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!

Two different views on the Leica SL

fotografz

Well-known member
G., IMO, it is inevitable that people will relate to a new camera by referencing what they already have experienced, or know about. After all, this new Leica isn't in very many GetDPI hands yet.

Two of my favorite lenses of all time were the R35/1.4 and R80/1.4. If I still had those today, the SL would be at the top of my consideration list. They would be a perfect fit in terms of size/balance and deliver the color rendering I prefer over most anything else on the market (except my S kit). I'll be keeping my eye on this for when Leica delivers the S adapter. I suspect my relatively smaller S70 and S100/2 would be amazing on it for more spontaneous shooting.

Enjoy your SL!

- Marc
 

doug

Well-known member
G., IMO, it is inevitable that people will relate to a new camera by referencing what they already have experienced, or know about.
Also note the OP compared the SL with several existing cameras including CaNikon and Sony.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
G., IMO, it is inevitable that people will relate to a new camera by referencing what they already have experienced, or know about. After all, this new Leica isn't in very many GetDPI hands yet.

Two of my favorite lenses of all time were the R35/1.4 and R80/1.4. If I still had those today, the SL would be at the top of my consideration list. They would be a perfect fit in terms of size/balance and deliver the color rendering I prefer over most anything else on the market (except my S kit). I'll be keeping my eye on this for when Leica delivers the S adapter. I suspect my relatively smaller S70 and S100/2 would be amazing on it for more spontaneous shooting.

Enjoy your SL!

- Marc
Hi Mark,
I also expect the 70 and 100 S lenses to be great portrait lenses on the SL, and they fit size wise.
The 180/3.5 could also be interesting.
Regarding the wider S-lenses, IMO they are too big for the SL if we look at focal length and speed, I would rather use the 24-90.

About the discussion SL vs Sony, IMO-why not, even if things are repeated and repeated.
The discussion for a product often includes also a look at the competitive products.
To me it proves that in the end it comes down to personal requirements and taste.
Many state to have tried both systems and then decided for the Sony for certain reasons.
For my part after about 1 year with several A7 bodies (last one was the A7II) I didnt find anything totally wrong with the Sony, but I dont regret giving the whole kit back when I decided to get the SL.
Using several systems from the same brand has a big advantage for me, that the logic of user interface of the menus and the color tweaking of the files are close. For example Auto_ISO ha sbecome a very important function for me and I like how Leica (and Nikon and Canon) have included this function (besides Leica should offer autoiso in the S007 in M mode, like they do in the M 240 and SL)
Using Leica lenses also lets me feel that I dont have to worry about inconsistent optical lens quality/ sample variation.
For me still the biggest argument against the SL is that there is just one native lens available at the moment, even though this is very flexible and I can work around with fast M-primes at the moment if the Zoom is to slow/dark.
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
I've managed to avoid investing any time in the Sony R's for the past 2-3 years, using Leica Ms and Olympus M-1/M-5.2's instead. I tend to push on with something that works and see what I can do. I heard enough about Fuji's strange mosaic replacement for the Bayer filter and Sony's usability issues that once I had gotten to the end of the Olympus menu list I was set for a while and could take pictures. I have accumulated enough very wide or fairly long full frame M/R lenses that the SL was hard to resist. But I can't help you all trash it against Sony for price or features -- it's paid for, and that's past.

I picked up the R 80/1.4 during the Black Friday madness and it is indeed a wonderful lens, but so is the APO-90/2.0 that I had purchased fairly inexpensively a bit earlier. I see the SL as a migration from the limited use of live view that the M[240] offered. I think if Leica gets the S to SL adapter right, the issue of too few AF lenses will defuse, and if metabones or someone gets a Canon/Zeiss/Sony adapter out that supports AF, the SL owners will go nuts. The Leica bosses seemed to be saying in a recent interview that the last thing was possible, which suggests that the AF controls on the SL/T are pretty close to an industry standard and not precious Leica secrets. But that may be reading too much into a throwaway comment.

scott
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I think if Leica gets the S to SL adapter right, the issue of too few AF lenses will defuse, and if metabones or someone gets a Canon/Zeiss/Sony adapter out that supports AF, the SL owners will go nuts. The Leica bosses seemed to be saying in a recent interview that the last thing was possible, which suggests that the AF controls on the SL/T are pretty close to an industry standard and not precious Leica secrets. But that may be reading too much into a throwaway comment.

scott
I agree with that. The market for an SL adapter is so tiny that no one would be investing so much effort (to be dissed as a China made adapter later), time and money. Metabones is a Chinese company, btw. :)

The best hope is that it is offered by Leica themselves in their boutique shops.

As it stands, the FE mount is the universal mount and that is not going to be challenged. Also, as Sergio outlined, the cameras offer more positives than the shortcomings (often overblown by some) they may have.
 

lambert

New member
Using Leica lenses also lets me feel that I dont have to worry about inconsistent optical lens quality/ sample variation.
For me still the biggest argument against the SL is that there is just one native lens available at the moment, even though this is very flexible and I can work around with fast M-primes at the moment if the Zoom is to slow/dark.
I have experienced sample variations with every brand I've owned (Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Zeiss and Leica). The 24-90 SL lens is also not without issue:

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2016/20160103_1438-LeicaSL-focusShift-90mm.html

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2016/20160103_1808-LeicaSL-focusShift-49mm.html
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I have experienced sample variations with every brand I've owned (Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Zeiss and Leica). The 24-90 SL lens is also not without issue:

diglloyd: Leica SL: Evaluation of Focus Shift at 90mm for Leica 24-90mm f/2.8-4 Vario-Elmarit-SL

diglloyd: Leica SL: Evaluation of Focus Shift at 49mm for Leica 24-90mm f/2.8-4 Vario-Elmarit-SL

Thanks for the links. Here is a quote from Ming Thein Premiere and review: The 2015 Leica SL (Typ 601) and lenses ? Ming Thein | Photographer :

"IS worked well (and it would be nice to have a 1/0.5x option for auto-ISO to take advantage of this, not just 1/1x and 1/2x) though it seemed somewhat less effective in portrait orientation than landscape. I wonder if this is evidence of shutter vibration."

Huh, interesting, as it jogs some memories. Well, I gave up on my Sony A7r and Leica APO 280/4 lens in portrait orientation because of shutter shock. For my system I also observed shutter shock in landscape orientation, but it was less severe and somewhat manageable to a certain degree.

For me it would be interesting to know if Ming Thein's finding above about the SL and 24-90 SL lens could be independetly confirmed or not. Now, I am even more curious about the shutter in the SL and how it works.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Well, thinking more about shutter shock or vibration, most folks would probably never notice it unless they shoot tele lenses like the Leica APO-R 280/4 or Vario-R 105-280/4.2 on a tripod in both the portrait and landscape orientation. I certainly never noticed shutter shock on the A7r for typical rangefinder focal lengths. It also would be good to separate any potential IS issues from potential shutter vibration issues. So, it would be a surprise IMHO if shutter vibration actually should rise its ugly head for the 24-90 mm focal length in an other than pixel peeping way.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Well, thinking more about shutter shock or vibration, most folks would probably never notice it unless they shoot tele lenses like the Leica APO 280/4 or Vario-R 105-280/4.2 on a tripod in both the portrait and landscape orientation. I certainly never noticed shutter shock on the A7r for typical rangefinder focal lengths. It also would be good to separate any potential IS issues from potential shutter vibration issues. So, it would be a surprise IMHO if shutter vibration actually should rise its ugly head for the 24-90 mm focal length in an other than pixel peeping way.
G could shed some light on this: if I'm correct he has got an R250.
Can't believe shutter shock to be an issue with the SL: I sincerely hope not.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
G could shed some light on this: if I'm correct he has got an R250.
Can't believe shutter shock to be an issue with the SL: I sincerely hope not.
I've used the Elmar-R 180/4, Elmarit-R 180/2.8, and Telyt-R 250, both with and without the 2x Extender R, both hand-held and on a sturdy tripod. I've seen no evidence of shutter shock at any exposure time I've used (from 2 seconds to 1/4000 sec). I did find my Manfrotto legs to be too light for the 250+2x+SL setup, and went to my sturdier Feisol legs (and a new Acratech GP head) to solve that issue.

But I guess my hands-on experiences using both the Sony A7 and the Leica SL, with the same lenses, are of no particular interest to those who want to discuss specifications, features, and theoretical notions without the camera in hand. My apologies for commenting.

I will join Jono and pass on this thread from now on.

G
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I guess my hands-on experiences using both the Sony A7 and the Leica SL, with the same lenses, are of no particular interest to those who want to discuss specifications, features, and theoretical notions. My apologies for commenting.

I will join Jono and pass on this thread from now on.

G

Sorry to hear that G. I always read jono's and your contributions with great interest.

- - - Updated - - -

G could shed some light on this: if I'm correct he has got an R250.
Can't believe shutter shock to be an issue with the SL: I sincerely hope not.
Bart, I completely agree.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I've used the Elmar-R 180/4, Elmarit-R 180/2.8, and Telyt-R 250, both with and without the 2x Extender R, both hand-held and on a sturdy tripod. I've seen no evidence of shutter shock at any exposure time I've used (from 2 seconds to 1/4000 sec). I did find my Manfrotto legs to be too light for the 250+2x+SL setup, and went to my sturdier Feisol legs (and a new Acratech GP head) to solve that issue.

But I guess my hands-on experiences using both the Sony A7 and the Leica SL, with the same lenses, are of no particular interest to those who want to discuss specifications, features, and theoretical notions without the camera in hand. My apologies for commenting.

I will join Jono and pass on this thread from now on.

G
Godfrey,

fully understand you (and Jono) and will also pass on this thread from now on, without mentioning why as I am a polite person :D

Peter
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I have experienced sample variations with every brand I've owned (Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, Zeiss and Leica). The 24-90 SL lens is also not without issue:

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2016/20160103_1438-LeicaSL-focusShift-90mm.html

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2016/20160103_1808-LeicaSL-focusShift-49mm.html
I am not surprised Digiloyd finds something wrong again, he allmost allways finds something. If it has something to do with using the equipment in real life is another question.

I am not saying that I didnt have issues with Leica lenses as well - for example calibration for focus, but I never had to give back a lens. I had very different experience with some Pentax lenses for example. Also most Leica lenses seem to be fully usable wide open while some fast lenses from other brands one ofte better stops down 1 ot 2 stops. Of course there are great lenses from other brands out there as well. It just looks like there are no/not many bad lenses out from Leica.
 
Focus shift is a serious matter though.

I would be curious to hear from users if they could observe similar behavior than DigLloyd has with his copy of the 24-90.
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Lloyd Chambers is not alone: Ming Thein observed the same behaviour: Premiere and review: The 2015 Leica SL (Typ 601) and lenses.
There must be something true. But is it serious, I wonder ?
I don't subscribe to Digilloyd, and Ming Thein did his report in a short time using lens and camera firmware 1.0 -- the camera shipped at 1.1 and is now at 1.2 with more to come, since the first reported issues are not cleared yet. Sean Reid had a 24-90 for over a month, and has published shots in the field, some with firmware 1.1, but not a studio resolution series, which would show focus shift when the lens is stopped down. Since he focus brackets at the maximum aperture and then selects the sharpest set to analyze, he won't see departures from parfocal behavior (unless he looks for it). Anyway, those were two rather early reports; have they been seen in later reviews?

scott
 
Lloyd Chambers is not alone: Ming Thein observed the same behaviour: Premiere and review: The 2015 Leica SL (Typ 601) and lenses.
There must be something true. But is it serious, I wonder ?
That is bad news. I assume Chambers bought his copy, so it is not pre-production, as Ming's. I also assume he is professional enough to use the latest firmware. Nevertheless, the problem should and could be solved by firmware, if Leica wants to ....

As I am not a subscriber of Diglloyd, I cannot see how serious the focus shift is.

He also speaks of AF problems. I wonder if the Leica SL has a AF fine tuning menu … seems not.
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
That is bad news. I assume Chambers bought his copy, so it is not pre-production, as Ming's.

As I am not a subscriber of Diglloyd, I cannot see how serious the focus shift is.

He also speaks of AF problems. I wonder if the Leica SL has a AF fine tuning menu … seems not.
The Digiloyd review appeared at the same time as Ming Thein's review, so it is not clear what was the production level of his lens. Both were done before deliveries to regular customers were permitted. Also, AF tuning is done in DSLRs with phase detection sensors which are separate from the image chip. Contrast detection AF doesn't have that separation -- the lens is adjusted to maximize contrast in selected locations of the actual image -- so as far as I know there are no cameras offering AF tuning when they work this way.

scott
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Loyd thinks the AF of the Leica S is flawed and I took thousands of images and even if the effect he describes can occur (I dont know if it does) the AF works just fine in real life.

Regarding focus shift of the 24-90. I havent explored any problem but I also have not searched for a problem (and will not search).
In my case I use the Zoom mostly either wide open (where focus shift shouldnt have any influence) or stepped down to maybe f5.6 or f8 (not so often) where I would guess DOF is so deep that focus shift also would not cause any problem.

I can see that focus shift of a Noctilux 1.0 or a f1.4 lens is a problem, but a midrange zoom with f2.8-4.0?
Any examples for situations where this shows up in real life?
Or is it just a trick to win readers to subscribe to a pixelpeaper-pay-site?
BUT: As I said, I havent looked for the issue, so it might be very well possible that it is really there.
 
Top