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?

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
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.
 

Bernard

Member
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.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
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.
 
ending up well behind the curve on the S007
I don't understand this statement. Could you explain it? The S007 is listed as having 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?
 
V

Vivek

Guest
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.
One year old egg?


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.
 

wattsy

Well-known member
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.
The SL is certainly far more appealing if you have an investment in R lenses (less so with M lenses because the M system cameras are surely more suited?) and I imagine that many of the initial customers will be looking to use the camera with their R lenses. To that end, I don't understand why Leica are not planning on shipping a proper T-to-R adapter from day one. Is it really so difficult to get these adapters manufactured? Expecting customers to stack two adapters (neither marketed as an SL accessory) strikes me as a very untidy solution and would certainly put me off were I an R system owner.
 

algrove

Well-known member
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.
IMHO, Leica needs to get the SL-S adapter out yesterday. In this way they can get bodies in real users hands who can then spread the word how good it is and they get AF through their S lenses.
 
Last edited:

algrove

Well-known member
I don't understand this statement. Could you explain it? The S007 is listed as having at least 13 but maybe even 15 stops of dynamic range with 16-bit color, while the Pentax 645Z is listed as having
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.


So, aside from some magical MP number, how is the 007 so well behind the curve?
Are you joking with us? Have you ever tried the S? Have you ever tried the 645Z? Looking at statistics and ratings on B&H is not the way to evaluate a camera. The S007 was announced 11 months before it actually began to ship. Do you really think the rest of the industry stopped development while Leica was trying to get their first CMOS S to market?
 
M

mjr

Guest
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.

Mat
 

algrove

Well-known member
The SL is certainly far more appealing if you have an investment in R lenses (less so with M lenses because the M system cameras are surely more suited?) and I imagine that many of the initial customers will be looking to use the camera with their R lenses. To that end, I don't understand why Leica are not planning on shipping a proper T-to-R adapter from day one. Is it really so difficult to get these adapters manufactured? Expecting customers to stack two adapters (neither marketed as an SL accessory) strikes me as a very untidy solution and would certainly put me off were I an R system owner.
Understand your point. However R lenses MF on the M use an EVF for focus and other info. R lenses on the SL will manual focus via an EVF just like the M.

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.
 

D&A

Well-known member
Are you joking with us? Have you ever tried the S? Have you ever tried the 645Z? Looking at statistics and ratings on B&H is not the way to evaluate a camera. The S007 was announced 11 months before it actually began to ship. Do you really think the rest of the industry stopped development while Leica was trying to get their first CMOS S to market?
Yes, the medium format industry at that time halted all production lines for 11 months out of courtesy for a fellow producer :) (couldn't resist).

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.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:
Are you joking with us? Have you ever tried the S? Have you ever tried the 645Z? Looking at statistics and ratings on B&H is not the way to evaluate a camera. The S007 was announced 11 months before it actually began to ship. Do you really think the rest of the industry stopped development while Leica was trying to get their first CMOS S to market?
No, I'm not joking. Yes, I've tried the S. I've owned an S2 for a few years and added a 006 a few months ago. They are both superlative cameras. I have a 007 on order. No, I haven't tried the 645Z, but your response doesn't begin to answer the question. And your "S007 was announced 11 months before it actually began to ship" is a red herring. Ricoh announced a full-frame DSLR in February 2015, and it's not due to ship until spring 2016. So what are the specific shortcomings the 007 allegedly has that puts it "so well behind the curve"? It's got to be something awful since Leica makes its best lenses for this system. I certainly need to know so I can call up my dealer and cancel my order before it's too late.
 
M

mjr

Guest
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.

Mat
 

algrove

Well-known member
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.

Mat
Well, I guess we disagree since many owners of S and 645Z admit the shadow recovery with the Z is the best in the industry even when comparing the same sensor to the Phase One and Hasselblad both of which use the same Sony sensor.

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.
 

algrove

Well-known member
Yes, the medium format industry at that time halted all production lines for 11 months out of courtesy for a fellow producer :) (couldn't resist).

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, especiallly 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 definotive annocements 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.

Dave (D&A)
+1
 
M

mjr

Guest
Algrove

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!

Mat
 

algrove

Well-known member
Algrove

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!

Mat
First I was not comparing the S-006 files to the 645Z, but instead the S007. You just brought that S006 idea up. Latest camera versus latest camera is the only comparison IMHO.

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:

S007=$17k
30-90=$10.5k or maybe more by now

Total $27.5k without wired remote $139 and extra batteries at $224 each (ouch).

645Z=$7.5k
28-45=$5k
90=$5k
55=$1k

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.
 
Top