Leica SL... Rational or Irrational Camera for a Nature Photographer

[BLeventhal]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello, this is my first post on this forum, but I am a photographer who has a lot of experience in the craft. 

I am a nature photographer who focuses on wildlife and landscapes and I have a simple buy high end Nikon mirrorless kit. To the point,... I have a Z9/Z6II/Z6 24-120S, 400 f4.5S, and 800 f6.3PF. I am a reasonable well published photographer with a moderate social following, do the occasional show, and maintain a business website that costs more than it makes (for those interested.. http://btleventhal.com ). I am a biology educator who after 31 years is retiring in 3 months. I am not wealthy... a middle class guy that is enamored with nature photography. 

I have owned Leica CLs (film) and an M8. My first exposure to photography was through my uncle who was a Leicaphile his whole life. I am guessing that he passed the bug to me, and now I want a Leica. I am no longer interested in film and I know that I am not a rangefinder photographer. The Leica SL has finally gotten to a price point that it make ownership of a Leica possible for me. While I could sell one of my Z6 bodies, I am not interested in a whole kit exchange... I just want a tase of Leica craftsmanship... and possibly the opportunity to use Leica glass. Of course, all of this has become confusing since Leica has incorporated a number of Panasonic and Sigma lenses in Leica structure w L-mounts. I am actually OK with this, in fact the introduction of the Sigma Designed/Leica Refined 100-400 interests me (that's how I am referring to it).

I have seen Leica SL's ranging from $1500-$2300 depending on condition and accessories. Sadly, I think the least expensive Leica L-mount lens falls in that range as well. I do not have enough money to buy an SL 2 (or SL 2-S), but I could swing an SL... and maybe an L-mount lens. What are your thoughts about using an SL for nature photography. How do you think it might perform with the new 100-400 mm lens. If I cannot afford German made Leica L-mount lenses, should I pass on this camera. 

To be clear, I have almost press the "buy now" button on Leica SL's about 6 times in the last two weeks... rational or strange obsession? Advice from users would be greatly appreciated.

regards,

bruce

[Advertisement]

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

[pgh]

Very little about Leica is rational, save for some highly specific use cases.

That said, while the SL line is quite nice, the only (possible) improvement you'd notice would be ergonomic and in every other category you'd be downgrading. You'd need to hold one (or rent) to be sure, but if I had that Nikon kit and shot nature I would quit thinking about the SL and think more about the pictures. 

FWIW, I own an SL2 and have had Sony and Nikon cameras in the past. I bought my SL2 to play nice with my M lenses and keep everything under one roof since I primarily shoot an M10. It's quite a nice camera, but if I weren't already down the Leica road there's no way I would have switched. It's a lateral move from the Sony/Nikons in every respect and has slightly worse latitude than my old Sony. No biggie but it's a clear case of paying a premium for brand and physical design - not image quality or other functionality. 

[Leicaiste]

The AF will disappoint you. 
 

 

[GFW2-SCUSA]

I have an SL2 and find it to be fine, but I am not in love with it. I'm much happier with my M's.  I have used Nikon in the past (still have an 850 and other stuff) and know it to be wonderful gear. Its quality is first class.  But, the Leica itch is hard to get scratch. I would suggest that you go to LensRental and rent an SL and see if it meets you expectations. It would be a less expensive way to make up your mind. Further I agree with all that has been said so far. 

[LeicaR10]

Bruce,  It appears you might have a case of GAS.  There are a number of photographers that will offer sage advice to include myself, but it gets down to your decision.  You might take a look at your photographs and consider what is your current gear not doing for you that moving to a Leica SL might give you.  The SL is a very good camera and had one for a number of years along with the S system.  I sold my business and retired and gravitated to what I needed being a SL2 and SL zooms then SL primes along with M cameras.  For me, its all that I truly need for landscape photography.  Do I want other gear?  Sure, but after going through GAS rehab 3 times, finding no cure, I discovered it takes discipline to decide what I need versus what I want.  Today, I only buy Leica gear that I need to capture the moment in time that my other camera(s) and lenses can not do.  I am certain you will find the answer within yourself.  I hope this helps.  r/ Mark

[gotium]

Depending on where you are based, you have to also weigh the risk that you might have to deal with support from Leica New Jersey (if you are in the US). I'm deep into Leica having crept in over years, but if I could go back and do it again I wouldn't. Exception now is the Q series, which really meets my needs well. 

Edited March 11, 2023 by gotium

[davidmknoble]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@BLeventhal, welcome to the forum! I know the Z system from a close friend that uses it for work and the stellar performance it’s capable of.  Quite honestly, if you are willing to manually focus, I love the SL system with an R adapter and certain R lenses.  The 70-180 APO is great and the 80-200 is more affordable. Those aren’t in that upper range of what you suggested though.

I have just purchased the sigma 14-24 f/2.8 ART sigma lens based on some recommendations from a few friends.  I think there are some good lenses out there that are not Leica brand.  But if you are looking for something specific, I would be sure to compare them to the lenses you have not to be disappointed.

More to the point, I think you might do well to rent a kit and see what you think.  I loved the SL and shot it in Haiti with the 24-90 getting some great shots.  Since you used the M8, you know how easy it can be to miss the highlights.  But for the right light, the SL is a great digital camera.  I do think if you are shooting moving birds, you will find the focus lagging compared to the Z system.  The 90-280 is pretty fast focus, but an expensive lens.

Consider renting and then plunging if it fits your style…

[BLeventhal]

Thank you to everyone who shared their thoughts. To be clear, I would not be looking at a system switch, but rather an addition. My current kit is deficient in an ultra wide and telephoto macro lens. Neither of these lenses need to be autofocus optics, as my photography with these optics would be done with a sturdy tripod. I just checked with lensrentals.com in the US and see that the SL and SL2's are in their catalog. I have also noticed that the R 100mm Macro is not outrageously expensive... while the adapter to connect the lens to the camera is terribly overpriced ($1050 for a tube with contacts?!)

With respect to GAS... well, this is yes and no. As I get older, I have become a bit nostalgic about my experiences with photography. As I indicated, my uncle (the Leicaphile) was the first to put a "proper" camera in my hands, and I have longed to own a piece of photographic history since. With that said, I have not desire to shoot film any longer, and thought a digital Leica might feed my nostalgic soul...

As I indicated in my first post, I've been at the precipice of a purchase many times just to back down.

Thanks for all of the information and advice...

regards,

bruce

[Mute-on]

You have said you want a taste of Leica craftsmanship. Fair enough - that’s why we are all here, most having tasted Leica craftsmanship (and returned for more). So what are you waiting for? Grab an SL, get a well regarded non-Leica adaptor (Novoflex), the 100 R Macro is a seminal R lens. No need for a ROM version. 

Life is too short for all this hand wringing. Buy it, try it. If you like it, keep it. If not, sell it on having satisfied your curiosity. Don’t die wondering, for goodness sake. 

[romaing]

Gilles Martin, french nature photographer works mostly with SL2

https://www.gilles-martin.com/fr

[dem331]

Great website, I enjoyed seeing your photography. 
 

I would not buy an older digital camera for this purpose, there will be always problems down the line, with the ultimate destiny of it being to become a paperweight. Nor would I use Leica to work alongside (“compete with”) your Nikon system by getting the SL 100-400, you will be disappointed I think. 

The Leica look, the mystique, whatever that is, is a function of its lenses. I think that with the possible exception of the more extreme wide angles Leica R lenses work well on Nikon Z. So I would forget the SL and buy some R lenses and use them on your cameras with a Novoflex adapter. For the investement you are considering you could get two or more great classic primes (35/50/90/180). If you do a search on this site you will find great information as to which ones are best for you. I would stay away from the R zooms, the good ones tend to be very expensive. You could use these lenses for non wildlife photography and this would complement you current set-up.  
 

I hope you satisfy your Leica desire whatever you decide to do. 

 

 

 

[LocalHero1953]

Nature photography can cover everything from macro shots of fungi to birds in flight at a great distance (or even naked humans). Do you want to cover the lot, or do you have specific areas of interest? 

I think you would struggle with AF of anything small that moves fast - the SL can do it, but there's likely to be better kit out there. Those members here who do wildlife photography at a distance ( @michali, @jaapv) mainly seem to choose static or slow moving subjects (but they can answer for themselves).

Edited March 11, 2023 by LocalHero1953

[mmradman]

Hi Bruce, as you are not interested in rangefinder system getting SL along your Nikon system would not provide you with desired satisfaction unless you match the body with good set of compatible lenses. You can easily spend serious money on Leica lenses, the whole purpose of getting into Leica is to shoot Leica lens.  You can shoot Sigma on pretty much any brand camera.

SL is nice Camera to hold and use but your Nikon Z cameras are more Advanced (capitalisation by auto spell checker) in pretty much all aspects, Z9 is ultimate wildlife, action and anything in between camera today and even early Z6 has IBIS, SL does not.

You will need new lenses to go along SL, Nikon S lenses are excellent but not compatible with any other system.

I exchanged SL which I used with M and R lenses for Nikon Z7 initially with kit zoom but quickly built S lens set, nowadays I have Nikkor S 105mm macro and perhaps you should consider it to complement your set.

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, BLeventhal said:

Thank you to everyone who shared their thoughts. To be clear, I would not be looking at a system switch, but rather an addition. My current kit is deficient in an ultra wide and telephoto macro lens. Neither of these lenses need to be autofocus optics, as my photography with these optics would be done with a sturdy tripod. I just checked with lensrentals.com in the US and see that the SL and SL2's are in their catalog. I have also noticed that the R 100mm Macro is not outrageously expensive... while the adapter to connect the lens to the camera is terribly overpriced ($1050 for a tube with contacts?!)

With respect to GAS... well, this is yes and no. As I get older, I have become a bit nostalgic about my experiences with photography. As I indicated, my uncle (the Leicaphile) was the first to put a "proper" camera in my hands, and I have longed to own a piece of photographic history since. With that said, I have not desire to shoot film any longer, and thought a digital Leica might feed my nostalgic soul...

As I indicated in my first post, I've been at the precipice of a purchase many times just to back down.

Thanks for all of the information and advice...

regards,

bruce

If you plan to shoot manual R lenses on a tripod a Novoflex adapter would be sufficient. The Leica adapter adds only very little extra functionality. The SL takes many manual non-Leica  lenses on third party adapters as well. 

[hansvons]

With the Z9, you already own the arguably best wildlife camera. Why do you still keep the Z6II and Z6? Keeping them means losing money, assuming you were not shooting events professionally.

I've shot wildlife and landscapes with the Z6 in three (short) seasons. I also own the SL2-S and the 24-90. The Z6 has a much better AF than the SL2-S for birds and other wildlife.  However, the SL2-S colour and DR are better. So much better, actually, that I prefer it over the Z6 for almost everything except wildlife. Plus, to my taste, skin tone rendering is also better with the Leica, at least if you are looking for the peculiarities of individual complexions. The same can be said about foliage. The 24-90 is visibly better than the Nikon equivalent in sharpness and plasticity. Leica's build quality is at another level regarding heft and robustness. That also accounts for ergonomics if your hands are not small. Lastly, the minimalist approach is very appealing to me. The menu is second to none.

The Z6 gear is now sold, and we purchased an OM-1 with the 300mm prime and the 1,4 extender for wildlife. It's an unbeatable package when Bird-AF, stabilisation and weight are of concern. For everything else, I stick to my SL2-S. 

[BLeventhal]

3 hours ago, dem331 said:

Great website, I enjoyed seeing your photography. 
 

I would not buy an older digital camera for this purpose, there will be always problems down the line, with the ultimate destiny of it being to become a paperweight. Nor would I use Leica to work alongside (“compete with”) your Nikon system by getting the SL 100-400, you will be disappointed I think. 

The Leica look, the mystique, whatever that is, is a function of its lenses. I think that with the possible exception of the more extreme wide angles Leica R lenses work well on Nikon Z. So I would forget the SL and buy some R lenses and use them on your cameras with a Novoflex adapter. For the investement you are considering you could get two or more great classic primes (35/50/90/180). If you do a search on this site you will find great information as to which ones are best for you. I would stay away from the R zooms, the good ones tend to be very expensive. You could use these lenses for non wildlife photography and this would complement you current set-up.  
 

I hope you satisfy your Leica desire whatever you decide to do. 

That you for checking out my website and the good advice. 

Nikon has now produced some extremely competitive mirrorless cameras. My mix of bodies allows me to do nearly everything I want to do. I hadn't thought about adapting R glass to the Z cameras. I appreciate the suggestion.

bruce

[BLeventhal]

1 hour ago, hansvons said:

With the Z9, you already own the arguably best wildlife camera. Why do you still keep the Z6II and Z6? Keeping them means losing money, assuming you were not shooting events professionally.

I've shot wildlife and landscapes with the Z6 in three (short) seasons. I also own the SL2-S and the 24-90. The Z6 has a much better AF than the SL2-S for birds and other wildlife.  However, the SL2-S colour and DR are better. So much better, actually, that I prefer it over the Z6 for almost everything except wildlife. Plus, to my taste, skin tone rendering is also better with the Leica, at least if you are looking for the peculiarities of individual complexions. The same can be said about foliage. The 24-90 is visibly better than the Nikon equivalent in sharpness and plasticity. Leica's build quality is at another level regarding heft and robustness. That also accounts for ergonomics if your hands are not small. Lastly, the minimalist approach is very appealing to me. The menu is second to none.

The Z6 gear is now sold, and we purchased an OM-1 with the 300mm prime and the 1,4 extender for wildlife. It's an unbeatable package when Bird-AF, stabilisation and weight are of concern. For everything else, I stick to my SL2-S. 

Thanks for sharing your experience... 

You asked why I continue to hold onto my other bodies... The Z9 is an amazing camera and it is a pleasure to hold. I do not have any problem using a heavier camera, in fact I prefer this. As I indicated, I have been shooting for years... once professionally for stock... and now for the pleasure of being outside with a camera. As for 3 bodies and 3 lenses, I live in Minnesota and our weather is incredibly unpredictable. I am not put off by rain, snow, or cold, but changing lenses under these conditions is very difficult. The chance of dropping a lens on an icy lake or pack of snow is very high at -10 F (-23 C). As such, I pack a bag with 3 lenses attached to 3 bodies. I waste absolutely no time shifting from one focal length to another. In fact, I can carry my 800PF w body and hood in shooting position as well as my other cameras attached to lenses in one pack... 3 bodies means less dust and bodies programmed to specific lenses with "power up."

As for my interest in Leica... clearly this is a ego/nostalgia mission. The SL or whatever would never replace what I have... it would be the "other system" when I want to try or do something different. 

bruce

[smcmason]

7 hours ago, Mute-on said:

You have said you want a taste of Leica craftsmanship. Fair enough - that’s why we are all here, most having tasted Leica craftsmanship (and returned for more). So what are you waiting for? Grab an SL, get a well regarded non-Leica adaptor (Novoflex), the 100 R Macro is a seminal R lens. No need for a ROM version. 

Life is too short for all this hand wringing. Buy it, try it. If you like it, keep it. If not, sell it on having satisfied your curiosity. Don’t die wondering, for goodness sake. 

Could not agree more. The SL 601 is one of the few cameras that I really enjoy holding and using. The viewfinder and easy magnification make it so perfect for using older glass. Even if you don't want to jump in to higher end lenses like the 24-90, there are always winners like the Sigma Art 14-24, Sigma 150-600 S, and quite a few Panasonic offerings that do a great job filling in the gaps between those focal distances if you want more modern AF lenses. As long as you aren't concerned about having Sony-level AF tracking and can live with the mandatory long expose noise reduction, I absolutely recommend this camera. Especially at the current price points. 

Edited March 11, 2023 by smcmason

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Stuart Richardson]

I think all of us here love Leica, but at least from my own point of view, this does not make much sense. You would be going back in time to a camera that was designed almost ten years ago, which is quite a long way back in digital terms. The SL is still a good camera, but it was never a particularly good camera for what you propose to do with it (if that is wildlife), due to the very poor AFc performance. I feel like this is a grass is always greener scenario. You already have some of the best equipment made to do what you want to do. If you must get a Leica, I can't help but think you might be better served by waiting until you could get an SL2-S (perhaps after an SL3 is released). I would suggest adapting R lenses, but they are now so expensive given that video shooters are buying them to rehouse and use on cinema cameras.

[ellisson]

I think the SL would be fine for nature photography, but as others have mentioned, not as good as your Nikon system for wildlife and fast moving creatures.  If you like to shoot landscapes and static or slowly moving subjects in nature, e.g. macro work, or with short to medium telephoto, the SL system with L autofocus or R manual focus glass would be fine and you could add this camera/lens to your bag on outings along with your Nikons.  The lenses are where the $$$ start to vanish, but you can get a used Leica R 60mm 2.8 macro, and some of the slower, non-APO telephoto lenses for modest (by Leica standards) cost.