Panasonic G9ii vs SL2-S For R lenses

[Shu_downunder]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Finially I feel like upgrading my Stone Age Sony a7 to the supplementary of my main body M246. 

Panasonic G9ii and SL2-S go to top of the option list. 

I understand they are two totally different cameras.

Here's what I need this body for:

• My veryday camera is the monochrome and I'm happy that 95% of my photos are black and white. When I need snapshot or short vedios in colour I just use iphone.
• Occasionally, maybe once every two months, however, I need colour photos that my smart phone can not deliver. Such as a friend gethering event when I need to share coloured photos. Or an event where I do volumteer works. In these ocassions, the level required is between serious task and casual ones. 
• In these cases video recording is often required. Again, not serious nor casual level, but somewhere in between. 

 

With regards lens

• I have a decent M4/3 mount 28-70/2.8 lens which is probably perfect for those events. 
• I don't have any L mount auto focus lens. 
• I have a few R lenses that not been used that much since I started to used M systems. I'd love to use them whenever I get a chance. 

 

Considering the lens I have it seems G9ii is better option. 

 

What's your thoughts? Any experience with R lenses on G9ii please?

[Advertisement]

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

[hepcat]

Since one of your potential choices is the SL2-S, I presume that having the 4/3 lens already isn't a deal maker or breaker.   The G9II isn't even in the same league as the SL2-S.  What ARE in the same league and can be had for pennies on the dollar compared to the SL2-S are the Lumix S1 and Lumix S5 and S5II.  I have an S1 and an S5 and both are more than adequate for my needs.  It's my understanding that the hybrid focusing system in the S5II is faster and more accurate, but as I mostly use the S5 with my R lenses,  that's not such a big deal for me that I'd sell my S5 for it.  As a matter of fact, I bought my S5 on clearance after the announcement of the S5II.  The S1 is a large form-factor body.  The S5 is more like a Leica R body.  My stable of R lenses work extraordinarily well on either body.  

Good luck with your decision.

ON EDIT:  Oh and...  the Panny L-mount 24-105 f/4 is an extraordinarily useful AF lens and gives an extra two stops of stabilization to the IBIS.  They're relatively cheap and a superb one AF-lens solution for those times when you need a zoom and/or AF. 

Edited December 27, 2023 by hepcat

[AZN]

4 hours ago, Shu_downunder said:

Any experience with R lenses on G9ii please?

Not with the G9ii, but a few years ago with another Panasonic M4/3 mount camera.

Fantastic colour but the 50% crop was incredibly frustrating.  An APSC camera would be a less severe choice.

4 hours ago, Shu_downunder said:

I have a few R lenses that not been used that much since I started to used M systems. I'd love to use them whenever I get a chance. 

FWIW I would suggest looking at the Panasonic S5iiX full-frame instead.  No crop factor and also doubles as a brilliant video camera.

Not Leica enough? A second-hand SL (typ 601) is just made for R lenses.

Either way, don't be cheap but fork out for a decent R→L lens mount adapter 😃

All the above is IMO, FWIW, YMMV etc.

[dpitt]

The 2 options you mention are as far apart as can be. I do use MFT occasionally but only at the extreme ends of my needs. I do not do video, so no comments on that. For me the advantages of my MFT are:

1. relatively small in weight and size, although not on par with the M system. I have an oldish Lumix Gx8 which is helping much better in this regard than the G9II, so maybe this advantage is off the table for you.
2. crop factor 2x allows for better reach in long tele (>500mm eq.) with reasonable size
3. crop factor 2x helps with larger DOF in extreme macro 1:2 to 1:1 range or more

If you have some nice R lenses, like I do, be aware that the 2x crop factor does not help at all. All of the R lenses except the extreme wide angles will not be of much use. Your Summicron 50 R becomes a portrait lens at best. And most of the zoom lenses like my Macro 35-70 F4 R become a weird 70-140mm eq., even a 35mm R lens is too long.
In the tele end, there are some nice uses, but that is all for me.

The SL range is a different matter. It is of about the same size as the G9II, which I would list as a disadvantage. But all the rest fits. It is a great platform for R lenses. The sharp and bright viewer with 10x magnification makes it easy to MF and the results are great. It is FF so all the R lenses can be used as designed, and the R lenses are typically a lot smaller than the native SL lenses, while still being able to make any SL shine with great Leica IQ.

I have the old SL(typ 601) and I am sure the SL2-S will be better in all area's. I use mine with a good mechanical R-L adapter. The Leica adapter only makes sense to me if I would use a lot of ROM lenses (for the EXIF info about zoom position mostly). Most of my R lenses are 3-cam, so I enjoy them just as much with the mechanical adapter.

Now, if size matters to you, I see an alternative which is sort of a compromise. I do enjoy using my TL2 with EVF as a platform for my R lenses. The 1,5x crop is not as hard to cope with as the 2x MFT crop. Results on the IQ side are on par with the SL mostly.
The form factor, certainly with a nice 21, 28 or 35mm M lens, brings a new dimension to the table, and adds a real portable alternative to my M system. So, if you do not mind buying used, the TL2 or CL look like real competitors to me.

[Shu_downunder]

Thanks a lot @dpitt @AZN and @hepcat for the experience sharing and suggestions. 
 

I realised that my problem comes with the mindset that I need something to resolve all issues at once. 
 

I wanted something that fill up all the gaps left with the monochrome M - a decent colour body, R lens friendly, a not too bad video camera with good enough autofocus. And what I haven't mentioned, compact enough. 
 

Apparently all these can be easily achieved, if I can give up IQ....:P

I think the first thing I can give up is compactness. In the events mentioned I don't mind the camera is a bit larger.

The second one is difficult. I feel like I need both a R lens friendly body and a convenient automatic one that cover 28-90, or 24-105.

If I need both, two camera setup seems to be attractive:

a SL for R lenses(maybe with a portrait one) and a compact M4/3 as supplementary. 

But this solution is not neat.

Any thoughts please?

 

 

[dpitt]

1 hour ago, Shu_downunder said:

Thanks a lot @dpitt @AZN and @hepcat for the experience sharing and suggestions. 
 

I realised that my problem comes with the mindset that I need something to resolve all issues at once. 
 

I wanted something that fill up all the gaps left with the monochrome M - a decent colour body, R lens friendly, a not too bad video camera with good enough autofocus. And what I haven't mentioned, compact enough. 
 

Apparently all these can be easily achieved, if I can give up IQ....:P

I think the first thing I can give up is compactness. In the events mentioned I don't mind the camera is a bit larger.

The second one is difficult. I feel like I need both a R lens friendly body and a convenient automatic one that cover 28-90, or 24-105.

If I need both, two camera setup seems to be attractive:

a SL for R lenses(maybe with a portrait one) and a compact M4/3 as supplementary. 

But this solution is not neat.

Any thoughts please?

 

 

Did you consider a CL with 18-56 zoom lens (28-90 eq.)? ... AF and compactness covered
R lens friendly and M lens friendly is covered with a simple adapter, with M lenses or the 18mm TL(AF) or 23 mm Summicron TL(AF), wonderful IQ and very compact.

Edited December 27, 2023 by dpitt

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1766363-REG/panasonic_lumix_s5_ii_mirrorless.html

Quite a deal on the S5II with 20-60 and 50mm 1.8. 700 dollars off. You could sell your MFT lens. Both of those lenses are compact and quite good...not APO Summicron level, but better than your MFT lens is likely to be. It will use your R lenses perfectly with an adapter, and it is still reasonably compact and light. If you add a telephoto (or have an R one), then you are covered for the range you are thinking. I don't think it makes sense to get the SL2S as a camera that you will only use occasionally as a supplement. Both of these cameras are likely to be fairly comparable in image quality to the M Mono, even though they are the same resolution. In my experience the sensor in the S1 was quite a bit sharper than the sensor in the M10, even when using the same lenses (not talking about M wides that do not do well on a non-m body, but telephotos that do well on both). So even though the mono is better because of the lack of a bayer filter, you may close most of that gap since the sensor is at least two generations newer.

[LocalHero1953]

I once bought an Olympus EM5ii and several of the better Olympus lenses. A beautiful jewel-like set up, very handy to have a round and use. Its user interface was a pain, but put that on one side. What turned me against it was the sensor size compared to my then current M240 system - I'm not sure exactly why it never satisfied me, but I was convinced it was the small sensor rather than something wrong with Olympus or its lenses. Eventually I replaced it with a CL system which never gave me the same concerns: I could look at the CL images along side those from the M and not be dissatisfied.

It sounds like you want a practical colour camera for social occasions and amateur 'assignments'. The element in your posts that doesn't fit into this use case is the R lenses: they are large, heavy, high quality lenses that require manual focus and exposure. That is not compatible (IMO) with social use and photography being done for others (though fine for video). 

If you must include the R lenses in your equation, I can't think of a reason for considering less than full frame - it would be a waste of their potential not to.

In your shoes I would consider the S5ii or the SL2-S - I have the SL2-S and I'm happy with it, but have considered the S5ii as a second video camera.

[frame-it]

10 hours ago, Shu_downunder said:

I have a few R lenses that not been used that much since I started to used M systems.

just get a Q3

[Shu_downunder]

4 hours ago, dpitt said:

Did you consider a CL with 18-56 zoom lens (28-90 eq.)? ... AF and compactness covered
R lens friendly and M lens friendly is covered with a simple adapter, with M lenses or the 18mm TL(AF) or 23 mm Summicron TL(AF), wonderful IQ and very compact.

I'm actually very interested in CL as I seldom heard any complaint from its users. I roughly remember you mentioned in a post sometime ago that you might upgrade your CL to TL2 as CL is discontinued.

I use 21-35 and PC28 quite a lot so the ASP censor is probably the only thing makes me hesitate. Saying that, these wide angles are not commonly used in those social occasions anyway.

3 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

It sounds like you want a practical colour camera for social occasions and amateur 'assignments'. The element in your posts that doesn't fit into this use case is the R lenses: they are large, heavy, high quality lenses that require manual focus and exposure. That is not compatible (IMO) with social use and photography being done for others (though fine for video). 

If you must include the R lenses in your equation, I can't think of a reason for considering less than full frame - it would be a waste of their potential not to.

In your shoes I would consider the S5ii or the SL2-S - I have the SL2-S and I'm happy with it, but have considered the S5ii as a second video camera.

You are spot on. Yes I need a practical colour camera in these cases AND the R lenses are for something other than the social occasions.

 

---

OBH I'm a bit frustrated.

The purpose of using M system was for simplicity and purity, which I think has been achieved. Now it seems that I'm making things complicated again.

 Maybe I should tell my friends that I can't take colour photos or videos.

[LocalHero1953]

3 minutes ago, Shu_downunder said:

The purpose of using M system was for simplicity and purity, which I think has been achieved. Now it seems that I'm making things complicated again.

 Maybe I should tell my friends that I can't take colour photos or videos.

Sell the R lenses, buy a Q3.

Sorted!

[dpitt]

2 hours ago, Shu_downunder said:

I'm actually very interested in CL as I seldom heard any complaint from its users. I roughly remember you mentioned in a post sometime ago that you might upgrade your CL to TL2 as CL is discontinued.

I use 21-35 and PC28 quite a lot so the ASP censor is probably the only thing makes me hesitate. Saying that, these wide angles are not commonly used in those social occasions anyway.

You are spot on. Yes I need a practical colour camera in these cases AND the R lenses are for something other than the social occasions.

 

---

OBH I'm a bit frustrated.

The purpose of using M system was for simplicity and purity, which I think has been achieved. Now it seems that I'm making things complicated again.

 Maybe I should tell my friends that I can't take colour photos or videos.

I never had the CL, but I like my TL2 with EVF (020) a lot. It is basically the same sensor but the CL has the edge with a built in EVF that is even better, although I have no complaints on that point. I think the crop factor will make you grab 21mm (30mm eq.) or 28mm (42 mm eq)  or 35mm (50 mm q.) for a compact solution. I do not mind using MF M lenses for that.

I even take my 35-70 mm R zoom without issues. It still makes for a more compact package compared to my Leica SL. And the results are very close, so close that I do not see the difference unless comparing them side by side.

Both CL and TL2 are discontinued,  but I think they will be very nice 24MP color camera's for years to come. They fill the gaps with your Leica monochrom as the main camera, and the APS-C as color, social. travel, macro, tele... And unlike the Lumix S and MFT, it works very well with M wides. Even the Voigtlander 15mm Heliar is fine on the APS-C sensor. And if you do not mind its size, the 35 Summilux TL F1.4 is probably on par with the SL Summicron lenses. It has no problem beating the Panasonic 20-60 zoom which I already have. I thought it would be a nice al rounder for both my TL2 and SL, but I am not sure now. The results from all my primes are so much better on both...
I would buy the 18-56 TL if I had the chance to trade up. And for the SL, I am not sure because the SL lenses are so big. For now, my R and M lenses do fine.

PS: You might wonder why I do not recommend the SL. All the advantages I mentioned about the TL2 and CL are even more true for the SL2-S except for its size and weight, and the size of the SL native lenses. For me, this is a deal breaker. I use my SL(type 601) at home or close to my car. That would be the same if I had a SL2-S. For traveling, holidays, social... I much prefer the size and weight of the M or the TL2/CL, and the IQ is almost the same as the SL.

Edited December 27, 2023 by dpitt

[Shu_downunder]

21 hours ago, dpitt said:

I never had the CL, but I like my TL2 with EVF (020) a lot. It is basically the same sensor but the CL has the edge with a built in EVF that is even better, although I have no complaints on that point. I think the crop factor will make you grab 21mm (30mm eq.) or 28mm (42 mm eq)  or 35mm (50 mm q.) for a compact solution. I do not mind using MF M lenses for that.

I even take my 35-70 mm R zoom without issues. It still makes for a more compact package compared to my Leica SL. And the results are very close, so close that I do not see the difference unless comparing them side by side.

Both CL and TL2 are discontinued,  but I think they will be very nice 24MP color camera's for years to come. They fill the gaps with your Leica monochrom as the main camera, and the APS-C as color, social. travel, macro, tele... And unlike the Lumix S and MFT, it works very well with M wides. Even the Voigtlander 15mm Heliar is fine on the APS-C sensor. And if you do not mind its size, the 35 Summilux TL F1.4 is probably on par with the SL Summicron lenses. It has no problem beating the Panasonic 20-60 zoom which I already have. I thought it would be a nice al rounder for both my TL2 and SL, but I am not sure now. The results from all my primes are so much better on both...
I would buy the 18-56 TL if I had the chance to trade up. And for the SL, I am not sure because the SL lenses are so big. For now, my R and M lenses do fine.

PS: You might wonder why I do not recommend the SL. All the advantages I mentioned about the TL2 and CL are even more true for the SL2-S except for its size and weight, and the size of the SL native lenses. For me, this is a deal breaker. I use my SL(type 601) at home or close to my car. That would be the same if I had a SL2-S. For traveling, holidays, social... I much prefer the size and weight of the M or the TL2/CL, and the IQ is almost the same as the SL.

Thanks for so much detailed information!

I do agree that while Lumix seems perfect with newer tech and almost all specification, its size might prevent me from taking it everywhere. 

Quote

unlike the Lumix S and MFT, it works very well with M wides.

Just to double check, does Lumix S, like a7's, not work well with wide M and R?

[Shu_downunder]

23 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Sell the R lenses, buy a Q3.

Sorted!

I can't give up my R tele's as yet😅

[Shu_downunder]

On 12/27/2023 at 8:04 PM, Stuart Richardson said:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1766363-REG/panasonic_lumix_s5_ii_mirrorless.html

Quite a deal on the S5II with 20-60 and 50mm 1.8. 700 dollars off. You could sell your MFT lens. Both of those lenses are compact and quite good...not APO Summicron level, but better than your MFT lens is likely to be. It will use your R lenses perfectly with an adapter, and it is still reasonably compact and light. If you add a telephoto (or have an R one), then you are covered for the range you are thinking. I don't think it makes sense to get the SL2S as a camera that you will only use occasionally as a supplement. Both of these cameras are likely to be fairly comparable in image quality to the M Mono, even though they are the same resolution. In my experience the sensor in the S1 was quite a bit sharper than the sensor in the M10, even when using the same lenses (not talking about M wides that do not do well on a non-m body, but telephotos that do well on both). So even though the mono is better because of the lack of a bayer filter, you may close most of that gap since the sensor is at least two generations newer.

Thanks! That's very clear! 

Just to double check if R wides performs badly in S5II as well?

[Stuart Richardson]

2 hours ago, Shu_downunder said:

Thanks! That's very clear! 

Just to double check if R wides performs badly in S5II as well?

No, R lenses were designed for SLR's, where the mirror is in the way, so they are designed to be more retrofocal and send the light more directly into the sensor/film, as opposed to rangefinder lenses which with film allowed for the light to go in at a steeper angle. This made it easier to design smaller, sharp lenses. The SLR lenses are larger, but should maintain their quality better on a digital sensor. Some M lenses work very well on the Panasonic bodies, but it is a bit variable. Typically any of the telephotos (90-135) work perfectly, while certain 35mm and 50mm lenses have few problems. Wider than 35mm tends to have pretty noticeable performance degradation. In my experience the 35mm 1.4 FLE does pretty well (not as well as on an M), while the 50mm 1.4 suffers a bit more but is still usable. You just have to experiment and see what is tolerable for you. The R lenses should perform as they did on film, however.

Edited December 28, 2023 by Stuart Richardson

[TomB_tx]

I have also been using a basic A7 for my R lenses (and other old SLR lenses), and was considering options including the SL2-S, etc. I finally woke up fiscally, and realized I already had adapters for the Sony, as well as a few native lenses My wife uses, so opted for an A7 III instead. The IBIS is amazing, as I've used my 250 f4 R lens hand-held down to 1/60 sec. with very usable results. Using Sony lenses my wife also appreciates the near-instant eye-AF. Sure, I'd rather have an SL series body, but retirement finances are a reality.

[dpitt]

2 hours ago, Shu_downunder said:

Thanks for so much detailed information!

I do agree that while Lumix seems perfect with newer tech and almost all specification, its size might prevent me from taking it everywhere. 

Just to double check, does Lumix S, like a7's, not work well with wide M and R?

Because of the sensor stack, in particular wide M lenses work better with the Leica SL range, compared with the Lumix and other brands FF camera's. An other thing that helps very much with the M wides is the lens profiles you can set for particular lenses on both the Leica TL2 and the SL. The TL2 benefits from the crop factor and a Leica sensor. So you cut of the outer edges of FF lenses. Older M and R lenses will benefit because you use the best/center part.

I do not own a Lumix S, but I read on this forum it is not ideal with wide M lenses. I think it does not provide M and R lens profiles like the Leica's do.

It is true that because Leica R lenses were designed for the larger flange distance of the R reflex bodies, the wides are designed as retrofocus design, just like the TL and SL lenses now. I expect the R lenses to equally perform on the S series, in particular the tele lenses.

In general, I found that all Leica sensors that I tested (DMR, Leica M8,Leica M9, Leica SL, Leica TL2) are very sharp and crisp, even as DNG OOC. Other brands need more tweaking in general. I tested Canon Lumix, Nikon, Fujifilm FF as well as cropped and MFT.  IMO, all lenses and in particular the sharp M and R lenses benefit from this inherent sharpness and crispiness.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Stuart Richardson]

The Panasonic S1 has a very crisp sensor...so no worries there. I had the M10, S series and currently use the SL2. The S1 holds up well with them. But it is not as good with M lenses as the SL bodies, which in turn are a little worse than the M bodies. If you want to use M lenses other than telephotos, your best bet is an M body, and your second best bet an SL body. But in my experience the S1 did better than my A7S and A7RII did when I had them. I imagine the S5 cameras would be comparable. If using M lenses is a concern, then a Leica body is going to give you better results. For R lenses any of the mirrorless companies should give you excellent results. There are some small advantages using a native Leica adapter and Leica body if you have ROM lenses, however, such as transferring of EXIF data and automatically setting the stabilization. But those are quite minor. With the S1, you just manually enter in the focal length for the stabilization and then it works fine.

[Shu_downunder]

Thank you so much for these valuable suggestions and experiences. 

 

Now I tend to resist my absession to FF and keep lightweight as now I feel like I need to bring this "secondary" camera everywhere. 

 

The plan is 

 

1. For every day and semi- serious shooting, which takes 90% of the case

 

M246+M24/3.8 as my main camera. This might not be a popular set up but really works for me. 

CL + 35/1.4 TL in monochrome mode, well, fake monochrome mode I should say, just not to disturb myself with colour. 

 

2. In social event. 5%

 

CL + 18-56

 

3. In very serious shooting.  5%

 

Both bodies + selected M and R lenses, depends on the purposes of shooting. For the R lenses,  my frequently used are 28/2.8 PC, 80/1.4 and 80-200/4. 
 

Each sold them should works well on a cl from info provided in the forum. 

 

Any thoughts?