From an Sony a7S to a Leica SL

[wdshuck]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@csg yes, very pleased with the 24-70. It’s quite sharp and focuses quickly. I had tried the Sony GM v1 before and like this lens better. Even if I get a prime or two I will keep it.

[Apparitus]

  Today, I've tried the SL in the store with the SL24-70 and the 24-90. The seller was very friendly and helpful. I have to say, I left pretty much hyped.

Here my observations:
-- Yes, the camera is bulky. But in positive way. Not as big as the aforementioned GFX100S, it was not overwhelming to my hands. That being said, sometimes it felt somewhat nimble.
-- The weight wasn't really an issue. My usual setup with the A7s is similar, just the distribution was different, probably due to better balance.
-- Sturdiness radiates like a collapsing star during a supernova.
-- The buttons have some very satisfying click. I had no problems reaching the joystick. The shutter sounded discrete and very robust. I also had the feel that this camera can be operated easily with gloves.
-- It is VERY snappy. Everything was instant, including the startup.
-- The handling required some used to, but towards the end of my trial, I just started to know where to look for what, and I think this says volumes.
-- The EVF is like an OVF. Big, easy to look at even with glasses on, easy to compose with. Regarding what @hansvons said above, he was right: both the camera size and the EVF, really helped me to find subjects and compositions in such a short time and (for me) unknown location. The camera basically disappeared between me and the subject.
-- The AF is huge upgrade compared to what I have with the A7s. Surprisingly good in low light, and very precise. Yes, there were some hunting, but far less than I hoped so. I was able to capture relatively fast moving people in darker areas, something I always had trouble with.
-- Although I was unable to shoot in very dark, the high ISO performance was on par with the A7s. The latitude felt higher at ISO 3200, the colors were so ridiculously accurate, that I almost thought they are shot at ISO 100. A weird contradiction to the various measurements. The noise is unobtrusive and feels natural.
-- The elephant in the room: the LENR. Yes. What can I say? A small tracker, like a MSM is all I need. For quick MW shots, a single 10s is usually enough at 15mm. I forgot to check whether it is present during interval long exposures. The countdown feature was something I craved for.
-- Finally, the colors. True to life, just as I saw them. When I returned home, the test shots needed minimal alignments. I was speechless.

I don't comment on the lenses they were all excellent. Interestingly enough, the SL with the 24-90 weighs the same as the A7s with the 100-400GM, and the former felt lighter. The 24-70 was a very good, quick lens.

@csg Your camera usage sounds similar to mine. I agree with all your points. While the A7s has a formidable weather sealing, I always wanted a bit more. I felt the SL has a power armor against adverse conditions. On the other hand, I'm curious about your findings during your Dolomites trip.

  @davidmknoble "I really just want to change key pieces - ISO, meter method and sometimes WB.  Other than that it's f/stop and shutter speed. " -- I agree. Too many buttons is too many distractons. The SL just put this into my face. (Literally.)

Overall, I found the camera a big step up in almost every direction -- except, of course, the LENR, and somewhat the bulk. The upgrade time has arrived.

[laowai_]

9 hours ago, Apparitus said:

The elephant in the room: the LENR. Yes. What can I say? A small tracker, like a MSM is all I need. For quick MW shots, a single 10s is usually enough at 15mm. I forgot to check whether it is present during interval long exposures. The countdown feature was something I craved for.

As far as I know, LENR is there in interval mode as well; I have not found a way to disable it. For each 10s exposure you get 10s of non-exposure. I never used a tracker and I have no idea if this will be a problem but star trails become star dashes or dots depending on the length of each individual exposure.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[Apparitus]

1 hour ago, laowai_ said:

As far as I know, LENR is there in interval mode as well; I have not found a way to disable it. For each 10s exposure you get 10s of non-exposure. I never used a tracker and I have no idea if this will be a problem but star trails become star dashes or dots depending on the length of each individual exposure.

<image>

This is a very interesting image, never seen like that. The dotted star trails look very unique, and a "go with the flow", nice visual solution to the LENR. May I ask how long was the total exposure time?

[laowai_]

4 hours ago, Apparitus said:

This is a very interesting image, never seen like that. The dotted star trails look very unique, and a "go with the flow", nice visual solution to the LENR. May I ask how long was the total exposure time?

Hi Apparitus,

Each exposure is around 30 s and the total exposure maybe an hour. 

If i would do this kind of pictures often I should get a remote release, but I don’t. A few years ago the Fotos app was very unstable and the WiFi/WLAN takes a lot of battery power. So the maximum exposure on the SL is 30 m. I didn’t like the dash-dotted star trails you get with this exposure. The hope was that if each individual image is a dot, I can blend this together into smooth trails in post. I applied the 500 rule. The lens is an old 15 mm Distagon FE via Novoflex adapter. 

If this is the effect you are going for, that’s great, but if you are trying to get smooth star trails, this is not it.

[davidmknoble]

Just a note.  The SL2-S (which is the one I have), pg 94 of the EN manual, you can turn on / off LENR.  I use it and prefer it, but it can be turned off if you like...

 

[Apparitus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@laowai_ Thank you for the detailed explanation. For spot stars, I use the NPF rule, which takes into account the aperture, pixel size, focal length, and the declination. PhotoPills can easily calculate that. 30s is too much for even 15 mm, more likely 10--13s for spot stars. It would be interesting to try a full 30 minute exposure

@davidmknoble Yes, I know. It would be ideal. You also recommended earlier the SL2-S, and I completely agree with all your points. It would be the ultimate successor to the A7s. But for now, the SL will be more than suffice for my needs.

Edited April 6, 2023 by Apparitus

[davidmknoble]

@Apparitus, that is still exciting, and I loved the SL for a long time and still print photographs from it.  Enjoy!!

[csg]

My last comment on this subject....

I still have both the Sony A7RIII and the Leica SL-2 and I haven't been able to make up my mind on which to keep, so I decided on a side-by-side test. Not pixel peeping, mind you, not that there's anything wrong with that and I appreciate the hard work and objective analysis that goes into that...but more of a subjective approach: which camera did I prefer using, and which would produce the better prints for me?

I went to NW New Mexico and Arizona for my comparison. I wanted to shoot the Bisti Badlands, Shiprock and some of the canyons near Canyon de Chelly. When possible I shot the same photo with both cameras, but also frequently just grabbed one or the other for a particular shot. I wasn't scientific about it, and my test is definitely random, but it's what I felt like doing.

So, the surprising news is that when comparing the outputs I'm unconvinced there's a qualitative difference in the image quality between the two cameras. The images are different, and the differences are more or less exaggerated by the circumstances of the shot. However, the differences are not substantial (this is very subjective!) and once I began manipulating the images those differences largely ceased to matter. And in any case, as long as I can end up where I want with my images, the starting point is less important to me.

I'm surprised and disappointed: I wanted the Leica to be better at landscape. There is another possibility, and that is that I'm not good enough to extract what the Leica can produce; I'm humble enough to realize that the camera is probably a lot better at it's job than I am at photography!

I still haven't made up my mind which to keep. My heart wants the Leica, but my wallet, shoulders and back want the Sony (as I've mentioned many times, I find the Leica heavy). I'm uncertain which will win

For the curious, the attached photo is Shiprock in NW New Mexico, which plays a significant role in Navajo tradition. This was shot at dawn, on a cold and windy morning. With the Leica SL-2, 24-90 lens.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[Kev]

On 3/28/2023 at 4:42 PM, Apparitus said:

I know this is GAS, but hear me out. Recently, I started to get more and more dissatisfied with the colors of my a7S. This is further increased by the notorius "star eater" on bulb exposures. So I enbarked on a quest to find an upgrade. By the influence of the chaos gods, I came across the Leica SL, with their used prices, and something immediately clicked in me. I mostly shoot only as a hobby for my hiking, wild camping adventures, low light scenery and some wide angle astrophotography. I do not shoot video at all. On the other hand, the camera never let me down. I do not babysit my a7S, as I'm somewhat clumsy.

One of my reasons I started to dislike the colors is actually the post processing part. Something is always off, too much control, and after 6 years of usage, I got tired of it. Another thing is... I'm shooting with a a 6x6 TLR for few months now. The simplicity of that camera is amazing, always ready, fabulous images, no fancyness and endless menus. I like that. If I ever upgrade, I want to transfer this feeling.

 

The two cameras that I have kept far longer than any other was my Sony 7s and my Leica Q 116 (which I still own).

I used my 7s for more than 5 years and still love the photos it was able to capture. My Q is in a different league. The images are breath taking. The only slight negative is the fixed 28mm lens limitation. This is what leads me to consider a used SL in 2023. There is something about the earlier generation Leica's (IMHO), with the 24 MP sensor. 

It is tempting to add an SL to my collection to use my collection of adapted legacy glass. 

When I find the right used SL, I think I am going to pull the trigger!

 

[agfa100]

Well I use my a7s with all my older M lenses and was looking at picking up a SL or a SL-2s and of course I came across a great deal on a used a9 that looked like new so that's what I picked up. I mostly shoot b&w so the a7s colors did not drive me crazy, but I must say the a9 is much better.  I still look at SL's and SL2s but the size and the weight just brings me up short after all those years of M cameras. Enjoy what you got and have fun.

wbill

[Apparitus]

To be honest, since my last posting, I haven't sold the a7S. I had other things to take care of, and that also meant a second chance for the existing equipment, and realising the mistake on my side. Turned out, I still did not like the images at all. Sometimes they look like some kind of rendering out of Unreal Engine 5, even with my CV15. Yes, the setup is small, cute, almost floats and a superb night visor, but thats about it. I don't enjoy shooting with it anymore, the magic is gone. The equipment is now off to the marketplace.