Whew, 45 pages of comments already.
It occurred to me that this is the type of camera that Canon and Nikon should have been making by now. A Mirror-less DSLR replacement with a EVF that rivals an OVF for clarity.
Personally, tiny little cameras fit for "girly man" hands hasn't worked for me very well All the complex Lilliputian buttons haphhazardly scattered around something the size of pack of gigs just invites screw-ups when hectically working with sausage digits ... especially in low light
Admittedly, DSLRs got too big ... and I think Mirror-less Sony's are too small for proper FF lenses with faster apertures, or longer focal lengths.
So, for me, this is sort of the "Goldilocks" solution ... just right.
IMO, anyone that walks around for long periods of time dangling a kit from their finger tips is asking for it. Moving from hip to eye without some sort of support is a recipe for Tendinitis. I moved to using a Camadpter dual lug Arca QR with a hand-strap and wide, spongy shoulder strap to shoot weddings after too many "bump and fumbles" from elbowing bystanders and staggering party animals, and 8 straight hours of "lift to eye" inflammation
Different strokes for different folks.
3 Member(s) thanked for this post3 Member(s) liked this post
Surely the zooms matter, because they are the only native lenses expected to be available in the next 12 months. The first native prime (50mm f1.4) won't be with us until late 2016 and not a single other prime has been laid out, or given a timeline. I'd therefore say the zooms are pretty important. After all, unless you own S lenses, neither M nor R lenses will give you access to the super-quick AF being touted.
And this is my concern for Leica. Should Canon or Nikon manage to produce a top end mirrorless FF camera (in the next year) with access to their huge stable of lenses, the SL's reason for being starts to look precarious. That said, Canon doesn't seem capable of moving beyond ten year old sensor technology, or polishing their 'M' despite three generations, so Leica may be OK.
DSLRs are kinda big and fat in some cases, but all credit to Nikon for the D750, which is quite compact and light for its spec. The 5DS is also no bigger or heavier than the last few generations of Canon. With the D750 and 7D II, I'd say there is even less of a reason to need a D4S/1DX behemoth than ever before, which is nice.
I'd like to see Leica get modestly sized SL 35mm f2 and 85mm f1.4/1.8 (or 90/100mm f2) lenses on the roadmap pronto. I really think it would help sell the camera - even more than a huge 50mm f1.4, which seems overkill for 24MP to my eyes.
Marc, I would love to see an image of your strap kit or know where you purchased it as I do suffer from tendinitis and my 810/Otus combo exacerbates the problem mightily.
Back on topic: After Ming's comments on the grip and seeing the pictures of the SL, I do wonder why the grip has such a sharp return on the inside. It seems to me that the inside curve should closer match the outside curve and would be more comfortable. If I have hands like Ming's (who knows?) then it becomes a problem. But, irregardless, 24mp (is this the same sensor as my M-P?) just isn't enough for a new high-end body at this time - 50 would have knocked it out of the park.
I wonder what some guys expect.
A fullframe camera with lenses in the size of T lenses but constant f 2.8?The internet has critcized Leica many times for the slow x vario lens and for the slow T- standard zoom.
So I guess Leica focus more on speed than on size for the SL lenses.
For me? I rather have a little slower lenses in a little smaller size.
so I agree and hope for some f2.0 primes for the SL.
1 Member(s) liked this post
Goodness - and for an adaptor too.
We all recognise that our digital cameras will gradually become out of date and often we don't care and keep using them for years. However, ideally, 'outdatedness' should not be too glaring at the time of receipt. Whereas Leica can get away with it with a M model (no direct competitors and its a platform laden with idiosyncrasies anyway), I don't think Leica has anywhere near that sort of leeway with the SL and S lines.
Without an appropriate lens roadmap at the time of release, I fear that many who might otherwise have adopted the SL won't, simply because they have no idea where it will go (how can anyone say what the SL system truly 'is' at this point - we simply have no idea). Poor initial sales would then impact what the system could have become. After goofing up the T, ending up well behind the curve on the S007, I am surprised by Leica with the SL. I fear they are spreading themselves far too thinly, resulting in an inability to really decisively deliver on any of them. While it may sound dangerous, I wonder if if the problem is that they are too afraid to put lots of eggs in any one basket. However, isn't that what the market wants: strong, enduring well thought out in-depth systems delivered on time? This is precisely what the SL isn't. Its one body and zoom lens, with another zoom 'quite a bit later' and one more prime 'a lot later'. This looks like an experiment and not a commitment. While the 'wait and see if they like it' approach might make sense for Leica, I don't think customers think the same way. Not at $12,500 anyway.
I don't think I have ever seen a camera system that was "complete" (for me at least) at the time of announcement. The nature of engineering is the art of compromise despite marketing rhetoric. If I as a photographer, were to wait until a camera system was "complete" I have really only three options.
1) go without a camera
2) Buy something new and wait hoping that over time I can add to the kit and have it approach completeness
3) Buy something that already fits into a broad line of compatible stuff (lenses etc.)
Since I happen to have a self full of Nikon glass, new nikons are a natural for me to update a system already invested. The interesting thing to me about the SL, all other considerations aside, is its ability to work well with M lenses. Although I don't have a shelf-full of them, I do have a few, so I already have an answer to the desire for small fast lenses at least at 35, 50, and 75mm.
As for price points, smallish manufacturers don't have the economies of scale that large ones do so they have little choice but to seek specialty niches or audiences where their necessarily higher prices will find a market.
Very unfair of Hermes don't you think pricing their birkin bags so high that they are out of reach for the average photographer
The absolute biggest issue here be it this camera is a dog or the best thing since sliced bread in your mind and the absolute biggest reason I stopped buying Leica. This has been a big big issue since them entering digital. They announce it takes s year and by that time the sensor , camera, functions have already been surpassed by someone else. It's like buying a year old egg. As soon as you get it is already old. I know small company , small market, handmade, luxury item takes time and all the reasons in the world but your still a year behind or more on tech. That's always been my biggest bitch is two words that totally define Leica. WAIT TIME
And what makes it far worse is not having those lens adapters immediately upon release so the native lenses take even longer. I just don't have that patience but get the damn adapters out with release so people can shoot immediately.
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
www.guymancusophotography.com4 Member(s) liked this post
The M adapter is available right now (it's the M adapter for the T), and the R adapter is available from Novoflex. Or you can use two Leica-branded adapters: T-to-M and M-to-R. I think that provides enough lens coverage for current Leica users.
Obviously, those two solutions are manual focus. M and R lenses always are.
It's pretty clear that Leica will need to offer more SL autofocus lenses in the future, but they seem to prefer "soft-launching" their cameras. The first batch goes to the diehard fans, and the system gains traction with new customers over time.
1 Member(s) liked this post
The more I read and think about the SL, the more I start appreciating it as potentially becoming a great tool for me. Just thinking about its capability as a great M lens back, this alone would justify that camera for me, instead of needing to buy the M240, which I often tried to love but never really could.
I think that Leica did a lot of things right and they again did a bold move! Given the current stagnant situation of development WRT Canon and Nikon in the mirrorless arena, let alone the FF mirrorless, just because they fear that this will canibalize their existing DSLR and FF lens sales. This is really stupid of them, they only had to nail something together like the SL and enable usage of all their legacy lenses on this body with an adapter from the very beginning and would have a powerful mirrorless alternative for their users (pro users) asking for this. And I guess there would be plenty of those. They could of course also launch a new set of lenses optimism for their mirrorless cameras (maybe making them a bit smaller or more attractive zoom ranges and speeds) and they even could offer a mirrorless APSC body for those wanting something a bit smaller.
Instead of doing so we just saw all these newly warmed up cameras like Nikon D7200, D750, D810, etc. or Canon 7D2 over the past years and now the new high end incarnation of 5DSxyz etc. They should have had the balls to do a real step forward and leapfrog the competition. I actually have the feeling from all what I hear about their innovation towards missorless, that they still stick to OVF and conventional DSLR and seem to want to follow this concept for the next years. This is nothing than fear, laziness and ignorance and I actually cannot help than wishing them bad luck and the ticket to hell for this.
Brave Leica came out with that new mirrorless concept and while this camera of course can be criticized for lot of things, the ones it seems to do right outweigh by far the bad side at least for me. And they have the much more difficult task to develop a complete set of new SL lenses to make use of this fast AF, where else the incumbents C/N would have already their undeniably great and in many cases excellent and modern AF arsenal they could offer their customers to immediately mount on their mirrorless cameras, which will obviously not happen soon. I can only reiterate, this is nothing less than IGNORANCE and has been so for years now.
I do hope Leica has the power, resources, money etc. to build the SL lens ecosystem asap.
Life is an ever changing journey
at least 13 but maybe even 15 stops of dynamic range with 16-bit color, while the Pentax 645Z is listed as having 14-bit color as well as PhaseOne's CMOS backs. It has WiFi, GPS, is weather-sealed, built like a tank, and is coupled with the best lenses Leica has ever made. So what gives?
If it's megapixels, Leica apparently made the decision that the current pixel pitch is optimum for best overall performance (I believe the M (240) and SL have the same sized pixels), and the way the camera is going to be used. Ming Thein, for instance, observed problems with the Canon 5DSR with the current trend of pixel cramming and passed it over.
By far my biggest headache with the camera was that it tended to be a ‘fair weather friend’: under ideal circumstances, on a tripod, or in very good light, with critical focus obtained with the very best lenses, the files are pretty incredible. But if any one of those stars fail to align, then you’re going to land up with something slightly soft-looking and just a tad disappointing: as though somebody slipped an AA filter back in the optical chain somewhere. Somehow, the jump from 36 to 50MP magnifies the visibility of a lot of things: operator shake and critical focus/focal plane being the main ones. It is both very rewarding and extremely brutal on those who are sloppy on technique or cheaper out on their support gear, perhaps the most unforgiving I’ve ever used.
So, aside from some magical MP number, how is the 007 so well behind the curve?
Century egg is a delicacy in some parts of the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_egg
Those who have seen it know it is gorgeous.
1 Member(s) liked this post
Leica SL (Typ 601) raw file (DNG) analysis by Sandy
ChromaSoft: Leica SL (Typ 601) raw file (DNG) analysis
With best regards, K-H.1 Member(s) thanked for this post
Some images with the 90-280mm:
1 Member(s) thanked for this post1 Member(s) liked this post
Last edited by algrove; 23rd October 2015 at 11:12.
2 Member(s) liked this post
I've used both, they are different cameras, the S 007 is a medium format sensor in a body the dimensions of a D810, the Z is a medium format 645 camera. I have tried lots of things, there is nothing at all to compare with the S for usability and for the range of lenses that match beautifully at all available focal lengths. There is no more highlight or shadow recovery in the Z than in the 007, I have a couple of hundred Z raws and thousands of S files.
I obviously think differently to a lot of you guys, when a camera is announced is irrelevant, when it's in the shop then it's worth consideration, I have never once seen a camera manufacturer announce a new product with a complete line of lenses available for purchase on day of release, it's unreasonable to expect it. That said, 1 zoom lens would be highly unlikely to attract users without access to current lenses wanting to use with an adapter.
The SL in my mind is not a compact mirrorless camera, it is a DSLR replacement with an evf and excellent video, that's it, for some useful, for others baffling.
No direct SL-R adapter exists for anything like Sean Reid was hoping for. So until that adapter comes out (I hope sometimes next year, but based on the time frame it took for Leica to get the M-R adapter out Leica does not have a good track record in this area) what is the advantage of getting a camera judges heavier than the M and which has one, just one native lens available until mid 2016.
If an S-SL adapter were NOW available it would at least get S users interested more than the ones I know who are on the sidelines waiting for that adapter.
I too have used both systems in a wide variwty of enviorments and each as expressed by others fills different but overlapping niches. Each has its strengths and weaknesses but does well at what its primarily designed for. No one camera nor system covers all bases although even where it doesn't play to its strengths, can often do well.
I believe the new SL will be no different. For some, especially for those that have Leica lenses of various systems, might find the unification (to a degree) of their lens use a blessing
Others will find the appropriate camera specifically designed for their lenses preferable. I think its only fair to wait till the camera is in hand and used to some capacity, before definitive announcements are made. On paper a body often appears differently than in actual use. The Nikon Df (a polarizing body in its own right) is one such body.
Last edited by D&A; 23rd October 2015 at 10:59.
I'm going slightly off topic here but it's very easy for me to explain why the S stands head and shoulders above the Z for one but also for other MF cameras.
This is my daily walking around kit, a Loka UL with 2 bodies and 4 lenses, a 180 on the 007 and in this case the 24 on the 006, both ready to use.
This is my event type setup which I use regularly, a Ando 18 with 2 bodies, the 70mm on the 007 and 35mm on the 006 with the 180 in the centre in case I need closer portrait stuff.
I make my living with this kit, it's impossible to do it with the Z and carry it about. The viewfinder on the Z is good, the S is amazing. To get the best lenses on the Z you need to spend as much as the S, of course you can supplement cheaper older lenses but can do the same on the S. The Z has more mp, this is the only area that it could claim to be better but better is subjective, I know my clients and the S is already overkill for MY commercial work.
I wanted to buy the Z and would if it had been better at the things that are important to me because it would be cheaper but I couldn't consolidate more mp with all the things the S is better at.
Obviously these are my views, may not be anyone else's.
http://matrichardson.com/1 Member(s) thanked for this post1 Member(s) liked this post
Does anyone know when the SL-S adapters will be available?
So you must use the S since you have thousands of raws from that cmaera, but just a handful of Z images compared to your S image inventory. Did you get your Z images off the internet or from others? Your statements suggest that if you owned a 645Z or used one for more than a few hours your statements would be different. Your comments about lenses also seem to substantiate this.
I love our chats!
The Z has much more shadow recovery than the S 006, that was never going to be contended by anyone, it's a ccd sensor, the 007 is a different thing, try it for yourself. The files I have are from having a Z for 3 days, the S files are from buying the S instead.
I'm stating personal preference.
Have a nice evening!
Good suggestion about trying the S007. I will rent an S 007 for 3 days and see if side by side shots are better with an S kit that costs multiples the price of a 645Z kit. Let's seenow:
30-90=$10.5k or maybe more by now
Total $27.5k without wired remote $139 and extra batteries at $224 each (ouch).
Total $18.5 without weather proof remote $20 and extra batteries at $45 each.
I can a second 645Z body and still have less in the kit than the above.
That S007 had better be WAY BETTER than the 645Z to justify all this expense.
Algrove, read my post again, I clearly state...
There is no more highlight or shadow recovery in the Z than in the 007, I have a couple of hundred Z raws and thousands of S files.
The Z is the latest camera isn't it? The S 007 is the latest S too.
The Z is cheaper, yes, I said that it's not part of my equation, I use the S to make a living and would have gladly used the Z if it worked for me. The benefit of a good dealer is also paramount, I never pay anywhere close to those prices.
So unsurprisingly we have the Z being cheaper, everyone knows that and I can only compare it against the older S not the newer one, ok, got it!
Enjoy your Z, I'm not in competition with you, I can honestly state that it doesn't matter to me in the slightest what you use as long as you feel good about it and enjoy it, what else could possibly matter!
EDIT I misread your post, thought you said you were comparing 006 against the Z not the 007, my mistake, ignore first bit, I'm adding this rather than just deleting! I can state though that the Z files I shot do not have any real difference to the 007 for shadow recovery.
It's nice isn't it, a lot of evenings sanding them!
Mat, I am not suggesting the S007 is a bad camera (I think its pretty nice actually), only that 11 months between announcement and release is looong. Were the camera to have arrived with ground breaking performance few would have cared; however, it arrived with a 37.5MP sensor. To many photographers (and the market) that matters. To me? It would depend on usage. As a landscape camera, I'd take the Z any day. For events and all round commercial work, I'd be struggling to find a reason not to use a D810.
37.5MP is not 'bad' - far from it - but it does not help the camera to clearly differentiate itself from the likes of the D810. No, I do not think they are 'the same', only that it makes it harder to sell the S007. I agree that the Canon 5DS has pushed that sensor architecture too far, but it has 50MP - more than the S and the same as the Z. Bigger pixels are nice, yes, but the S007 is closer to D810 territory than it should be, I personally think. Yes, the S performs well, but I am surprised to hear you say it performs on the same level as the Z with regard to dynamic range and shadow recovery, because most other commentators suggest otherwise (including with noise). The Z also has more pixels. That might not matter to you, but to many buyers it does and I cannot help but feel that a 50MP S007 would have done a much better job catching people's attention at the date of actual availability.
The key selling point with the S is, as you say, the ergonomics and lenses. However, to be fair, the system is a lot more expensive than the 645Z. 2 x Z bodies is $14K. Two S007 bodies is $34K. The Pentax 90mm macro is $4500. The Leica lenses are a bit more expensive, with $5k for the 70mm and $7K for the 100mm, however in fairness to the Pentax, their 90mm is stabilised, as is the 28-45, which runs at half the price of a Leica S zoom. BUT, the two are very different cameras and so I do not see this is a competition between the two.
My original point was that releasing a 37.5MP MF camera at a time when FF has all but perfected 36MP and is looking upwards (and when loads of amazing Zeiss lenses are coming to market) 11 months after announcement was a bit of a let down. I know many S006 users felt very frustrated for the same reasons. My comments are in relation to how many potential customers respond to these developments and what this might mean in terms of sales, not whether the camera is good and desirable to people who appreciate its spec.
Would I love a S007 and do I think it is a great camera? Yes. But that is a different point. The reason all this came up is that I fear Leica is gonna be too slow on the release of optics to make the SL viable, but enough people jump in, maybe all will be well and there will be a MK 2 released in 3 years when the lens lineup is more developed.
It's no problem if you feel it's a good or bad camera, I have read your stuff for quite a while and followed your journey through lots of cameras and systems and your requirements are different to mine and it's all good!
50mp is honestly something that isn't a problem for me at all, but then I am shooting to a market, I shoot loads of personal stuff too but I use the same kit. I ran a large Nikon kit for ages and didn't change to the S because I wanted more resolution, obviously, I didn't have an issue with resolution, I changed because of the viewfinder, lenses, weather proofing and to a smaller extent but no less important, everyone has a DSLR where I work and nobody has MF, to some clients it means nothing and to some it's important, mainly because I tell them it is! Haha.
The change from Nikon to Leica for the most part was image quality and the ease I can achieve it, sitting on my computer are thousands and thousands of files, the difference between the D800 and E and the S from a visual viewpoint is substantial to me. I made the decision to offer the best I could for my clients, worked very hard to make the money and have made a lot more money since, entirely down to the S unlikely but I have a renewed passion every time I pick it up!
As above post with pictures of my kit, it's the way I work, I simply couldn't carry 2 Z bodies and the equivalent lenses in the same way, I need a backup system and cost isn't a major factor. I have said before that the profit from my recent Mali trip easily paid for the 007 and the 24mm lens.
Bottom line for me, something that really doesn't need justification by the way, is that the S is the best system I have ever used, I just use it, all the time, every day and wouldn't change anything about it. I honestly hope you guys get the same feeling from the Z.
By the way Tom, I have told you before that your Afghan drug work is some of the best I have ever seen, I love it! I wouldn't care what you had shot it on, it's the subject I find beautifully portrayed.
http://matrichardson.com/3 Member(s) liked this post
R adapter in November
S adapter middle of next year
M adapter - already available (same as the T)
you can also stack the M to T adapter with the current M to R adapter very satisfactorily for R lenses.
So it's only really the S adapter that we'll have to wait for.
Just this guy you know
2 Member(s) thanked for this post
Here is the home site: http://camdapter.com/home.html
First you select an adapter: http://camdapter.com/adapter.html
I use a dual lug version of the ARCA Type Quick Release Adapter because my tripod and monopod heads are ARCA type QR. The dual lug type allows use of a hand strap from the camera strap lug to the adapter lug on one side, and a camera strap from the second adapter lug to the other camera strap lug. When using the shoulder strap, the camera hangs from one end like a M5 does.
Then you select the hand strap: http://camdapter.com/handstrap/prostrap.html
I use the above Pro Strap in black, but there are other style choices.
I can attest to the durability and toughness of this gear. I used them under duress on all my DSLRs and MFD cameras including the Leica S2.
RE: Meg Count: Frankly, 24 meg FF has been a sweet spot for most work I do with a DSLR. More than that starts making the technique required more and more difficult in order to realize the full potential of a 40 or 50 meg FF 35mm sensor. My last 3 DSLRs were 24 meg FF: Nikon D3X, Sony A900 and the Sony A99, and do not recall needing more other than in studio where I use the S camera.
1 Member(s) thanked for this post
Good review. My whole problem here that Leica has dropped the ball by not having the one adapter for guys who could immediately be early adopters-the S lens owners, i.e., S owners.
R lenses work on the M and M lenses work on the M, but S lenses are the important element in my mind for this gorgeous SL.
1 Member(s) thanked for this post
Just this guy you know
1 Member(s) liked this post
It's a whole lot more fun thinking of what kinds of things your kit can do than commiserating on forums about how the world's best camera designers and engineers have just missed it.
1 Member(s) liked this post
1 Member(s) liked this post
There are many perspectives from which to view the SL. The noisiest is from current Sony owners, many of whom are terribly sensitive, partly since the Canikon pros still don't take the system seriously, and of course 3K for a r2 is no small price for most of us mortals. If you spent that, irrational attachment may follow. Consider the original entered at 1800 and is now used at below 7. Guy calls that one a beta, but with a Kolari mod it is the cheapest decent FF M option available, and makes very nice images with all sorts of legacy glass, certainly better than the un-modded r2 with no small number of them. Worst thing about it is the highly distracting shutter.
Anyway, this group generally just looked at DPR's picture and blew up
Many M owners had exactly the same reaction. They already didn't like the Sony and this one was bigger and sort of looked like it!
These impulses drove drove countless posts. Some mellowing is currently occurring
But from the perspective of an S owner or R glass enthusiast it's a wonderful option really bridging all the various Leica systems, even the crop lenset. The discussion on the last page is a good illustration of this, and Ming also touched on the context in his preview.
Leica, although they threw away autofocus back in the day, have been much more clever with the SL than the Sony masses or M 'snobs' (i belong to both groups ) give them credit. Certainly for an S007 shooter who also has an M kit, well you can walk out the door with one body, lenses from each, and any great legacy lens to boot. It makes a second body to either kit as well. Shaving 100 grams and 10% off the footprint would have dampened the shock to some, but it's not like that extra is doing nothing: this camera is far more protected that a Sony a7r2. Armored in comparison.
As to the price, I'd bet the profit margin on the r2 is twice the margin on the SL, if there is any margin at all, in the end.
Here a few views of the camera by Kristian Dowling:
slside by All The Websters, on Flickr
sl angle by All The Websters, on Flickr
2 Member(s) liked this post
"Sony owners, many of whom are terribly sensitive...."
Unlike Leica users, who are quite calm in the face of criticism of their cameras.
5 Member(s) liked this post
Agree that 24 MP is the sweet spot for many endevors, there are occasions when 40-50 MP is very desirable and even necessary. Very large format prints, especially landscapes comes to mind as well as commercial posters size prints for posters for a client as well required the detail of a higher MP camera.
Then again the manageability of a 24MP file size in grip and grin situations and personal use has been a godsend.
What it boils down to is intended use and needs and a case can be made for both 24mp bodies as well as those that have higher resolution. There is no right or wrong.
1 Member(s) thanked for this post2 Member(s) liked this post
One effect of the SL launch is that a decision to release a full frame mirrorless by Canon and Nikon is probably drawing closer, unless it has already been made. With the V3, Nikon has clearly shown that they have the ability and technology available, and it would be foolish to think that Canon doesn't have access to what is needed too. While the A7 must have stolen market shares from the DSLR market that the two brands dominate, they probably haven't seen it as a serious contender to hard use by professionals, and the fact that Sony failed to make a big impression on the DSLR market when they tried 10 years ago, has probably also contributed to the relaxed attitude from the two camera behemoths.
With Leica showing a bigger, heavier instrument, that changes. Although the SL won't throw cameras like the D4s or 1D X out of the market, it shows what is possible, and the next competitor from Sony (an A9?) might be much more difficult to handle.
For me, this is also a reason to wait and see. A Nikon full frame mirrorless with a sensor similar to the one in the D810, one that can AF with my AF-S lenses using an adapter, would clearly be an alternative to this camera from Leica. A lower price would help too
I don't care what gear I have.
Things I sell: http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/413...html?rid=61105