Will the SL ever become a full system?

[FrozenInTime]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The GH7 closes the dynamic range gap with full frame by using dual gain sensor readout:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M10,Leica SL2-S,Panasonic Lumix DC-GH7

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M10,Leica SL3-S,Panasonic Lumix DC-GH7

I agree m43 is at risk as Lumix has not invested in small m43 bodies, which are now outrageously popular. Like Leica the marketing is pushing full frame. Lumix forgot their camera business grew on the strength of compact lenses and bodies like the Leica 15/1.7 and GX-80.

[Advertisement]

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

[Einst_Stein]

23 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

The GH7 closes the dynamic range gap with full frame by using dual gain sensor readout:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M10,Leica SL2-S,Panasonic Lumix DC-GH7

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica M10,Leica SL3-S,Panasonic Lumix DC-GH7

I agree m43 is at risk as Lumix has not invested in small m43 bodies, which are now outrageously popular. Like Leica the marketing is pushing full frame. Lumix forgot their camera business grew on the strength of compact lenses and bodies like the Leica 15/1.7 and GX-80.

It is a funny report.  Dynamic range improved by dual gain read out? Make triple gain read out, you will beat God. 

it is the technology improvement that makes larger sensor cheaper, so that to get the same IQ you will need higher optical performance per area with smaller sensor, to the point that the overall cost and performance of smaller sensor becomes less attractive.

M43 has reached that dying point, maybe the next will be APS-C. In fact, the Fujifilm APS-C with 40+ MP sensor also shows out of the scaling curve. It will need improved new lenses to make sense but the cost will be less attractive than FF sensor systems. We might see same trend between FF and mini medium format, maybe, just maybe, but won’t be in the near future.

[FrozenInTime]

11 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

It is a funny report.  Dynamic range improved by dual gain read out? Make triple gain read out, you will beat God. 

it is the technology improvement that makes larger sensor cheaper, so that to get the same IQ you will need higher optical performance per area with smaller sensor, to the point that the overall cost and performance of smaller sensor becomes less attractive.

M43 has reached that dying point, maybe the next will be APS-C. In fact, the Fujifilm APS-C with 40+ MP sensor also shows out of the scaling curve. It will need improved new lenses to make sense but the cost will be less attractive than FF sensor systems. We might see same trend between FF and mini medium format, maybe, just maybe, but won’t be in the near future.

Diminishing returns beyond two ADC gain channels.

Large sensors get cheaper to produce, but the size of lenses grows with image circle and demand for higher resolution as well as AF motors and floating elements. Today's systems seem over-engineered and over-specified.

[Einst_Stein]

37 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

. Today's systems seem over-engineered and over-specified.

For people happy with 1/2.3” sensor, M43  might be over engineered and over-specified.

[BernardC]

19 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

it is the technology improvement that makes larger sensor cheaper, so that to get the same IQ you will need higher optical performance per area with smaller sensor, to the point that the overall cost and performance of smaller sensor becomes less attractive.

That's only true if you are trying to extract the same number of pixels from the smaller sensor. Real-world, MFT sensors are fine in the 24MP range that people actually want and need. Sure, if you want 60 or 100 MP, you should investigate larger formats.

The fact that MFT starts to break down for prints wider than a meter isn't really relevant. 

7 hours ago, Einst_Stein said:

For people happy with 1/2.3” sensor, M43  might be over engineered and over-specified.

If you are fully content with you phone's cameras, you don't need anything else. 

[tom0511]

I guess AF is not needed on a 15 or 16mm lens.

So any adapted R or M or other lens would do. Than there is the 16-35 SL lens existing.

I would wish for a Leica 70200 or a Leica 200/2.0 or 400/2.8.

And for a smaller Leica midrange zoom (not sigma clone).

Personally I have arranged to combine the Leica design lenses with a few Sigma ones (70200/2.8 and 500/5.6) and one Pana one (100 Macro).

 

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Am 7.10.2025 um 23:22 schrieb Archiver:

My formative DSLR years were with Canon, giving me significant muscle memory with their zooms. Switching to Panasonic was aggravating at first because of the opposite zoom ring direction, but I got used to it. Sigma can't quite make up its mind, producing zooms that rotate in either way, which is annoying when I work with their 18-35 (Nikon direction) and 24-105 (Canon direction) on the same job.

The Canon R 70200/2.8 is about the lightest and most compact 70200/2.8 I know. The 100500 Canon is also quite compact light.

 

[Einst_Stein]

On 10/23/2025 at 10:37 AM, BernardC said:

That's only true if you are trying to extract the same number of pixels from the smaller sensor. Real-world, MFT sensors are fine in the 24MP range that people actually want and need. Sure, if you want 60 or 100 MP, you should investigate larger formats.

The fact that MFT starts to break down for prints wider than a meter isn't really relevant. 

If you are fully content with you phone's cameras, you don't need anything else. 

Trying to match the  MP on  a smaller sensor as a large format sensor is probably one of the most stupid goal. 
I have seen 40MP on APS-C requires redesigned lenses to make sense, so would be 24MP on M43. I don’t know what you mean 24MP is fine with M43. 

leica DLUX 8 chooses to stay in 17MP is a clear sign.

Any format can be a good format as long as you are aware the limitation and be happy with that limitation, including M43. But hoping anything to make a smaller sensor to match a larger sensor in IQ (such as multiple gain ADC) in the practical sense, you have to beat God.
 

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said:

I have seen 40MP on APS-C requires redesigned lenses to make sense, so would be 24MP on M43. I don’t know what you mean 24MP is fine with M43. 

Times have changed. The current G9ii has 25MP with excellent image quality. 

[Einst_Stein]

2 hours ago, BernardC said:

Times have changed. The current G9ii has 25MP with excellent image quality. 

No, Try to get a high end G9ii camera/lens combo and a comparable FF.  The price has no advantage, size has no advantage, but FF wins in IQ. 

Face it, it is physical law!

[BernardC]

Really? Have you compared the size of a fast long MFT zoom with a FF equivalent? It's a huge difference, especially if you are carrying it all day. 

[jaapv]

6 hours ago, BernardC said:

Times have changed. The current G9ii has 25MP with excellent image quality. 

I am presently editing a mixture of CL and SL2S shots. Although the CL sensor is considered to be an excellent one (and I am happy using it), the IQ difference is striking and I have to edit considerably to get the images to match more or less with the SL. That is even more the case for MFT shots - more than satisfactory on their own, but they won't hold up to Full Frame in direct comparison.

[Markey]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

I am presently editing a mixture of CL and SL2S shots. Although the CL sensor is considered to be an excellent one (and I am happy using it), the IQ difference is striking and I have to edit considerably to get the images to match more or less with the SL. That is even more the case for MFT shots - more than satisfactory on their own, but they won't hold up to Full Frame in direct comparison.

I noticed that when I had both cameras .

I only have the SL2s now.

Having said that I miss the CL .

[BernardC]

16 hours ago, jaapv said:

I am presently editing a mixture of CL and SL2S shots. Although the CL sensor is considered to be an excellent one (and I am happy using it), the IQ difference is striking and I have to edit considerably to get the images to match more or less with the SL. That is even more the case for MFT shots - more than satisfactory on their own, but they won't hold up to Full Frame in direct comparison.

The CL came out in 2017. It had a competitive sensor at the time, and it's still fine at lower EI settings, but you really can't compare it to a state-of-the-art 2025 sensor. Newer sensors have dual native ISO, lower noise, faster readout, etc.  They are still slightly behind FF for ultimate IQ, but you probably won't notice that unless your exposure is way off, or you plan to make huge prints (well over 1m on the long end).  MFT is a very compelling option for long lens work these days.