To update or to change systems?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

23 minutes ago, wattsy said:

Just semantics really. LUTs and profiles just convert one set of numbers into another set of numbers.

Profiles are to convert and maintain colour accuracy (or lack thereof 😜) between devices and programs, LUTs transform colours for artistic. purposes. Mostly profiles operate in an RGB colour space, and RGB numbers not only indicate colour but at the same time luminosity. Thus colour editing through profiles will lose dynamic range. LUTs are also used to preserve dynamic range. (an alternative is to edit in CIELAB).

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

Use of LUTs is also critical in monitor calibration to ensure color/tone accuracy.

Edited June 24 by Jeff S

[Stuart Richardson]

LUTs vs Profiles aside, I will say that when I was not happy with the S3's colors, the Cobalt Image profile really improved the starting point to my eyes. While not free, it is a pretty cheap fix to try if you like a camera in most ways other than its straight out of camera results. I found that it was quite a bit better than what I could make with a dual illuminant profile and color checker passport, for example. It had much better clipped gamut handling and highlight/shadow behavior. Those guys know what they are doing. The film simulations, however, never really looked all that like film to me, but they are good starting points.

[IkarusJohn]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

Look Up Table

https://retouchinglabs.com/how-to-use-luts-in-photoshop/

And then it wasn’t.

[Oxfordian]

On 6/12/2025 at 2:30 PM, Dazzajl said:

f you put two shots from any comparable systems side by side, I don’t think anyone can tell the difference anymore. All cameras are fabulous now and where the differences really lie is not in the outright image quality but in how well what you choose fits your very personal brief. 

Truest statement I've read in a long time, I couldn't agree more about the picture comparison, almost any modern camera and lens is more than capable of returning top quality images today.

[tom0511]

as far as I remember the SL3 you can deactivate the black image for long time exposure. I recently did a workshop for night photography and the SL3 worked fine.

You also get the flip screen.

Only thing is the crop 24x65, which the SL3 doesn't offer.

I would still rather get just an SL3 in your case. (I own SL3, X2d and also S system) S is really slow and inaccurate focus, x2d is great but much less flexibility than SL system.

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, tom0511 said:

as far as I remember the SL3 you can deactivate the black image for long time exposure. I recently did a workshop for night photography and the SL3 worked fine.

You also get the flip screen.

Only thing is the crop 24x65, which the SL3 doesn't offer.

I would still rather get just an SL3 in your case. (I own SL3, X2d and also S system) S is really slow and inaccurate focus, x2d is great but much less flexibility than SL system.

You can also deactivate the black image on the SL2, I tried, but you don’t want to do that. Image, to me, is not usable. May be up to a minute it is fine, but for longer exposures it aint.

Having already sold some of my system, I won’t even bother to try it anymore. For long exposure I will switch to another system, and I will reduce my SL system to a portrait only system…

[tom0511]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Olaf_ZG:

You can also deactivate the black image on the SL2, I tried, but you don’t want to do that. Image, to me, is not usable. May be up to a minute it is fine, but for longer exposures it aint.

Having already sold some of my system, I won’t even bother to try it anymore. For long exposure I will switch to another system, and I will reduce my SL system to a portrait only system…

sure the black image has a reason which is to reduce noise. If you shoot however multiple images you might not need it.

Which system will you choose for long exposure?

[Olaf_ZG]

6 hours ago, tom0511 said:

sure the black image has a reason which is to reduce noise. If you shoot however multiple images you might not need it.

Which system will you choose for long exposure?

Hasselblad will be the final choice, but a 50mp sensor.

[Olaf_ZG]

Since the beginning of this thread, I managed to sell off most unnecessary stuff for portraits. All Leica stuff went, only the Sigma and Laowa is still unsold.

My reduced kit is now the SL2 plus Lux, a great portrait setup, plus the 24-90 (the SL will be my only weather proof system) and the Pana 100mm macro (for the garden).

Having sold a lot, and going two weeks on a remote island, I now can think about the best set for me.

The latest is always more attractive, but maybe not needed. I am set on the brand, I know which lenses I want, but I am still indecisive about the body.

I will buy all second hand, but the gap between the bodies is significant, and basically based on one factor: tilt screen, yes or no.

Ibis, higher mp are not relevant at all, size is, and price is a mental block: I might take too much care of a too expensive camera, instead of just using it…

[IkarusJohn]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I will buy all second hand, but the gap between the bodies is significant, and basically based on one factor: tilt screen, yes or no.

The difference is significant, in many more ways than just the tilt screen.  It was enough for me to buy back into the system (from the X1D II, 21/4, 45P, 80/1.9 & 135).  I wouldn’t worry about the MP - I was initially against the increase in MP as being pointless (my Monochrom has ONLY 18MP), but now I think it is irrelevant, as the camera has IBIS, it really doesn’t matter.

While you are focused on portraits and landscapes, the X2D does so much more - you will use it, I’m sure.

[o2mpx]

For my use case, systems building is highly dependent on one’s life activities, it seems 3-4 camera systems are necessary vs 1. An all purpose point and shoot - Q3, GFX100RF etc. A top rated high resolution/color system - X2D and lenses. A classic look and feel system - M plus SL3 for aging eyesight/unsteady hands for the M lenses. A fast utility system - A7Mk4/5 and zooms. 

For example, rare journeys, X2D system; city tours, Point and Shoot; extended immersive trips, M/SL and m lenses; run and gun long hikes with unpredictable weather, Sony. 

Certainly just a guess, but forum threads show many have multiple systems; actually perhaps single Leica system owners on this forum might be the minority. 

[jaapv]

I think that, in the end - with a few notable exceptions: don’t do dangerous wildlife with a Q , etc. . Present-day systems are flexible enough to adapt to most photographic situations eliminating the need for a trunkful of camera systems. The limitations will not show up in the end results. Lenses will make a difference and the most important differentiator shows up each morning in the mirror when I shave. Cameras come a long way down in the list. 

[Benoo]

10 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The limitations will not show up in the end results

I think they do, if you need fast AF then there are cameras that are best in class. I like the SL for the way it makes me apprach photography, but i would not sell my sony kit as i use it for things the SL would not be good for. the images and end result is how i know that 

[jaapv]

Having been restricted to manual focus for decades, I have difficulty in seeing an absolute need for AF, fast or otherwise. I like and use it for convenience and the occasional shot that cannot be taken without, but those are few and far between. And that includes things like fast-moving wildlife, running athletes, etc. Jesse Owens was not photographed with a Sony. As I said, the mirror shows the guy to do it - and cameras don't shave.

I know, I know, we are entering an age of self-driving cars and self-photographing cameras, but, to keep it German, ohne Mich, bitte. 

[IkarusJohn]

6 hours ago, o2mpx said:

For my use case, systems building is highly dependent on one’s life activities, it seems 3-4 camera systems are necessary vs 1. An all purpose point and shoot - Q3, GFX100RF etc. A top rated high resolution/color system - X2D and lenses. A classic look and feel system - M plus SL3 for aging eyesight/unsteady hands for the M lenses. A fast utility system - A7Mk4/5 and zooms. 

For example, rare journeys, X2D system; city tours, Point and Shoot; extended immersive trips, M/SL and m lenses; run and gun long hikes with unpredictable weather, Sony. 

Certainly just a guess, but forum threads show many have multiple systems; actually perhaps single Leica system owners on this forum might be the minority. 

I agree with this.  Where I’ve got to:

SL - not worth selling.  Used for tramping and outdoor activity with the 24-90, where weatherproof and robustness is useful.  Telephoto with the Elmarit-R 180/2.8 and scanning slides with the Sigma 105/2.8 macro.  AF a bit rubbish, so use back-button manual focus - the 24-90 manual focus has zero feel.

TL2 - fits in my cycle jersey with the 28 Summaron-M.  Won’t replace it when it dies..

X2D - travel and general use with the XCD 38v lens.  It has lovely tactile manual focus, AF is good (not bllindingly fast, but accurate) and the image quality is sublime.  This system will ultimately take over from the SL system.

M - for everything else with fabulous manual focus, wonderful lenses and all very compact.  The M10-D complements the X2D, the Monochrom does black & white beautifully and the M-A will be my forever camera to use with my M lenses, which I don’t plan to sell.  No plans to buy another digital M, until my Monchrom can’t be repaired, then I will try to find and M10-M.

[Olaf_ZG]

As the OP, I guess my system will look as following:

SL: for portraits (the Lux) and with the 24-90. Perfect for those rainy days as well

M: pure for fun and as a daily carry. I settled down on a nice CCD set with few lenses only.

Q: had to leave to fund another system

X?D/907x: for long exposure work

 

It took me several years to clearly come to this setup, buying/selling quite some stuff, but finally I know what I want to photograph and can base my needs upon that.

(and regarding the HB set, I am perfectly clear about the lenses I want, but the body is still not decided. I guess the x2d is the way to go, but only because of its tilting screen)

[LocalHero1953]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

Having been restricted to manual focus for decades, I have difficulty in seeing an absolute need for AF, fast or otherwise. I like and use it for convenience and the occasional shot that cannot be taken without, but those are few and far between. And that includes things like fast-moving wildlife, running athletes, etc. Jesse Owens was not photographed with a Sony. As I said, the mirror shows the guy to do it - and cameras don't shave.

I know, I know, we are entering an age of self-driving cars and self-photographing cameras, but, to keep it German, ohne Mich, bitte. 

Sure, your choice and I don't have any argument about that. 

When someone says 'this is so' my immediate instinct is to say 'no it's not' or 'where's the evidence?' (which annoys the hell out of my wife, but that's another matter). I've searched for photos of Jesse Owen; every one of him in movement was probably prefocussed (the start, a hurdle, finish line etc). None of him moving towards or away from the camera doing something at an unpredictable spot, such as overtaking another runner. 

AF offers opportunities for shots that couldn't easily be taken then (without a dose of luck): they are closer, at unpredictable locations, with shallow depth of focus, and at surprising moments.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jaapv]

Quite and I have no problem with that as it falls in the same category of taking a shot using a Q for a hungry Lion. My point was that some people spend huge amounts of money on systems that they think they need for nerdy reasons. Like your example:  Think whether one really needs a Sony for AF. Examine whether Leica’s AF is really the bottleneck and whether as you say cannot be replaced by the prefocus technique. Many parallel examples can be thought of. Like do I really need a medium format with a TS lens or will an SL3 with PC and a stitch do? If the answer is negative, by all means use a different tool. But don’t reverse the decision process, that leads to redundancy. And poverty 😜

[Dazzajl]

3 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I guess the x2d is the way to go, but only because of its tilting screen)

As I become less inclined (okay, willing or able) to get on the floor or in the mud to get my shots, the flip screen has become one of the greatest inventions in photography. 
 

If the X2d fits your kit budget then it has to be a great choice. If you’re not overjoyed at the massive price hike from the X1dii just for a screen, then a very left field thought to mull might be the GFX50R? I’ve not held one myself so it might be horrid but I know it wasn’t built to be affordable in the way the 50Sii or 100S have been and might not be so sterile to use??

I also prefer the look of the 50mp sensor to the 100 but that’s a very personal take and I might even consider working without the flippy screen to have the X1dii but that’s very much my ‘mileage’ and yours will surely vary.