Why I gave up on the Leica SL3

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Which means that I don't complain about a hammer not being able to drive a screw.

That's the USP of the SL series - even without a battery they make great hammers, self-defence weapons, ship anchors and objects to throw at cats in the middle of the night.

[jaapv]

Yes - it replaces my R3 mot. 😊

 

[kiwidad]

14 hours ago, JohnSantaF4 said:

I am curious why anyone would expect mediocre autofocus from a "state of the art, modern autofocus camera" from Lecia or anyone else at this super-premium price point? why wouldn't a buyer expect simply the best? 

Itr all is a matter of opinion. I can name 5 cars that can do over 200mph and people who will never drive of 70mph argue over which is best. Seems to be the case here!

[jonoslack]

12 minutes ago, kiwidad said:

Itr all is a matter of opinion. I can name 5 cars that can do over 200mph and people who will never drive of 70mph argue over which is best. Seems to be the case here!

Nicely put! - I went around the houses looking at cameras with fast AF (Sony A1, OM-1 ii and others) . . .  which at least gave me some perspective on this. . . But I only need AF to be accurate (which it is) and reasonably quick (which it is) - not shooting baseball or birds in flight . . . . . and there are no other lenses like the SL lenses (lighter ones, sure). 

[Markey]

4 hours ago, JTLeica said:

But it doesnt fall short. Its falls short in just one way. In others it excels. I still cant understand how people are expecting one camera to be best at everything. Nothing in life is best at everything.

For me it stems from the fact that if you are going to provide AF it is reasonable to expect it to be at least on par with that offered by the rest of the market. I still have not heard any explanation as to why Leica cannot do this.

Is the technology difficult ?

Whenever this subject is raised nobody has addresses that instead the reply is  .... buy a different camera or deploy different skills.

Can`t argue with any of that but the question remains why is Leica so uncompetitive in the rather important area.

I`m curious.

Just trying to understand the logic.

 

 

Edited November 12, 2024 by Markey

[Markey]

4 hours ago, JTLeica said:

But it doesnt fall short. Its falls short in just one way. In others it excels. I still cant understand how people are expecting one camera to be best at everything. Nothing in life is best at everything.

Yes but I would regard its ability to focus accurately to be a reasonable priority.

People may differ about this.... far enough.

[Luke_Miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

18 minutes ago, Markey said:

Yes but I would regard its ability to focus accurately to be a reasonable priority.

Certainly a reasonable expectation.  I have no insight into Leica's design criteria, but contrast detect autofocus is the most precise.  My Nikon bodies have a "pinpoint autofocus" mode in which phase detect is disabled and only contrast detect is used.  Phase detect is faster, but less precise.  Some systems use both, starting with phase detect and shifting to  contrast detect as the last step.  

I have no experience with the SL3, so can't comment on its autofocus performance.  My SL2 & SL2-S bodies produce amazing in-focus images in my event shooting.  They really bring out the  best from my Leica L-mount lenses, especially the 'Lux 50.  For active subjects, say on a water slide or running, the keeper rate goes down (but not to zero) since the focus can't always keep up. As Leica refines the SL3 phase detect autofocus performance I expect it will perform better with active subjects.  But in my opinion it will never reach the level of the cameras normally used for sports and action photography. I expect that the design compromises between speed and precision will remain biased towards the precision side.

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, Markey said:

Yes but I would regard its ability to focus accurately to be a reasonable priority.

People may differ about this.... far enough.

Totally reasonable expectation... But by not providing all of the story there you are removing the context which is all important. It focusses perfectly accurately in AFs, I have not missed any shots with AFs. It's even more accurate than the Z7 it replaced, just use Pinpoint AF, in single focus mode and you have fast and accurate focus. That is just the facts.

I have only tried AFC with the 75mm APO, and it failed, but I was shooting a stupidly fast dog running around. That lens isnt ideal for that anyway. Maybe it's better with other lenses like the 24-70 or 70-200. I expect it is.

But when you say 'up to par with the rest of the market' you really must clarify what you mean. It's on par with AFs. As said in a previous post, in fact several, it's superb using the pinpoint AF mode. It's super fast, extremely accurate and most importantly I have 100% faith in it. I have used it to shoot the milky way in darkness, using pinpoint, and it locked better than the Z7II I had before, and that camera has its own night focus mode that it engaged.

So... It's on par for me. In fact its better than my previous camera, that was more than enough for me already.

What you cannot expect though, is that it's best at everything which is what this thread is essentially complaining about.

Go and get the 'best' Sony camera and you will be forgoing UI, resale, reliability (I have had 3 Sony products fail), APO lenses, for me ergonomics... But great, you have fast AFC tracking that 5% of the users actually need.

Anyone that doesnt have the SL3, really shouldnt be commenting on its AF performance. I am a user and have shot a tonne of images with it so far, without a hint of thought of poor AF.

Also, until very recently. Sony's best AF was only in its A9 and A1. Its trickled down over time...

Can you expect Leica to just snap their fingers and be on par with their 3rd camera? Sony have released probably 100 mirrorless cameras to Leicas 10.

Edited November 12, 2024 by JTLeica

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, jonoslack said:

Nicely put! - I went around the houses looking at cameras with fast AF (Sony A1, OM-1 ii and others) . . .  which at least gave me some perspective on this. . . But I only need AF to be accurate (which it is) and reasonably quick (which it is) - not shooting baseball or birds in flight . . . . . and there are no other lenses like the SL lenses (lighter ones, sure). 

This is right yes. It's as simple as, those that need it, need it, and those that dont, dont. But theres a large section of the market that like to have it, and not use it, yet moan when it's not there.

I've yet to find a friend interested in me bragging over the fastest autofocus...

[BernardC]

There are several factors at play here. One of them is that Leica is an "expensive camera," and many users expect such a device to be fully optimized out of the box. Not all users, just some. As a counterpoint, professionals sports photographers need several weeks to fine-tune the AF on their new Canons and Nikons. Everybody's expectations are different, so its unavoidable that someone feels left-out, no matter how the product performs.

Another factor is that there's more than one metric for "good AF." For instance I've posted a link before where a very experienced creator thinks that Panasonic has better video AF than the competition. The SL3 isn't a video-centric camera (even though the specs are good), so that's irrelevant for now, but it will be important when the SL3-s comes out. That's partly why we get to read arguments where one person claims that a camera is useless, and others respond that it works just fine.

Third, and this is also related to the "very expensive camera" meme, let's not forget that the camera/lens is just a tool. When I was much younger I had the pleasure of hanging out with the last vestiges of a generation that bought view cameras and densitometers in order to shoot just like Ansel, or just like Minor White, or other famous large format photographers. It's a commendable goal, and some of them were very good, but equipment is only a small part of the process.

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Markey said:

Yes but I would regard its ability to focus accurately to be a reasonable priority.

Accuracy is different from speed, even though people often use the terms interchangeably.

[jonoslack]

3 hours ago, Markey said:

Yes but I would regard its ability to focus accurately to be a reasonable priority.

People may differ about this.... far enough.

As far as I can see the AF on the SL3 is absolutely accurate - better than most of the other cameras I've tried. It just isn't as fast as some other cameras. 

[Stephen.s1]

ummmm... I wonder if the Swiss Army Knife company would give some thought to dipping it's toe in the camera biz...

[FlashGordonPhotography]

14 hours ago, Cronilux said:

Bro, don’t make a fool out of yourself. I can get all the pictures I want with it, but it it’s just annoying to have old tech in such an expensive camera. I can easily work around all the flaws and still think it’s sad the camera can’t do, what other cameras with the same specs can.

And yes, Leica just has not the software yet, to compete with the biggest, when it comes to AF. Period. You can cry as much as you want, that won’t change the facts. 

How can someone argue about the short comings of the AF and mention manual focus in the same sentence? That’s hilarious. Yes, I enjoy manual focus on an M. Didn’t you talk about intended use?

BTW, „Mr. I know it all“ The S9 has the same IBIS as the S5II. It is incredible and you can easily vlog with it hand hold, while applying LUTs in real time. 

You are not better, than anyone else. You are just someone with severe GAS like a lot of us and you can’t take it, that someone dislikes some features of a camera you bought. You are on a very high horse, but make a fool out of yourself with your conclusions, that don’t even make sense. 

I am a professional photographer for a very long time now and make multi six figures every year with it. I am good. Really. I don’t have any hard feelings, but your attacks are laughable. 

 

13 hours ago, satijntje said:

For IBIS, you are 100% wrong sir.
The S9 has definitively a fantastic IBIS.
My family members (and myself too) love this small camera and it’s the most used camera in our family I can assure you.
And 24MP is sufficient for our printing as we do not print billboard size.

 

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!

Apologies. I was incorrect on the IBIS.

 

Gordon

[Markey]

Thank you for all the replies to my post.

I understand the issue better now.

Oh and mea culpa I should have been more precise ... it was speed which I had in mind.

Edited November 12, 2024 by Markey

[FlashGordonPhotography]

13 hours ago, Smogg said:

I'm going to stick something convex on the back with double sided tape.

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!

Maybe something like Sugru?

https://www.amazon.com.au/Sugru-Moldable-Multi-Purpose-Glue-Creative/dp/B089WHGQDP/ref=asc_df_B089WHGQDP/?tag=googleshopdsk-22&linkCode=df0&hvadid=712358871977&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=7105671425897340645&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=t&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9072186&hvtargid=pla-1063026617891&psc=1&mcid=91f21c91a2e73c8b9f3d9f18b60d76be&gad_source=1

Gordon

[Smogg]

5 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Maybe something like Sugru?

https://www.amazon.com.au/Sugru-Moldable-Multi-Purpose-Glue-Creative/dp/B089WHGQDP/ref=asc_df_B089WHGQDP/?tag=googleshopdsk-22&linkCode=df0&hvadid=712358871977&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=7105671425897340645&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=t&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9072186&hvtargid=pla-1063026617891&psc=1&mcid=91f21c91a2e73c8b9f3d9f18b60d76be&gad_source=1

Gordon

Wow! Thank you!

[Simone_DF]

23 hours ago, Markey said:

For me it stems from the fact that if you are going to provide AF it is reasonable to expect it to be at least on par with that offered by the rest of the market. I still have not heard any explanation as to why Leica cannot do this.

Is the technology difficult ?

Whenever this subject is raised nobody has addresses that instead the reply is  .... buy a different camera or deploy different skills.

Can`t argue with any of that but the question remains why is Leica so uncompetitive in the rather important area.

I`m curious.

Just trying to understand the logic.

Mine is only an educated guess, so take it with a grain of salt, but I've been working in software and hardware products for 20 years and I think the main issue is that Leica doesn't develop their own autofocus, but implements Panasonic's AF. Leica engineers have to adapt the autofocus to run on the SL and Q platforms, and I suspect that there's no unified timeline between the two brands, so it's Panasonic first, Leica later. Or it could simply be that Panasonic has a higher headcounts, say 10 engineers, and Leica only 2, and therefore any release and improvements takes longer to be implemented for Leica.

But at the end of the day, if we look at the previous generation, by EOL the gap was closed. For a while I used both a SL2-S and a S5, and while I found the S5 to be a hair ahead, it didn't really make a substantial difference in an everyday scenario, and I'd expect the same to happen now. Panasonic ahead of the game, Leica playing catch up, but eventually they'll reach parity or comparable performance.

[Simone_DF]

21 hours ago, JTLeica said:

Anyone that doesnt have the SL3, really shouldnt be commenting on its AF performance. I am a user and have shot a tonne of images with it so far, without a hint of thought of poor AF.

Also, until very recently. Sony's best AF was only in its A9 and A1. Its trickled down over time...

Can you expect Leica to just snap their fingers and be on par with their 3rd camera? Sony have released probably 100 mirrorless cameras to Leicas 10.

Gotta love gaslighting. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Ko.Fe.]

On 7/17/2024 at 11:57 AM, geesbert said:

Ever since the first SL came out I loved the appearance of this system, but especially those huge lenses and way too large bodies put me off. I have small hands an I am a weakling, so the SL and the SL2 were not for me.

I am shooting M and Q and CL and Canon R, but staying within one ecosystem was very tempting, so when the SL3 cam out I bought it and a boatload of Sigma contemporary primes, which I absolutely love.

 

the first couple of days I had the usual fresh love syndrome, especially switching between Q3 and SL3 seemed seamless. So after a while I used it on some paid jobs and absolutely hated it.

AF is weak in any but the best light situation, especially face detection really misses most of the time when shooting fast. WB and exposure is mediocre.

If I compare that to my Canon r5 it means so much more work and sweat while shooting and in postprocessing. 

Another big problem is the lacking ergonomics, my hands are so much more tired after a few hours of shooting, it reminds me of shooting the Hasselblad H years ago, the worst camera I have used in that respect. When you sling the SL3 over the shoulder, there is always one of its corners biting into my back. 

I still think it is the most beautiful camera made at the moment, but for a working pro it doesn't deliver. 

So I sold it and preordered two R5 mk2. 

 

It is hard to get something else after Canon. If I have assignment I use 5D MK II. To me all of those face eyes recognitions are obstacles. I trust only myself and DOF

I still haven't decided if I want SL 601 or original body shape Sony A7S Just for casual wearing