Ashwin, you are making the camera look very good
Your friend, Steve is now more than smitten and has some nice samples where he makes the SL "Camera of the Year":
He is just jumping around "mentally" like crazy and what was great one day is forgotten the other day. How long will it take before he has another darling camera?
Definitely the Leica SL deserves much much more than whatever review from him!
Last edited by ptomsu; 1st December 2015 at 17:50.
Life is an ever changing journey
https://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_...tography/sets/2 Member(s) liked this post
I just shot some side by sides with the 35FLE on the M and the SL and have to say the M 240 color comes out more natural and more alive, and for me 35mm M lens is easier to focus on the M.
I like the SL a lot so far but I believe there is some work due in regards of the color profiles.
I'll have to take both cameras out with the 24 and 75 mm lenses (limiting it to those two because they are modern, six bit lenses that I know the lens corrections should be about on par) and do a bit of comparison testing, I guess. :-)
The S-system and the M-system still produce better IQ in my eyes. The colors are better, and the transitions are better. The M lenses and S lenses beat the pants of the zoom. The SL JPG files are whack.. This is something Leica needs to address. And the M to T adapter has a weird glitch.. Nothing detrimental but annoying none the less.
The zoom is a very high performance lens. But it lacks anything that makes me feel as if I'm using a Leica lens. No familiar signature. This bothers me, as I'd rather take a shittier performing lens with signature then a better preforming lens with no signature.
Battery life REALLY sucks. Seriously confused as to how they got it right in the Q, but wrong in the SL.
Some positive points about the SL:
1) Fastest AF I've used EVER in good light. And the most accurate at ALL distance (very important if you've ever used Canon lenses). Yet to shoot it indoors to fully test the AF.
2) Ergonomics and UI are a joy, but I am bias since I'm use to the M and S. And hate overly fussy cameras.
3) Weather sealing really works. I got caught in a Singapore flash flood, and kept shooting (even though I almost got swept away). Camera still works.
4) EVF is phenomenal. Making it easy to focus without the need for magnification (for me). Which is a good thing considering the stupid placement of the magnification button. And the fact that the spot metering circle isn't linked to where the magnification zooms.
5) I'm almost two weeks in and I don't want to sell the camera yet (perhaps because I'm hopeful for the S-adapter and 50LuxL)
Here are some shots (edited RAW files) with the zoom and 50APO: http://www.jupitersnake.com/walks/haw-par-villa/
(Note: I will be exploring why the 50APO doesn't seem familiar on this camera, could be colors, could be something else.)
So not its not just a Sony problem but a design issue that requires extra engineering to overcome if that's the desire. I don't doubt that the SL is a better fit for many M lenses but some M lenses don't even work that well (for the corner junkies) on a M. I've noticed that many are using with SLR lenses as well and I didn't recall have smearing with most SLR lenses on any mirrorless body.
Priolite Ambassador | Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
I'm up with all your positive points - I actually like the character of the zoom lens . . . . but maybe I've had longer to learn it, or possibly my eyes have been affected by the lack of issues it presents.
is an interesting one. I agree that if you wander about with the camera switched on and the LCD on, then it seems to last about a day (without much reference to the number of shots you take).
However, on the couple of occasions I've been shooting events it's been great - more than 700 images on two occasions. I think it was Ming Thein who said he had got more than 1000 shots from it - So it seems to be a bit unpredictable, I always shoot with GPS on and Wifi off (FWIW).
- - - Updated - - -
I started using it at the beginning of the year - after a long comparison with Capture One . . . and something else I've forgotten! I still don't like it anything like as much as Aperture, but for the time being it seems to be the only horse.
Just this guy you know
It's entirely possible that I have a bad battery. It would explain the banding that I get sometimes and then other times not at all. It would also explain a few other things.
When Leica releases spare batteries I'll buy one. If the problem goes away, I'll assume I had a bad battery and contact Leica about it.
I shoot the SL like I shoot the Q, and with the Q I almost got 2000 shots at one wedding!! So the SL is way behind at 300 before a dead battery. And I'm pretty diligent about switching the camera on and off as I walk around. MAYBE the sensor cleaning is draining batteries? Maybe OIS is? I try keeping it off when outdoors in the sun.
Also I keep wifi and GPS off.. I don't need either of those things.
Curiously, I found the battery life seemed to improve when I switched GPS on. Still measuring though.
I've not seen any banding unless I strongly underexposed, by more than three to five stops. That's just bad exposure practice, to me.
Battery spares seem to be showing up. I have one coming in today or tomorrow from Popflash.com and Adorama/B&H were expecting stock right about now/next week. What I'm waiting for is the remote...
I have looked at 9 - I've never really liked the colour (just me), but the real problem with C1 is that the DAM isn't yet good enough.
But there are practical reasons - LR always supports the Leica cameras first, but more to the point, the DNG files always work in Lightroom even if there isn't explicit support.
But Bah - I still prefer Aperture, I've even considered moving back again!
Just this guy you know
I'm sad that you don't like the zoom though - perhaps it'll grow on you over time?
Just this guy you know
And I hate the DAM stuff. Don't use it. If I can't find something, it didn't happen.
Life is an ever changing journey
I'm going to try turning GPS on. Maybe it wastes more battery scrubbing the GPS from the files
I leave the LCD off.. I don't check when I shoot.
And the banding issues aren't happening from bad exposures. They're sometimes showing up on perfectly exposed non-pushed images. Then sometimes they're not showing up at all.. Even if I push the thing 5 stops for the heck of it.
I think the zoom will grown on me. I've just been away from zooms for so long. That's not to say I'm not foaming at the mouth waiting for the S-adapter L to show up. Or the 50LuxL.
1 Member(s) liked this post
Great discussion. I have generally noted variable battery life, depending on how I shoot. At a recent American Football game, I shot over 600 images with battery left over, in quite cold temperatures. However, after a day of general shooting, about 200 shots, I am often left with a half-full battery. I too shoot with GPS on, Wifi Off, but I keep the screen LCD activated to be able to use all of the manual pre-sets if needed (the upper left one does not work if you use just the EVF.
I have been very happy with output from my M lenses on the Q. I have no real complaints at all, and for my way of shooting with M glasses, i doubt that people (or myself for that matter) could really distinguish between files coming from an M vs SL.
With a few firmware tweaks, this will be one of my favorite cameras, and as you all know, I have had my share. It's a bit bulky, at times, particularly with the 24-90, but does not feel drastically different than an M with Luigi/arte di mano half case (with grip, my preferred type of half case). I do feel no desire for a half case here, hahah, but a bit more of a thumb rest would be welcomed. The EVF is a miracle for focusing manual lenses.
At this point, while I suspect that R lenses would perform somewhat better at the edges that similar M lenses, I prefer the look, rendering, and OOF of my M lenses (and to boot, I already have an M collection, and only 1 R lens)...I am hesitant to build a new R lens collection, even though the ergonomics of lenses such as an R35, R50, and R80 are really lovely on this body....
Fun times. Great camera....a few quirks...but this camera, along with the Q, represent the future of Leica...and it's a promising future. Even better, the future is NOW...
My Photography1 Member(s) liked this post
....Now on to a few images...with M lenses
Canon 35 mm f/1.5 LTM (Jiro Mukai RF design)
Canon 85 mm f/1.8 LTM (also a Mukai design...he was the Mandler of Canon RF)
Leica 50 mm f/2 Summicron-R (great lens for this body, and affordable to boot)
My Photography6 Member(s) liked this post
Great! More photos! Nice! :-)
On the other hand, if your nose doesn't tend to hit the TL button, you can change Menu Access In EVF in the Setup menu to enable the button when the EVF is active. Then you can use your assigned shortcut or go into the menu system through the EVF.
Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream1 Member(s) thanked for this post
I saw this on the way to my car after work last evening...
Leica SL + Summicron-R 35mm f/2 II
ISO 2500 @ f/2 @ 1/60
full rez image: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/610/2...52563690_o.jpg
I think it benefits from being printed fairly large, and looks best in the full-resolution image.
I liked the look of the "grain" (noise) that was produced and did no smoothing or sharpening.
Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream9 Member(s) liked this post
After work today, I was sitting here sipping some wine, and thinking, "What do I want to do for tomorrow morning's walk?" Meaning, of course, what kind of photos would I like to make? I've been working with the normal to longer end of the FoV range lately and feeling uninspired with wide views. Hmm.
I thought for a moment about pulling out the Hasselblad SWC. And then I thought, hmm, I wonder if I set up the SL with the Elmarit-R 19mm, set it to square format, and set the JPEG rendering to contrasty B&W ... I wonder how close that comes?
The SWC with Biogon 38mm on 6x6 format nets 92° across the diagonal. Calculating for 24x24mm format on the SL, the 19mm nets 84° ... a 15mm would run to 97°, but I don't have one of those or a WATE (16mm would do 93°).
Good enough, 19mm will have to do. So ... I created another User Profile named "SWC" and stuffed the Elmarit-R 19mm and the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm in the bag. Should be an interesting combination to work with.
This will be fun.
My faux-SWC experiment with the 19mm worked nicely this morning:
... although I think a 15-16mm lens is needed to accommodate the amount of cropping that lens corrections consume out of the original image FoV. The 19mm becomes an effective 21mm after corrections and doesn't net the SWC's full 92° utterly rectilinear diagonal FoV.
(Note: corner softening and darkening is post-processing work ... the Elmarit-19 at f/5.6 is sharp right to the corners, particularly on a square crop.)
I must admit that the SL is very compelling and that I almost followed you all down the veritable rabbit hole ... went down to the local shop today after demo-ing the SL a couple of days
ago and the one body they had was GONE.
Sometimes things work out in spite of our best efforts to push them in our preferred direction.
So I thought ... I really don't need a Beaufort 5+ capable camera ... as I will be in front of a fire with the dogs and a single malt.
But at my age any help in focus for distant landscapes is a blessing.
I dug around in the closet and came up with the following.
Now I can keep the D810 Otus 55 85 ZF.2 25 135 and the quirky Nikon 50 1.2 with a bit more pixels and DR.
Mandler will live on the Type 246.
EVF on a High MP OVF Camera for Ultimate Focus
Back to the thread ....
1 Member(s) liked this post
No Tom the D810 has been in my CLOSET for a long time ... second one I have owned and used.
Short story ... I had a S2-P and wanted to upgrade to the S006 recently.
Received an S006 with a new 70 CS that was dead on arrival ... no AF nothing.
So I dropped out of the loop ... using this D810 with Zeiss Otus lenses ... no AF but
expectations were met.
Would love the S 007 but a bit leery of Leica S AF as the issue still exists some 2/3 years
after the initial delivery. Not a great sense of product QC when a three year old lens cannot
AF .... and it is probably their least exotic lens.
I may still seek out a Leica SL but not for AF ... would prefer the live view aspects of the camera
but I have found that with the add on Zacuto ... in addition to better DR and higher resolution.
Just not the most approachable ergonomics but I thrashed around for a number of years with
a Sinar F2 Master Tech 4x5 and Alpa TC with film backs. SO this is nothing. Still disappointed to have
missed the opportunity to play long term with the SL.
Just saying there are other options for those who prefer a bit larger file for landscapes. And I think that
an external EVF would be ideal for those who have the S 007 as it allows for 100 magnification at a
pixel level when shooting long or wide.
So partly my decision was based on the camera's lack of availability but also on my rather mixed
view of Leica's efforts to resolve the S AF issue ... first the Macro 120s then other lenses but stunning
that the 70 would be affected with the same issue.
YET we have three new systems that are marketed and this one for "PROs"
Leica S support is wonderful in that they will send you a loaner overnight while your lens or body
goes to Solms for months ... but in my view AF issues might be addressed before you deliver a
dead on arrival lens to a dealer. JMHO.
Consider me a bit jaded by the experience and I am basing all of my purchase decisions by
my experience ... first M camera in 1984 M6 M7 M8 M8P M9 S2-P S 006 M Monochrom and now M Type 246.
2 Member(s) liked this post
just to not be misunderstood: I fully understand and there are good reasons to use a D810, it just sounded you wanted to buy an SL but didnt buy it just because someone else bought that one sample.
Regarding S AF I have not had any comparable problem with neither my S2/S006 and also my new S007 seems to work fine.
And all my S2-P and first S006 lenses were perfect.
Realizing that finding a SL in the next few months was unlikely it
nevertheless inspired me to try the external EVF.
And I very pleased with the 100% focus accuracy at this point.
The S007 is the only camera that could replace the D810 for
color resolution and DR. Yet not a walk about camera ... my M Type 246
will suffice for the present.
I'm testing a SL and notice that none of my pictures are sharp or look out of focus on the back display when I shoot DNG (Raw) only without JPG. When I added JPG to the the DNG, everything back to sharp again in preview. Is this normal?
Godfrey has it . . . .
If you want to see sharp pictures on the rear display you need to shoot DNG+jpg - you can always ditch the jpg files afterwards (I don't even import them) and it doesn't have any noticeable impact on the speed of the camera.
Hopefully that will be cured in a firmware upgrade later on, but we shall see!
All the best
Just this guy you know
Add to "allow the option to provide either a minimum or a standard sized JPEG preview in raw-only mode" an additional option to output a lossless-compressed DNG file for raw mode.
Love the camera, but this is obviously "1.0" firmware. It doesn't bother me much, but a couple of update generations down the pike and this camera will become much more fluid and comfortable in operation.
17 Member(s) liked this post
One of you that has both the SL and the Q, how do the images compare given that both use the same sensor? Can someone post a comparison set of images? Thanks
The aesthetic (look) is being produced by the 50 APO ...notice how smooth the image looks and the graceful fall off into the unsharp areas . You see that the image is sharp but it also looks realistic with plenty of detail available . If you captured this same image using for example a zeiss zm 50/2 you would see much stronger edge sharpness and higher overall contrast . Quite different .
I am finding that the SL (and Q) files as they are rendered thru LR ...both have greater saturation and contrast than the M240 files . They have some “Bite” (edge contrast?) similar to the way a Nikon D4s,Df renders . This makes sense for their intended usage .
A professional shooting for web publication is going to love the SL files .
It will be interesting to see how they complete the lens line up . It took a long time to fill in the S lenses but they are as good as it gets from 24 thru 180mm . The SL is going to limp along for quite a while if all they have is the 24-90 . (FYI ...I have the SL primarily because of my desire to use the long R lenses ).
http://rogerdunham.com/1 Member(s) liked this post
The funny thing about the various sensors, there is no doubt about the newer ones giving ISO and DR benefits, but for daylight 28, nothing charms me more than the M9 and 28 cron. It's like an MM, you don't have some aspects (in that case it's color ), but the aspects you do have can be stunning.
In fact, from M9 to SL, to my eye the primary factor in many shots is the lens. Of course there are exceptions, low light, or high DR, where the sensor is going to really effect things. The M9 is weak in those aspects, obviously, but otherwise lenses, like the 28 cron and 50 lux, and many others, just love that camera. But it's a matter of taste, for sure.
I like the SL very much, but I see nothing in the images which set it apart from the 240, if anything I still like the 240 better with M glass. The A7r2 on the other hand does create files which are distinctive from the other A7 cameras, especially in color, and so does the A7s which has a gritty look (not in bad way). The M9 is also distinctive, though as is the case with all these examples, heavy editing begins to blur the differences alot.
So to me, the SL comes across as a very good vanilla 24mp sensor. In fact if you just leave the files alone, as DPR does, they can look dull. But those same files really pop if edited nicely by someone like Ron (he grabbed their samples), and they handle that with out making a bunch of noise.
But many variables, and I'd imagine with strong light the SL will really jump as well.
Had about an hour today to push the buttons and see what results. First, the mandatory action shot of a parked bicycle:
L1000004 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr
with the APO SC-R 90. And then some edgy colors. This one seems over-corrected at the edges but the colors are good:
L1000010 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr
Then a distant scene (focus was at infinity, the golf flag was about 1-2 m away) with the R 15/2.8 @f/5.6 (again overcorrected at edges, but this may be partly because I forgot to revise the lens profile...)
L1000028 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr
No more posts until I get time to shoot a little more carefully, and have figured out more of the menus. I'm processing in CaptureOne 9.0 with the generic dng profile.
2 Member(s) liked this post
Great to see you've received yours, scott. I hope you enjoy it.
I think the best processing environment for the SL at present is Lightroom 6.3. It's the only raw processor that I'm sure has the right camera calibration profile for Leica SL DNGs as yet, although I have to say that*a couple of tests using Photos on OS X has shown it does a very nice job of rendering as well (leading me to believe that Aperture will too). I haven't seen the over-corrected edges that your photos are showing with my (pre-APO) Summicron-R 90 or Elmarit-R 19 v1; all my SL processing other than the tests in Photos have been done in LR 6.3.
It would be interesting to see a test using the defaults of the same DNG files in LR6.3, Photos, and Capture One 9 with your lenses.
Another from my squares session:
I thought this was an interesting enough capture, technically, to give folks access to the full rez for examination/inspection because of both the very broad dynamic range in the scene and because of the detailing at the focus plane (on the tree trunk) at f/2.8. First is the full 4000x4000 rendered:
Then, for additional comparison, the 6000x4000 original capture, with no processing other than to roll it out from DNG to JPEG:
Much of OS X RAW processing is done by the OS itself. Aperture doesn't need updating to support new cameras. Aperture is very far from dead and may outlive standalone LR.
Photos doesn't have the same UI but has most of the same image processing capabilities. Certainly the same raw engine and basic tools, at least, expressed in different ways.