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

[LD_50]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, BernardC said:

That's a nice little conspiracy theory, but none of the evidence supports it.

First, and most obvious, we all know what happens to Leica product lines that aren't pulling their weight: they are cancelled. Witness the R line, TL line, Summarit (cheap M lenses), S line, etc. The SL line has gone the other way, with its fifth new model in 10 years, and a full lens line.

Sure, they share tech with Panasonic, but is that any different from having cheap Nikons share tech with expensive Nikons? What about Sony or Canon? Do we really need to ask Leica to use an "exclusive" microprocessor in order to appear more pure to people who aren't customers? The more you know about modern electronics manufacturing, the less that type of thinking makes any sense. At all. You don't stay competitive by wasting money re-inventing commodity components that are available elsewhere. Only the geekiest camera geeks care at all, and they would complain even more if Leica used home-grown electronics.

What does that leave us with, the old "re-badged" trope, as if adults had never before seen products that share some components. Is a Lenovo laptop just a re-badged HP? Try this simple experiment: cover your eyes, hold an S5 in one hand and an SL3 in the other. Can you tell which is which? Now open your eyes and look through the viewfinder. Still can't tell them apart? Now use them for a few weeks or months, look at the files, experience the UX, examine the files. At some point most people will notice a difference (except internet commenters, of course).

Well said. If Leica were priced lower this would never come up. 

That said there is a line between sharing components and rebadging at a higher price. The Panasonics and SL cameras are different enough for me. The new Summicrons and the rebadged Sigma zooms are not. I can tell them apart while holding them with my eyes closed but that’s simply because they’re slightly different externally. That apparent difference is not enough for me to choose the Leica versions with the price differential. 

[Advertisement]

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

[AndyAV]

59 minutes ago, tom0511 said:

Will the viewfinder of sl3-s stay clear when using c-af or will it blur like SL3/SL2-s? 

Using the AFC with continuous half press does not inflict any blurred EVF view. The AFC will continue to track and the screen remained crisp

[LD_50]

5 minutes ago, AndyAV said:

Using the AFC with continuous half press does not inflict any blurred EVF view. The AFC will continue to track and the screen remained crisp

Do you acknowledge the blur being referenced with the SL2-S and SL3? Are you suggesting the SL3-S EVF behaves differently than those two when using AFc?

[LBJ2]

2 minutes ago, AndyAV said:

Using the AFC with continuous half press does not inflict any blurred EVF view. The AFC will continue to track and the screen remained crisp

Thank you. Very good to hear.

I've long since conditioned my eye to ignore the SL2 EVF AFC/Tracking wobble and trust focus w/in the confines of CDAF/DFD, will find its target as seen in the final images. I was disappointed to read reports the SL3 EVF blurs/wobbles too in a similar scenario. So good news. No SL3-S AFC EVF wobble! 

Must be a technical constraints of processing 24MP signal in AFC vs 60MP in AFC on what appears to be the same EVF in both the SL3 and SL3-S. I had always attributed the 47MP EVF AFC wobble to the nature of CDAF/DFD continuous depth target acquisition behavior, but maybe a bit of both 47MP and CDAF.

[jaapv]

40 minutes ago, BernardC said:

That's a nice little conspiracy theory, but none of the evidence supports it.

First, and most obvious, we all know what happens to Leica product lines that aren't pulling their weight: they are cancelled. Witness the R line, TL line, Summarit (cheap M lenses), S line, etc. The SL line has gone the other way, with its fifth new model in 10 years, and a full lens line.

Sure, they share tech with Panasonic, but is that any different from having cheap Nikons share tech with expensive Nikons? What about Sony or Canon? Do we really need to ask Leica to use an "exclusive" microprocessor in order to appear more pure to people who aren't customers? The more you know about modern electronics manufacturing, the less that type of thinking makes any sense. At all. You don't stay competitive by wasting money re-inventing commodity components that are available elsewhere. Only the geekiest camera geeks care at all, and they would complain even more if Leica used home-grown electronics.

What does that leave us with, the old "re-badged" trope, as if adults had never before seen products that share some components. Is a Lenovo laptop just a re-badged HP? Try this simple experiment: cover your eyes, hold an S5 in one hand and an SL3 in the other. Can you tell which is which? Now open your eyes and look through the viewfinder. Still can't tell them apart? Now use them for a few weeks or months, look at the files, experience the UX, examine the files. At some point most people will notice a difference (except internet commenters, of course).

Actually the Q is mainly Panasonic inside ( source: the late Erwin Puts in a private conversation) 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Elliot Harper said:

After watching your video twice, I’m more convinced that SL3-S is not worth it.

You forgot to add : “ for me”.  This camera will be quite attractive for a lot of people who were looking precisely for the upgrades offered. 

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

46 minutes ago, BernardC said:

That's a nice little conspiracy theory, but none of the evidence supports it.

First, and most obvious, we all know what happens to Leica product lines that aren't pulling their weight: they are cancelled. Witness the R line, TL line, Summarit (cheap M lenses), S line, etc. The SL line has gone the other way, with its fifth new model in 10 years, and a full lens line.

Sure, they share tech with Panasonic, but is that any different from having cheap Nikons share tech with expensive Nikons? What about Sony or Canon? Do we really need to ask Leica to use an "exclusive" microprocessor in order to appear more pure to people who aren't customers? The more you know about modern electronics manufacturing, the less that type of thinking makes any sense. At all. You don't stay competitive by wasting money re-inventing commodity components that are available elsewhere. Only the geekiest camera geeks care at all, and they would complain even more if Leica used home-grown electronics.

What does that leave us with, the old "re-badged" trope, as if adults had never before seen products that share some components. Is a Lenovo laptop just a re-badged HP? Try this simple experiment: cover your eyes, hold an S5 in one hand and an SL3 in the other. Can you tell which is which? Now open your eyes and look through the viewfinder. Still can't tell them apart? Now use them for a few weeks or months, look at the files, experience the UX, examine the files. At some point most people will notice a difference (except internet commenters, of course).

You misunderstood me. I am not at all against Leica copy pasting other companies' products (I would like it to be copied from Sony, not Panasonic, of course). I even regret that it was forced to discontinue the CL and S series, since it could not find a source for copying in the Panasonic line. Leica is great at creating a new beautiful and sometimes convenient shell with high-quality design and improved screens and viewfinders. The SL3-S is certainly better than the S5II for this reason.

[BernardC]

13 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Actually the Q is mainly Panasonic inside ( source: the late Erwin Puts in a private conversation) 

Yes, and it's all the better for having an SD card controller that has been stress-tested in hundreds of thousands of MFT cameras, instead of a bespoke controller (for instance). That's one of the main benefits of the technology partnership. Leica can concentrate on what makes their cameras special instead of trying to duplicate technology that already exists and that benefits from economies of scale.

[Markey]

I been using Leica  since the 1980`s and shot sport (horses) with a `53 M3 double stroke for years .

I know all about getting  results using manual focussing techniques.

Maybe its my age or whatever but I prefer to let the technology do that bit for me now .

So it isn`t a matter of lack of experience or not knowing how

I still fail to understand why Leica ,or I guess I should say Panasonic, haven`t seen the need to up their game as regards the AF .

 

[jaapv]

6 minutes ago, BernardC said:

Yes, and it's all the better for having an SD card controller that has been stress-tested in hundreds of thousands of MFT cameras, instead of a bespoke controller (for instance). That's one of the main benefits of the technology partnership. Leica can concentrate on what makes their cameras special instead of trying to duplicate technology that already exists and that benefits from economies of scale.

Nothing new here. Remember the R series? Rebadged and upgraded Minoltas. Even the “Leica Design R8 and R9 had plenty of Minolta bits and pieces. 

[jaapv]

10 minutes ago, Markey said:

I been using Leica  since the 1980`s and shot sport (horses) with a `53 M3 double stroke for years .

I know all about getting  results using manual focussing techniques.

Maybe its my age or whatever but I prefer to let the technology do that bit for me now .

So it isn`t a matter of lack of experience or not knowing how

I still fail to understand why Leica ,or I guess I should say Panasonic, haven`t seen the need to up their game as regards the AF .

 

Maybe you should read and view the comments by people who have actually used the SL3S for a while. 

[Smogg]

I'm really looking forward to the review by the highly respected @jonoslack

[AndyAV]

59 minutes ago, LD_50 said:

Do you acknowledge the blur being referenced with the SL2-S and SL3? Are you suggesting the SL3-S EVF behaves differently than those two when using AFc?

SL3 AFC view from the EVF does exhibit something I would describe as latency delays to a point that I no longer use AFC on my SL3, just AFS. SL2-S I almost never use it on EVF because I use it 100% for video (not using EVF at all)

[LBJ2]

50 minutes ago, Smogg said:

I'm really looking forward to the review by the highly respected @jonoslack

There will be cringes the minute I post this comment on this forum, but here goes...I'd also like to see Fro Knows review Leica SL3-S autofocus. IMO this guy does some of the very best real-world Auto Focus testing/comparisons on Youtube. He also often provides downloads of the results as well.

We already know SL3-S image and video quality are very capable/great it is a Leica after all, and as we see with each current SL3-S review and more of that to come I am sure. However, when leading with "Leica SL3-S: Fastest Camera in Leica’s 100-Year Camera History" I think some of us also want to see the "Action-Jackson" 😎

Now I run for cover...

Edited January 17 by LBJ2

[LD_50]

1 minute ago, LBJ2 said:

There will be cringes the minute I post this comment on this forum, but here goes...I'd also like to see Fro Knows review Leica SL3-S autofocus. IMO this guy does some of the very best real-world Auto Focus testing/comparisons on Youtube. He also often provides downloads of the results as well.

We already know SL3-S image and video quality capabilities are very capable/great it is a Leica after all, as we see with each current SL3-S review and more of that to come I am sure. However, when leading with "Leica SL3-S: Fastest Camera in Leica’s 100-Year Camera History" I think some of us also want to see the "Action-Jackson" 😎

Now I run for cover...

I think you’re right when it comes to an AF evaluation. I expect the camera will review well when it comes to IQ and handling (equal to SL3).

The differences between SL3-S and SL3 are what need to be clearly shown and explained. 

[Dazzajl]

Haters gonna hate, fan boys gonna fan and a wedge in the middle will take this camera as they find. 

I think everyone should be able to agree that this isn't a camera looking to capture a share of a market segment, it's a camera looking to bring some more up to date features to Leica users and surely that's exactly what it should be? Leica are never going to be able to compete on cutting edge tech, because they don't actually make any and their cameras will never compete on internal specs with any of the big players.

This will be the most beautifully made full frame mirrorless on the market and the quality of materials will be a touch above anything else available. There can be no doubt there and some people will also no doubt find that the badge, tactile joy and individuality warrant the cost of the camera. Others might not be in a position to either afford one in the first place, or money aside, be prepared to sacrifice AF performance or video features etc for dials and buttons that feel higher quality. 

 

 

[Tjazz]

This is a fun forum for watching the flow of spirited opinions on highly technical, heavily engineered equipment. I’m surprised how much secret IP data some have access to. A few thoughts. So if a Leica camera is a rebadged Panasonic, and some Leica lenses just reskinned Sigma, then buy the cheaper one, right? Should be no difference? If I buy a Bosch drill at a big box store like Home Depot and it has the same specs as the more expensive Bosch drill at my local contractor store, why pay more? If Chevrolet uses the ZF 8HP automatic transmission but so does an Aston Martin, kind of crazy to overspend, right? My point is obvious: the contractor Bosch drill has more metal inner construction, the Aston Martin is a little better than a Chevy, and to me, a Leica lens gives me better IQ and color than a Sigma. Design and engineering count when core commoditized components are used across brands. I love my Leica cameras and value their design and engineering, and the extra money is well worth it to me over cheaper brands with better lab specs. A truly proprietary, bespoke camera with hand crafted parts would cost multiple times what Leica charges.  I do think Leica invests and spends where it matters most. And yeah, it’s expensive. But for the price of a modest holiday week in London or Paris, I can have a camera that brings me long-term joy and satisfaction.  
PS I’ve ordered my SL3-S, trading in my SL2-S. Can’t wait for my marginally but noticeably more capable (where it matters to me) camera!

Edited January 17 by Tjazz

[jonoslack]

1 hour ago, Smogg said:

I'm really looking forward to the review by the highly respected @jonoslack

I hope I'm not going to disappoint you! The responsibility is rather large - but I'm grateful for you confidence, I'll do my best to make it a good read at least. 

Thanks

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Markey]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Maybe you should read and view the comments by people who have actually used the SL3S for a while. 

  Oh I fully intend to do that .

Edited January 17 by Markey

[hdmesa]

5 hours ago, AndyAV said:

I have all three SL3, SL2-S and now SL3-S. What I can share now, as a former user of Sony Alpha series, as well as former Canon RF series, and also former Panasonic professional shooter, SL3-S punches well above Canon and Panasonic with the AF in iAF, AFC and AF-S. I was actually stunned to witness how accurate and prompt the SL3-S with the improved AF Ai over what was a hit and miss SL3 and even SL2-S AF. Now as it is, SL3-S is competing neck to neck with Sony Alpha (with GM lenses) on AF performance and I can totally trust it 100% for any sort of AF needs. Even when pitted against strong glare lights in extreme ISO in low light situation, SL3-S AF did not fail to impress.

You can check my video here on how crazily good the AF on SL3-S:

 

Sorry, but there’s no fucking way the SL3-S AFc is on par or exceeds Canon AF. How long has it been since you tried Canon? 5DM4? The SL3-S doesn’t even exceed the S5II, and the S5II is at least a generation behind the latest Canon AF.