To update or to change systems?

[Chris W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

26 minutes ago, Dazzajl said:

The H system will still outperform the X for studio portraits and the GFX will outperform both.

This is the kind of thing that sends me a bit batty. The number one criteria for a good portrait is getting something out of the sitter, some kind of insight, or spark of personality. Many amazing portraits have been made with very old, basic cameras. One of the best portraitists from the 70's and 80's used a basic Olympic SLR and a kit lens.

In what way does an H or GFX 'out perform' an X system?

[Dazzajl]

5 minutes ago, wattsy said:

Quite.

Given a certain standard of equipment (which all the gear being discussed here meets), the only thing that is going to "outperform" in any meaningful sense is the photographer's talent. 

 

4 minutes ago, Chris W said:

This is the kind of thing that sends me a bit batty. The number one criteria for a good portrait is getting something out of the sitter, some kind of insight, or spark of personality. Many amazing portraits have been made with very old, basic cameras. One of the best portraitists from the 70's and 80's used a basic Olympic SLR and a kit lens.

In what way does an H or GFX 'out perform' an X system?

I understand perfectly what you’re both saying and of course, the talent and eye of the photographer is always the most important aspect of any single photo or shoot. 
 

Some of my favourite portraits ever taken have been with absolutely hopelessly performing cameras. But what happens when we spin the perspective slightly from taking a great portrait to having to take a great a portrait. Shoot after shoot, day after day and year after year. Your reputation and business, your entire career rests on you delivering better results than any of your competitors all the time. 
 

That’s when these performance aspects go from being almost irrelevant to almost critical and why purpose matters when choosing a system. 

[Chris W]

Just now, Dazzajl said:

That’s when these performance aspects go from being almost irrelevant to almost critical and why purpose matters when choosing a system. 

I owned the Hassy X for couple of years, have owned and used M's and the SL series. I can't see why an X2D wouldn't be amazing for portraiture. I mean it's inherently a slower more contemplative process, where you often control the location, lighting.

Yeah, I wouldn't necessarily recommend the X series for reportage, journalism, street, sports etc.

[BernardC]

19 minutes ago, Dazzajl said:

Some of my favourite portraits ever taken have been with absolutely hopelessly performing cameras. But what happens when we spin the perspective slightly from taking a great portrait to having to take a great a portrait. Shoot after shoot, day after day and year after year. Your reputation and business, your entire career rests on you delivering better results than any of your competitors all the time. 

Having seen@Olaf_ZG's excellent portraits, here and on his website, I don't think that camera performance is a limitation. The work is outstanding.

[lightsourcekauai]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

issue. However it does pay to ask Leica for a loaner. If there is a good reason ( pro, urgent need) they will go out of their way to try and find a solution in my experience. 

Thank you. Yes, I did ask.  They offered an SL2. For the repair of an SL3. 
When the 21 APO needed repair (defective out of the box) Leica initially quoted 8 months for the repair. I was very unhappy and reached out to Leica Store SF who worked to get me a new lens and loaned me a 21 for a week.

Anyway, I received my camera back earlier this week and was surprised that there was no repair memo or service order stating the issue,  resolution, nor work completed. The only documentation was a card saying that the camera was tested and met factory standards.

Lee

[Olaf_ZG]

21 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

If I understand right, your main problem is to have flip screen and to shoot 24x65mm, right?

I don't think you can find a solution in digital world. Go sell it and buy a 6x7 or larger format film camera, with waist level finder. 

That would be an option if I had good developing and scanning services in my country. But I don’t have that. At current, one click on my rolleiflex cost me 3 euro, which is ok-ish for seascapes, but then for long exposure, “immediate” feedback is very helpful.

3 euro per click for portraits is rather expensive though.

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, Olaf_ZG said:

That would be an option if I had good developing and scanning services in my country. But I don’t have that. At current, one click on my rolleiflex cost me 3 euro, which is ok-ish for seascapes, but then for long exposure, “immediate” feedback is very helpful.

3 euro per click for portraits is rather expensive though.

You can use any digital camera to scan you film.

If you really enjoy photography, developing a film is rather simple. Far simpler than to print in darkroom. 

[Olaf_ZG]

@pgh @ravinj thanks. You’re both obviously in the HB camp and I appreciate you sharing your experience.

[Olaf_ZG]

@Photoworks the Lux is what keeps me to the SL. I have read many things about the sigma 1.2, but owning the Lux, I don’t have the need to try the sigma.

Thanks for the tip of the Panasonic though. I didn’t think of it, and while not being able to do long exposure (without LENR), it can do double exposures which I really loved. So a viable option.

[Olaf_ZG]

@lightsourcekauai @Dazzajl  before Leica I had the gfx series. Used the 110 for portraits, but it let me down on my seascapes taken on infinity. Had many unsharp images, while at the sametime the 32-64 was excellent. That said, it’s handling isn’t that great, and I never really enjoyed photographing with it…

[Olaf_ZG]

@hansvons thanks for your extended reply, regarding GAS ( @LocalHero1953, @wattsy), ofcourse it isn’t nice to admit, but maybe it is, maybe it isn’t.

Maybe it has been Gas which drove me into current system… that’s why now I ask feedback…

[Olaf_ZG]

9 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I would wait until at least early next year and see if the S4 comes out. If it does, it may be intriguing for you. Even if it isn't, it will likely push the price of used SL3's down, but it will not really affect the price of the lenses, I believe. It is also quite probable that there will be some interesting new cameras from other companies in that time frame as well, X2D II etc. If nothing else, it will give you time to cool off and evaluate what you need and whether a change is justified.

The S4 will be most probably out of my leak financial wise…

[Olaf_ZG]

5 hours ago, earleygallery said:

I haven't used any of the gear mentioned in the OP but my advice would be to stick with Leica (why make a wholesale change for minimal if any benefit and some downsides?). 

Sell the lenses you say you don't need anymore, the 24-90, 90-280 and the 85. Sell the older SL body and buy the new one. Don't buy the 90 APO (why do you need it?). 

The 90mm would be for seascapes…

[Olaf_ZG]

For those I didn’t reply to, still thanks for that. Good thing of this forum is that while writing down your thoughts, you might get some clarity as well.

Basically, having both a M and a Q, I need two things from a third system: portraiture and seascapes (or better said, long exposure).

For portraiture the SL2 with the Lux is superb for handheld, but when on a tripod it is far from great. I use a tripod quite often so I have my hands free to direct my model. A flipscreen is a big plus when working on a tripod, sadly, in portrait mode, flipscreen still hardly exist.

For long exposure, due to LENR, the SL aint great. If I take a trial image of 8min, I lose 8 minutes waiting for the black image. Not to mention a 30min exposure. I tried several times, but it is simply no fun. Both the GFX and HB can do without LENR.

24x65 crop and double exposure are bonus, but won’t drive my decision.

So, I narrowed down my options towards following ideas:

1. Upgrade the SL to a SL3, keeping the 21 and 50 and add a 90. Sell the zooms and sl2’s. Live with the burden of the black image.

2. sell the SL system, and buy into HB: even the 907-50 might be enough for the type of work I do, with a 28/30, a 45, the 80 and the 135mm.

3. Maybe still to consider the GFX.

Within two weeks I will be 15 days on an island, and will really try to get the most out of my system regarding long exposure. Based on that experience I would be able to make a better judgement. Even then, I really need to consider deeply, as changing systems is a big thing.

[Stuart Richardson]

21 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

The S4 will be most probably out of my leak financial wise…

I felt the same about the S2/S006 when it came out. I sold almost all the gear I had to help pay for the camera and 3 lenses, and proceeded to shoot with it happily for seven years. In this case I preferred having one camera that would do everything for me, rather than a wider variety of other cameras. I think in the case of the coming S4, it will also be able to use 35mm lenses, so there is the potential that it can replace everything else. But I understand that that is not conducive to all kinds of photography, and it depends on either a good dealer who can provide a backup or some other kind of replacement in case there is an issue. Anyway, just a thought! I suspect it will be closer in price to the Hasselblad than the S3 was, for example. I bet it still is significantly more, however.

Edited June 12 by Stuart Richardson

[lightsourcekauai]

For long exposure seascapes I really enjoyed the SL3. I found The metering to be quite accurate with 6 stop and 10 stop ND filters on. I turned off in camera noise reduction and applied Tooaz Denoise afterwards. But I didn’t shoot longer than 3 minute exposures. 
 

[Olaf_ZG]

1 minute ago, lightsourcekauai said:

For long exposure seascapes I really enjoyed the SL3. I found The metering to be quite accurate with 6 stop and 10 stop ND filters on. I turned off in camera noise reduction and applied Tooaz Denoise afterwards. But I didn’t shoot longer than 3 minute exposures. 
 

Thanks for this, it is worth trying it out on some images, so I will test it.

[Jon Warwick]

3 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

In this case I preferred having one camera that would do everything for me, rather than a wider variety of other cameras.

A lot to be said about simplicity of gear. I’m pretty certain my photos are better from a concentration of equipment. In my case, best demonstrated when I used film exclusively, with either just an M7, or a Mamiya 7.  One lens apiece. What resulted was full concentration on the subject due to less gear. I could envisage an S4 (if it ever materialised) would also simplify the equipment into one body for all my needs. 

[S Maclean]

I have both the X2d and 907x and I have the sl3 system.  I had the x2d before the sl3 and absolutely loved it.

since I got the sl3 I barely use the x2d. The SL is just better for me. I can pair it with the m lenses, focus is faster, camera feels a little hardier. I don’t  know, I just end up grabbing the SL3

so now I’m probably selling the x2d along with a couple of lenses and keeping the 907x. Probably selling the 25v and the 135 plus extender as I have that covered by zoom and the 90v respectively and then have the 70-200 on the Leica.

getting the m11 monochrome to pair with my m11 with the funds.
 

on my image comparisons the x2d does outperform the SL3 on IQ, but not by as much as one would think. The ibis on the x2d is incredible.

anyway, i keep the 907 for medium format, and I can use it with the 500 system as well. Careful MF shots. The sl3 for running around and the M’s for walking around.

IF I did’t have any of it , I would probably go for the Fuji GFX medium format system which marries the IQ of the hasselblad, with the function of the Sl3, better AF etc. That, to me, makes more sense as a one system that does it all.

but personally I like multiple systems that tick different boxes ina more special way than one that does everything well in a slightly less “special’ way.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[hansvons]

12 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I really need to consider deeply, as changing systems is a big thing.

Absolutely—for your creative output. There‘s going to be a rewiring process, adjusting your muscle memory. That will steal time. Then you‘ll be discovering that the new lawn‘s grass isn’t greener, just different with many new problems. In the end, the results are different because gear matters, but better? In my experience not so much.

However, cleaning shelf is a always a good thing as Jon says (and I can only agree):

8 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

A lot to be said about simplicity of gear. I’m pretty certain my photos are better from a concentration of equipment.

Stuart brings in the essential aspect of technical development that actually does matter because it’s not incremental.

12 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I think in the case of the coming S4, it will also be able to use 35mm lenses, so there is the potential that it can replace everything else.

We don‘t know what the S4 will be. But it certainly will be Leica‘s proposal to photographers who look for the best IQ without compromising on the sensor. And it will be a strong leap forward with emphasis on DR and colour, especially in the shadows. Chances are high that it will be geared towards landscape photography and portraiture and not positioned as a better SL3, which is Leica’s take on a Swiss Army knife photo/video machine like most other mirrorless FF cameras. I‘m certainly looking forward to it and then might buy one—if my work will benefit visibly.