Leica SL3-S: ‘More light’ – The Unbearable Lightness of Being

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 minutes ago, la1402 said:

Not sure this is enough anymore. Leica and the whole luxury segment rode the wave of more of 10 years of increasing wealth globally, but those times are over. You can even get on a waiting list at an authorized dealer for a Nautilus from Patek today (no, i did not...). Customers will look more for value for money, even in this segment. Leica can always demand a premium, but it seems after entering the L2 alliance, Leica is satisfying themselves with copy pasting technology from mainstream suppliers in their SL line. Nothing against Sigma and Panasonic - but where is Leicas own ambition? 

Leica isn't big enough to have multiple camera lines at the same time, so it's focused on two lines: the M as the flagship and the Q as the money maker. At the same time, it keeps the rest of its customers in its sphere of influence by rebadging the other camera lines. A very smart strategy.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

19 minutes ago, la1402 said:

Not sure this is enough anymore. Leica and the whole luxury segment rode the wave of more of 10 years of increasing wealth globally, but those times are over. You can even get on a waiting list at an authorized dealer for a Nautilus from Patek today (no, i did not...). Customers will look more for value for money, even in this segment. Leica can always demand a premium, but it seems after entering the L2 alliance, Leica is satisfying themselves with copy pasting technology from mainstream suppliers in their SL line. Nothing against Sigma and Panasonic - but where is Leicas own ambition? 

Depends on your definition of value for money. Spec sheets cost nothing. It is the experience and results that count for the individual user. Nobody will ask you for AF speed or readout specs after you have printed your photograph. 

[LocalHero1953]

Just now, Smogg said:

Leica isn't big enough to have multiple camera lines at the same time, so it's focused on two lines: the M as the flagship and the Q as the money maker. At the same time, it keeps the rest of its customers in its sphere of influence by rebadging the other camera lines. A very smart strategy.

Or: "Panasonic's rebadging Leicas (wait for the S1ii) - everybody's at it."

The reality is neither of these slick lines: Leica & Panasonic cooperate and both benefit. After all, Panasonic wouldn't even have a mount, and the FF market that goes with it, without Leica. It's a smart strategy for both.

[Smogg]

A large number of camera lines is also needed for more "entry points" into the Leica world. Buyers of these cameras usually do not stop at one camera. If Panasonic produced APSC cameras, LEICA would not have abandoned the CL line and we would also see a Panasonic clone.

[LocalHero1953]

3 hours ago, frankchn said:

Yeah, Leica has not been the best bang-for-buck manufacturer, and I think that's perfectly fine. Some people are OK with Toyotas, other people want a Lexus.

Hmm, you may have misunderstood what I wrote, that "Leica doesn't have the best spec sheet for your buck". If your 'bang' means a good spec sheet, then you're better elsewhere. But there's more to a camera (any camera) than is written, or can be written, in a spec sheet.

[Smogg]

2 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Hmm, you may have misunderstood what I wrote, that "Leica doesn't have the best spec sheet for your buck". If your 'bang' means a good spec sheet, then you're better elsewhere. But there's more to a camera (any camera) than is written, or can be written, in a spec sheet.

Agreed. Leica SL3/SL3-S gives very good color, better than many manufacturers with much more advanced cameras. Only X2D can beat SL3 in color in my opinion.

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, la1402 said:

Ah. I smell Magic and Glow around the corner 😉

Sadly, I've never seen them. But I have enough experience with the SL2-S (and other cameras) to see its merits for (my) real world photography beyond those that are represented by numbers. As I've just written in another post: there's more to any camera, not just Leicas, than can appears in a spec sheet.

[Tjazz]

I'm excited about this one. I shoot with the Q3, Q2M, and SL2-S now. I go through the same mental gyrations as others when considering new gear. I really like Q3 and its focus and resolution but can't say that it's given me better pictures than my old Q2. I had owned the SL2 but traded for SL2-S and THAT move truly made be a better photographer. I shoot more is sparse light, appreciate the rich image quality, am in love with the color rendering, and can print to my heart's content in any size. So for me, the thought of an even better 24MP sensor (it does appear not to be the same as its predecessor), with improved AF, tilt screen, and now hand-held multi-shot capability in a slightly lighter package have caused me to order one. I'll not miss the SL2-S knowing that I'll be getting its improved offspring. And I really don't care about absolute dollar value, spec sheet competitions, and some of the other criteria mentioned here. I just love how the Leica SL series makes me feel and helps me create. 

[jaapv]

I think that this camera is an excellent one to pull new users into the system. Or a desirable second body for SL3 owners.
For me personally it makes no sense. I have an SL2S which I really like and an S5Ii for the bells and whistles. There is really nothing to see for me here.

But disappointing ? Not at all. Very close to what I expected a year ago. 

[CptSlevin]

37 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I think that this camera is an excellent one to pull new users into the system. Or a desirable second body for SL3 owners.
For me personally it makes no sense. I have an SL2S which I really like and an S5Ii for the bells and whistles. There is really nothing to see for me here.

But disappointing ? Not at all. Very close to what I expected a year ago. 

There is a lot of lost potential, we are stuck with this camera for 4-5 years now until Leica SL4S comes out.

 

it’s not about bells and whistles, even Leica confirms that it’s harder for them to sell SL camera than M / Q and they release SL3S with old tech and not competitive by any standards, it even can’t compete with SL2S of 2020, because it’s 85% the same camera.

 

It’s dead on arrival release, because SL2S exists and when it was announced it was a breakthrough for Leica, now it’s just disappointing release with a lot of lost potential for a real hybrid camera (video af is subpar, no internal raw, IBIS worse than SL2S, crop video, no Evf improvement, focus lag,  etc etc)

 

Edited January 17 by CptSlevin

[FlashGordonPhotography]

2 hours ago, ALScott said:

I ordered it today.  It has improvements over the SL2-S no matter what they are or how they are judged by individuals, they are undeniably there.  I have an SL3, and love it, and would like any better AF over it so a different model, the SL3-S, fits that requirement.  Less than a year into Leica but I have never seen anything where they promise sports, BIF, etc but they do promise color and IQ which I think we can all agree they deliver on.  As many have said, if you want the other things maybe Leica isn't what you want or need.  By the way, Flash, speaking more in general here not to you as I know, or think, you agree.

This is actually the point for me. It’s still not really a sports camera. That’s fine. Leica have not said as such. But if you’re dropping Leica money anyway, why not get the SL3? The SL3’s AFS is actually really good for general shooting. It’s only in AFC where it suffers. And if I need AFC I’ll want more than the SL3-S? If I were video centric the S5iiX is a better system and is more widely supported. If I shoot wildlife or sports would I not just add an A1ii/R5ii/Z8 to my kit with their MANY tele lens options? And use my SL3 for general shooting.

I do have most of the L mount long lens options. I get the occasional wildlife thing. I have some shots I like. But it’s still a relatively slow read sensor and there’s no EFCS. So how useful is 30fps in 12 bit on a slow readout camera? Now if they’d gotten permission to use the A1’s 50MP sensor/processor you could charge me whatever you want and I’m in. Even without the mk2 upgrades.

I have a S5ii. The SL3-S looks to be that camera in a SL3 body/menus/UI. Sure that AF is better but not radically, for stills.

Please note. I will never criticise anyone who gets a SL3-S. It’s your money and if it makes sense to you and makes you go take pictures, I’m fully on board. It’s me, not you. I just don’t get it……yet.

Gordon

p.s. At some point the Sl3 and SL3-S animals/AFC have to come out of beta, don’t they? At that point does the Sl3 catch up to the Sl3-S/S5ii?

p.p.s. The SL3 is my favourite small format camera of all time. I’m not anti-SL3.

[jaapv]

I. Wonder why people always lump sports and wildlife together. They both use long lenses and there the resemblance stops. Wildlife is not about frantic action. It is about observation, understanding and recording nature  and feeling for the outdoors. Except on rare occasions ( somebody mentioned photographing a buffalo stampede) there is absolutely no need for cutting edge AF or extremely fast sensor readouts. In fact, when AF fails, switching to manual focus will save the day. 

Note that the top wildlife photographers on this forum like Michali are more than happy with their Leica SL/Sigma combinations. 

[SrMi]

Some here feel that 24MP is enough, so why pay more for 60MP. Also, once SL2-S becomes unavailable new, SL3-S becomes the entry SL camera. 

[jaapv]

And one avoids the drawbacks of high-MP cameras. If there is no compelling need why pay for unneeded pixels? - and gain in things like low light performance, AF performance, postprocessing speed, etc.  

[jaapv]

40 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Some here feel that 24MP is enough, so why pay more for 60MP. Also, once SL2-S becomes unavailable new, SL3-S becomes the entry SL camera. 

I see your point and it may well work that way for some, but it is not a real ( stripped) entry camera. It is aimed at a more general style of photography and every day use. The weight and size argument against that use is moot IMO. Put a Panasonic 1.8 35 on and you are under 1250 grams with identical performance to the Leica lens ( and a practical AF-MF switch) and a M lens will bring the size down (Leica would be well advised to bring out a good 35 pancake IMO). 

[LD_50]

4 hours ago, Paul K said:

 

The UI interface and ergonomics are far better on Leica than Sony and a major reason I changed systems last year.

I agree. However I also recognize the value in some of the handling choices with busier designs (Nikon in my experience). If Panasonic and Leica were to match Nikon’s AF performance, as an example, I would want more options in controlling it, while keeping the overall design of Leica’s UI.

It’s really hard to do complex functionality with simple design. Leica is best in my opinion, but with a lower ask than Canon, Nikon, and Sony in terms of functionality. 

Example:
With Nikon, I can set the rear AF-On button to 3D tracking and the rear DISP button to face/eye/subject detection AF. In practice that means I can press the DISP first to find the eye/face/subject, then press and hold the AF-On button to maintain tracking. I would want the same two-button option if Leica were to ever match that capability. It could be done with a combination of rear joystick and shutter half-press, though I prefer not to use the shutter for this.

[ALScott]

In my very short foray, so far, into wildlife I needed good AF all the time.  I think most, if not all, of that is due to my just starting to shoot wildlife. I needed help on elk, moose, coyotes, bison and an eagle flying very close to me.  I got some good shots with the SL3 but missed some too.  If I had more FPS I could have gotten even more keepers. I prefer wildlife pics with some movement, but that's just me.  I hunt and most of what I will photograph is whitetail and coyotes.  The coyotes here never, I mean never, stop moving.  The deer will stand in one place but not statue like and some great pics could be had when they are running.  I have years of grandson's sports ahead to shoot but that's in my wheelhouse from my newspaper days.  Sports are way easier to predict than an animal imo.  The are a few reviews out there already shared here and all mentioned the AF improving over the SL3 so great!  Right?  Plus, nobody here has one or used one other than the reviews mentioned, no?  One of those reviewers seems to be well respected.  For a while I read many posts wishing Maestro IV this and that and it has that but that seems completely lost now.  So this is all just conjecture at this point.  It's said AF is better, I think it will be, how much will be down to the opinion of each user who gets one and what their wants and expectations are not necessarily what the actual facts are.  Guess what, it probably won't be as good as whatever S, N or C and really who cares?  Really if that's what you want buy that.  And don't say it should be as good as whatever S, N, or C because of cost, where it is in product line etc.  That doesn't matter either.  It's an entirely different company with an entirely different philosophy.  Plus, nobody ever mentions those other bodies are plastic slapped over a metal frame.  My SL3 doesn't appear to have much plastic on it.  That alone would drive cost way, way up.  Let Leica start building like that and the freaking sky would fall. 

[LD_50]

54 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

This is actually the point for me. It’s still not really a sports camera. That’s fine. Leica have not said as such. But if you’re dropping Leica money anyway, why not get the SL3? The SL3’s AFS is actually really good for general shooting. It’s only in AFC where it suffers. And if I need AFC I’ll want more than the SL3-S? If I were video centric the S5iiX is a better system and is more widely supported. If I shoot wildlife or sports would I not just add an A1ii/R5ii/Z8 to my kit with their MANY tele lens options? And use my SL3 for general shooting.

I do have most of the L mount long lens options. I get the occasional wildlife thing. I have some shots I like. But it’s still a relatively slow read sensor and there’s no EFCS. So how useful is 30fps in 12 bit on a slow readout camera? Now if they’d gotten permission to use the A1’s 50MP sensor/processor you could charge me whatever you want and I’m in. Even without the mk2 upgrades.

I have a S5ii. The SL3-S looks to be that camera in a SL3 body/menus/UI. Sure that AF is better but not radically, for stills.

Please note. I will never criticise anyone who gets a SL3-S. It’s your money and if it makes sense to you and makes you go take pictures, I’m fully on board. It’s me, not you. I just don’t get it……yet.

Gordon

p.s. At some point the Sl3 and SL3-S animals/AFC have to come out of beta, don’t they? At that point does the Sl3 catch up to the Sl3-S/S5ii?

p.p.s. The SL3 is my favourite small format camera of all time. I’m not anti-SL3.

You see this all almost identically to me. 

I do think Leica is not outright calling the SL3-S a “sports camera” but they do say the following:

”Leica combines the strengths of three focus technologies here: the latest generation in phase detection AF (PDAF), depth map (object detection AF) and contrast detection AF enable continuous shooting with the Leica SL3-S at up to 30 frames per second with full autofocus support. Together with a high dynamic range and the impressive ISO range of 50 to 200,000, the SL3-S delivers excellent quality photos and videos in all shooting situations.”

The bold is my own addition. I guess you have to read between the lines and assume “latest generation” doesn’t mean in comparison to Canon, Nikon, and Sony. You also have to read between the lines and assume the 30 fps with full autofocus support doesn’t mean you can expect competitive tracking (where that type of capability is typically needed). You then have to read between the lines and assume “all shooting situations” doesn’t include the types where the latest generation AF at high fps is most useful (sports, BIF, etc). 

If the same AF capability comes to the SL3 I don’t see much reason for the SL3-S to exist, other than for those who want the ability to crop at high ISO, prefer the video capability (not my area of expertise or use), or simply want smaller file sizes. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[trickness]

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

p.p.s. The SL3 is my favourite small format camera of all time. I’m not anti-SL3.

Not sure I saw a summary as to why you prefer it over the SL2, forgive me if you've shared this but I'd love to know why you prefer the newer camera

[jaapv]

13 minutes ago, ALScott said:

In my very short foray, so far, into wildlife I needed good AF all the time.  I think most, if not all, of that is due to my just starting to shoot wildlife. I needed help on elk, moose, coyotes, bison and an eagle flying very close to me.  I got some good shots with the SL3 but missed some too.  If I had more FPS I could have gotten even more keepers. I prefer wildlife pics with some movement, but that's just me.  I hunt and most of what I will photograph is whitetail and coyotes.  The coyotes here never, I mean never, stop moving.  The deer will stand in one place but not statue like and some great pics could be had when they are running.  I have years of grandson's sports ahead to shoot but that's in my wheelhouse from my newspaper days.  Sports are way easier to predict than an animal imo.  The are a few reviews out there already shared here and all mentioned the AF improving over the SL3 so great!  Right?  Plus, nobody here has one or used one other than the reviews mentioned, no?  One of those reviewers seems to be well respected.  For a while I read many posts wishing Maestro IV this and that and it has that but that seems completely lost now.  So this is all just conjecture at this point.  It's said AF is better, I think it will be, how much will be down to the opinion of each user who gets one and what their wants and expectations are not necessarily what the actual facts are.  Guess what, it probably won't be as good as whatever S, N or C and really who cares?  Really if that's what you want buy that.  And don't say it should be as good as whatever S, N, or C because of cost, where it is in product line etc.  That doesn't matter either.  It's an entirely different company with an entirely different philosophy.  Plus, nobody ever mentions those other bodies are plastic slapped over a metal frame.  My SL3 doesn't appear to have much plastic on it.  That alone would drive cost way, way up.  Let Leica start building like that and the freaking sky would fall. 

Let’s agree to disagree on wildlife - it has been my game since 1988. I’ve added it up and I have spent over three years out in the African bush over time. I have never felt dependent on AF and rarely shoot bursts. More like decisive moment. The problem with bursts, unless you have really high FPS like the last few years, your shutter is closed more than 90% of the time so you are more likely to miss than to get the shot.