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

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, BLeventhal said:

So I threw caution to the wind and purchased a Leica SL (Typ 601) from CameraWest this weekend. I payed $1650 which seems to be on the lower side of the going price. My (new to me) camera is rated at 8+ and appears to be used but not abused. CameraWest offers a 90 day warranty on their used gear, and this will be long enough for me to know if it is destined to fail. 

For those who have not read my initial post, this will supplement an Nikon System that now consists of a Z9, Z6II, 800PF, 400 f4.5, 50mm MC Macro, and 24-120 f4S. I am a wildlife shooter that likes to do a bit of moody landscape work and detail studies. The SL will be my "also" camera, something that I will carry to shoot a mix of nature and shadow play. I will also use it for landscape photography. While 24MP is modest by present standards, I have yet to shoot a 24MP landscape that can't be enlarged to 30" and pass careful scrutiny. 

With respect to lenses, I purchased a used Sigma 45mm DG DN f2.8 so I could have something in the short term to learn the camera. I am open to lens suggestions, but am not interested in buying a $3000 + SL lens at the moment. I need to make a commitment to the camera before going big with the ultra-expensive SL glass. I know Leica makes some "Leicafied" Sigma and Panasonic lenses, but I'm not sure these will fill the niche I am seeking to fill. 

I am curious about Leica R lenses that people might recommend. I have seen that the 2 or 3-cam 100mm f4 Macro-Elmar can be had for less than $500. I am also interested in lens that falls between 16 and 20mm. I am not looking for speed, as I will use these lenses from a tripod and stop down. I've seen that Sigma has these focal lengths in the contemporary line.. but am open to other suggestions.

thanks and regards,

bruce

For the wide get the Sigma 14-24 f2.8. Fabulous lens. Sharp wide open at all focal lengths. Almost indistinguishable from the SL16-35 at the focal lengths they share. Five stars. Highly recommended. Only downside is filter use.

You may not care for macro AF but the various L mount macros also make a decent portrait and landscape lens. I have several R mount lenses but all have been replaced by native glass.

Enjoy your SL. I think they nailed the button layout. The SL2 is a very slight backward step in that regard. (Only that regard. Everything else is much better.)

Gordon