The Leica SL3-S Review by Jonathan Slack

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

25 minutes ago, Cronilux said:

No 14bit with 30fps. Not interesting to me then. That’s why I asked for the 5fps setting. This is also a big bummer to me, that this has not been improved. 

Why do you care whether it is 14 or 12 bit especially when you are probably shooting high fps at ISO a couple of stops above base ISO?

12 bit has probably twice the readout speed of 14 bits.

Edited January 23 by SrMi

[jonoslack]

38 minutes ago, Cronilux said:

No 14bit with 30fps. Not interesting to me then. That’s why I asked for the 5fps setting. This is also a big bummer to me, that this has not been improved. 

The SL2-S didn’t shoot DNG above 5fps! 12 bit DNG is just fine for the sort of thing you would want to shoot at 30fps!

[hdmesa]

I only need 1 fps because I have flawless timing. All you 30 fps people need to practice more 🙃

[mpauliks]

vor 13 Minuten schrieb hdmesa:

I only need 1 fps because I have flawless timing. All you 30 fps people need to practice more 🙃

Follow a moving BVG bus on Kurfürstendamm at night! You are invited   

SL3-S on 24-90 at ISO 20k 

@jonoslack sorry please Jono for posting this guy!

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 January 23 by mpauliks

[jonoslack]

8 hours ago, hdmesa said:

I only need 1 fps because I have flawless timing. All you 30 fps people need to practice more 🙃

Well, I mostly agree, but it can be fun 

[SingingSnapper]

On 1/21/2025 at 8:33 PM, jonoslack said:

Thank you Paul!

I thought that Ralf's contribution pulled it all together into something sensible(ish)

You state that it is a 60mp, but it is still 24mp isn;t it?

 

[hdmesa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Well, I mostly agree, but it can be fun 

I was trying to be sarcastic about not needing more than 1 fps 🤪

[jonoslack]

2 hours ago, SingingSnapper said:

You state that it is a 60mp, but it is still 24mp isn;t it?

 

Hi There - definitely a mistake! Where do I say that?

best

Jono

[jonoslack]

15 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

I was trying to be sarcastic about not needing more than 1 fps 🤪

Well - sorry! I missed it, probably because I might have said it myself!

[mpauliks]

2 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Hi There - definitely a mistake! Where do I say that?

best

Jono

You never did Jono! You write at first sentence of review: " It has a 24mp sensor as opposed to the 47mp of the SL2." So, maybe good for a morning before coffee? lol

 

 

5 hours ago, SingingSnapper said:

You state that it is a 60mp, but it is still 24mp isn;t it?

 

Jono did never ever say so for SL3-S! What are you saying! Please think twice! Explain you!

[jaapv]

17 hours ago, Markey said:

I know that is the line which I was referencing when I said   "as the other attempts made by Leica to provide an alternative platform to the M" .

I thought that much was clear 

Wasn`t the R an alternative to the M ?

No - it was an attempt to stem the flow of SLRs from Japan - Not an M substitute; these were rebadged  -to be fair partly re-engineered- Minoltas, it did not quite have the succes that was aimed for. The public went for cheap - like Praktika.

[la1402]

 

49 minutes ago, jaapv said:

No - it was an attempt to stem the flow of SLRs from Japan - as these were rebadged  -to be fair partly re-engineered- Minoltas it did not quite have the succes that was aimed for. The public went for cheap - like Praktika.

No. The vast majority went to Canon and Nikon, which proved to produce very reliable workhorse for decades and whose cameras where used to produce countles master pieces. 

[SrMi]

39 minutes ago, la1402 said:

 

No. The vast majority went to Canon and Nikon, which proved to produce very reliable workhorse for decades and whose cameras where used to produce countles master pieces. 

Yet, the old R-mount cameras seem to be in higher demand/appreciation than the old Nikon cameras. Is it because of the lenses?

[J.C.T.]

16 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Yet, the old R-mount cameras seem to be in higher demand/appreciation than the old Nikon cameras. Is it because of the lenses?

The R lenses are delightful. I have used them on my SL3 and enjoyed their rendering. I know a few professional videographers that use those lenses on the SL2-S to great effect. 

[Markey]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

No - it was an attempt to stem the flow of SLRs from Japan - as these were rebadged  -to be fair partly re-engineered- Minoltas it did not quite have the succes that was aimed for. The public went for cheap - like Praktika.

It could have been both .... or why would a manufacturer of RF`s be concerned about the flow of SLR`s from Japan.

Anyway whatever .

 

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, la1402 said:

 

No. The vast majority went to Canon and Nikon, which proved to produce very reliable workhorse for decades and whose cameras where used to produce countles master pieces. 

Forgetting Asahi Pentax, Konica, Minolta and Olympus. Both Canon and Nikon produced rangefinders as well, BTW.

[la1402]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

Yet, the old R-mount cameras seem to be in higher demand/appreciation than the old Nikon cameras. Is it because of the lenses?

Yeha its the lenses. Luxury brand + scarcity drives value. And some of them where very special.

[BernardC]

2 hours ago, la1402 said:

Yeha its the lenses. Luxury brand + scarcity drives value. And some of them where very special.

R lenses became very popular back when the Canon 5D and 1D were the primary full-frame digital option. R lenses were, on the whole, better than anything with an EOS mount, and very solidly built. They were also relatively cheap at the time. You could mount them with a simple adapter, or buy a kit to swap the mount.

They are also very popular with cine shooters, partly because of build quality, and partly because they have a consistent signature from lens to lens. That's important with video content because you don't want to edit together two shots that have different contrast, colour, flare, etc. You can correct for that "in post" to a certain extent, but that wastes time. It's much better to have a matching lens set to begin with.

I don't think that the luxury aspect had much to do with this. People first tried adapting R lenses because of their reputation, but they delivered, unlike most other brands. If you spent your younger days in the film era, you probably remember long pointless conversations about whether Leica's R lenses were any good, with the common trope that they were just prettier/pricier Minolta lenses. Digital put a stop to that, and we quickly found-out that the reputation was justified. Contax/Zeiss lenses went through the same re-evaluation.

On the other hand, some formerly legendary lens lines were re-evaluated the other way. To be fair, all classic SLR lens lines contained a few jewels, but most of them also had a lot of so-so designs that haven't held-up in the pixel-peeping era.

Edited January 24 by BernardC
typo

[Melampus]

Thank you Jono! As expected - up to your always superbly high review standard. Very informative overall, and especially regarding the multi-shot features. Much appreciated..

Cheers,    -Peter

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jrp]

I think that you've captured the state of things well, Jono.  The SL3s are quite a tough sell, when compared to the top of their line competition.  I enjoy the SL3 almost as much as I enjoyed the SL when it first came out.  I quite like the SL2 (despite its tendency to clip.). But the Sony A1 II, which on paper looks like a minor spec bump over the A1, is also an enjoyable camera to use because of it is a refined A1.  The quality of the Summicrons is the main reason to stick with the SL line (as well as the build quality). But the Sony-compatible lens line is hard to compete with, unless you are interested in historic lenses.  12-24f2.8, or 28-70f2 anyone?