SL3 Rumors

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

18 hours ago, trickness said:

I think this is the challenge for Leica, and perhaps the misunderstanding that we sometimes have about the brand. They are not Sony/Canon/Nikon, they aren’t going to introduce cameras, every two or even three years. They are a small company. It’s pretty ambitious for them to put out something like the SL, which is going to be compared with all those other cameras, unlike the M system (because it’s unique). 

Quite honestly, I’m extremely happy that they’re not like Sony, who seem to come out with a new body every single year. If I had to use my SL2 as my only camera for the next 20 years, I can’t really envision a time when I would ever feel like some new camera hugely surpassed what I can accomplish with this body and this system.

All my babbling here can be boiled down to kind of one thought: progress is a wonderful thing, but it is no substitute for knowing how to take a decent photograph in the first place. And there is absolutely nothing missing from the SL platform that will prevent anybody from doing that, despite endless posts on here about how outdated the camera is and how much better all these other brands are.

 

Agreed, Leica is not Sony/Canon/Nikon, but with the SL it's competing in the same battlefield. Which cameras are Leica's biggest success? The Q and the M, two cameras that don't have any direct competition. There's no substitute for the M and there's no substitute for the Q, except maybe the Fuji X100V, with the caveat of APS-C.

Other brands have slowed down releases. The Sony A7RIV was released in July 2019, the A7RV in December 2022, that's 3 years and half. The A7C was released in 2020, the A7CII in 2023, and the Canon R5 in July 2020, and there's no R5II in sight yet, so Leica's 4 years life cycle should be perfectly acceptable for pretty much everybody.

It's not a matter of being able to take a decent photograph. To be brutally honest, Leica doesn't give a crap if you use their camera to take photos or as a door stopper, as long as you buy their cameras, and they need to convince people to buy a SL instead of another brand. No people buying Leica = no more Leica.

[Simone_DF]

8 hours ago, Paul2660 said:

I feel it's safe to assume the SL3 when announced with cost around 7.5K US.  Possibly 8K.  

And who's going to buy it at that price? Leica has been going in the opposite direction with the SL2. Price reduced compared to the original SL, discounted bundles, rebates, free M adaptor, a cheaper SL2-S, you name it. Have you ever seen any of this on the Q or M? All red flags that the platform was not selling as much as hoped. A 7.5K price will kill the platform for good.

[frame-it]

7 hours ago, rcusick said:

I have a theory that Leica is going to dramatically reduce the size of the sl3 and lenses

so you think they will release a full set of new smaller lenses for a smaller sized SL3?

 

i think they're combining the R&D for the SL3 and S4, to be more cost efficient, kind of like a GFX100 and GFX100s, similar body, similar functions and features, just an SL3 Sensor cut out of an S4 sensor.

 

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

And who's going to buy it at that price? Leica has been going in the opposite direction with the SL2. Price reduced compared to the original SL, discounted bundles, rebates, free M adaptor, a cheaper SL2-S, you name it. Have you ever seen any of this on the Q or M? All red flags that the platform was not selling as much as hoped. A 7.5K price will kill the platform for good.

probably around $6k max.

[trickness]

7 hours ago, rcusick said:

I have a theory that Leica is going to dramatically reduce the size of the sl3 and lenses. My hunch is that they are listening to market feedback about the size and weight of the sl system.  They also have to compete with Fuji and hasselblad that are battling in different segments on size and weight.  I think the reason we haven’t seen an sl21 apo is that they will change the form factor of the entire range. 
 

just and hunch….  Maybe we’ll eventually see an s4 with the original sl form factor?

I don’t see this happening to a “dramatic” degree. Change it too much and it becomes a different thing entirely 

[Stuart Richardson]

11 hours ago, frankchn said:

The lens mount diameter of the L-mount is not big enough for the the S format. The L-mount diameter is 51.6mm, but the diagonal of the S sensor is 54mm.

While I am not sure if it is technically feasible, I don't think the lens mount width necessarily makes a difference here. There are a number of cameras whose image circle is much larger than their lens mount diameter...just look at large format or any tilt/shift lens. I have a 450mm Fuji lens in Copal 1 which has a roughly two inch wide diameter and covers at least 11x14 inches of film.

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

34 minutes ago, trickness said:

I don’t see this happening to a “dramatic” degree. Change it too much and it becomes a different thing entirely 

I expect to see two bodies, a SL3 the same size as now and a smaller SL3-S, a bit like Panasonic is doing with the S1R and the S5

[trickness]

26 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

I expect to see two bodies, a SL3 the same size as now and a smaller SL3-S, a bit like Panasonic is doing with the S1R and the S5

Interesting idea. But would Leica put out two different sized SL’s, given the challenges of selling the SL platform generally? Using the same body for SL & SL/S is financially simpler for Leica one would think.

And with a triple resolution sensor like the M11 & Q3, is a separate SL3-S even necessary anymore?

Edited September 13, 2023 by trickness

[Simone_DF]

12 minutes ago, trickness said:

Interesting idea. But would Leica put out two different sized SL’s, given the challenges of selling the SL platform generally? Using the same body for SL & SL/S is financially simpler for Leica one would think.

And with a triple resolution sensor like the M11 & Q3, is a separate SL3-S even necessary anymore?

With the demise of the CL, Leica needs to provide a smaller alternative, or lose part of their customers that are not interested in carrying a 900g camera. Pick one, you can’t have both.
 

For the triple resolution, the 60mp sensor is not good for video because of the slow sensor readout and terrible rolling shutter, and Leica has been pushing a lot into video with the SL2-S

[BernardC]

10 hours ago, rcusick said:

I have a theory that Leica is going to dramatically reduce the size of the sl3 and lenses.

The smaller lenses have already started: 24-70, ASPH 35 and 50. People complain that they aren't as good as the bigger and more expensive models, but that's a given with any Leica product.

I think that the SL line will keep it's current size. The size is proportional to adult hands; a smaller camera would be uncomfortable for all-day use.

However, I also agree that we will eventually get a smaller L-Mount camera that complement the SL3.

[LBJ2]

I don't understand why those that prioritize small and compact above all else, just don't go and buy small and compact new and/or used? Sure there might be some compromises, just like relatively larger and heavier is often the compromise to those that prioritize ultimate IQ.

 

 

 

[Jon Warwick]

4 hours ago, frame-it said:

 

i think they're combining the R&D for the SL3 and S4, to be more cost efficient, kind of like a GFX100 and GFX100s, similar body, similar functions and features, just an SL3 Sensor cut out of an S4 sensor.

 

I have no idea (obviously!) if what you say is right or not, but my personal guess is wouldn’t another EVF like a possible S4 medium format cannibalise the SL3 full frame, assuming the former could have an adapter to fit SL lenses in a crop mode whilst also giving medium format options too? If such a camera theoretically emerged, the S4 could be Leica’s pinnacle of EVFs and image quality at that stage, and as a barbell (*), the M would remain the uniquely lightweight and compact travel camera (and, to my eyes, an M11’s output in terms of image quality is ahead of an SL2 anyhow) ….so where would the SL fit in?

(*) I partly bring this up because I have done essentially that, via a barbell of 100mp GFX (when I really need that extra resolution) and an M11 (for nearly everything else), which have replaced an SL2 (where I thought the image quality was not obviously better than the M equivalent, and especially given the size / weight penalty of the SL range). 

Edited September 13, 2023 by Jon Warwick

[Paul2660]

4 hours ago, frame-it said:

probably around $6k max.

6K would be great but the current SL2 is 7K list in the US. I realize there are combo deals such that if you get a new body and lens you can save 1.5k. But I like most will only need a body. Also Leica has consistently raised prices in April on most of the 35mm gear. 
Paul

[Stuart Richardson]

Agreed. With Leica it is nearly always more expensive...at least 90% of the time. Certain things like the S excepted, as when they launched it there were no affordable medium format cameras and no 35mm cameras over 24mp. The market completely changed by the time the S006 came out, and they had to start lowering the prices (albeit not enough to make it competitive).  I think we will see Leica continue to keep the price similar, but a bit higher for the SL3, and perhaps offer another lower priced SL3-S like they did before.

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, LBJ2 said:

I don't understand why those that prioritize small and compact above all else, just don't go and buy small and compact new and/or used? Sure there might be some compromises, just like relatively larger and heavier is often the compromise to those that prioritize ultimate IQ.

What small and compact interchangeable lens camera with autofocus is currently being offered by Leica?

[trickness]

On 9/13/2023 at 10:55 AM, Simone_DF said:

What small and compact interchangeable lens camera with autofocus is currently being offered by Leica?

It's a gap in their lineup so I wouldn't conflate that gap into a new "SL or SL-S" per se - perhaps an entirely new L mount camera, less pro, lower price point.

But do we really need this camera? They've tried to do it multiple times and it seems like it never hits. Plus it ends up competing with other products in the line, decreases marketing and production bandwidth. All to make less money.

I think the real missing arrow in their quiver is an EVF M mount/M form factor/non rangefinder.

[Simone_DF]

1 minute ago, trickness said:

But do we really need this camera? They've tried to do it multiple times and it seems like it never hits. Plus it ends up competing with other products in the line, decreases marketing and production bandwidth. All to make less money.

I think the real missing arrow in their quiver is an EVF M mount/M form factor/non rangefinder.

But which products does it compete with? The SL is big, bulky and heavy. If you want a more svelte camera, the SL clearly is not the one. The Q has a fixed 28mm lens. Great for what it is, but buying a 6000€ camera to constantly crop is daft, imho. The M lacks pretty much everything. Currently the Panasonic S5 is the obvious choice in L mount.  

[ynp]

18 minutes ago, trickness said:

It's a gap in their lineup so I wouldn't conflate that gap into a new "SL or SL-S" per se - perhaps an entirely new L mount camera, less pro, lower price point.

But do we really need this camera?

I would like to get a smaller L-mount camera to use it with my TL lenses with a reasonable resolution. 

[trickness]

3 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

But which products does it compete with? The SL is big, bulky and heavy. If you want a more svelte camera, the SL clearly is not the one. The Q has a fixed 28mm lens. Great for what it is, but buying a 6000€ camera to constantly crop is daft, imho. The M lacks pretty much everything. Currently the Panasonic S5 is the obvious choice in L mount.  

Just because a market segment exists, doesn’t mean Leica has to (or wants to) serve it. Especially as they’ve had failed product lines very recently that targeted that market.

But I guess we’ll see.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Stuart Richardson]

I think there is a big difference between a compact full frame camera and a compact APS-C camera, at least in the high end market. For me at least the CL never had enough going for it with its small sensor and fairly large lenses that simply were not to the level of the full frame lenses (at least not the only compact ones, like the 18 and 23). I know it was the perfect balance for some photographers...for me it was too big to be an APS compact (the GR series is so much smaller here), and not high performance enough to replace an SL in my bag for other tasks... I think Leica could have used a more classic Olympus style philosophy...small, but absolute top notch lenses and a no compromise body. I feel like as expensive as the bodies and lenses were, they were built to a price spec in a way that the SL, M, Q and S lines were not. The 23mm was a particularly disappointing lens for me in that way.

I would definitely consider adding a compact SL camera to use with the smaller Sigma lenses and M lenses, or just to cut down on weight on hikes or trips, but I would not want it to replace the SL entirely, as the SL2 is the perfect size for my professional work. Maybe the SL2S equivalent could be the smaller size and the SL2 equivalent could be the original larger size?

All that said, I agree with trickness...I don't think this is a niche they are going to fill...at least not in the short term. I think even though it is different, I can see it undermining the sales of both the SL and Q lines, assuming they continue more or less unchanged in size.

Edited September 14, 2023 by Stuart Richardson