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!

Fun with the Leica SL (digital)

algrove

Well-known member
Right now, no one can have fun with the SL (since none have shipped yet baring one in the UK) except for Jono. Just give it a few more weeks and the images should start pouring in.
 

JorisV

New member
Thats your choice but don't leave it up to me. Actually do me a big favor and do leave. Your whining is tiresome. I don't have the time nor do I care if your here. Your welcome has worn out for me. I'm done
I cannot believe you deleted my and Sven's reply just because we said that Godfrey was right... What is wrong with you?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
DELETED -- not helpful

Now the rules


1) Keep your discussions polite, fun and on topic. In short, act like you would at a friend's dinner party. Arguing, rudeness, generally poor or negative behavior will be dealt with at moderator discretion as they see fit. This may result in the offending post(s) or entire thread(s) being deleted with or without explanation, and/or the offending poster(s) being banned or having their accounts suspended or erased. Note that broader topical and emotional latitude is tolerated in the "Sunset Bar" forum, but decisions on thread or post appropriateness remain at moderator discretion there as well.
 

jonoslack

Active member
OK, now that I read Guy's comments I will chime in.

I believe that 24 MP is lame in this day and age. The simple fact is that Leica has themselves boxed in with new cameras what with their flagship S fixed at 37.5 MP.

The SL sounds superb, but if I am printing 24"x 60" prints (stitched) I might surely need more MP than 24 after cropping too. IBIS seems the best anti shake approach to me, but for the SL they decided to go with in lens stabilization. Maybe it is fine, but if in body stabilization is used then ALL lenses used on it could benefit.
Hi there
I think the primary motivation with the SL was speed, and it might be better to be thinking along the lines of the D4s (16mp) than the Sony A7r2. It seems you can't have it all ways! I also wonder about microlens design and M lens compatability (but I don't know).

Personally I don't think I've ever taken a picture that deserved more than 24mp and I enjoy the faster processing of the smaller files in Lightroom.

I agree with you about IBIS but I do wonder a little about resilience and alignment on those wobbly sensors!

To be honest, the more I use the camera the more I realise that the Sony comparisons are fairly irrelevant. This is designed to be a solid and reliable workhorse rather than a technological experiment. . . . . They've put all their efforts into what really matters when you're shooting: the viewfinder and the responsivenessand and in both of these categories comparisons with the Canon and Nikon workhorses seems more appropriate.

.......... And I'll miss Godfrey's contributions. Most of us lose it from time to time. Come back soon!
 
M

mjr

Guest
Morning

I could be alone here but I just don't get image stabilisation in this era of superb high iso, maybe I'm jaded by my experience with the only lens I have used with IS, a Nikkor 200 f2 which was to blame for what could have been a superb shot of a reindeer backlit at dawn, swung the camera up whilst upping the shutter speed, brought to my eye and shot before the IS settled and had a strange double image, immediately turned the IS off and never ever used it again! An instance of technology getting in the way. I can understand on monster lenses but having read these forums for a long time, it seems that most legacy lenses that people are enthusiastic about are shorter and personally I would much rather chose a higher ISO or even under expose a couple of stops and recover in post as almost every sensor available now has amazing file flexibility.

As for 24mp, the vast majority of images posted on this forum for example are never destined for anything more than web use and rightly so in my opinion! There are far more people in my view who enjoy grabbing the camera whilst walking the dog or on a weekend when not working and who just like the process and taking snapshots of family and stuff than dedicated landscape photographers looking to print 60" shots, there are options for all types. 24mp is a really nice combination of reasonable file size, nice big pixels and the ability to print as large as the majority of normal people have space for in their houses, what's not to like?

The positives of the SL for me would be for event work where the 1 native lens currently available would probably be the only lens needed but I am looking from a commercial point of view so expect there are people who have their own reasons for liking it or not. Negatives for me would be the EVF which I just don't like on other cameras but willing to try it and always open to change.

Anyway, I decided long ago that the camera needs to work but good photographs only come from pointing it at beautiful things, the only people focussed on the minutiae of sharpness, mp's etc are other photographers and speaking personally here, other photographers are not my market for selling prints or commercial work!

Have a nice weekend.

Mat
 

jonoslack

Active member
Morning

I could be alone here but I just don't get image stabilisation in this era of superb high iso, maybe I'm jaded by my experience with the only lens I have used with IS, a Nikkor 200 f2 which was to blame for what could have been a superb shot of a reindeer backlit at dawn, swung the camera up whilst upping the shutter speed, brought to my eye and shot before the IS settled and had a strange double image, immediately turned the IS off and never ever used it again! An instance of technology getting in the way. I can understand on monster lenses but having read these forums for a long time, it seems that most legacy lenses that people are enthusiastic about are shorter and personally I would much rather chose a higher ISO or even under expose a couple of stops and recover in post as almost every sensor available now has amazing file flexibility.

As for 24mp, the vast majority of images posted on this forum for example are never destined for anything more than web use and rightly so in my opinion! There are far more people in my view who enjoy grabbing the camera whilst walking the dog or on a weekend when not working and who just like the process and taking snapshots of family and stuff than dedicated landscape photographers looking to print 60" shots, there are options for all types. 24mp is a really nice combination of reasonable file size, nice big pixels and the ability to print as large as the majority of normal people have space for in their houses, what's not to like?

The positives of the SL for me would be for event work where the 1 native lens currently available would probably be the only lens needed but I am looking from a commercial point of view so expect there are people who have their own reasons for liking it or not. Negatives for me would be the EVF which I just don't like on other cameras but willing to try it and always open to change.

Anyway, I decided long ago that the camera needs to work but good photographs only come from pointing it at beautiful things, the only people focussed on the minutiae of sharpness, mp's etc are other photographers and speaking personally here, other photographers are not my market for selling prints or commercial work!

Have a nice weekend.

Mat
Great Post Mat
I've got some 40" prints made from old Olympus E1 (5mp?) shots - they look just fine . . . . 24mp is certainly enough for 60" prints in most circumstances.

I've shot 2 events with the SL, and the 24-90 covers most bases admirably (add in a couple of MF primes for good measure) . . . interesting remark about image stabilisation settling - it might easily to be to blame for the shot further up with the girl on the phone and her shadow . . where I swung the camera up to grab the shot. I shall be turning it off unless I need it.

EVF - perhaps this one is the one to convince you - certainly it's better for manual focus than an SLR . . . and this might just be the point where the exposure and white balance wyswg of the EVF outpoints the nicer feel of an optical finder. . . . . . but it takes time to get comfortable, that's for sure.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Hi there
I think the primary motivation with the SL was speed, and it might be better to be thinking along the lines of the D4s (16mp) than the Sony A7r2. It seems you can't have it all ways! I also wonder about microlens design and M lens compatability (but I don't know).

Personally I don't think I've ever taken a picture that deserved more than 24mp and I enjoy the faster processing of the smaller files in Lightroom.

I agree with you about IBIS but I do wonder a little about resilience and alignment on those wobbly sensors!

To be honest, the more I use the camera the more I realise that the Sony comparisons are fairly irrelevant. This is designed to be a solid and reliable workhorse rather than a technological experiment. . . . . They've put all their efforts into what really matters when you're shooting: the viewfinder and the responsivenessand and in both of these categories comparisons with the Canon and Nikon workhorses seems more appropriate.

.......... And I'll miss Godfrey's contributions. Most of us lose it from time to time. Come back soon!
I agree with Jono here that speed seems one important factor in the design of the SL.
However I also believe that the S line with its 36MP could have effected the decission to got for 24MP.

I dont know yet what the SL really is.
Is it a A7II with a more solid built and simpler user interface?
Or is it a D750 with an EVF?
Or is it a modern Leica R with EVF?
A small S with a less IQ but more speed?

It seems to work with all kinds of Leica lenses, but then most Leica lenses seem to make most sense on their original body (M on M , S on S, T on T) except R where we actually dont have an actual R body.

SO in the end I find it hard to compare directly to anything else. IMO it is a very interesting combination.
Since it is more expensive than other options I am looking forward to see how it compares in regards of handling and IQ.
 
M

mjr

Guest
Jono, EVF is a really odd thing for me, I am happy to say I don't get it! There are many ways to shoot and many people with differing requirements so I can only speak for myself but I have a very specific way of working which is probably different to others here.

In the context of landscape, architecture and the like, my aim is almost always to have everything sharp in the scene, I have separated focus from everything else, it is not, for me, anything to do with subject or composition, it is purely a function of aperture and focus distance and as such, I have no need for either OVF or EVF, I know where to focus based on experience and actually with the 007, the biggest advancement for me is the depth of field scale, it means I don't even have to look through the viewfinder at all! I read people say that they couldn't have got a shot at night or in a dark building without the benefits of evf and it makes no sense to me because I shoot at night and in dark buildings all the time and never ever get a shot out of focus. It's just knowing your equipment.

The wysiwyg thing also doesn't make sense to me, I have never yet seen an evf capable of showing the dynamic range the sensor can capture, this may be different with the SL so all I am seeing is an approximation of the exposure of the scene, I am sure that you are like me Jono in that in general you know what settings you will use when you see a scene, I have shot enough to know what my camera will do and in most cameras the small exposure scale is pretty accurate so I'm not sure of the benefit of the evf in this regard, especially as in high contrast scenes you are usually missing detail in either highlights or shadows or both, something you just don't have with an ovf, you are seeing what your eyes see.

For portraits and wide open stuff then I am lucky that I have an S, it is so easy to see what is in focus that it's just simple to use, in these instances I can see how some will like being able to zoom in for mf but I really hate losing the whole image, I like to see what is happening all around plus by the time you have zoomed back out again it's likely that people have moved or you have swayed a bit so for me, seeing the whole scene with a good ovf is currently better for me.

I am sure there will be situations like with t/s lenses where there are benefits but even then, it takes very little time to know that for example, on a full height tripod at f5.6 I only need 1 degree of tilt to get a sharp frame. Removing the mirror box on cameras that would otherwise have shutter shake is obviously a benefit but it doesn't always help the issue as with the earlier A7's, I never see shutter shock in any of my images so a non issue for me. There are people who shoot still life and studio stuff who may well see real benefits but whenever I shoot those small jobs I am tethered anyway.

I read people say that some evf is now getting close to ovf, I don't personally see an advantage so it is solving problems that don't exist for me so I accept that it isn't yet for me. There are many people who want smaller cameras and no doubt it aids that but I don't care about the size or weight so it doesn't help me there either, that could obviously change as I get older!

Anyway, I like that there is choice and something no matter what your preference, I will definitely look at the SL in a while once there are more native lenses or at least an S adapter available but until then I'm happy to look at the nice shots taken with it.

Mat
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Had a play with an SL yesterday. The camera is really great, of course it is what one expects from the Leica name and it is easy to hold for me, albeit a bit (too) heavy with the kit zoom attached.

WRT EVF - this is for sur the best EVF currently available, especially when it comes to resolution (detail) and size of the viewed image. BUT WRT dynamic range it is still way behind a great OVF (Leica S, Nikon D810, etc.). Sure I could live with it, but IMHO there is still way to go till EVF will equal OVF. My personal opinion maybe at least 4 years out. This is also one of the major reasons why I came back to Nikon FF (D810).
 

jonoslack

Active member
WRT EVF - this is for sur the best EVF currently available, especially when it comes to resolution (detail) and size of the viewed image. BUT WRT dynamic range it is still way behind a great OVF (Leica S, Nikon D810, etc.). Sure I could live with it, but IMHO there is still way to go till EVF will equal OVF. My personal opinion maybe at least 4 years out. This is also one of the major reasons why I came back to Nikon FF (D810).
Hi Peter
Optical viewfinders don't show you the dynamic range you're going to get In the image either, but the DR your eyes can manage. Arguably that in an EVF is more representative.
But personally I never give DR a thought when I'm shooting - after all, I can't change what the camera gives me! There's more important things to think about :)
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Are we having fun yet?:ROTFL:

I don't get all the kerfuffle. Point/counter point ... what's the point?

Most people here seem pretty smart, and there is a lot of talent exhibited on GetDpi. We all make our own choices to fulfill our artistic vision or meet specific task oriented requirements ... because it is OUR personal vision or requirements, not someone else's.

In other words, the "State of the Art in Gear" doesn't necessarily translate into "Art" the same way for each individual.

This Leica SL seems a good choice for those who would like the benefits of mirrorless technology, have defined their needs, and do not need what other choices may offer.

I feel the same way about my S(006) system. I had 40 and 60 meg 645 (and had a H5D/200MS on order) ... but my needs changed, and the larger than 35mm, 38 meg of the S is now perfect for most everything I need to accomplish. More importantly, it has the feature set and interface I enjoy using, and does a few things that 35mm DSLR or Mirror-less cameras can not do. The few speculative times that I may ever need more, I'll just rent it ... so far, after years with the S, I've had no need to rent anything. Not one time.

The SL appears to be positioned for swift operation (swift for a mirror-less), seems to have less lag than I've experienced from mirror-less, is solidly built and weather proofed, offers the security of dual card capture with a streamlined interface. More than enough resolution for some, deficient for others.

The real question is ... how honest are we in ascertaining what we really need to do our Art or perform our tasks?

For me the SL would be a perfect choice of a mirror-less camera. Unfortunately, I'll have to wait for a mirror-less solution with those attributes that fits my cost threshold for such a camera because I'd rather have a 24mm for my S.

- Marc
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
When I went from many years from optical to a radical system switch to EVF at first it was how they function that got me really excited but it takes a little time to the hang of EVF but more important your brain to understand what's it's seeing. I really love it now and in my head it's not a optical vs EVF it just all blended together. So it was a easy transition from being trained so long on a optical. The good news as more OEMs start going to EVF it will keep getting better. Glad to see or better said hear the SL is supposed to be pretty good. Like to see how they did at some point.

Btw I got lost when this is supposed to be out in the wild. Time table anyone
 

jonoslack

Active member
I dont know yet what the SL really is.
Is it a A7II with a more solid built and simpler user interface?
Or is it a D750 with an EVF?
Or is it a modern Leica R with EVF?
A small S with a less IQ but more y.

SO in the end I find it hard to compare directly to anything else. IMO it is a very interesting combination.
Since it is more expensive than other options I am looking forward to see how it compares in regards of handling and IQ.
Hi Tom
I think it's all of those things. For me I think it's what I need when I'm not shooting with an M.

I don't think they restricted the MP so as not to compete with the S. I really think that they reckon 24mp is the right compromise with full frame. I'm pretty sure they're right from a technical point of view........whether it's right from a commercial point of view is another matter altogether!
 
Top