wildlightphoto

I'm using the Sony a7rIII and 100--400 GM

They'll have to show me. As far as I'm concerned they've dug themselves into a very deep hole and it will take a hell of a lot of improvement to make their "service" the equal of the sh!ttiest of their competitors.

The 25% downtime included a period when it was a current item. Leica could also have returned it right away when they couldn't service it instead of sitting on it for eight months and causing additional damage before telling me that parts are no longer available (DAG subsequently repaired the lens). The "service" was so bad they were unable to even ANSWER THE TELEPHONE, for EIGHT MONTHS. This has nothing to do with the age of the lens. F*** 'em. And I haven't mentioned the R8's mirror box "repair" a few years ago.

If 0.1% was all the downtime I'd probably be much more willing to pay Leica prices for my equipment. The lens I've most enjoyed using was the R 280mm f/4 APO and the downtime with Leica "service" approached 25%. The SL may be another story entirely but Leica will have a lot of goodwill to restore before I trust any of my dollars with them.

Atmospheric conditions can be a problem.

Same for myself.

I've found that IBIS makes a dramatic improvement in image quality particularly when shutter speeds are in the danger zone, i.e., slower than 1/(2x FL). It also makes manual focus with viewfinder magnification much easier.

my Sony didn't cost that much when it was new. How much has the M9 depreciated?

this is why I crop. More MP isn't 'keeping up with the Joneses' unless the Joneses are your competitors selling photos. 42MP camera, BTW.

I don't have a problem with your photographic subjects or preferences. I don't see how more pixels with an option to use a subset of them would hinder your work in any way. With my subjects the moire and aliasing from the SL's 24 MP makes the images unusable and this combined with Leica's mind-boggling shitty service means the SL isn't the camera for me. More pixels is one of several changes that would need to be made before I consider the system again.

Why look back at Leica? It's simple: APO lenses. Leica's APO lenses are spectacular. The Sony FE 100-400 GM is quite good but its performance isn't the breathtaking, heart-stopping optical performance of a Leica APO lens. The R 280/4 APO has left a deep impression in my mind that I can't erase. A camera or lens failing isn't that big a deal. The camera or lens failing multiple times with the same problem and the service department failing to correct the problem multiple times after each failure is a big deal. My R8/DMR in one year racked up enough frequent flier miles between Sacramento and New Jersey to take a very nice vacation, and this was for one problem that was not repaired multiple times. Leica's service has left an impression in my mind as indelible as that of the 280/4 APO.

Perhaps 25% downtime isn't a big deal to you but it is to me. 25% downtime to me means buying a duplicate backup camera (body and lens) so that I have a camera available when I want it. For comparison the downtime on my Sony system has been 0% despite the Internet Forum Wisdom that the Sony is a 'fragile' body with 'unreliable' sensor stabilization.

This kind of "service" was the final nail in the coffin for my 35-year association with Leica Camera Inc. I had been considering the SL + 90-280 APO, even making up bizarre usage scenarios in my mind that wouldn't be tripped up by the inadequate 24MP resolution and sluggish OS until Leica finally returned my 280 R APO not only un-repaired but also with additional damage after 8 months in Germany and no explanation other than 'parts not available'. (The lens was subsequently repaired by DAG: parts required? three screws.) Knowing what kind of performance to expect from Leica APO lenses, there's still a temptation to buy back into the SL system but then I remember Leica's service. I don't need that kind of abuse.

24 MP is grossly inadequate for the performance of the 90-280 APO; the color moire and aliasing was clearly evident without pixel peeping. I don't know what you guys who think 24MP is fine are photographing but I'm willing to bet it's not fine regular detail like fabrics or feathers.

I've used both the 75-200 f/4.5 and the 80-200 f/4 and IMHO the 80-200 f/4 is a much better lens. The 75-200 was good in its day but comparing image detail, color, contrast and bokeh I prefer the 80-200 f/4. There's also the rotating filter thing.