Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Most professionals and artists I know are more concerned with handling and lens quality and flexibility than they are the bleeding edge technical advancements. As a printer I can tell you that there really hasn't been a pro camera since 2015 or earlier that wasn't capable of beautiful prints. Most professional video people I know have no interest in 8k, some are not even that interested in 4k. None of them use autofocus for video at all. Most of them don't really look at any stills focused mirrorless camera as a viable professional tool. They are using Arri, RED or Blackmagic etc. I don't know what the SL3S will be, but I am sure that the people using it well will be more interested in the sum total of its parts, rather than the most extreme technical boundaries of the body. That is generally more of interest to amateurs anyway. If you want the most bleeding edge tech there are better companies to chase. Leica has always been more focused on utility/ergonomics, overall build and image quality. And Leica certainly has been a leader in some ways. If I recall they were the first with a high resolution viewfinder in the SL, and the second with full frame 4k...it might have been the first internal? I believe the A7S was external 4k only. Either way, the SL was three years before Canon and Nikon. I think you are mistaking focusing on different areas with being out of date.

very true.. i noticed that videographers were not interested of sharpest lenses aka APO.

40yr old R-lenses are quite popular as conversion lenses for video. Typical video lenses are not very sharp but good enough for them. Even the chinese ones :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 2 Stunden schrieb BernardC:

The SL3-S will be one of the very best low-light shooters on the market, as were the SL and SL2-S in their time. On top of that it will have improved AF for those who need it, and class-leading video.

 

So we are back to technical features then?😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, tomasis7 said:

very true.. i noticed that videographers were not interested of sharpest lenses aka APO.

40yr old R-lenses are quite popular as conversion lenses for video. Typical video lenses are not very sharp but good enough for them. Even the chinese ones :D

Video has limited resolution (UHD is around 8 megapixels), and also sharpness rarely works as a narrative tool. The only sub-genre that exploits sharpness are demo reels looped in electronics stores, and "the world in 4K" (or 8K) nature films.

One of my all-time favourite video lenses is a 1970s Zeiss 18mm. It's not the sharpest thing, but the way it responds to backlight is magical. Light envelops the subject like a warm blanket, it shimmers during camera moves, and it adds a layer of "atmosphere" like a smoke machine.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ex Orient Lux said:

And now, with the SL3-S, they are bringing out another camera that continues to lag behind the technology leaders in terms of technical features (autofocus, clinging to a 24 MB sensor that is no longer state-of-the-art because the 60 MB sensor cannot be managed) in the photo sector and also fails to convince demanding professionals when it comes to video. Unfortunately, neither fish nor fowl.


So, who is this camera for? The ‘discerning amateur’?

Well, I guess I'm what you call a "demanding professional." Based on my past work, I used a mirrorless camera for precisely one (small) client-paying project: my SL2-S when it was new, which I took out for a spin to find out what it could do. And it worked flawlessly. Will I use it again? No. I'm doing what I always did: rent an Arri (or have the producers rent an Arri). So yes, the "demanding professional" won't use any of the current crop of mirrorless, including Leica's upcoming SL3-S.

Will I swap my SL2-S with its very out-of-date sensor for a less out-of-date sensor (24MP–yikes!)? No. Why? Because it does what I expect it to do: help me make fantastic digital pictures. Sadly, how fantastic they are depends on me. That burden cannot be taken off my back with whatever state-of-the-art sensor. So here I am, lost at what to eat: fish or fowl? 

---

To answer your question, yes, the camera is priced and specced for the "discerning amateur." Also, maybe a "demanding professional" might buy it for the joy of using a Leica-vised version of a mirrorless everyday digital camera from an unfortunate alliance with Panasonic. If I were still in that market, I'd buy it. Stupid, I know. But I'd do it. Perhaps I'm not discerning enough. 

Edited by hansvons
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Who will buy the SL3-S? Probably the same kind of people who bought the SL2-S. Some of those who bought the SL2-S may make the change. 
I'm just waiting to see what it will do differently. I am content with what the SL2-S does, but if I didn't have it, then I'd go for the new model.

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the topic of who wants to buy this camera - I have SL3.  Also use M. But want now a backup camera and also one for night photography. I really loved Q3 43 that I tested for a few weeks, but I don’t need it as I have plenty of M lenses.  Also when I am on a shoot, what a good thing to have two bodies with different lenses. So for me, SL3-S is just a perfect addition at the price of Q3 (as some people will say - why do you need two bodies, but will come let’s say with SL3 and Q).

 

P.S. or three bodies 😂

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 by Postelnikov
  • Like 6
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Postelnikov said:

In the topic of who wants to buy this camera - I have SL3.  Also use M. But want now a backup camera and also one for night photography. I really loved Q3 43 that I tested for a few weeks, but I don’t need it as I have plenty of M lenses.  Also when I am on a shoot, what a good thing to have two bodies with different lenses. So for me, SL3-S is just a perfect addition at the price of Q3 (as some people will say - why do you need two bodies, but will come let’s say with SL3 and Q).

 

P.S. or three bodies 😂

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!

Plus the one you took the photo with!

  • Haha 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the attraction of SL3-S will be a lower price, faster readout (faster AF?), better video (?), and good enough resolution. 

The distinction of SL2-S was that it had better low-exposure DR. That is probably not the case with the SL3 series.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I‘m going to buy the Camera on Thursday. I bought an m last year after years of shooting with Sony. I just love the way the camera feels and how it affects me in the way i take photos. That is something Sony never did. The SL3s checks all the boxes for me. 24mp is enough… even though I’d like to have a bit more. But low light plus af ist the most important for me. 
Im going to use it with my m 35 2.0 apo and 50 1.4 summilux. Going to buy either the 24-70 or 24-90 to complete my setup. Still unsure which might be better for me. 
 

Even though there are several technical more advanced systems on the market. I could not think of another camera for me. I want to enjoy the process. I think it will do exactly that. 
 

Greetings

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

26 minutes ago, DonDonkey83 said:

I‘m going to buy the Camera on Thursday. I bought an m last year after years of shooting with Sony. I just love the way the camera feels and how it affects me in the way i take photos. That is something Sony never did. The SL3s checks all the boxes for me. 24mp is enough… even though I’d like to have a bit more. But low light plus af ist the most important for me. 
Im going to use it with my m 35 2.0 apo and 50 1.4 summilux. Going to buy either the 24-70 or 24-90 to complete my setup. Still unsure which might be better for me. 
 

Even though there are several technical more advanced systems on the market. I could not think of another camera for me. I want to enjoy the process. I think it will do exactly that. 
 

Greetings

Well said! I would think that you are not the only one here on the forum (and elsewhere) buying the camera on Thursday... Enjoy!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tom0511 said:

For me the question would be how good the AF really is.

We 'only' have that the AF is 'crazy good'... (remains to be seen whether the craziness is related to existing SL-bodies or Lumix-bodies or the top players out there; personally I am happy with a real/significant improvement over SL3s AF-C):

 

Edited by helged
Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, helged said:

We 'only' have that the AF is 'crazy good'... (remains to see whether the craziness is related to existing SL-bodies or Lumix-bodies or the top players out there; personally I am happy with a real/significant improvement over SL3s AF-C):

 

I fear that AF will never be good enough for some ….

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...