SL Typ 601 in 2024

[steelephotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all, I am new to the forum so I hope this is in the right place,

 

I have really started to find my footing with photography and got a Leica D-Lux 4 to complement my Canon R50. I love my Canon but I am more motivated to shoot with my Leica, and I love the results from many Leica cameras, but don’t have an infinite budget by any means. This led me to the SL 601. I mostly shoot stills and any video would be handled well by my R50, so the IBIS seems less relevant. However, I hear mixed reviews online regarding performance and how well it has held up for 2024 standards
 

So, I thought I’d turn to the experts. What do you all think of its future usefulness, and would a roughly $1.7k USD investment in the body plus a Sigma 24-70 2.8 be worthwhile?

 

Thank you for your input!

Edited May 7, 2024 by steelephotography

[Advertisement]

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

[dpitt]

Welcome to this forum.

Let me first point out that there is a lot of technical info on our wiki about anything Leica produced in the last hundred years. For each item there are specs and links to usefult discussions on this forum: Leica Wiki

I am a late adapter to anything Leica, mostly for budget reasons, but sometimes also for IQ reasons. One example is that I am still perfectly happy with my M9 which was released in 2009, so when I purchased my Leica SL(601) last year, it was one of my youngest Leica's. I love it, and I think it will be relevant for many years to come.

I mainly use it with my older manual focus R lenses, but occasionally I use an M lens too. I think it is a very capable camera, and at lower ISO it produces stunning results. Since I use it mainly with fast primes, IBIS is not relevant and I mostly use it on ISO 50 or ISO 200. But it is great up to ISO 3200 if need be.

Regarding the future...
It is always hard to predict, depreciation of the SL series is faster than with the Leica M series, but still very good compared to mainstream brands. The price seems to have bottomed out because the introduction of the SL3 had more impact on the SL2 prices than on the SL(601) price. With the SL the build quality is excellent, software is very stable, ease of use is legendary. All these reasons make it future proof and in some area's better/more loved than the newer models.
I would not surprised if it will have the same fan club and revival my M9 experienced in a few years time, and I would not at all be surprised if a large percentage of the SL1 ever produced will be still in use 10 years from now. I think that I will keep it that long too. 

Regarding lenses, I have bought a Lumix 20-60 zoom, which I use on a lazy day. I think that I use an R lens 50% of the time, Leica M lens 30%, 10% for the Lumix 20-60 and 10% for other brands or types of lenses. FYI, I use a  mechanical adapter from URTH mainly, and would advise to start with that before going for the expensive Leica M-L or R-L adapters.

[jaapv]

I use a 601 and no newer SL and can only say that the camera holds up excellently to the point of appearing to be indestructible. From a photographical point of view the image quality is as good as any high-end camera of the last decade or longer. Yes, we have more pixels, dynamic range, better AF and a host of other advances, but if I look at the images in the forum ten years ago and now I see little to no photographic relevant  difference. I am sticking to my 601 and M9M/ M9 for the “ Leica essence “. If I want or need cutting edge performance there are more affordable options out there. 

[LeicaR10]

Steelephotography,   First, welcome to the Leica Forum.  Its a great place to learn and ask questions pertaining to your interests in many things Leica and other topics.  You will also find many well meaning, highly knowledgeable photographers who will offer their sage advice to include myself.  Second, you asked a great question and you will find better responses if you post your question in the "Leica L-Mount" thread, followed by the "Leica SL System" for posting.  You posted the question in the Leica S camera thread and its a different system.  Last, we look forward to seeing your photographs should you wish to post them in the SL601 Image thread.  r/ Mark

Edited May 7, 2024 by LeicaR10

[LocalHero1953]

Welcome to the forum!

I suggest the moderators move this question to the L subforum.

I owned the SL(601) and now have the SL2-S. There are two practical limitations of the SL601 compared to the later models that led to my decision to switch. The IBIS is a real benefit in stills, enabling hand-held shots at speeds much slower than 1/f. Some of the L-mount lenses have OIS which can compensate for its absence in the SL(601), but many do not. The SL2-S and (from my reading) SL3 are much better performers in low light and high ISO (much better shadow recovery, less ugly noise patterns). If these are not major issues for you at present, then the SL(601) will serve you well till obsession and addiction oblige you to upgrade, whatever the cost.

Edited May 7, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[tomasis7]

I bought SL 601 in the year 2024. Im positively surprised by the quality of both hardware and software. I say go for it! 

I also have a bunch of Leica lenses from 1970 and film Leica M bodies. I would suggest testing various M-mount lenses. Maybe Voigtlander. 

[AZN]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I still have and use the SL (Typ 601). Bought it in 2017 and still going strong.

I solely use it with manual focus lenses, R and M in roughly equal amounts.  If I want/ need AF then I use my Sonys.

I like the solid build and stable interface, and also how well it integrates with Capture One Pro. The built-in GPS is also handy, when it works 😃

No IBIS, but neither has my IIIG or M6 TTL or R9 or 501cm (!)

What I don't like though is the the low-light performance.  But it's good enough for my needs. After all, it's a vast improvement over what we had in the 1980's, when you had to push-develop ASA 400 film to ASA 1600 equivalent for the dark stuff…

[jaapv]

Don’t be put off by the AF comments. It may not be up to present-day sophistication and speed, but it is accurate and reliable and more than good enough for more than 90% of situations. The same about EVF. It’s actually more than sufficient for its purpose, which is composing the image. The detractors should be sentenced to three months shooting a Digilux2 🤣

[steelephotography]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Don’t be put off by the AF comments. It may not be up to present-day sophistication and speed, but it is accurate and reliable and more than good enough for more than 90% of situations. The same about EVF. It’s actually more than sufficient for its purpose, which is composing the image. The detractors should be sentenced to three months shooting a Digilux2 🤣

Haha I was looking at a Digilux before my D-Lux pick, sounds like I dodged a bullet there! Do you all have any specific zoom lens recommendations? I’d say my maximum price would be around $800 USD

[jaapv]

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1624216-REG/sigma_592965_28_70mm_f_2_8_contemporary_dg.html
 

actually my L walk-around lens. Amazing value for money. 

[steelephotography]

Ha! That was actually the one I was looking at. As much as I love the 24-90 I would never financially recover from purchasing one. 
 

Is there anything you wish the camera did that it doesn’t quite live up to? And do you shoot AF or MF?

[jaapv]

Both AF and MF.  I tend to change ISO with my nose…

[steelephotography]

Got it. I typically shoot AF, not quite as good at MF just yet, would like to learn zone focusing which I think this camera could help with

[dpitt]

For MF, use the magnification focus aid to focus. Focus peaking is too inaccurate for critical focus.
IMO learning to do MF is much easier with a real manual focus lens. Lots of options around.

All R lenses and M lenses and a multitude of old SLR lenses can be adapted. If you are on a budget, I would start with an old Nikkor, Canon or Zeiss 50mm lens. 50mm F2.0 or even F1.4 can be found very cheap. The Summicron 50mm F2.0 R (v1) is probably the cheapest way to get into vintage Leica glass for the SL. 
e.g. compare prices for the Summicron 50 M v3 with the Summicron 50 R v1, or the Elmarit 28mm F2.8 R with the Elmarit M 28 F2.8 pre-ASPH.

People need to understand that M lenses are different in design compared to normal DSLR or mirroless lenses. They need to be small and short because of viewfinder blockage, and they need to be made extremely accurate because of the RF coupling. They also have a MFD of 0,7 to 1m because the RF does not work for shorter distances. Also, M lenses can not do zoom or AF because of the RF. All this makes them more expensive without adding to the IQ of the output. And you do not use any of it on the SL bodies.

M lenses were designed to  last for ever and were always very good, so good that I would spend more on a 40 year old MF vintage Leica M lens than on most new L lenses from other brands, but the vintage R lenses give definitively more value for money and are in some cases even better than their M siblings.

If you do not already have a Leica M camera, there is no technical reason to go for an M lens, unless you want to make the combo compact and light. The SL is big and heavy to start with, so reducing the size of the lens does not help as much as on the M body.  Leica designed the SL series and L mount as a successor to their analog R series and also as a digital solution for R lens owners. It works great for that. Of course Leica being Leica they designed to the SL series also for use with their M range, which makes it the best mirrorless body to do that apart from a real M camera.
So if you buy your M lens to work with a digital or film M or if you plan to buy a digital M in the future, then investing in M glass for  the SL makes perfect sense. But if you are on a budget I would certainly consider going for R glass instead.

[2M6TTLs]

On 5/7/2024 at 11:42 AM, steelephotography said:

Hello all, I am new to the forum so I hope this is in the right place,

 

I have really started to find my footing with photography and got a Leica D-Lux 4 to complement my Canon R50. I love my Canon but I am more motivated to shoot with my Leica, and I love the results from many Leica cameras, but don’t have an infinite budget by any means. This led me to the SL 601. I mostly shoot stills and any video would be handled well by my R50, so the IBIS seems less relevant. However, I hear mixed reviews online regarding performance and how well it has held up for 2024 standards
 

So, I thought I’d turn to the experts. What do you all think of its future usefulness, and would a roughly $1.7k USD investment in the body plus a Sigma 24-70 2.8 be worthwhile?

 

Thank you for your input!

I'm still using my original Leica CL ( the film one! ) in 2024 so I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be using a Leica SL 601 for quite a few more years. It makes great  images.

You probably don't always need the latest features. With the SL cameras the quality and capability is there in all model variations.

[jaapv]

9 hours ago, steelephotography said:

Got it. I typically shoot AF, not quite as good at MF just yet, would like to learn zone focusing which I think this camera could help with

Zone focusing is the least accurate way of getting a more or less sharp image. It is made largely obsolete by the advent of autofocus cameras. It is meant for manual focus cameras in cases where the photographer is unable or unwilling to focus precisely. It is nothing more than setting aperture and lens to a DOF zone of acceptable unsharpness for the intended print size and take the image as the subject enters that zone. Which means that it is  basically controlled misfocus.
An AF camera  is not a tool that encourages zone focus. Best is a Brownie Box camera with a lens that can be set to four focus distance symbols: cartoon face, stick man, stick man family and mountain symbol. 

[tomasis7]

31 minutes ago, jaapv said:

It is meant for manual focus cameras in cases where the photographer is unable or unwilling to focus precisely. 

Not true. Zone focusing is much faster than the fastest AF system in the world. You preset the focus and capture the moment at 0.1ms. 

[jaapv]

You will miss critical focus more than 95% of the time.  Using a fix-focus camera or smart phone is even faster. You don't have to twiddle the aperture and focus ring.
Or use preset focus on an M and press the button  (30 ms before) the moment that your subject is sharp in the RF patch. 
Zone focus is spray and pray. Nobody would accept an AF system that gives zone focus results. The 601 is quite good at manual focus as it is designed to accept M lenses on an adapter.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[dpitt]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

You will miss critical focus more than 95% of the time.  Using a fix-focus camera or smart phone is even faster. You don't have to twiddle the aperture and focus ring.
Or use preset focus on an M and press the button  (30 ms before) the moment that your subject is sharp in the RF patch. 
Zone focus is spray and pray. Nobody would accept an AF system that gives zone focus results. The 601 is quite good at manual focus as it is designed to accept M lenses on an adapter.

Yes, you are right. Maybe the OP did not really mean hyperfocal or careless zone focusing. 

The MF lenses are ideal to get a feeling for DOF at different apertures and learning to estimate distances and what objects (or parts of the object) will be in focus.
When objects move very fast, you can make use of a sufficient large aperture and pre-focus at a distance where the object will pass...
Then you also have a system that is faster than any AF system, all you have to do is waiting for the object to enter your frame before clicking.

A variant of this technique is to focus at a certain distance, either by the scale on the lens or by focusing on an object that is at the desired distance. Then walk towards you objects and click when they are in the same distance. This works very well for candid photography.

I am not sure if this is strictly zone focusing but at least it aims for perfect focus with a bit of tolerance. I am not sure how good the best AF speed monsters would cope with the small amount of time I need to get a shot this way, but I am sure none of my current camera's can get the same percentage of keepers in AF mode as I do with my M9.

[steelephotography]

17 minutes ago, dpitt said:

Yes, you are right. Maybe the OP did not really mean hyperfocal or careless zone focusing. 

The MF lenses are ideal to get a feeling for DOF at different apertures and learning to estimate distances and what objects (or parts of the object) will be in focus.
When objects move very fast, you can make use of a sufficient large aperture and pre-focus at a distance where the object will pass...
Then you also have a system that is faster than any AF system, all you have to do is waiting for the object to enter your frame before clicking.

A variant of this technique is to focus at a certain distance, either by the scale on the lens or by focusing on an object that is at the desired distance. Then walk towards you objects and click when they are in the same distance. This works very well for candid photography.

I am not sure if this is strictly zone focusing but at least it aims for perfect focus with a bit of tolerance. I am not sure how good the best AF speed monsters would cope with the small amount of time I need to get a shot this way, but I am sure none of my current camera's can get the same percentage of keepers in AF mode as I do with my M9.

This is great info, I will definitely reference this in the future. As for the AF, I’ve been hearing a lot of negativity about the contrast focusing, is there any truth to that?