The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Leica SL (601) ..Oct 20th?

Paratom

Well-known member
I am also a little concerned regarding the size of the lenses. Body size looks good to me. Right now Inthink if I would have theat amount of money I wouldnrather upgrade from s006 to s007 than buying a sl+lens.
I am also quite happy with the T system for casual shooting. If they give us a T with included evf and af-speed like the sl then I am fine.
 

Zony user

New member
I am also a little concerned regarding the size of the lenses. Body size looks good to me. Right now Inthink if I would have theat amount of money I wouldnrather upgrade from s006 to s007 than buying a sl+lens.
I am also quite happy with the T system for casual shooting. If they give us a T with included evf and af-speed like the sl then I am fine.
Exactly, a ILC version of the Q. What everyone was waiting for!! Why on earth did they overthink this?
 

ohnri

New member
What I find troubling with regards to Sony's answer to this is that they have already, within a time frame of two years, launched 6 - six - more or less overlapping versions of the A7. Still, this single model from Leica seems to be a better all-round option.
I can see where Sony's rapid upgrade path causes a great deal of frustration. However, I went from the A7 to the A7r2 and feel very little overlap in their functionality.

I also cannot see where this giant camera that lacks IBIS, low light capabilities, PDAF, canon lens compatibility, a significant native AF lens availability, Eye Tracking AF, a tilting screen, high resolution, any semblance of affordability and more can be flatly called a better all-around solution.

For me, it would represent a giant leap backwards from either my A7r2 or my Samsung NX1.

But, for the well-heeled Leica specific crowd, especially those that don't mind a large camera body, it looks like an interesting choice.

I would particularly like to see a Sony body with a high frame rate and a deeper buffer and more responsiveness in every day usage.

Hopefully, these strengths of the Leica are praised so widely that Sony begins to feel the heat.

Otherwise, I hope that Canon or Nikon makes a mirrorless with those features.

Or, I would love to see Samsung wake from its long slumber and invest in the NX1 system with more great lenses. Or release their own insanely spec'd FF body.

Or maybe the rumored November Sony camera body already incorporates those features.

-Bill
 

Hulyss Bowman

Active member
This is a very nice piece of gear. Video side with full HD at 120fps (super interesting), built like a fewKing panzer ... a very durable tool if someone is able to invest such a price. With this in the pocket and some judicious lenses, no need other cameras for many many years.

Now, this is sure Nikon or Canon will produce something at least similar (in build quality I hope).

For me it is the best leica ever and it will be a major success for the brand.


BUT ...

With a body that large, I would have expected MF sensor inside. It is almost the size of a Mamiya 7ii...
 

JorisV

New member
This camera seems to have hit a very sensitive spot with Sony shooters...

I guess Leica must have done something right :)
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
This camera seems to have hit a very sensitive spot with Sony shooters...

I guess Leica must have done something right :)
I don't know that nerves are struck so much as there are some that are more vocal about the hypocrasy of some that ding Sony and the limitations of being a new FF system (like lens size, not having DSLR like PDAF, lens selection, etc) but see Leica gets "a pass" for having some of the same flaws.

Personally I think this will be a great camera, specifically for those looking for a 35mm FF Leica S backup or a true R solution (even if it doesn't currently fit into my personal needs) and one that could be a real DSLR alternative IF there were more market and user access. From that marketing standpoint I think this is a market success. As a competitor in the mirrorless market though I think it's somewhat of a failure as Sony, Olympus, Fuji, and Samsung will likely surpass the technological features of this cameras pretty quickly as many pf them are already surpassed. The same can be said for the pro level DSLR's (5D, 6D, D810, etc) that are all about due for replacement/update soon.

Choice is good and if I still was in the "Leica Ecosystem" or wanted to get my wife a camera this would be something I'd consider along with the Fuji, Sony, or Olympus choices.
 

Zony user

New member
This camera seems to have hit a very sensitive spot with Sony shooters...

I guess Leica must have done something right :)
Presumably you are referring to me as well, but I have been a Leica shooter long before I was a Sony shooter, and I haven't completely converted.
I used to shoot with a M8/M8.2/M9/M240 and recently switched to the A7 series, but I still have my M lenses and a Leica Q.

This product pisses me off because it wasn't a ILC version of the Leica Q like it was hyped to be. That is what I wanted. Nothing more nothing less
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I also cannot see where this giant camera that lacks IBIS, low light capabilities, PDAF, canon lens compatibility, a significant native AF lens availability, Eye Tracking AF, a tilting screen, high resolution, any semblance of affordability and more can be flatly called a better all-around solution.

-Bill
Ah... but I never had IBIS or eye tracking AF, I mostly shoot at ISO 64 with manual focus lenses, all of which can be fitted to the SL with an adapter, and I prefer to use the viewfinder. When I used Panasonic cameras, the LCD where mostly turned in towards the camera body, since all the information was available in the viewfinder anyway.

But I do want a great viewfinder, 4K video, slo-mo video, 2 storage cards, a top LCD, batteries that last as long as possible and a camera that can take the abuse that I expose it to. And I don't care if my camera is 600 or 800 or 900 grams. I carry several kilograms of lenses anyway, always.

So for me, this is a better all-round solution than any A7. That may change when the A7 Mark III versions are launched next year of course, and I probably can't afford the Leica anyway. But that is fine, since the D810 is still a great camera, and it will continue to be great for years to come.
 

ohnri

New member
I don't know that nerves are struck so much as there are some that are more vocal about the hypocrasy of some that ding Sony and the limitations of being a new FF system (like lens size, not having DSLR like PDAF, lens selection, etc) but see Leica gets "a pass" for having some of the same flaws.

Personally I think this will be a great camera, specifically for those looking for a 35mm FF Leica S backup or a true R solution (even if it doesn't currently fit into my personal needs) and one that could be a real DSLR alternative IF there were more market and user access. From that marketing standpoint I think this is a market success. As a competitor in the mirrorless market though I think it's somewhat of a failure as Sony, Olympus, Fuji, and Samsung will likely surpass the technological features of this cameras pretty quickly as many pf them are already surpassed. The same can be said for the pro level DSLR's (5D, 6D, D810, etc) that are all about due for replacement/update soon.

Choice is good and if I still was in the "Leica Ecosystem" or wanted to get my wife a camera this would be something I'd consider along with the Fuji, Sony, or Olympus choices.
Or, wait six months and get the Panasonic FF version with tilting rear screen for under $3,500

So many fantastic cameras are out there and this is definitely one of the most interesting. I am so blown away by the choices.

-Bill
 

ohnri

New member
Oooh! Where's my Panasonic Leica S clone? I missed it.
LOL

Fair point. But Leica bought this technology from someone and my eight ball says All Signs Point To Panasonic.

If Panasonic wants to take their well regarded GH line into FF territory it will, no doubt, have some very similar internal technology as the new Leica.

Of course, Panasonic going FF is wild speculation and the powerful Leica is real.

-Bill
 
LOL

Fair point. But Leica bought this technology from someone and my eight ball says All Signs Point To Panasonic.

If Panasonic wants to take their well regarded GH line into FF territory it will, no doubt, have some very similar internal technology as the new Leica.

Of course, Panasonic going FF is wild speculation and the powerful Leica is real.

-Bill
Woot, I would have thought Leica would be smart enough to have a contract to lock Panasonic out of the game. This is the big league, so to speak, that a m4/3 player has no place in here. Unlike the P&S market, if Panasonic would come out with their SL version, it would wreck Leica in a major way.
 

rmueller

Well-known member
Personally i really welcome the new Leica SL. I was about to buy a M-240 as a backup for my beloved MM, i guess i will
stop this and consider the SL instead. It would also give me something in between my MM and Hasselblad H3D and could
be used as a backup for both. Wondering if it would work to stack the H Adapter for S and then the S Adapter for SL for
attachment of Hasselblad HC lenses to the SL. I'd probably get the SL with just one fast prime lens and then
adapt the rest either from M glass or HC glass. Needless to say i really don't care about weight and size of the SL.
It looks like a sturdy beast of a camera which i like.

I might get my hands on one SL next weekend, lets see...

Just my 2 cents,
Ralf
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I just don't get the value proposition for a professional.

My niece got married on Saturday. The professional was toting a bog standard Nikon pro body and had a smaller spare (probably a D610 or similar). Her main lens was obviously a 24-70 type zoom (a Sigma from the look of it) and she had what looked like the monster Nikon WA zoom for group shots.

Unless my maths is wrong the total of her kit including strobe is probably equal to, or even less than the SL+24-90. What Wedding Pro except those doing the top end weddings is going to be able to afford two SLs (for safety) and two lenses?

Then there is the disaster recovery issue. If her camera had failed on the day then she had a cheaper similar body for backup but with an equally good sensor. If her camera had failed before the wedding she could hire a body for the day/weekend which will be compatible with her bog-standard lens collection.

So, I can only assume the SL is aimed at wannabe professionals and not real professionals.

Actually, thinking about it I'd modify that and say it probably does have a place for videographers with deep pockets. But it is competing with the Panasonic GH-4 'whatever' which professionals I have talked to use as the 4K standard, some use the Sony A7S which has the iso sensitivity advantage and just got a whole lot better in the M2 version, so again why buy a £10K system - what on earth would be the ROI?

There is nothing I can see in this system which would compete with or replace the value proposition of my Sony kit at the best mirrorless ILC on the market. There is the Leica build and ergonomics but the premium is ridiculously high.

The strangest contradiction in product management terms is that the Leica Q which is by comparison a third of the price but has the same sensor would probably make a good second camera for a wedding pro for reportage and grab shots. I have an order in for one (no deposit, so no pressure) but I'm now seriously thinking of getting the Sony RX1R mk2 instead.

Sony is basically thrashing Leica and I seem to meet some of my Leica forum chums here at GetDPI who can no longer justify the benefits of a Leica system over the value proposition of Sony - especially as each iteration of their body/sensor works better and better with legacy Leica glass.

Anyway, if a pro out there can explain the value proposition I am genuinely interested and not just trolling.

Just my two cents!

LouisB

I can't see a value proposition for a working Pro. If this sported. 36 or 42 MPX it's a maybe at best. Problem here is one the money out of gate. It's a big investment for 24 MPX besides that you need backups either in hand or a place to rent one. I mean I have been here before on the cost issue with medium format and even with big sensors high MPX backs it was hard to justify sometimes. For pros it's a tough call but for Leica fans with money to burn it maybe a great setup. I'm bothered by the hand grip. I never meet a straight hand grip that would not cramp my hand in a hour. That looks like a poor design choice. Granted I have not read much about this since I already counted myself out but it's going to be hard to compete on the outside world of Leica itself and its users. Sony has taken a pretty big punch in the market. I can seriously buy two bodies of the A7rII and a 1200 dollar lens for the body cost alone. This is where ROI steps in at least for me. Leica lenses are not exactly cheap so a good kit to get going is at least 20k out of the gate. Seriously if I made mid 6 figures a year than I maybe would not think twice. I don't so I'm out but I'm not so sure how many Pros are in

But bottom line Pros are not leicas target it would be a mistake

I'm going to stay out of this conversation though as I don't want to sound negative about it. I love Leica and wish them well but the last couple years they priced me out of there product selections. I simply can't afford anything from them. I know that's my problem and there serving there niche buyers. The sad thing is I'm just not one of them anymore. I do like a lot of what they make.
 
Reading the last few pages, it's quite clear that those that want this camera would not budge on their POV and those that don't see of the point of this camera would continue to do so. It has been very repetitive. Leica is clearly not going to compete with Sony so it doesn't matter. Sony is gunning for Nikon position on the market while Leica is going to serve their own niche.

However, I do agree with Dre though. Sony got so much flak with their lens size, citing the incompetency of Sony for having thick sensor stack and small diameter mount. Now this camera comes out with ginormous lenses and no one questions why. I guess a big camera (though it's not that much bigger than Sony according to some :D) needs a big lens.
 

Zony user

New member
Reading the last few pages, it's quite clear that those that want this camera would not budge on their POV and those that don't see of the point of this camera would continue to do so. It has been very repetitive. Leica is clearly not going to compete with Sony so it doesn't matter. Sony is gunning for Nikon position on the market while Leica is going to serve their own niche.

However, I do agree with Dre though. Sony got so much flak with their lens size, citing the incompetency of Sony for having thick sensor stack and small diameter mount. Now this camera comes out with ginormous lenses and no one questions why. I guess a big camera (though it's not that much bigger than Sony according to some :D) needs a big lens.
I understand that Leica feels the need to serve their own niche, but it seems they have no clear vision of what they want to accomplish. I mean they're all over the place with the S lenses, M lenses, Cine lenses, R lenses, T lenses, and now the SL lenses. Even the "Big 3" (Canon, Nikon, Sony) only have 2-3 lens systems. And these companies are at least 10 times the size of Leica. So what on earth are they thinking making yet another niche product and accompanying lens system? Why not an ILC version of the Leica Q that will reach a broader fanbase?
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I can't see a value proposition for a working Pro. If this sported. 36 or 42 MPX it's a maybe at best. Problem here is one the money out of gate. It's a big investment for 24 MPX besides that you need backups either in hand or a place to rent one. I mean I have been here before on the cost issue with medium format and even with big sensors high MPX backs it was hard to justify sometimes. For pros it's a tough call but for Leica fans with money to burn it maybe a great setup. I'm bothered by the hand grip. I never meet a straight hand grip that would not cramp my hand in a hour. That looks like a poor design choice. Granted I have not read much about this since I already counted myself out but it's going to be hard to compete on the outside world of Leica itself and its users. Sony has taken a pretty big punch in the market. I can seriously buy two bodies of the A7rII and a 1200 dollar lens for the body cost alone. This is where ROI steps in at least for me. Leica lenses are not exactly cheap so a good kit to get going is at least 20k out of the gate. Seriously if I made mid 6 figures a year than I maybe would not think twice. I don't so I'm out but I'm not so sure how many Pros are in

But bottom line Pros are not leicas target it would be a mistake

I'm going to stay out of this conversation though as I don't want to sound negative about it. I love Leica and wish them well but the last couple years they priced me out of there product selections. I simply can't afford anything from them. I know that's my problem and there serving there niche buyers. The sad thing is I'm just not one of them anymore. I do like a lot of what they make.
I am not all that sure of the Mpx argument.
A lot of the working pros I know are shooting stuff in the 16.2 (Nikon D4s) to 18.1 (Canon EOS-1Dx) range or they are using the less expensive pro-sumer cameras and it is only then that we see larger numbers of pixels, or they are going much larger with medium format.
I doubt that Mpx alone are that much of an influence in the pro market anymore.
Yes, Guy, I know you personally like more Mpx, but the market figures seems to indicate it is the whole package that a pro camera needs and further the is not that homogeneous depending a lot on what sorts of assignments the pro typically obtains. One argument against is that a more mature line just has more stuff available and more stuff means more options. Rental house availability is also a good measure.
Two features that many pros like is the dual storage cards and the weather sealing. The SL I wager is NOT weatherproof with an M lens attached.
The camera, pro or not, looks to be a "date of the art" mirrorless camera with evidence of several lessons learned by others incorporated. I am most eager to actually experience the viewfinder.
One point that is a bit weird for me is that the one native lens I have seen seems to be on the large-ish side.
-bob
 
I understand that Leica feels the need to serve their own niche, but it seems they have no clear vision of what they want to accomplish. I mean they're all over the place with the S lenses, M lenses, Cine lenses, R lenses, T lenses, and now the SL lenses. Even the "Big 3" (Canon, Nikon, Sony) only have 2-3 lens systems. And these companies are at least 10 times the size of Leica. So what on earth are they thinking making yet another niche product and accompanying lens system? Why not an ILC version of the Leica Q that will reach a broader fanbase?
Based on the responses here from those that want to get this camera, they would care less if Leica has too many systems or whether they should cater to a broader audience. Leica produces what they want (and Leica knows this by asking some of the photographers in this niche), and that is the end of story. I think if Leica is more aware of pricing their product, they would be able to come up with a more sensible product line. As it stands right now, high price = niche = out-of-touch product (only to the bigger market).
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I understand that Leica feels the need to serve their own niche, but it seems they have no clear vision of what they want to accomplish. I mean they're all over the place with the S lenses, M lenses, Cine lenses, R lenses, T lenses, and now the SL lenses. Even the "Big 3" (Canon, Nikon, Sony) only have 2-3 lens systems. And these companies are at least 10 times the size of Leica. So what on earth are they thinking making yet another niche product and accompanying lens system? Why not an ILC version of the Leica Q that will reach a broader fanbase?
Technically it's a new lens system but in a common mount similar to how the E mount and FE mount are different systems but use a common mount. Maybe a branding strategy of naming the SL the "FT" (for FF T mount) or "TL" (for T mount Large) would make more sense from a system standpoint to many. I think SL (or S light as Jono mentioned) makes sense from a marketing/pricing standpoint in that this is a legitimate S system backup and a completely credible R solution (FINALLY) for R users.

As an M backup body I still think that a Leica Q that could mount lenses would make a great future Leica ML. People still want a camera like that as well.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I don't get the "this is expensive" argument. For a professional photographer who buys this camera and throws it into the dustbin after 150,000 exposures, the cost would be $0.05 per click. A typical event would for me equal a maximum of 2,000 clicks, which would then sum up to a camera cost of $100. Lens cost would be much lower, but let's say that other "hardware" costs are $100 too, and we are up to the grand sum of $200. If my income from photography can't cover that level of cost, I should look for other work (which I have, so I'm not a full time photographer anymore). For smaller jobs that require fewer exposure, portraiture for example, the mathematics look even more favourable.

Backup is of course an issue, but if this proves to be a reliable camera, a Leica T would be a great backup, although a separate WA lens would be needed to compensate for the crop factor.

Some claim that 24MP isn't sufficient, and that's fair enough, but I also think it's fair to say that users of the most common DSLR brand in the world, the one called Canon, haven't had access even to 24MP until very recently. Still, several of them have been able to make a living from their somewhat inferior cameras ;)
 
Top