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)

jonoslack

Active member
Guys who actually got an SL...

I still don't understand the point of this camera if you already own an M. Can you help me? Thanks.
Can't help Brad . . . . . except that it will replace "that other camera" you might have that you find useful but don't like that much (Sony A7, Canon 5D, Nikon D4, Olympus OMD) . . . and while doing it will also play with all the nice Leica glass you have . . . . very very very very fast!
 

bradhusick

Active member
Can't help Brad . . . . . except that it will replace "that other camera" you might have that you find useful but don't like that much (Sony A7, Canon 5D, Nikon D4, Olympus OMD) . . . and while doing it will also play with all the nice Leica glass you have . . . . very very very very fast!
Hi Jono,

I find that I really like the Sony A7R2 and their autofocus lenses. I need my D4 for sports - I know the Sony can't keep up to it and I doubt the Leica SL could replace it either. I love my M for M lenses and I don't own any R or Canon glass, so I guess I am just not in the target market for the SL.

Thanks,
Brad
 

ashwinrao1

Active member
Guys who actually got an SL...

I still don't understand the point of this camera if you already own an M. Can you help me? Thanks.
Hi Brad, as I begin to know the camera, I suspect that the SL is a view to the future of Leica. It is the ultimate bridge camera that can handle M lenses, R lenses (for those who have that investmetn), and it's own SL lenses. It does so while preserving exif data, which then permits the ability to make in camera vignetting corrections for M lenses and other relevant glass. The experience is similar to using M lenses on a Sony, but in Leica's own ecosystem and support in place.

The camera feels substantially larger in hand than the Sony A series, as you well know. The EVF is FAR FAR FAR superior to anything I have tried, and permits facile manual focusing, particularly for those who have an investment in manual glass who may have difficulty focusing with a RF.

I purchased the SL as I do not currently have a color M and desired a color option for my M lenses, at least until a time when Leica releases the next M.

While I don't want to turn this into a "wishful" Next-Leica-M/M262 discussion, I would suspect that the next M will take design cues from the SL. One could imagine such a camera employing a similarly spec'd EVF that, if implemented properly, could become the whispered/patented "opto-electronic" RF, which could theoretically shrink camera size. The rear 4 button layout is really nice, and once you are used to it (took me about 10 min), it was truly a pleasurable, minimalistic system, that may make its way to future M's.

Ultimately, though, part of this has to do with enjoying a refined build, while gaining that pride of ownership that many of us in the Leica fan club enjoy so much (for better or for worse). Plus, I do enjoy focusing my M lenses in this manner as well as in the RF manner, so one has options in that way of using M lenses in a variety of ways....

In a sense, Leica has offered us one more choice for M lenses while providing a professional solution for those willing to make the investment in a responsive camera that blazes new territory and can handle a variety of lenses in the Leica ecosystem.

All of that said, if you are happy with the Sony cameras to suit a similar purpose, you are really only giving up the simplicity and build quality that is Leica. You gain a bunch of megapixels (24 vs 42 is substantial) and a reduced size profile....oh yes, Leica gets you the best EVF out there, and that's seriously awesome....particularly for manual focusing in this method...though I do still prefer the RF way...
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi Jono,

I find that I really like the Sony A7R2 and their autofocus lenses. I need my D4 for sports - I know the Sony can't keep up to it and I doubt the Leica SL could replace it either. I love my M for M lenses and I don't own any R or Canon glass, so I guess I am just not in the target market for the SL.

Thanks,
Brad
Hi Brad
I think the SL might be able to keep up with the sports, although it'll need a slightly different focusing routine - 11fps RAW to two cards really is quite fast, and the blackout time is negligible. I've not tried the 90-250, but if it's focusing performance is as good as the 24-90 it will be a real contender.

As Ashwin says - MF is easy and fast with the big EVF . . . . . I must say for my prime usage I'm happy with manual focus as long as it's this good - it has real advantages over AF if you can live with it. M lenses just perform better on the SL (why wouldn't they with lens profiles and a sensor designed for them).

But maybe you need 42mp (I certainly don't).

best
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I think I must be completely oblivious an hour into owning the camera, but I can't seem to activate focus peaking with my M-adapter T and Noct f/0.95. I can zoom, no problem, but don't see any signs of peaking with focus....Any suggestions here?
Press the lower-right button to cycle view display modes. The view display modes cycle in order, they're all on by default. FP is the one after the live histogram.

It can be rather subtle, many some lenses with soft contrast don't let the display show much. I have a more positive e pertinence with it than Jono, but in most cases using a 50mm lens, it's pretty unnecessary.

G
 

atanabe

Member
Guys who actually got an SL...

I still don't understand the point of this camera if you already own an M. Can you help me? Thanks.
Brad,
For me this will be my high ISO camera for my S lenses. It will also serve as the long lense solution lacking with the S. As for the M in my life, I mostly shot with the 28 'cron and the Q has replaced most of the brace of lenses, I still have the M9 and 35 v4 'cron.

I did look into getting the Sony A7rII but with the SL, I can use my Leica family of lenses and get support if it does not work.

As for sports, the most memorable images taken were done with cameras only capable of one frame per second and manual focus. It is not the equipment that should hold you back.

Al
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Guys who actually got an SL...

I still don't understand the point of this camera if you already own an M. Can you help me? Thanks.
Hi Brad,

The SL is to the M just as the R was to the M: the more versatile complement to handle all the things that the M isn't well suited to. That's all. It's the same reason why, for almost all the years between 1969 and 2001, I always had a Nikon SLR kit next to a Leica RF kit with a couple of lenses.

Gosh knows most of the folks on this forum have more than enough cameras to go around the block a few times and few really *need* to buy another camera. However, I seem the M and SL as being excellent complements, the SL in particular being nicely optimized to use all my R lenses as well as all my M lenses, as well as its own new, AF, OIS lenses. And S, and Leica Cine lenses too if you work in those rarified strata.

If you're happy with the equipment you have, just enjoy the photos that people post. And keep shooting.

G
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Some one out there who's willing to try the M(240) and SL(601) side-by-side (same scene, iso and speed) with the same M-lens ?
I really like to know if there's any noticeable difference between the two sensors.

TIA
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Some one out there who's willing to try the M(240) and SL(601) side-by-side (same scene, iso and speed) with the same M-lens ?
I really like to know if there's any noticeable difference between the two sensors.
I will, eventually, do that with the Elmar-M 24 and 'Lux 35 v2 lenses. My 'wide muse' seems to be on vacation today, however. I was seeing better with the 90mm.

G
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Would you say you need any of the zoom or fp aids to consistently focus it wide open?
Hi Mike
I really don't think so. I've been shooting the 75 'lux a lot recently, and I just use the EVF to focus ( no zoom and no peaking)
I'm still in the "shoot with different lenses and see how it goes" phase of understanding the SL.

  • Most of the time with 35mm and longer lenses, I can nail focus right on the money with no focusing aids down to f/5.6 or f/8.
  • Focus peaking works best with shorter focal lengths—19, 24, 35, 50, 60mm—after which it becomes less effective at highlighting edges and showing focus zone.
  • Focus magnification helps with all lenses, but as the focal length grows longer I use less of it. Using the 180mm lens, for instance, the view gets a bit too jittery hand-held for maximum magnification to be effective, but it's really handy at 19mm, particularly in less than perfect light.

With a fast 50mm lens, wide open, no aids is just fine for most situations.

G
 

Knorp

Well-known member
I will, eventually, do that with the Elmar-M 24 and 'Lux 35 v2 lenses. My 'wide muse' seems to be on vacation today, however. I was seeing better with the 90mm.

G
Really looking forward to the results, Godfrey.
I'm torn between the M and the SL.
If it is the SL :) ... then goodbye A7R2 :(

Kind regards.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Really looking forward to the results, Godfrey.
I'm torn between the M and the SL.
If it is the SL :) ... then goodbye A7R2 :(

Kind regards.
Well Bart
Unless you need the 42mp I'd have said that it was pretty much a no brainer. . . . . . . M next year :)
 
Top