You have to admire that, even if your musical tastes run elsewhere.

[trickness]

5 minutes ago, BernardC said:

That lifestyle section has some t-shirts, a hat, and a few books/magazines. Do the t-shirts even count as "luxury?" They aren't all that expensive for medium weight organic cotton. Granted, you can get a 6-pack of super-thin t-shirts at Walmart for less, but these are not €400 Armani-branded t-shirts. The hat seems to be of decent quality. I have a similar one which has a car brand on it. It was displayed at a similar price, but I asked and got it for free when I had my car serviced. It shades my eyes on sunny days, and keeps raindrops off of my spectacles on rainy days. I guess everyone's definition of "luxury" is different!

Let's not discuss books. It's a photography store, they have photo books.

The whole discussion is based on old-fashioned notions. Leica may have been an elite brand 40 years ago (when they were nearly bankrupt), and maybe it still is for the M line. The current SL line is priced similarly to its competition. I don't agree that a $6000 Sony is "salt of the Earth," but a $5000 Leica purchased from the same store is elitist luxury. The SL is actually a far more usable and durable camera in my mind.

Maybe this is about special editions? What else can Leica do to get publicity? Canon just sponsored the Rugby World Cup, maybe Leica should spend millions on a similar "partnership?" Sony's logo is everywhere. That's Playstation dosh, but you can't help but see it. Leica gets PR value from fancy neck straps, or from a few dozen Lenny Kravitz cameras. It's great marketing, people still talk about it half a decade later. The ROI is out of this world, plus they sold the cameras! You have to admire that, even if your musical tastes run elsewhere.

It’s really great how deeply this post goes into the topic of SL3 rumors. Do you know somebody in Wetzlar who is feeding you all this inside information?  🤣

[T25UFO]

6 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

there's no luxury coffee brand around

Have you seen the price of Blue Mountain 😳

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

That lifestyle section has some t-shirts, a hat, and a few books/magazines. Do the t-shirts even count as "luxury?" They aren't all that expensive for medium weight organic cotton.

You really only read what you want to read, right?

As I wrote, the section had a 90€ tshirt, a 350€ hand strap, a 700€ fountain pen. It doesn't anymore, because probably are sold out.

Leica Miami has the same list as the Amsterdam store. Please tell me how a 850$ lighter is not a luxury item, I'm very curious to hear that, especially when they are listed as "high end accessories".

https://leicastoremiami.com/collections/0-95

 

Edited November 15, 2023 by Simone_DF

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

The whole discussion is based on old-fashioned notions. Leica may have been an elite brand 40 years ago (when they were nearly bankrupt), and maybe it still is for the M line. The current SL line is priced similarly to its competition. I don't agree that a $6000 Sony is "salt of the Earth," but a $5000 Leica purchased from the same store is elitist luxury. The SL is actually a far more usable and durable camera in my mind.

Sony, Canon and Nikon have top of the line tech. This tech is expensive, even more so on the R&D side. Leica is always one or two generations behind with cheaper, older technology. Which is fine. I don't buy Leica for its tech, but this is a different discussion.

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

What else can Leica do to get publicity? Canon just sponsored the Rugby World Cup, maybe Leica should spend millions on a similar "partnership?"

Leica had its logo on Huawei phones, and now that they're gone, on Xiaomi smartphones, one of the most popular brands out there, so they do have their partnerships.  

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

Leica gets PR value from fancy neck straps, or from a few dozen Lenny Kravitz cameras. It's great marketing, people still talk about it half a decade later. The ROI is out of this world, plus they sold the cameras! You have to admire that, even if your musical tastes run elsewhere.

I'm fine with any special edition Leica puts out, because it fills their coffins, and you're right, it's clever marketing. But it's marketing aimed at the luxury section of their customer base.

Leicas are great photography tools, there's no denying that, I'm using a couple of them myself and so are people on this forum, but they also target the luxury and lifestyle section of the market to differentiate themselves from other brands, and there's nothing wrong with that, they found their niche and it's profitable for them, and they can be both.

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

You really only read what you want to read, right?

As I wrote, the section had a 90€ tshirt, a 350€ hand strap, a 700€ fountain pen. It doesn't anymore, because probably are sold out.

Leica Miami has the same list as the Amsterdam store. Please tell me how a 850$ lighter is not a luxury item, I'm very curious to hear that, especially when they are listed as "high end accessories".

https://leicastoremiami.com/collections/0-95

 

I wonder what happened to the Leica watch line? 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Sony, Canon and Nikon have top of the line tech. This tech is expensive, even more so on the R&D side. Leica is always one or two generations behind with cheaper, older technology. Which is fine. I don't buy Leica for its tech, but this is a different discussion.

Leica had its logo on Huawei phones, and now that they're gone, on Xiaomi smartphones, one of the most popular brands out there, so they do have their partnerships.  

I'm fine with any special edition Leica puts out, because it fills their coffins, and you're right, it's clever marketing. But it's marketing aimed at the luxury section of their customer base.

Leicas are great photography tools, there's no denying that, I'm using a couple of them myself and so are people on this forum, but they also target the luxury and lifestyle section of the market to differentiate themselves from other brands, and there's nothing wrong with that, they found their niche and it's profitable for them, and they can be both.

On this forum we have a rather narrow view of  Leica and their products. We tend to forget that their binoculars, rifle scopes, spotting scopes and above all Cine lenses are industry standard   And you are right, it is not all about the newest and shiniest. In the M series there is no competition, the Q is a unique full-frame cropping point and shoot. There are no more advanced cameras on the market in those niches. 

[Virob]

I haven’t gone through all the pages on this topic, but aren’t all camera brands luxury, or on their way to becoming luxury items? Once upon a time, photography was only for the privileged. That gradually changed to point where almost every mom and dad had an slr or point in shoot, which evolved to the camera phone,  and sales for dedicated cameras dropped like a stone. We lost a number of brands and those remaining have had to downsize and are scrambling to stay relevant. The market today is very different then it was 10- 20 years ago. The high end, low volume cameras, which used to be only a small percentage of the total market, is now a much bigger percentage of that market. The big guys like Sony, Nikon and Cannon have no choice but to fight for this market.

To me, the car analogy doesn’t work very well because the auto market is still very diverse and hasn’t gone through that contraction phase (yet).

 

 

[frame-it]

2 hours ago, Virob said:

To me, the car analogy doesn’t work very well because the auto market is still very diverse and hasn’t gone through that contraction phase (yet).

 

try buying a car in Singapore!! now that's a luxury

[SrMi]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

I wonder what happened to the Leica watch line? 

https://leicacamerausa.com/lifestyle/boutique/leica-watch/

 

[frankchn]

11 hours ago, BernardC said:

The current SL line is priced similarly to its competition. I don't agree that a $6000 Sony is "salt of the Earth," but a $5000 Leica purchased from the same store is elitist luxury. The SL is actually a far more usable and durable camera in my mind.

Considering that the new $6000 Sony has a new generation of imaging sensor that hasn’t been seen in consumer digital cameras ever, and the $7000 Leica (the SL2 still retails for $7000 new at B&H) contains the same sensor and AF system as a Panasonic S1R for half to almost a third the price ($2500 from Best Buy, or $3700 from B&H), I’d say the SL line is also priced notably higher than the competition.

In fact, no mirrorless camera from any other manufacturer is more expensive than the SL2 right now on B&H. The A1 is $6500, the Z9 is $5500, and the R3 is $5000. The only ones more expensive than the SL2 are the M11, M11-P, and M11-M.

The SL line might be worth the cost to you (M lens compatibility, perceived build quality, controls, etc…), but I don’t think you can really argue that it is priced similarly to its competition.

Edited November 16, 2023 by frankchn

[IkarusJohn]

So, a few pages on, will the SL3 be evolutionary or revolutionary?

I know that removing a button or rounding an edge can be too much for some, but sometimes more can happen.  It has very good lenses, and cheaper alternatives.  Despite the doomsayers of a few years ago, it seems to have thrived.  Where will it head next, and will the SL3 take us there?

That’s not an invitation to list what you want, but where it will go …

Edited November 16, 2023 by IkarusJohn

[LocalHero1953]

Evolutionary, not revolutionary. I can't think of what would make it revolutionary.

(But since we cannot agree on what is luxury, what is high-end tech, and what is a significant price differential among cameras, I suspect that is also how this discussion will go: what is evolutionary vs revolutionary.)

Edited November 16, 2023 by LocalHero1953

[padam]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

So, a few pages on, will the SL3 be evolutionary or revolutionary?

I know that removing a button or rounding an edge can be too much for some, but sometimes more can happen.  It has very good lenses, and cheaper alternatives.  Despite the doomsayers of a few years ago, it seems to have thrived.  Where will it head next, and will the SL3 take us there?

That’s not an invitation to list what you want, but where it will go …

The main priority for the SL system is image quality, the rest is not so important. With regards to sensors, moving up to BSI will improve dynamic range and ISO performance a bit (at least the SL2, not the SL2-S), but otherwise, there hasn't been any revolutionary change on that front.
It will have a tilt-screen, which is annoying, as the rest just isn't so important from a usability standpoint, it does seem like that while AF will be better, it is probably still best control it as much as possible, rather than leave it to do what it's supposed to do. This is not necessarily a bad thing, there is more intention to capture photographs instead of blasting through dozens of frames, just because the camera easily can follow through. But just like the Q3, it will be capable of that, UHS-II SD + 8GB buffer should be plenty.

I guess I am in the minority, but actually don't like the lenses that much, I think Sony's engineers did a much better job of coming out with ones that aren't APO corrected, yet still incredibly high resolving as well as light and compact with large apertures and fast focusing motors. (that is why M lenses are great even from an original 50/1.4 ASPH, now almost 20 years old...from then on upwards I don't care about further 'gains') If there is a lens that they should clone from the alliance, it would be the 24-105/4 with OIS, apart from the 24-90/2.8-4 there is no other in that range with combined IS (but maybe that would be internal competition, I find the whole idea of the L-mount system very weird in the first place).
Even from the native lenses it is clear that speed is not a priority for Leica, so I don't really understand why people are seeking more advanced sensors that won't offer any improvement in stills image quality, only better speed and video features which was a "revolution" but I don't see them keeping a similar momentum as most other brands also don't seem evolve in their equivalent models.

[BernardC]

6 hours ago, frankchn said:

Considering that the new $6000 Sony has a new generation of imaging sensor that hasn’t been seen in consumer digital cameras ever, and the $7000 Leica (the SL2 still retails for $7000 new at B&H) contains the same sensor and AF system as a Panasonic S1R for half to almost a third the price ($2500 from Best Buy, or $3700 from B&H), I’d say the SL line is also priced notably higher than the competition.

Let's compare like with like. Leica's 24MP offering is the SL2-S, not the SL2. The SL2-S is $800 less expensive than Sony's new a9.

The 47MP SL2 is similar to Sony's 50MP a1, and they are priced within 10% of each other. Don't forget that Leica's 47MP sensor rates much higher in image quality, plus Leica has much better IBIS, and access to better lenses (which matters if you need the highest resolution). If that last $500 makes a big difference to you, go for the Sony (or find a used/old-stock S1r, which is an awesome deal). If not, just pick the one you prefer. No one will think less of you in either scenario.

 

[frame-it]

16 minutes ago, BernardC said:

Let's compare like with like. Leica's 24MP offering is the SL2-S, not the SL2. The SL2-S is $800 less expensive than Sony's new a9.

was the new A9 released in dec 2020 like the SL2S?

[Simone_DF]

23 minutes ago, BernardC said:

Let's compare like with like. Leica's 24MP offering is the SL2-S, not the SL2. The SL2-S is $800 less expensive than Sony's new a9.

Apart from being 2 years old, does the SL2-S offer a global shutter, which is a brand new tech?

[Simone_DF]

24 minutes ago, BernardC said:

The 47MP SL2 is similar to Sony's 50MP a1, and they are priced within 10% of each other. Don't forget that Leica's 47MP sensor rates much higher in image quality, plus Leica has much better IBIS, and access to better lenses (which matters if you need the highest resolution). If that last $500 makes a big difference to you, go for the Sony (or find a used/old-stock S1r, which is an awesome deal). If not, just pick the one you prefer. No one will think less of you in either scenario.

The A1 is a do-it-all camera and excels at everything. Want to use it for sport? You can, thanks to the high FPS. Want to use it for landscape? You can too, thanks to 50mp. Incredible fast AF.

The SL is definitely not a do-it-all camera. The only superior hardware piece in the SL is IBIS.

Image quality and better lens is debatable. What does constitute "image quality"? How do you define it? Are the photographers using Sony A9 producing inferior images to the ones we see from Leica shooters?

Better lenses is another one. Sony has an outstanding lens selection, their G Master series is awesome. Add to that Zeiss, Sigma, Voigtlander and countless of other native options. Who needs an adapted M lens that may underperform when you can go native? Sure, the APOs are out of this world, but they are only 6 prime lenses in total.

[Simone_DF]

4 hours ago, padam said:

it does seem like that while AF will be better, it is probably still best control it as much as possible, rather than leave it to do what it's supposed to do. This is not necessarily a bad thing, there is more intention to capture photographs instead of blasting through dozens of frames, just because the camera easily can follow through.

I love how an underperforming AF now becomes a "want". Kind of like "it's not a bug, it's a feature".

Unsurprisingly, you can do the same with Canon etc., and limit the AF to your liking, but also blast it at full potential if you so wish.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

The SL is definitely not a do-it-all camera. The only superior hardware piece in the SL is IBIS.

Image quality and better lens is debatable. What does constitute "image quality"? How do you define it? Are the photographers using Sony A9 producing inferior images to the ones we see from Leica shooters?

Leica's 47MP sensor was the highest-rated full-frame sensor on DxO for many years, although the M11 sensor now surpasses it. So if you define "image quality" by colour depth, accuracy, and dynamic range, you should consider a camera that uses one of these two sensor. If you define it by speed (AF and read speed), look at options from Sony, Canon, Nikon. They will all cost around the same in the end, so choose according to your own preferences.

Obviously, if having "the latest" is especially important to you, irrespective of image quality, Sony has you covered. They'll sell you a new camera every quarter. Not the most cost-effective approach, but we all have different priorities. Ironically, this conversation started with accusations that Leica customers were followers of fashion (and by implication, people who purchase other brands are not), but here we are: there's a strong case to be made that buying an SL2 on release would have saved you thousands compared to buying the latest Sony upgrades, and you would have benefited from the best image quality all along. Maybe it's not for you, but this logic appeals to some of us.

That's why I find this conversation interesting from a psychological point of view. We are all adults, we make decisions like these every day. And yet you'll get tons of static if you explain your choice. I've stated multiple times that every major brand makes good products, and they each have unique features. Maybe one camera is faster. That's about as appealing to me as buying a car that can reach 3x the speed limit instead of just double the speed limit, but it matters to others. That's fine with me. Another camera offers better UI, or colour response. We all rank these features differently. Why is this upsetting? Why denigrate other people's ranking system? It's just a camera.