SL4 speculations

[wjdrijfhout]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, ALScott said:

For me it absolutely IS about design and knobs.  ALL other cameras look like a train wreck of crap to me and I hated using them.  I had no option until I went Leica and is a massive breath of fresh air to me.  You don't see it that way and that is fine, but others can see it differently than you and that is more than fine too.

That is exactly how I feel about it as well and has drawn me into Leica from the first moment I picked one up. It's about a unique experience that makes you want to pick up the camera and shoot. My concern however is that the direction they are taking is being less unique and more mainstream. Chunkier body instead of sleek design, less aluminium/more magnesium, etc. And the design 'improvements' are questionable. On/off button annoying (which problem does this solve?), new 'Leicons' (honestly, who came up with that horrendous name, and oh, where's the IBIS icon?), less menu on each page, an extra dial that can only be programmed for a handful of functions, an articulating screen but no tilting in portrait, etc. And technically, we don't need the cutting edge. But AF has long been the achilles heel, so one would expect that with fase-detect AF that would now be on par. But the times I found my 90-280 or 35 APO hunting for focus is significantly more than with the SL2. AFs only, and I'm sure firmware upgrades will make things better, but AF is evolutionary better at most, not revolutionary better (talking SL3). And overall impression is that the Maestro IV processor is just too weak for the 60MP sensor, with lower frame rates, worse IS, shorter battery life (with increased capacity battery), etc. compared to the SL2.

I'm still a happy Leica shooter and will remain so for the foreseeable future, but with the SL3 system, the development team appeared to be a bit out of steam. Perhaps because focus is on getting the S4 ready, which I would be very interested in.

For now, I have decided to upgrade my GFX100 to the GFX100 II. The original never came off its tripod, but with the mark II the plan is for some more 'every day' use cases. When it comes to image quality (unfair of course as it is medium format), EVF, AF, frame rate, high ISO, grip, etc, it runs circles around the SL3. Yes, it's bulkier, not heavier.  

Sorry for the rambling, but I'm an absolute Leica fan and would like to stay that for a long time. 

[LocalHero1953]

Best to see the SL3/S as a refresh rather than a significantly new model. As such its market is most likely new buyers into the SL system, not those wanting to replace their SL2/S. I don’t see a point in grumbling about this 3rd generation, as the 2nd does what I want. Perhaps Leica saw nothing in the current tech that made a seriously new model worth while and decided to hold their fire - and investment money. 

[jaapv]

s4 speculation moved into the S forum

[o2mpx]

Admittedly likely to be unpopular, would have great interest for a higher resolution sensor, 75mp perhaps?  For landscapes(traveling on the move, not stationary with tripods), it’ll make cropping(from FF image or using APS-C lenses) and carrying smaller/fewer lenses more viable. Might be close enough not to warrant keeping the HB X2D set.

Edited February 24 by o2mpx

[FlashGordonPhotography]

SL3 actually suits me just fine. It's not a sports camera. I didn't expect it to be. The IQ is stunning. The build and ergonomics are great. Menus are easy and well laid out. Lots of great lens options. It's my ideal general use camera and an excellent travel companion.

Broken record. But add efcs and I'd want nothing more from the SL3.

I know some people like the SL3-S. I know others are screaming for a sports camera. The Panasonic drops tomorrow. I'm not sure Leica needs to follow Panasonic down this path. The extra buttons are really useful on a performance based camera. And the deeper menus are kind of unavoidable. If the S1Rii really has a fast read out sensor I see no issue adding one beside my SL3. They're supposed to be different.

I wonder how a SL4 might be received if they just pulled video altogether and made it a stills camera with the SL4-S being a hybrid?? Hmmmm.

Gordon

[Photoworks]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

SL3 actually suits me just fine. It's not a sports camera. I didn't expect it to be. The IQ is stunning. The build and ergonomics are great. Menus are easy and well laid out. Lots of great lens options. It's my ideal general use camera and an excellent travel companion.

Broken record. But add efcs and I'd want nothing more from the SL3.

I know some people like the SL3-S. I know others are screaming for a sports camera. The Panasonic drops tomorrow. I'm not sure Leica needs to follow Panasonic down this path. The extra buttons are really useful on a performance based camera. And the deeper menus are kind of unavoidable. If the S1Rii really has a fast read out sensor I see no issue adding one beside my SL3. They're supposed to be different.

I wonder how a SL4 might be received if they just pulled video altogether and made it a stills camera with the SL4-S being a hybrid?? Hmmmm.

Gordon

Unlike you, I find the shortcomings of the SL3, a challenge and limiting. I still use it for my professional work.

After 4 years of rocking the SL2, I got SL3 in the hope few parts have gotten better and resolved.

AF was my nr 1 wish. and to this day Leica is quiet on how and where phase AF is active.

I wanted a camera that improved the AFs in low light, instead of contrast, I would like to see improvements in the range of phase or a combination. In reality, it is as bad in low light as the SL2, the improved AF is only in AFc. But review people are happy to do all the tests in good light and never really question the manufacturers.

My other gripe is the Video resolutions, I would be happy with different speeds of 4K resolutions, at this point 6K and 8K are overkill.

Almost all video resolutions are in cropped mode. Why is that if the SL2 was capable?

 

Panasonic camera looks on paper very promising. The aspects are impressive and would make a good 2nd camera.
It has been 6 years since Panasonic updated the camera, they added everything they could think of, their market share is very small and they hope to attract people with this camera and competitive price.

 

[padam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Most likely scenario is sensors from an A7RVI (that might be in the M12) and A7V, maybe 2-3 years after these have been released.

[Simone_DF]

16 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I wonder how a SL4 might be received if they just pulled video altogether and made it a stills camera with the SL4-S being a hybrid?? Hmmmm.

But what would be the benefit of removing video altogether? The body will still match the -S video variant, because it's cheaper to design.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

21 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

But what would be the benefit of removing video altogether? The body will still match the -S video variant, because it's cheaper to design.

I quite like the X2D in part, because of its singular focus. It’s a stills camera. That allows more simplification of the menus. Makes the camera more of a precision instrument rather than than a jack of all trades. It knows what it is and so do owners. It distinguishes itself from the GFX by saying, nope. No video. This is a stills camera that just concentrates on that. Same with the M. The SL3 video sucks anyway. Just get rid of it completely. Every other company throws every feature possible into a camera. You differentiate by not doing that. The 911 Porsche variant without the back seats cost more than the one with those and air conditioning.

To some extent it’ll stop the constant whining sound that comes from forums. People keep going on about the SL3 competing with Canikony. This will stop that instantly. There are plenty of photographers who have little to no interest in video. Or those who’ll use a Osmo or their phone. Want a hybrid? Buy a SL4-S. It could even have a fully articulated screen and a big red button. Want a photography focused machine? Buy a SL4.

It’s not about cost. It’s about intent.

Gordon

[Simone_DF]

47 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

People keep going on about the SL3 competing with Canikony. This will stop that instantly.

No, it won't. Like it or not, the SL3 competes directly with the other full frame mirrorless on the market, with Canon, Nikon and Sony being the top seller. That's the primary competition, and it won't change by removing video.

48 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Want a hybrid? Buy a SL4-S. It could even have a fully articulated screen and a big red button. Want a photography focused machine? Buy a SL4.

You forget about the elephant in the room: sales. How many sales will be lost with the SL3 not offering video? Or, alternatively, how many extra sales will the SL3 gain by not offering video?

[LD_50]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I quite like the X2D in part, because of its singular focus. It’s a stills camera. That allows more simplification of the menus. Makes the camera more of a precision instrument rather than than a jack of all trades. It knows what it is and so do owners. It distinguishes itself from the GFX by saying, nope. No video. This is a stills camera that just concentrates on that. Same with the M. The SL3 video sucks anyway. Just get rid of it completely. Every other company throws every feature possible into a camera. You differentiate by not doing that. The 911 Porsche variant without the back seats cost more than the one with those and air conditioning.

To some extent it’ll stop the constant whining sound that comes from forums. People keep going on about the SL3 competing with Canikony. This will stop that instantly. There are plenty of photographers who have little to no interest in video. Or those who’ll use a Osmo or their phone. Want a hybrid? Buy a SL4-S. It could even have a fully articulated screen and a big red button. Want a photography focused machine? Buy a SL4.

It’s not about cost. It’s about intent.

Gordon

I’ve never been bothered by video’s inclusion on the SL cameras because of the way the cameras are designed. If it were removed it would make no difference to me.

If they add record buttons and clutter the menus and UI I would absolutely take issue and would agree they should offer a photo only model without those features.

The challenge I see from Canon, Nikon, and Sony as a stills only system (I don’t shoot video) is about AF, speed, and live EVF. 
 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 2/27/2025 at 12:07 AM, Simone_DF said:

No, it won't. Like it or not, the SL3 competes directly with the other full frame mirrorless on the market, with Canon, Nikon and Sony being the top seller. That's the primary competition, and it won't change by removing video.

You forget about the elephant in the room: sales. How many sales will be lost with the SL3 not offering video? Or, alternatively, how many extra sales will the SL3 gain by not offering video?

I don’t think it does, mostly. Why on earth would anyone buy a SL3 over an A7R5 based on specs and performance? Or the Z8 or R5ii? You just wouldn’t. But people still buy and love the SL3 anyway. Me included. Or more so, they buy one of the others and then buy a SL3 as well. It’d be an interesting poll to see how many SL3/SL3-S owners also own something *equivalent* from one of the majors. I reckon it’d be a higher number than most would suspect. Leica owners need to be somewhat separate from the cost of the product, so they’re likely to have cameras from other brands as well. The SL3 approaches the mirrorless thing from a different place than the others. They see how much they can cram in at a certain price point. The SL’s remove as much as possible until the shooting experience is compromised. It’s more an Apple vs Android thing. They’re the same but not really and you tend to choose either more for less or less for more.

As for sales, well it hasn’t affected the Hasselblad too much vs the GFX. Most people could just buy the new DJI smart gimbal and use their phone and get as good video as the SL3. How many people really mess around with LUT’s and crap like that? As a percentage of owners. Plus there’d be an SL4-S with all the video bits. Additionally we now have small wireless mics that just work with all these things, like phones and action cameras and Osmos. Sound was really the big issue holding portable devices back. No an issue now. I suspect not a lot of sales impact. Maybe some improvement as the SL4 interface would be simplified massively and a lot of Leica shooters are attracted to that.

I do get that some wish Leica would make an S1Rii alternative with a red dot or an A1ii sensor. But they haven’t. Leica do best in a niche within a niche. This is the company that had success with a b&w manual focus camera after all. IMHO the more that Leica tries to be like the others the less successful it’ll be. The more different they are the more they stand out for the buyers who appreciate that. It’s not like they want to be top 3. Even 5% market share would be massive.

Just IMHO, of course.

Gordon

[Photoworks]

It is not like the Brand Leica can produce so many units. they have been selling well.

The SL3 is good for video, heck it can do 1h 8k video on an SD card, I don't think Canon can manage that, but don't need it.

The challenge for leica is innovation and keeping their customers happy. I have been using the SL3 since the fist day, it is a wonderful camera for photos.
I have ordered the S1RII for the extra video options, it wont replace the SL3 for photos, but looking at Panasonic menu OMG, there are so many option, I am sure some people want them.
Benefits are, better audio integration, realtime luts, and compatibility with other companies like DJI, atomos and so on.
what Leica falls short of is 3rd party Apps support, Flash integrations, Gimble controls, Monitor with settings on the screen, time-laps focusing sliders....

For some stuff, you have to look elsewhere, but that is not a problem, it is good to have choices.

[Simone_DF]

13 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I don’t think it does, mostly. Why on earth would anyone buy a SL3 over an A7R5 based on specs and performance? Or the Z8 or R5ii? You just wouldn’t.

You're mixing up specs and performance vs video, which is a feature. I'm happy with the current specs and performance of Leica camera, but I wouldn't be happy without video. 

 

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

The SL3 approaches the mirrorless thing from a different place than the others. They see how much they can cram in at a certain price point. The SL’s remove as much as possible until the shooting experience is compromised.

I disagree. The SL3 is a mirrorless just like any other. The main difference is UI/UX, and some goodies here and there, like exceptional IBIS, really nice EVF, weather sealing.

 

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

As for sales, well it hasn’t affected the Hasselblad too much vs the GFX.

Hasselbland and GFX are big, heavy and niche cameras that are good mostly for static subjects like landscape, portraits, etc. The SL3 is more svelte and a more generalist camera. You wouldn't buy a Hassy to shoot birds in flight, but you could buy a SL3 for that.

 

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Most people could just buy the new DJI smart gimbal and use their phone and get as good video as the SL3.

Yes, and you can also buy an iPhone and use it to shoot raw photos too, and get as good photos as the SL3. See where this is going?

 

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Plus there’d be an SL4-S with all the video bits.

And a S4 for the no-video option. I see the SL3 as a camera that sits comfortably between the upcoming S4 and the SL2-S. Want a still only camera? Get the S4. Video-focused? SL3-S. Want a stills focused camera but you want the occasional video use? SL3. 

 

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Leica do best in a niche within a niche. This is the company that had success with a b&w manual focus camera after all. IMHO the more that Leica tries to be like the others the less successful it’ll be.

100% agree on this.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

8 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

You're mixing up specs and performance vs video, which is a feature. I'm happy with the current specs and performance of Leica camera, but I wouldn't be happy without video. 

 

I disagree. The SL3 is a mirrorless just like any other. The main difference is UI/UX, and some goodies here and there, like exceptional IBIS, really nice EVF, weather sealing.

 

Hasselbland and GFX are big, heavy and niche cameras that are good mostly for static subjects like landscape, portraits, etc. The SL3 is more svelte and a more generalist camera. You wouldn't buy a Hassy to shoot birds in flight, but you could buy a SL3 for that.

 

Yes, and you can also buy an iPhone and use it to shoot raw photos too, and get as good photos as the SL3. See where this is going?

 

And a S4 for the no-video option. I see the SL3 as a camera that sits comfortably between the upcoming S4 and the SL2-S. Want a still only camera? Get the S4. Video-focused? SL3-S. Want a stills focused camera but you want the occasional video use? SL3. 

 

100% agree on this.

We’ll agree to disagree and that’s just fine. It’s just my thoughts. I know some others would like an even simpler camera and some a more featured one.

I will say that the X2D and GFX100Sii are generally smaller and lighter than the SL3. An X2D with 55V is lighter than the SL3 with 50 Summicron (non apo). Same with the 16-35 vs the 20-35 on the ‘blad. The GFX with a 63 is lighter as well. The SL3 has better weather sealing and more lens options, but that’s about it. And really not that many more than the GFX system. The GFX also has better CAF.

I think the S4 is still years away. I’ll likely be dead. If they do it at all. HB and Fuji own that market and I don’t think Leica will drop a body for less than the X2D.

Gordon

[wjdrijfhout]

9 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

You wouldn't buy a Hassy to shoot birds in flight, but you could buy a SL3 for that.

My GFX100II is better at that than my SL3…

 

[LocalHero1953]

If future SL bodies had no video I would be out. I was out of the digital Ms when they removed video for the M10 (and didn't include a silent electronic shutter). I can forgive Leica for the digital Ms - they have a heritage dead weight which will always hold them back, but I hope their modern systems like the SL and Q series continue to be practical visual tools and not a representation of some sort of photographic 'purity'.

As an aside on comments about how good the SL 601 interface was compared to later editions: the SL601 had a separate video button!
(Though I'm glad they removed it in the SL2 - I was always pressing it by accident).

Edited March 3 by LocalHero1953

[BernardC]

16 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I will say that the X2D and GFX100Sii are generally smaller and lighter than the SL3. An X2D with 55V is lighter than the SL3 with 50 Summicron (non apo). Same with the 16-35 vs the 20-35 on the ‘blad.

Not according to camerasize. The SL3 is slightly smaller/lighter than the latest GFX, but the difference is immaterial: a few grams and millimeters. You can tip the scales by choosing a bigger lens for the SL3, but you can also choose some of excellent smaller lenses in L mount (Sigma Contemporary, for instance). I don't see size/weight as a major factor when choosing between these systems, given the major workflow and UX differences.