What if…the SL line and the L Mount Alliance didn’t exist?

[o2mpx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

23 hours ago, BWColor said:

Why did you ask this question?  Are you interested in alternative gear?

Thanks for all the responses. 

On the fence about getting rid/significantly reduce the SL setup: SL2, 16-35/24-90 zooms, Pana 20-60/24-105, Sigma 105 macro. The Pana zooms were a result of assembling a lighter weight carry than the native zooms (albeit not equal in terms of IQ), since travel landscapes are the main subjects.

If the SL2 set is gone, will be mainly using the X2D setup, and occasionally M10-R but the lack of ibis in the latter has drastically reduced usage lately. 

The other option is move to SL APO primes only, 21/35/90 and eliminate all other L Mount lenses; which is perhaps a good route to take, and upgrade to the SL3 if the setup is viable. The SL3 with APO’s might be a good alternative to the X2D setup, and if it’s close, perhaps eliminate the HB setup and end up with 2 systems (instead of currently 3) with the SL3 setup plus the M10-R (the latter more for nostalgia given it’s the last of the removable baseplate bodies).

At this moment, leaning more to the APO primes. 

 

Edited September 7, 2024 by o2mpx

[BWColor]

I understand wanting two systems vs three.
 I assume that you have used the new Hasselblad ‘v’ lenses and found the AF not sufficiently fast/accurate enough for your use case, or the lack of continuous AF to be a problem.  Also, there isn’t a 90mm equivalent  ‘v’ lens. I say this because I think that the X2D’s IBS and final image resolution is superior to the Leica’s.  Of course, unless you are printing really large prints, or like to crop images, the resolution advantage of the Hasselblad is of little use.

[jaapv]

Panasonic/Sigma. And M system. In fact I already use the system this way. SL and Panasonic are working side by side. CL is hovering in the background. M has its own use 

[BLeventhal]

Interesting to see such an aversion to Nikon and Canon.

One chooses the SL system because of the Leica optics, engineering, and design.  While I understand why a GFX with its large sensor might be an obvious 2nd in line, if one cares about optical performance and unique rendering, you should not overlook the Nikon ZF as body to which the 135 Plena or 58mm .95 Noct could be attached.

[dkCambridgeshire]

I'd likely still be using my former DMR / R8 – fitted with its new internal battery. My DMR was sold 18 months ago. And I'd still be using my former R 28-90mm, R 21-35mm, and R 280/4. And might also be using whichever other non-rangefinder ICL camera Leica introduced to replace its R series SLRs.

[BWColor]

51 minutes ago, BLeventhal said:

Interesting to see such an aversion to Nikon and Canon.

One chooses the SL system because of the Leica optics, engineering, and design.  While I understand why a GFX with its large sensor might be an obvious 2nd in line, if one cares about optical performance and unique rendering, you should not overlook the Nikon ZF as body to which the 135 Plena or 58mm .95 Noct could be attached.

I’ve owned Nikon film cameras and Canon professional digital cameras, but neither company has been cutting edge over the last decade.  I can understand looking to Sony as an alternative to the SL system and ten tears ago maybe Nikon and Canon.  Why is a 24Mpix camera a reasonable alternative and if it is, why not a Sony with a global shutter?  Sony optics are now world class.  With all of that said, both German and Swedish cameras tend to have a simpler and more sensible button and menu system.  It’s not my choice, but I can understand preferring the Japanese approach. Perhaps I will fault Hasselblad for not having a joystick, but I’m now used to using my thumb on the touchscreen.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, BLeventhal said:

Interesting to see such an aversion to Nikon and Canon.

One chooses the SL system because of the Leica optics, engineering, and design.  While I understand why a GFX with its large sensor might be an obvious 2nd in line, if one cares about optical performance and unique rendering, you should not overlook the Nikon ZF as body to which the 135 Plena or 58mm .95 Noct could be attached.

If I were choosing between the big three from scratch the Z8 would be at the top of my list. I already had the A1 but I think the Z8 is better overall, especially from a build quality pov. It's just that Nikon took their sweet time about it.

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

14 hours ago, o2mpx said:

Thanks for all the responses. 

On the fence about getting rid/significantly reduce the SL setup: SL2, 16-35/24-90 zooms, Pana 20-60/24-105, Sigma 105 macro. The Pana zooms were a result of assembling a lighter weight carry than the native zooms (albeit not equal in terms of IQ), since travel landscapes are the main subjects.

If the SL2 set is gone, will be mainly using the X2D setup, and occasionally M10-R but the lack of ibis in the latter has drastically reduced usage lately. 

The other option is move to SL APO primes only, 21/35/90 and eliminate all other L Mount lenses; which is perhaps a good route to take, and upgrade to the SL3 if the setup is viable. The SL3 with APO’s might be a good alternative to the X2D setup, and if it’s close, perhaps eliminate the HB setup and end up with 2 systems (instead of currently 3) with the SL3 setup plus the M10-R (the latter more for nostalgia given it’s the last of the removable baseplate bodies).

At this moment, leaning more to the APO primes. 

 

It's all about enjoyment, isn't it? Don't let logic ruin that. If you can afford it shoot what you want when you want.

Yes the SL3 with APO'S are as close as you'll get to the X2D in IQ and usability. It's not a smaller kit though. Slightly larger and heavier when I compare a 28, 50, 90 SL kit to a 28, 55, 90 X kit. There's the rather spectacular 135 which is a 105 equiv for your longer stuff. The X2D has more pliable files being 16 bit. The SL 3 is faster and has more lens options. I have 3 SL APO'S  but still prefer the X2D usually.

The SL3 and Panasonic's make a lot of sense for travel. Or the new 2.8 Sigmas. I just did my last trip with both the SL3 and X2D and didn't use the Hasselbald at all. I carried the SL16-35, Panny 24-105 and SL100-400. But it was a landscape kit. That doesn't mean I'm getting rid of my other systems. I keep what I enjoy. I don't have that thing where I need to be using it every day to justify keeping it.

I get that some really like small kits. Even a single camera and single lens. Go for it. But you can also prefer lots of gear and should do so without guilt if that's what you want to do. So get the APO's if you can afford them and then decide if the other stuff stays or goes.

Gordon

[o2mpx]

@FlashGordonPhotography interesting your mention of the A7CR plus the 20-70/70-200 f4 G zooms as I was also considering that for a light weight carry kit with 60mp resolution for landscapes. Decided to put a hold on the APO’s for now and went in with the camera + 2 zooms setup as B&H has a couple of them in the used area out of box condition. Planning to sell off the L Mount zooms to fund the Sony setup; retaining just the SL2 and 24-90 for now. If the small kit turns out well, clearly it won’t be equivalent to APO IQ, may exit the SL and zoom all together and use the X2D setup when need arises.