Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

31 minutes ago, pf4eva said:

What a joke from Leicas side... Cmon putting an old sensor with slow readout... what are they thinking about...

Which old sensor would that be? It has phase-detect like the S5ii, but readout is faster and low-light has improved.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BernardC said:

Which old sensor would that be? It has phase-detect like the S5ii, but readout is faster and low-light has improved.

S2-S, S5, S5II and SL3-S, sony A7III have the same old sensor, the only difference is some of them have its version with phase detection:

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry, the SL4-S will be sooooo much better. With 1,000,000 iso, the grain comparisons will be off the charts! Bookshelves, teddy bears, and brick walls will never have had it so good.

In the meantime you'll have the M12/P/M/D and SL4, Q4 etc to throw money at. And let's not forget the 'Reporters.' Or perhaps that elusive M-EVF that will have everyone trading in every Leica camera ever made for...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, pf4eva said:

S2-S, S5, S5II and SL3-S, sony A7III have the same old sensor, the only difference is some of them have its version with phase detection:

So the same, but different? The SL2-S and SL3-S have different low-light sensitivity, so the performance has improved even if the number of pixels (6000 x 4000) is the same. Read speed has improved over the years too.

To my mind, the main takeaway from PtP charts is that sensors don't really matter, unlike 15 years ago. Pick the system that has the lenses you want, that fits best in your hands, and that has most of the features you need.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For those that use their SL for M lenses, looks like the SL2-S will still be the king for now if you depend on magnified live view. I had thought the higher resolution of the SL3 was the issue with the low quality magnified live view, but it must be something more global in the firmware or hardware since it also affects the SL3-S. This is why I went back to the SL2-S from the SL3.

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!

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pf4eva said:

It will be the same as on S5II at best, most likely a bit behind, since FW updates go to Panasonic cameras first. In a nutshell, it is still crap in comparison to other cameras. here is an AF test:

 

I must go and wash my hands because despite derogatory posts the Panasonic crap is just fine in mine. I get a feeling that the detractors simply bought the wrong camera for their wishes. If you like Sony performance you belong to Sony’s target audience. If you like the Leica or Panasonic approach you know where to spend your money. Due diligence. 

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

14 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

*Is saying SL3-S AF is better than SL3 and finally in the same ballpark as other manufacturers 

 

Gym membership, expensive black tee one size too small, and EV SUV required. That has got to be the most 'bro' review site I've seen yet. 

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

2 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Gym membership, expensive black tee one size too small, and EV SUV required. That has got to be the most 'bro' review site I've seen yet. 

I'm sure plenty of reviews by wrinkled old men are incoming to balance it out.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, steveBK said:

I'm still eager to find out how much AF improvement/AFc performance improvement are there in real world.

Having done some very rushed, very basic tests with human detection AFc in video at the launch event (less than 5 minutes hands-on). It seems in line with the SL3, which is to say I wouldn't quite trust it to shoot a "talking head" shot of someone sitting down. Comparing it directly to the S5ii, it's not so much less confident, just a bit ... hesitant? Even when customizing the settings.

I'd say more than good enough for stills of medium speed objects. For sports (whatever that means to you - I'm thinking of hockey), I'd probably still pick the S5ii if I was forced to choose an L mount camera.

Having had the option to buy one on the spot, I didn't take the opportunity to hurl my two S5ii bodies away and do it. But, maybe once the SL second hand price drop sets in, the UI and compatibility with my Q line batteries might push me to swap one of them.

Edited by summarity
more details
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I must go and wash my hands because despite derogatory posts the Panasonic crap is just fine in mine. I get a feeling that the detractors simply bought the wrong camera for their wishes. If you like Sony performance you belong to Sony’s target audience. If you like the Leica or Panasonic approach you know where to spend your money. Due diligence. 

Forgive me but shouldn`t all manufacturers be aiming for the best overall performance ?

For them to think otherwise and take a more complacent approach is tantamount to commercial extinction unless of course that the price of the product reflects that .

With Leica that doesn`t seem to be the case and it continues too charge a premium.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

So the same, but different? The SL2-S and SL3-S have different low-light sensitivity, so the performance has improved even if the number of pixels (6000 x 4000) is the same. Read speed has improved over the years too.

To my mind, the main takeaway from PtP charts is that sensors don't really matter, unlike 15 years ago. Pick the system that has the lenses you want, that fits best in your hands, and that has most of the features you need.

Different? Could you please provide any links to DR and S/N ration test for it? Everything indicates that those are same sensors. There might be some sample variations however.

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

*Is saying SL3-S AF is better than SL3 and finally in the same ballpark as other manufacturers 

 

AF will be faster just because sensor readout is faster, it will be similar to S5II

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Markey said:

Forgive me but shouldn`t all manufacturers be aiming for the best overall performance ?

For them to think otherwise and take a more complacent approach is tantamount to commercial extinction unless of course that the price of the product reflects that .

With Leica that doesn`t seem to be the case and it continues too charge a premium.

No, they'll be aiming  to squeeze as much profit from you as possible with minimal R&D and CAPEX. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CptSlevin said:

No internal raw video recording like Sigma FP (l mount partner)

Evolution of Leica SL2S, but not a revolution, that's a bummer, I waited for that camera for a year. hoping it to be a REAL hybrid of video and photo, because I love 24mp of Leica SL2S.

Stick to Leica SL2S for Leica SL4S.

It’s an improvement. But like most of Leica’s innovations a slow climb. The SL, SL2, SL2-S and SL3 each have something for different shooters. It’s an upgrade, but maybe not one for everyone’s wants or needs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Markey said:

Forgive me but shouldn`t all manufacturers be aiming for the best overall performance ?

For them to think otherwise and take a more complacent approach is tantamount to commercial extinction unless of course that the price of the product reflects that .

With Leica that doesn`t seem to be the case and it continues too charge a premium.

And the numbers don’t lie.

 

it is working. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Markey said:

Forgive me but shouldn`t all manufacturers be aiming for the best overall performance ?

For them to think otherwise and take a more complacent approach is tantamount to commercial extinction unless of course that the price of the product reflects that .

With Leica that doesn`t seem to be the case and it continues too charge a premium.

Leica is in the luxury segment of photographic equipment and they don't have to compete on having the "best" specifications if you can sell your products in other ways (build, heritage, etc...).

Similarly, you don't see Hermes advertising the carrying capacity of their Kelly bags, or Rolls-Royce used to advertise their horsepower numbers as "enough".

Edited by frankchn
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...