First Leica—SL3?

[rangerider]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So I’m following these SL3 rumors and know the release is coming up. I have been debating getting a Leica for the better part of a decade now. I shoot mostly landscapes, nature, and wildlife, so I just haven’t felt like the M or Q systems would make sense for that reason. The SL system interests me, though, and it looks like the SL3 might make it feasible for my needs.

I’ve heard a lot of mixed reviews about the SL system, though. Is the build quality the same? Does it feel like a Leica? Is the image output up to Leica standards? How about the glass? For this purchase, I’m at the point where I want a camera that has sentimental value that I can hang onto for a long while. I want some memories associated with it, maybe even begin collecting some glass and pass them on to family. Any Leica purists out there who love their SL bodies/lenses and plan on collecting them or is that just an M thing? Would an SL3 be a good entry point into Leica?

[dpitt]

Maybe I am not the right person to comment, because I use gear the will look very old in your eyes. But after using Leica camera's for 20 years now, and with experience in all systems Leica released between 1930 and now, I think that I know what Leica is about.

I wanted a Leica SL to use my Leica R lenses on digital for years before I bought the SL(601) last year. I can tell you that the results I get from that sensor with R and M lenses are as close as it gets to using a M body, maybe even better in some aspects. The user experience of the superb built in EVF is much better than using a M body with external VF. Focusing is accurate and easy as long as you use magnification. Focus peaking is only used as an indication at best for my use.

The downside is that the SL is much heavier and also a completely different form factor compared to the M bodies. That makes it an ideal camera for indoor and close to home or car. The M is a much better solution for traveling and long walks. Also, using smaller M lenses on the SL makes less sense because the body is big and heavy anyway. I use my lenses purely based on purpose and quality, so some R lenses will win over their M counterparts.

Regarding SL lenses, I have little hands on experience, but I have tested a few. And I own the superb Leica Summilux 35 TL lens for APS-C cropped mode. This one gives superb results, better than most modern M lenses. It is big and heavy compared to an M lens though. That does not matter much on the SL, but it stays at home often when I use a 35mm M lens on my  TL2 to take it for a walk.

The same goes for the SL lenses. They are great lenses, probably the best Leica ever made for FF, but they are big, heavy and expensive. My SL is used mostly with M or R glass. Maybe my opinion would change when I will use a SL2 or SL3 high resolution sensor, but I doubt it. Of course I will probably own a Summicron SL one day, but even then the M and R lenses will get some use.

IMO, you should at least wait for the SL3 release and then choose in function of price, availability and features if buying a used SL2 or SL2-S is a better option for you. Prices for used SLs will drop after the release in any case.

[Advertisement]

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

[la1402]

I had the SL2S and several Ms. The SL is a repackaged Panasonic and never will have the sentimental or collectible value like the M. Results and UI are very good and in many aspects better than the M, though. The APO lenses are great and better than their M counterparts., but very big and heavy. The repackaged Sigma and Pana SL lenses make no sense at double the price for the Leica Logo - then I’d much rather buy the originals. 

[davidmknoble]

I have and use the Leica R film system, film and digital M system, SL system and S system.  The SL and S system are very good for landscape work.  I have shot both the SL and S system in freezing rain and snow, down to 20 degrees F (some have shot it lower).

The weather sealing is the draw for many that use those two systems (The Q is also weather sealed, but a fixed 28mm lens, so I have not used it).

The APO 24-90 and APO 90-280 lens are the most stellar zooms I have ever used.  The primes are have incredible falloff from the sharpness zone and are also APO.  Some dislike the 16-35 zoom, in part because it starts with a higher f/stop, but I like it for ultra wide landscape.

The SL3 is said to have the same sensor as the M11.  Having the S3, the M11 is the closest I have seen yet to the S system in rendering.  I prefer the S system for some things - it is much easier to use graduated filters with an optical viewfinder.  However, I believe the next S generation will be mirrorless, so it will likely be just as challenging going forward.

For landscape work, I think you will likely enjoy the SL system very much. 

Not the best image and from an iPhone, but I printed yesterday a 17x22 image I took in Antarctica in January with the SL2 and the 90-280 zoom.  I had to dial back the sharpening, literally.

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!

[darylgo]

The M lenses are mechanical, I shoot some manufactured as fast back as the 1930's.  The SL lenses and most everything today from the big 3 manufacturers are electronic.  The electronics are the limiting factor, Nikon currently will not fix their original AF-S lenses.  Leica, while being exceptional at supporting their products for many years may not be able to support the electronic part of their lenses for multi generations.  

Edited February 25 by darylgo

[Geoff C. Bassett]

I will say the SL cameras definitely feel like a Leica. I love my SL2. If rumors of the SL3 are correct and it's the same but slightly smaller, I think it easily could be a forever camera.

I stick with the system because of the incredible lenses. People talk about the glass being massive, for the zooms (24-90, 90-280) , yes they are bigger than the competition. I find their rendering worth it. However I think the SL primes are a reasonable size, and are the best rendering lenses currently available. Sharp with character. 

I expect the SL3 to be an excellent camera, especially for landscape. Whether it's worth the price depends on your budget.

Photo with SL2+ 75mm SL

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!

Edited February 25 by Geoff C. Bassett

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would say that SL system is the top-of-the-line of the Leica system, there is the medium format S, but it is so hard to get a modern camera and lenses and I think the biggest market is the amount.

In compare to your M lenses, the Leica SL lenses are much more reliable and image quality is close to the best.

For landscape is probably the best choice these days. I’ve been using it for the past four years I was in my main camera for all kinds of work.

For wildlife, I suppose you will have to rely on Sigma Lens the SL 3 will probably have a better out of focus system. Well see you next week how it turns out.

[tomasis7]

2 hours ago, Geoff C. Bassett said:

I think it easily could be a forever camera.

 

you say that .. in every release

However, SL is perfect for landscape. APO is stunningly sharp. 

[LBJ2]

16 hours ago, rangerider said:

So I’m following these SL3 rumors and know the release is coming up. I have been debating getting a Leica for the better part of a decade now. I shoot mostly landscapes, nature, and wildlife, so I just haven’t felt like the M or Q systems would make sense for that reason. The SL system interests me, though, and it looks like the SL3 might make it feasible for my needs.

I’ve heard a lot of mixed reviews about the SL system, though. Is the build quality the same? Does it feel like a Leica? Is the image output up to Leica standards? How about the glass? For this purchase, I’m at the point where I want a camera that has sentimental value that I can hang onto for a long while. I want some memories associated with it, maybe even begin collecting some glass and pass them on to family. Any Leica purists out there who love their SL bodies/lenses and plan on collecting them or is that just an M thing? Would an SL3 be a good entry point into Leica?

My only other experience with Leica is owning a few of their rangefinder cameras. I think the Leica rangefinder system is what most people think of/refer to when they read/comment "feel like a Leica" 

However, my Leica SL2 camera oozes High Design look and feel. Attaching one of the best photography lenses Leica has ever made, their Leica SL APO primes ( true treasures), propels the whole SL2 system experience to a special experience and results level IMO. So if you equate High Design to Leica, the SL2 is it and I can't imagine the SL3 will be anything less than improvements on the SL2. *There will however be those on the forum that will have initial not so positive reactions to the new SL3 design, but that's just how it goes on the forums. 

[Stuart Richardson]

I would dispute that it is a rebadged Panasonic...the Panasonic and the Leica shared sensors and technology, but they did very different things with them. It's kind of like saying the food is the same at the local bistro and a Michelin star restaurant because they both buy ingredients at the same market. I have both the S1 and SL2 and they are very different cameras. Both are well made and capable of excellent results. The Leica, however, is much nicer. It is more solidly built, the viewfinder is better, the ergonomics are better, the color is better, the multishot is better (meaning literally sharper and with fewer artifacts), the overall construction and experience of using the camera is better. Additionally, the Panasonic has a standard thickness cover glass over the sensor and does not employ offset microlenses. That means that when using M lenses, it has far far worse performance with most M lenses. The edges and corners are completely muddy because the sensor was not designed to support those lenses. Meanwhile, all the SL cameras have thin cover glass and can support M lenses almost natively. This thin cover glass also means that many lenses get a small bump in sharpness as compared to the Panasonic bodies, as the light rays are less diffracted.

As for the lenses, the SL APO Summicrons are the best lenses Leica has ever made from a technical standpoint. Their performance is beyond reproach. But as stated above, they are not as likely to be able to be passed on to your grandchildren, as they are driven electrically. They will be useful for as long as Leica makes cameras in L mount, which is something that is likely to be for a long time yet. However, I don't think this is a reason to avoid the system. This is an issue shared by every modern camera system. You can get around it with M lenses, but there is no guarantee that the M lenses will necessarily age as well in the next sixty years as they have so far. Already the M is running up against the possibilities of physics and human vision (accurately focusing a fast lens on 60mp is beyond most people already). In any case, I would encourage you more to buy a camera that you think you will be able to use for yourself. If the stars align and you are able to pass it on, I am sure your children will be happy, but if it is anything like it was in my family, they will be more nostalgic for the photos you take of them and their lives than for the gear itself. My dad was an amateur photographer and passed on a Canon T90 and an M6 each with a few lenses. I learned how to photograph on them and made it my career. I cherish them but rarely use them these days. The pictures he took, however, are the most important legacy. Couldn't tell you what camera he took the photo below with or what camera I have in my hand, but I am happy that he gave me the interest in photography.

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!

[LocalHero1953]

6 hours ago, la1402 said:

I had the SL2S and several Ms. The SL is a repackaged Panasonic and never will have the sentimental or collectible value like the M. Results and UI are very good and in many aspects better than the M, though. The APO lenses are great and better than their M counterparts., but very big and heavy. The repackaged Sigma and Pana SL lenses make no sense at double the price for the Leica Logo - then I’d much rather buy the originals. 

Hmm. Leica SL launch 2015, Panasonic S1 launch 2019. Leica developed the L-mount on its own. I'm sure there is Panasonic tech in there, especially in AF, and one or more of the zooms appears to be from Panasonic optical patents (though Panasonic has not used them itself), but the Apo primes are Leica's own.

I agree that there is nothing in the SL line to make them collectible (perhaps just a bit more than any other digital camera, because of the red dot), and I welcome that. I don't buy such cameras to collect, but to use. The M is in a heritage blind alley which limits its development, and I would not want the SL line to take the same path.

Back to the OP......IMO the SL line is an excellent system as long as you recognise its limitations. Only you can tell if they would limit you. I don't shoot wildlife, and I wouldn't choose the system for birds in flight, but might for less challenging wildlife. I wouldn't choose the system for long hikes or lightweight travel. I've tried walking around a city with it, and it is not for me (even with M lenses). But I value its simple interface that I can adjust quickly on the fly, its image stabilisation (IBIS & OIS), its high quality video, its durability, its colours, its accurate AF in single shot, the Apo primes, and (for the SL2-S) its low light capability. I find Leica's service return times laughably bad (many months). I wouldn't use anything else for portraits and photography of people in the widest sense.

Does that help?🙂

[beewee]

17 hours ago, rangerider said:

So I’m following these SL3 rumors and know the release is coming up. I have been debating getting a Leica for the better part of a decade now. I shoot mostly landscapes, nature, and wildlife, so I just haven’t felt like the M or Q systems would make sense for that reason. The SL system interests me, though, and it looks like the SL3 might make it feasible for my needs.

I’ve heard a lot of mixed reviews about the SL system, though. Is the build quality the same? Does it feel like a Leica? Is the image output up to Leica standards? How about the glass? For this purchase, I’m at the point where I want a camera that has sentimental value that I can hang onto for a long while. I want some memories associated with it, maybe even begin collecting some glass and pass them on to family. Any Leica purists out there who love their SL bodies/lenses and plan on collecting them or is that just an M thing? Would an SL3 be a good entry point into Leica?

I’ve been shooting digital M since the 2010, first with an M8.2, then with the M10, and then went onto the SL2-S, and most recently the Q3. Like you, unless I’m traveling, my primary subjects are focused around landscapes, nature, and wildlife in a more documentary style. Through out my years with Leica, I’ve kept a Canon 5Dmk2 for more dedicated wildlife photography which I acquired before my first Leica.

I mainly use my camera outdoors while hiking, skiing, climbing, etc… in the Canadian Rockies so it’s generally dry or if it’s snowy, it’s cold. However, I’ve shot my M/SL/Q systems in all weather conditions from 40°C humidity in the tropics to -30°C and below in winter, and downpours in between.

So these are what I perceive as strengths/weaknesses of each system in very broad terms. Since most people also carry their smartphone, I’m going to throw the iPhone 14 Pro in the mix since this is what I have and I do also use it alongside the Leicas.

• iPhone 14 Pro
  • Strength:
    • It’s always in my pocket and I can take a photo within a few seconds
    • Pro RAW at 48 MP on the main wide camera is very good, dynamic range is pretty good too
    • Photos and videos are always geotagged
  • Weakness:
    • Colors are not the same as Leica, even when editing Pro RAW images in LR, I’m more likely to run into the limits of what LR can pull out
• M8.2/M10 + M lenses
  • Strength:
    • Lenses are compact and I can fit them in my pocket. The smaller primes will fit in a backpack waist belt pocket.
    • System size is small not too heavy (at least compared to SL system)
      • My main 3 lens kit(s) (24/35/90, or 18/24/90 ) + body weigh around 2-2.5kg (5lbs) total
    • Being able to focus with the lens covered is actual a pro while shooting in the rain or water spray because I can focus with the rangefinder with the lens hood on, and then only uncover the lens for a split second when pressing the shutter, thereby avoiding the need to constantly wipe the lens’ front element
    • Lens value stay reasonably stable. They go up but not faster than inflation, specially if you’re actually using your gear and they experience normal wear and tear. If you really want to collect some special piece and you actually want to see the value go up, don’t shoot with it and put it in a safe deposit box but now you have a lens sitting there literally collecting dust.
    • There are some gems in the M lens lineup that are truly reasonably priced but spectacularly sharp on the M bodies like the 18 SEM, 24 Elmar which will continue to hold up to the 60 MP all the way to the corners but many of the other summicron and summilux will not hold up unless you’re either stopped down or you’re buying the most recent generation of uber expensive APO Summicron M. So get ready to drop a ton of cash to get good corner sharpness.
  • Weaknesses:
    • At least on the M8.2, anything above ISO 320 was noisy. The M10 was good to around ISO 3200 but shutter speed limits made it unsuitable for astrophotography
    • Although I’ve taken Ms while hiking and climbing, I would hesitate to take it skiing due to the risk of throwing off the rangefinder if/when I take a fall
    • My M10 actually arrived with a misaligned rangefinder and it was out of commission for a 1 yr to get that sorted (long story for another day)
    • Leica stopped making the 18 SEM and 24 Elmar which are absolutely amazing (won’t be selling these two)
    • Trying to service any M lenses is a giant pain in the butt due to how long it takes to get lenses serviced
• SL2-S + SL zooms and APO prime
  • Strength:
    • Dynamic range is fantastic, even at ISO 12500 and colors are very natural and easy to edit in LR.
    • SL zooms perform as well as just about all the best M primes except APO Summicrons and 75 APO Summilux. The SL zooms will happily resolve to the corners even at 50-60 MP but 100MP is a bit of a stretch. 
    • APO SL primes are absolutely incredible, second to none, and have no trouble resolving to the corners at 100 MP and should hold up to 200 MP
    • Sigma’s L mount DG DN lenses will get you SL zoom performance for a fraction of the price and will support all the capabilities of the L-mount specifications if you are ok with ‘third-party’ brands
    • The Sigma 14-24 DG DN is as sharp as the Leica 16-35 SL zoom.
    • Sigma is slowly but surely providing a huge range of top quality specialty lenses including the 14/1.4, 15/1.4, and 500/5.6 DG DN which are spectacularly sharp
    • You can use zooms which are pretty much a must in dusty environments (think desert and safaris) unless you are willing to carry multiple bodies
    • You can share the batteries between the M and Q system
    • Charging via USB-C is nice because I no longer carry a dedicated camera battery charger while traveling
    • If you want a camera to do everything except birds in flight or fast action, then the SL2 series will do the job. Maybe SL3 with PDAF will address this last hurdle.
    • EVF is as good as having an OVF
  • Weaknesses
    • Most of the lenses a huge compared to M lenses
    • Although you can adapt M lenses, the performance from all but the latest generation (35 APO M and later) will not perform nearly as well compared to mounting on an M body. If optical performance is your goal, then stick with native L-mount lenses as it’ll be cheaper, and more robust.
    • All the Leica and Sigma Art series of the lenses are heavy
    • SL2/SL2-S body is heavy. The SL2-S + 24-90 weighs as much as a 3-4 lens M kit so unless you need the flexibility of multiple focal lengths, the M kit will be lighter and definitely smaller.
    • AF is not good enough on the SL/SL2/SL2-S for fast action photography
    • Without PDAF, focusing non-L mount AF lenses like the Canon 300/2.8 IS is very slow but maybe the SL3 will address this
• Q3
  • Strength
    • Small, light, and compact and one I can take anywhere, including skiing
    • Has a fast aperture prime that is very sharp and will get you good performance to near the corners but the far corners are slightly compromised, even when stopped down
    • Shares the same battery as SL2/SL2-S, and most likely SL3
    • USB-C charging means I’m not carrying any chargers while traveling
    • The 28mm lens has IS and feels more like a 26-27mm lens than a 28mm, which is closer to my preferred 24mm focal length
    • Dynamic range is very good. As good as the SL2-S and colors are fantastic.
    • EVF is as good as having an OVF
  • Weakness
    • If you’re shooting video, the lens has focus breathing
    • You’re stuck with one focal length so you better like shooting at ~26-28mm
    • I wouldn’t travel with just the Q3 alone but I would take it on outings where I don’t need/plan to shoot wildlife

At the end of the day, any of the cameras will perform amazingly well for shooting and it’s more about what kind of shooting experience you prefer. There’s really something for everyone.

Although I haven’t sold many of my Leica lenses (just 1 M prime), I wouldn’t consider myself a collector. I buy my lenses for shooting and over the years, I’ve built a sizable M and SL kit. However, for the past 2+ years, I’ve mostly been shooting with the SL and Q because they just perform so well and I find I often shoot at 24mm on the M10, and I want to geotag my photos, which means I need an EVF so it kind of defeats the purpose of having a rangefinder. 

Some images from M10:

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!

 

 

Some images from SL2-S:

Some images from Q3:

[jaapv]

Please don’t flood technical threads with images. A few can illuminating but in general they belong in the image threads . 

[rangerider]

1 hour ago, beewee said:

I’ve been shooting digital M since the 2010, first with an M8.2, then with the M10, and then went onto the SL2-S, and most recently the Q3. Like you, unless I’m traveling, my primary subjects are focused around landscapes, nature, and wildlife in a more documentary style. Through out my years with Leica, I’ve kept a Canon 5Dmk2 for more dedicated wildlife photography which I acquired before my first Leica.

I mainly use my camera outdoors while hiking, skiing, climbing, etc… in the Canadian Rockies so it’s generally dry or if it’s snowy, it’s cold. However, I’ve shot my M/SL/Q systems in all weather conditions from 40°C humidity in the tropics to -30°C and below in winter, and downpours in between.

So these are what I perceive as strengths/weaknesses of each system in very broad terms. Since most people also carry their smartphone, I’m going to throw the iPhone 14 Pro in the mix since this is what I have and I do also use it alongside the Leicas.

• iPhone 14 Pro
  • Strength:
    • It’s always in my pocket and I can take a photo within a few seconds
    • Pro RAW at 48 MP on the main wide camera is very good, dynamic range is pretty good too
    • Photos and videos are always geotagged
  • Weakness:
    • Colors are not the same as Leica, even when editing Pro RAW images in LR, I’m more likely to run into the limits of what LR can pull out
• M8.2/M10 + M lenses
  • Strength:
    • Lenses are compact and I can fit them in my pocket. The smaller primes will fit in a backpack waist belt pocket.
    • System size is small not too heavy (at least compared to SL system)
      • My main 3 lens kit(s) (24/35/90, or 18/24/90 ) + body weigh around 2-2.5kg (5lbs) total
    • Being able to focus with the lens covered is actual a pro while shooting in the rain or water spray because I can focus with the rangefinder with the lens hood on, and then only uncover the lens for a split second when pressing the shutter, thereby avoiding the need to constantly wipe the lens’ front element
    • Lens value stay reasonably stable. They go up but not faster than inflation, specially if you’re actually using your gear and they experience normal wear and tear. If you really want to collect some special piece and you actually want to see the value go up, don’t shoot with it and put it in a safe deposit box but now you have a lens sitting there literally collecting dust.
    • There are some gems in the M lens lineup that are truly reasonably priced but spectacularly sharp on the M bodies like the 18 SEM, 24 Elmar which will continue to hold up to the 60 MP all the way to the corners but many of the other summicron and summilux will not hold up unless you’re either stopped down or you’re buying the most recent generation of uber expensive APO Summicron M. So get ready to drop a ton of cash to get good corner sharpness.
  • Weaknesses:
    • At least on the M8.2, anything above ISO 320 was noisy. The M10 was good to around ISO 3200 but shutter speed limits made it unsuitable for astrophotography
    • Although I’ve taken Ms while hiking and climbing, I would hesitate to take it skiing due to the risk of throwing off the rangefinder if/when I take a fall
    • My M10 actually arrived with a misaligned rangefinder and it was out of commission for a 1 yr to get that sorted (long story for another day)
    • Leica stopped making the 18 SEM and 24 Elmar which are absolutely amazing (won’t be selling these two)
    • Trying to service any M lenses is a giant pain in the butt due to how long it takes to get lenses serviced
• SL2-S + SL zooms and APO prime
  • Strength:
    • Dynamic range is fantastic, even at ISO 12500 and colors are very natural and easy to edit in LR.
    • SL zooms perform as well as just about all the best M primes except APO Summicrons and 75 APO Summilux. The SL zooms will happily resolve to the corners even at 50-60 MP but 100MP is a bit of a stretch. 
    • APO SL primes are absolutely incredible, second to none, and have no trouble resolving to the corners at 100 MP and should hold up to 200 MP
    • Sigma’s L mount DG DN lenses will get you SL zoom performance for a fraction of the price and will support all the capabilities of the L-mount specifications if you are ok with ‘third-party’ brands
    • The Sigma 14-24 DG DN is as sharp as the Leica 16-35 SL zoom.
    • Sigma is slowly but surely providing a huge range of top quality specialty lenses including the 14/1.4, 15/1.4, and 500/5.6 DG DN which are spectacularly sharp
    • You can use zooms which are pretty much a must in dusty environments (think desert and safaris) unless you are willing to carry multiple bodies
    • You can share the batteries between the M and Q system
    • Charging via USB-C is nice because I no longer carry a dedicated camera battery charger while traveling
    • If you want a camera to do everything except birds in flight or fast action, then the SL2 series will do the job. Maybe SL3 with PDAF will address this last hurdle.
    • EVF is as good as having an OVF
  • Weaknesses
    • Most of the lenses a huge compared to M lenses
    • Although you can adapt M lenses, the performance from all but the latest generation (35 APO M and later) will not perform nearly as well compared to mounting on an M body. If optical performance is your goal, then stick with native L-mount lenses as it’ll be cheaper, and more robust.
    • All the Leica and Sigma Art series of the lenses are heavy
    • SL2/SL2-S body is heavy. The SL2-S + 24-90 weighs as much as a 3-4 lens M kit so unless you need the flexibility of multiple focal lengths, the M kit will be lighter and definitely smaller.
    • AF is not good enough on the SL/SL2/SL2-S for fast action photography
    • Without PDAF, focusing non-L mount AF lenses like the Canon 300/2.8 IS is very slow but maybe the SL3 will address this
• Q3
  • Strength
    • Small, light, and compact and one I can take anywhere, including skiing
    • Has a fast aperture prime that is very sharp and will get you good performance to near the corners but the far corners are slightly compromised, even when stopped down
    • Shares the same battery as SL2/SL2-S, and most likely SL3
    • USB-C charging means I’m not carrying any chargers while traveling
    • The 28mm lens has IS and feels more like a 26-27mm lens than a 28mm, which is closer to my preferred 24mm focal length
    • Dynamic range is very good. As good as the SL2-S and colors are fantastic.
    • EVF is as good as having an OVF
  • Weakness
    • If you’re shooting video, the lens has focus breathing
    • You’re stuck with one focal length so you better like shooting at ~26-28mm
    • I wouldn’t travel with just the Q3 alone but I would take it on outings where I don’t need/plan to shoot wildlife

At the end of the day, any of the cameras will perform amazingly well for shooting and it’s more about what kind of shooting experience you prefer. There’s really something for everyone.

Although I haven’t sold many of my Leica lenses (just 1 M prime), I wouldn’t consider myself a collector. I buy my lenses for shooting and over the years, I’ve built a sizable M and SL kit. However, for the past 2+ years, I’ve mostly been shooting with the SL and Q because they just perform so well and I find I often shoot at 24mm on the M10, and I want to geotag my photos, which means I need an EVF so it kind of defeats the purpose of having a rangefinder. 

Some images from M10:

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!

 

 

Some images from SL2-S:

Some images from Q3:

Really thoughtful response and much appreciated, thank you. Also very relevant for me because I live in the Rockies just across the border in Northwest Montana. I hope you'll indulge a few questions I have about your setup, workflow, and using these tools outside. I'm coming from Canon and Sony for wildlife, which at this point make a lot more sense for autofocus, but I'm hoping the SL3 will close the gap to be "good enough," including with BIF. I don't expect Leica to ever keep up with them on the electronics, but I also think we're all very spoiled these days. I'm willing to put in a little extra work for the wildlife shots if it means having tools that inspire me, are well-made, and that I can keep for many years to come with some sentimental value. I feel like we've all been part of this horserace in technology and snapping thousands upon thousands of photos and somewhere along the way we lost touch with the art form and slowing down to appreciate each shutter snap. Maybe I'm just getting older and valuing different priorities.

You said you still shoot your Canon 5Dm2. What are your Leica files like in comparison with regards to the colors, contrast, and rendering. I realize this comes down to lenses used, as well, but in general when speaking of systems do you find there's enough there in the Leica files to make you appreciate investing into their systems, or is it mostly just hardware differences and build-quality differences?

Regarding Sigma lenses, I'm not opposed to third party lenses at all, I think my primary question around that is say I want to pick up that new 500mm f/5.6 they just released, which would be fantastic for critters, based on early reviews. Would using that lens still yield the same quality colors, contrast, and rendering in my files that I get from native Leica glass? If not, I guess I feel like I may as well shoot that Sigma on a Sony for a fraction of the price. What has your experience been like using Sigma lenses on your Leicas and do you still find the files to benefit from Leica's processing magic?

Finally, I plan to put my gear through the rigors of the Rockies, so it will be well used. When I say "collecting" I guess I meant more like keeping it for a long time or even possibly for life rather than trading it every few years for upgraded models. But I do worry about weather sealing and durability out in these elements. You are in the snow a lot like me with frigid temps, higher elevations, and tough terrain. I don't want to have to deal with sending my gear in often based on how long some of you are waiting on repairs, so have you noticed that you tend to grab a certain system or cameras more often when the weather is particularly cold or you're going into tricky terrain? Can you talk a little bit about whether you've had any limitations that you may not have with the Canon setup with regards to the elements and durability? I worry about having to baby Leicas in the field.

Thanks again for the thoughtful response, and I really appreciated the images, as well. Beautiful contrast and color from those, and lovely memories.

[KaKa]

20 hours ago, rangerider said:

So I’m following these SL3 rumors and know the release is coming up. I have been debating getting a Leica for the better part of a decade now. I shoot mostly landscapes, nature, and wildlife, so I just haven’t felt like the M or Q systems would make sense for that reason. The SL system interests me, though, and it looks like the SL3 might make it feasible for my needs.

I’ve heard a lot of mixed reviews about the SL system, though. Is the build quality the same? Does it feel like a Leica? Is the image output up to Leica standards? How about the glass? For this purchase, I’m at the point where I want a camera that has sentimental value that I can hang onto for a long while. I want some memories associated with it, maybe even begin collecting some glass and pass them on to family. Any Leica purists out there who love their SL bodies/lenses and plan on collecting them or is that just an M thing? Would an SL3 be a good entry point into Leica?

I’ve shot the M and have the SL2-S and Q2 as current workhorses, ordered the SL3 to join the family.

Simply love the SL camera and can highly recommend them 100%! I wish you wisdom in making your own choice😀

[beewee]

18 minutes ago, rangerider said:

Really thoughtful response and much appreciated, thank you. Also very relevant for me because I live in the Rockies just across the border in Northwest Montana. I hope you'll indulge a few questions I have about your setup, workflow, and using these tools outside. I'm coming from Canon and Sony for wildlife, which at this point make a lot more sense for autofocus, but I'm hoping the SL3 will close the gap to be "good enough," including with BIF. I don't expect Leica to ever keep up with them on the electronics, but I also think we're all very spoiled these days. I'm willing to put in a little extra work for the wildlife shots if it means having tools that inspire me, are well-made, and that I can keep for many years to come with some sentimental value. I feel like we've all been part of this horserace in technology and snapping thousands upon thousands of photos and somewhere along the way we lost touch with the art form and slowing down to appreciate each shutter snap. Maybe I'm just getting older and valuing different priorities.

I don’t really shoot BIF so from an AF point of view, I mainly shoot AFs on all my cameras. Since the SL3 is not officially out yet, only time will tell how it competes with Canon/Nikon/Sony.  I can imagine if I really wanted to have a BIF rig, I’d probably go either Sony A1 or Nikon Z8/Z9 as they have some very impressive eye tracking for moving subjects but I’ve never felt such need. As far as wildlife goes, I’d consider myself more of an opportunistic shooter and I’m not one to seek out wildlife to shoot. If I know there’s a good likelihood of seeing some wildlife, I may take a 300/2.8 + TEs and keep them in the car but I’m not one to hike with such a rig.

22 minutes ago, rangerider said:

You said you still shoot your Canon 5Dm2. What are your Leica files like in comparison with regards to the colors, contrast, and rendering. I realize this comes down to lenses used, as well, but in general when speaking of systems do you find there's enough there in the Leica files to make you appreciate investing into their systems, or is it mostly just hardware differences and build-quality differences?

I went to Leica for 2 main reasons. High quality glass and good, sensible, and consistent ergonomics. Sony is definitely the front runner in terms of absolute mirrorless capability and their glass is up there with Leica but the menu system and ergonomics is a dealbreaker for me. I know they’ve improved but it’s still maddening and the fact that every camera they release has a slightly different menu system would drive me nuts. It’s also one reason I don’t use Android because every Android phone has a different look and feel whereas iPhones have had a consistent interface since the beginning so I don’t need to relearn the interface each time I get a new camera.

I’ve honestly never had trouble with build quality of cameras. Granted, I’m usually on the mid-upper tier bodies. I don’t abuse my gear but I’m also not babying it either. If anything, the one time I’ve actually had to get a lens repaired was a Leica 35 Summilux ASPH which literally separated into 2 pieces cuz some screws came loose inside. I had it repaired and CLA’ed and now it’s good as new but it just goes to show that anything can ‘break’. 

For my Canon 5Dm2 system, I had the 16-35/2.8, 70-200/2.8 IS, and 300/2.8 IS. Back in the day, Canon’s wide angle was the weakest so when I got the M10, I pretty much stopped using the 16-35 completely. When I got the SL2-S and 90-280 SL, I stopped using the 70-200/2.8 IS. I’ve since sold both Canon zooms and only keep the 300/2.8 IS around for wildlife. The only reason I even have the 5Dm2 is because of AF on the 300/2.8 IS. If the SL3 can focus as well as the 5Dm2 with the 300/2.8 IS + Sigma EF to L-mount adapter, I’d likely get rid of the 5Dm2 as well.

I don’t have anything against the 5Dm2. It has really good colors and it hasn’t let me down on ruggedness but I like having a very consistent interface across the M/SL/Q cameras and it’s more natural to switch between them. Also, the fact that the SL and Q share the same batteries mean there are less extra batteries and chargers to carry. Canon’s 300/2.8 IS was one of their sharpest lenses at the time and still holds up well, especially without extenders. And even with the 1.4x extender, it’s still very good. With good high ISO performance on current generation cameras like the SL2-S, I find there’s not much of a need to have f/2.8 so the 90-280 SL is a more flexible option if I don’t need to go beyond 300mm. However, for proper wildlife photography, I’d want something more around 400-500mm. With the Sigma 500/5.6 now on the market, I think between the 90-280 SL and 500/5.6, they could probably take the place of the Canon 5Dm2 with 300/2.8 IS. If I were to say go on a safari trip, I’d probably just get the SL3 + 500/5.6 and call it done. As good as the Canon 300/2.8 is, it’s big, heavy, and a pain to lug around especially if I’m already carrying a 24-90 + 90-280.

40 minutes ago, rangerider said:

Regarding Sigma lenses, I'm not opposed to third party lenses at all, I think my primary question around that is say I want to pick up that new 500mm f/5.6 they just released, which would be fantastic for critters, based on early reviews. Would using that lens still yield the same quality colors, contrast, and rendering in my files that I get from native Leica glass? If not, I guess I feel like I may as well shoot that Sigma on a Sony for a fraction of the price. What has your experience been like using Sigma lenses on your Leicas and do you still find the files to benefit from Leica's processing magic?

I think part of the ‘Leica magic’ is not just in the glass but the color filter array used on the sensors as well as the image processing pipeline. Leica has been known to customize their color filter and micro lens arrays even if the sensors are based on ‘off-the-shelf’ versions from Sony and other sensor manufacturers. Although I don’t own any Sony bodies myself, I’ve downloaded raw images from A1 and A7R5 and tried to edit them in LR just to get a sense of their colors and malleability and I find the Sony files harder to work with. Maybe I’ve grown accustomed to the Leica color science, or maybe it just suits my taste and it’s very close to where I want my colors so I find when it comes to editing Leica files, I don’t have to do much adjustments in LR to get the images looking the way I want.

Sigma has been putting out some truly impressive lenses over the past few years, ever since they started shipping DG DN lenses. Their 24/3.5 DG DN is every bit as sharp as the 24 SEM on the M10 and I’ve stress tested it in 100MP multi-shot mode and it holds up nicely to the corners when stopped down. Their 14-24/2.8 DG DN is sharp to the corners wide open. In fact the shot of the milky way that I shared in my earlier post was taken with the Sigma 14-24/2.8. Would I buy the Leica version if it were available when I purchased the Sigma? Maybe? But I got the Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN before Leica had their rebadged version and it is very bit as good as the 16-35 SL for all equivalent focal lengths and aperture values. I spent an afternoon last summer doing side-by-side testing against all the L-mount lenses that I had and compared them in 100 MP multi-shot mode and the Sigma glass can hold its own from a sharpness point of view.

The only lens that truly stands out from the rest was the 28 APO SL which is head and shoulders more sharper than any of the native L-mount lenses that I currently own. If anything, the reason to get into the L-mount system is really for the APO SL primes. Otherwise, if you can live with the Sony menu system and the Sony color science is your jam, then I don’t see any reason to buy into the L-mount system. For me, L-mount makes sense in that I’ve always liked the Leica ergonomics, color science, and the Sigma makes some top notch glass that I’d be happy mounting to the SL bodies. The biggest factor for me is actually the fact that Sigma is part of the L-mount alliance. There’s no way Leica would be able to build out a full lens line-up for L-mount on their own and even if they did, I wouldn’t be able to afford such a system. With Sigma in the game, I have options. I can build up a core kit with Leica glass (SL zooms and APO SL primes) and then fill the gaps with Sigma. To be frank, I wouldn’t have bought into the L-mount system if Sigma wasn’t part of the L-mount alliance.

56 minutes ago, rangerider said:

Finally, I plan to put my gear through the rigors of the Rockies, so it will be well used. When I say "collecting" I guess I meant more like keeping it for a long time or even possibly for life rather than trading it every few years for upgraded models. But I do worry about weather sealing and durability out in these elements. You are in the snow a lot like me with frigid temps, higher elevations, and tough terrain. I don't want to have to deal with sending my gear in often based on how long some of you are waiting on repairs, so have you noticed that you tend to grab a certain system or cameras more often when the weather is particularly cold or you're going into tricky terrain? Can you talk a little bit about whether you've had any limitations that you may not have with the Canon setup with regards to the elements and durability? I worry about having to baby Leicas in the field.

Like I mentioned earlier, I don’t baby my gear and the only time I’ve actually experienced legit, ‘catastrophic’ equipment failure was with the 35 Lux and this is over the span of 15 years. The closest I’ve gotten to breaking anything else was shooting with the M8.2 in pouring rain in Norway and Alaska. I know the M8.2 is not weather sealed but, like I said, I don’t baby my gear. I buy camera gear to shoot and not to keep in a bag or a cabinet. Weather sealing on the M10 was a big reason for me to upgrade from the M8.2.

In my experience, the hardest conditions on camera gear is generally rain and dust. Cold and snow is actually not that bad. As long as the camera is acclimated to the outside temperature , you can toss a camera in the snow and it’s not going to impact it because the snow will just brush off. It’s not like the snow will melt and drown the camera. Although most cameras are rated down to 0°C or -10°C, they can go much colder. The key is just to keep your spare batteries in an inside pocket so that they stay warm. Back in the M8.2 days, there’s been times where the batteries would be crapping out in at -20°C after some shooting and I’d had to literally stick them into my armpits to warm them up to get a few more shots but I haven’t had to do that on the M10 or anything newer.

I’ve taken M/SL/Q cameras on hikes, climbs, and I’ve skied with both the SL and Q. The only thing I would shy away from on the M is skiing because if I take a fall, I don’t want to risk throwing off the rangefinder. That’s literally the only reason I don’t ski with the M10. If I’m ice climbing, the camera stays in the bag until I’m in a safe spot and I’ll take it out to take photos. If I’m hiking or scrambling, I generally have the camera out slung across my body diagonally to keep it from bouncing around while walking. The only time I put my camera in a bag is if I need to go up a chimney or run down a scree slope where I don’t want to bang my camera into the rocks while shimmying up some narrow sections or get the camera super dusty. In such case, I just toss the body in a beanie/hat and put it in my backpack and as soon as I’m clear, I’ll take the camera back out. Or if it’s a short section, I may hand the camera off to a friend. When I’m hiking/climbing/skiing, I never carry a proper camera bag. Since I’m usually going fairly light, I’ll just put the body/lenses in a padded pouch that goes in my backpack.

Biggest limitation with Canon and SL gear is just the weight and bulk. Sometimes, I just don’t have enough space or I can’t afford to carry so much weight for long days in the mountains. If I’m looking to move fast and carry minimal gear for an extended long day, the Q3 is perfect for this, especially in the Rockies. These days, if I’m in the mountains, I’m normally carrying either SL2-S + 24-90, SL2-S + 16-35, or Q3. Since getting the Q3, I’ve mostly been using that in place of the SL2-S partly because of the compactness and weight, but also because of the higher resolution camera. Also with LR panorama stitching, I don’t really need a super wide angle unless I’m shooting moving subjects so the Q3 works pretty well most of the time. I’ve done some 300+ MP panoramas with the Q3 and they look great with the latest panoramas stitching algorithms from LR.

[rangerider]

11 minutes ago, beewee said:

I don’t really shoot BIF so from an AF point of view, I mainly shoot AFs on all my cameras. Since the SL3 is not officially out yet, only time will tell how it competes with Canon/Nikon/Sony.  I can imagine if I really wanted to have a BIF rig, I’d probably go either Sony A1 or Nikon Z8/Z9 as they have some very impressive eye tracking for moving subjects but I’ve never felt such need. As far as wildlife goes, I’d consider myself more of an opportunistic shooter and I’m not one to seek out wildlife to shoot. If I know there’s a good likelihood of seeing some wildlife, I may take a 300/2.8 + TEs and keep them in the car but I’m not one to hike with such a rig.

I went to Leica for 2 main reasons. High quality glass and good, sensible, and consistent ergonomics. Sony is definitely the front runner in terms of absolute mirrorless capability and their glass is up there with Leica but the menu system and ergonomics is a dealbreaker for me. I know they’ve improved but it’s still maddening and the fact that every camera they release has a slightly different menu system would drive me nuts. It’s also one reason I don’t use Android because every Android phone has a different look and feel whereas iPhones have had a consistent interface since the beginning so I don’t need to relearn the interface each time I get a new camera.

I’ve honestly never had trouble with build quality of cameras. Granted, I’m usually on the mid-upper tier bodies. I don’t abuse my gear but I’m also not babying it either. If anything, the one time I’ve actually had to get a lens repaired was a Leica 35 Summilux ASPH which literally separated into 2 pieces cuz some screws came loose inside. I had it repaired and CLA’ed and now it’s good as new but it just goes to show that anything can ‘break’. 

For my Canon 5Dm2 system, I had the 16-35/2.8, 70-200/2.8 IS, and 300/2.8 IS. Back in the day, Canon’s wide angle was the weakest so when I got the M10, I pretty much stopped using the 16-35 completely. When I got the SL2-S and 90-280 SL, I stopped using the 70-200/2.8 IS. I’ve since sold both Canon zooms and only keep the 300/2.8 IS around for wildlife. The only reason I even have the 5Dm2 is because of AF on the 300/2.8 IS. If the SL3 can focus as well as the 5Dm2 with the 300/2.8 IS + Sigma EF to L-mount adapter, I’d likely get rid of the 5Dm2 as well.

I don’t have anything against the 5Dm2. It has really good colors and it hasn’t let me down on ruggedness but I like having a very consistent interface across the M/SL/Q cameras and it’s more natural to switch between them. Also, the fact that the SL and Q share the same batteries mean there are less extra batteries and chargers to carry. Canon’s 300/2.8 IS was one of their sharpest lenses at the time and still holds up well, especially without extenders. And even with the 1.4x extender, it’s still very good. With good high ISO performance on current generation cameras like the SL2-S, I find there’s not much of a need to have f/2.8 so the 90-280 SL is a more flexible option if I don’t need to go beyond 300mm. However, for proper wildlife photography, I’d want something more around 400-500mm. With the Sigma 500/5.6 now on the market, I think between the 90-280 SL and 500/5.6, they could probably take the place of the Canon 5Dm2 with 300/2.8 IS. If I were to say go on a safari trip, I’d probably just get the SL3 + 500/5.6 and call it done. As good as the Canon 300/2.8 is, it’s big, heavy, and a pain to lug around especially if I’m already carrying a 24-90 + 90-280.

I think part of the ‘Leica magic’ is not just in the glass but the color filter array used on the sensors as well as the image processing pipeline. Leica has been known to customize their color filter and micro lens arrays even if the sensors are based on ‘off-the-shelf’ versions from Sony and other sensor manufacturers. Although I don’t own any Sony bodies myself, I’ve downloaded raw images from A1 and A7R5 and tried to edit them in LR just to get a sense of their colors and malleability and I find the Sony files harder to work with. Maybe I’ve grown accustomed to the Leica color science, or maybe it just suits my taste and it’s very close to where I want my colors so I find when it comes to editing Leica files, I don’t have to do much adjustments in LR to get the images looking the way I want.

Sigma has been putting out some truly impressive lenses over the past few years, ever since they started shipping DG DN lenses. Their 24/3.5 DG DN is every bit as sharp as the 24 SEM on the M10 and I’ve stress tested it in 100MP multi-shot mode and it holds up nicely to the corners when stopped down. Their 14-24/2.8 DG DN is sharp to the corners wide open. In fact the shot of the milky way that I shared in my earlier post was taken with the Sigma 14-24/2.8. Would I buy the Leica version if it were available when I purchased the Sigma? Maybe? But I got the Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN before Leica had their rebadged version and it is very bit as good as the 16-35 SL for all equivalent focal lengths and aperture values. I spent an afternoon last summer doing side-by-side testing against all the L-mount lenses that I had and compared them in 100 MP multi-shot mode and the Sigma glass can hold its own from a sharpness point of view.

The only lens that truly stands out from the rest was the 28 APO SL which is head and shoulders more sharper than any of the native L-mount lenses that I currently own. If anything, the reason to get into the L-mount system is really for the APO SL primes. Otherwise, if you can live with the Sony menu system and the Sony color science is your jam, then I don’t see any reason to buy into the L-mount system. For me, L-mount makes sense in that I’ve always liked the Leica ergonomics, color science, and the Sigma makes some top notch glass that I’d be happy mounting to the SL bodies. The biggest factor for me is actually the fact that Sigma is part of the L-mount alliance. There’s no way Leica would be able to build out a full lens line-up for L-mount on their own and even if they did, I wouldn’t be able to afford such a system. With Sigma in the game, I have options. I can build up a core kit with Leica glass (SL zooms and APO SL primes) and then fill the gaps with Sigma. To be frank, I wouldn’t have bought into the L-mount system if Sigma wasn’t part of the L-mount alliance.

Like I mentioned earlier, I don’t baby my gear and the only time I’ve actually experienced legit, ‘catastrophic’ equipment failure was with the 35 Lux and this is over the span of 15 years. The closest I’ve gotten to breaking anything else was shooting with the M8.2 in pouring rain in Norway and Alaska. I know the M8.2 is not weather sealed but, like I said, I don’t baby my gear. I buy camera gear to shoot and not to keep in a bag or a cabinet. Weather sealing on the M10 was a big reason for me to upgrade from the M8.2.

In my experience, the hardest conditions on camera gear is generally rain and dust. Cold and snow is actually not that bad. As long as the camera is acclimated to the outside temperature , you can toss a camera in the snow and it’s not going to impact it because the snow will just brush off. It’s not like the snow will melt and drown the camera. Although most cameras are rated down to 0°C or -10°C, they can go much colder. The key is just to keep your spare batteries in an inside pocket so that they stay warm. Back in the M8.2 days, there’s been times where the batteries would be crapping out in at -20°C after some shooting and I’d had to literally stick them into my armpits to warm them up to get a few more shots but I haven’t had to do that on the M10 or anything newer.

I’ve taken M/SL/Q cameras on hikes, climbs, and I’ve skied with both the SL and Q. The only thing I would shy away from on the M is skiing because if I take a fall, I don’t want to risk throwing off the rangefinder. That’s literally the only reason I don’t ski with the M10. If I’m ice climbing, the camera stays in the bag until I’m in a safe spot and I’ll take it out to take photos. If I’m hiking or scrambling, I generally have the camera out slung across my body diagonally to keep it from bouncing around while walking. The only time I put my camera in a bag is if I need to go up a chimney or run down a scree slope where I don’t want to bang my camera into the rocks while shimmying up some narrow sections or get the camera super dusty. In such case, I just toss the body in a beanie/hat and put it in my backpack and as soon as I’m clear, I’ll take the camera back out. Or if it’s a short section, I may hand the camera off to a friend. When I’m hiking/climbing/skiing, I never carry a proper camera bag. Since I’m usually going fairly light, I’ll just put the body/lenses in a padded pouch that goes in my backpack.

Biggest limitation with Canon and SL gear is just the weight and bulk. Sometimes, I just don’t have enough space or I can’t afford to carry so much weight for long days in the mountains. If I’m looking to move fast and carry minimal gear for an extended long day, the Q3 is perfect for this, especially in the Rockies. These days, if I’m in the mountains, I’m normally carrying either SL2-S + 24-90, SL2-S + 16-35, or Q3. Since getting the Q3, I’ve mostly been using that in place of the SL2-S partly because of the compactness and weight, but also because of the higher resolution camera. Also with LR panorama stitching, I don’t really need a super wide angle unless I’m shooting moving subjects so the Q3 works pretty well most of the time. I’ve done some 300+ MP panoramas with the Q3 and they look great with the latest panoramas stitching algorithms from LR.

Thanks for all your input.

[jaapv]

1 minute ago, rangerider said:

how it competes with Canon/Nikon/Sony.

Lumix? The superior stabilization and high-level AF have convinced me.
I would defer my speculation to the time that we actually know what the SL3 is and does. Rumours have a habit of being...erm...rumours.

[dpitt]

6 hours ago, beewee said:

I think part of the ‘Leica magic’ is not just in the glass but the color filter array used on the sensors as well as the image processing pipeline. Leica has been known to customize their color filter and micro lens arrays even if the sensors are based on ‘off-the-shelf’ versions from Sony and other sensor manufacturers.

This.
I have been using Leica glass on other brand bodies for years (Nikon, Canon, Lumix/Pana, Fuji) and the results are never the same. Not only for wides where micro lens arrays matter, but also with standard/tele lenses where it is only the filter stack. OOC , the Leica files always look sharper, better colors and their DNG files are much more mallable in PP. This in effect made me prefer the files from the R8+DMR (10MP) to the files from a Nikon D800 (36 MP). Both were shot with the same type of Summicron 50 R lens. One obviously converted to Nikon mount.

I see Leica made some extra efforts in the M line and now the SL series to keep this advantage.

So even if you find a magical Leica lens, part of the magic is gone if you use it on other brands.

6 hours ago, beewee said:

Sigma has been putting out some truly impressive lenses over the past few years, ever since they started shipping DG DN lenses.

Disclaimer: I do not own a Sigma L lens.
From what I see online, even on this forum this seems to be true for the sharpness and color part. But to my eyes, the Sigma images always look more flat, less 3D compared to the best SL lenses. Maybe this impression would be less prominent with full resolution on my monitor, but I doubt it. Of course it is up for debate if this justifies the difference in price.

Edited February 26 by dpitt

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[52K]

21 hours ago, la1402 said:

I had the SL2S and several Ms. The SL is a repackaged Panasonic and never will have the sentimental or collectible value like the M. Results and UI are very good and in many aspects better than the M, though. The APO lenses are great and better than their M counterparts., but very big and heavy. The repackaged Sigma and Pana SL lenses make no sense at double the price for the Leica Logo - then I’d much rather buy the originals. 

Concise and accurate, and I totally agree.

The APO SL lenses are the best I've ever used. The Vario Elmarit 24-70 is a re-badged Sigma and also a 'dust-hoover'. I ended up getting rid of mine and swapping it for a Panasonic. Using Ms for all my personal projects, my SL2-S was used almost exclusively for paid commissions. The image quality is outstanding especially with the APO prime lenses but it's hard to get around the weight, size and cost issue. I've been a fan and user of Leica for many years but the offerings from other manufacturers are leaving Leica behind in the pro-mirrorless arena and hard to ignore. The SL3 brings too little, too late in my opinion.