Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 72 of 72

Thread: Why the SL?

  1. #51
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    12,726
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    I buy cameras as tools and for me there is no utility in a hip toy which gives postage stamp sized prints.
    So do quite a few others. The prints are definitely not postage stamp sized. It is a neat concept camera that Leica thought of, of late.

    Could we return to the SL discussion please? Thanks!

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Changed my mind.. Don't want to be negetive..

    Did you guys see the new 50SL? Some samples here:
    » Photokina 2016 – Day 1: Checking Out the 50mm Summilux-SL ASPH and Multifunction Handgrip
    Last edited by aDam007; 21st September 2016 at 06:37. Reason: Personal reasons :D
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,594
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Will keep this Singapore advice in notes for using the S006. Thanks. Wait where did your post go?

  4. #54
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,509
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Adam,

    Glad I had a chance to read the original post ... did not find it negative in any sense.

    But I respect your decision to pass on commenting on something that is so obvious to you.

    So much effort has been transferred from the S system to the SL ... assume that they are after
    a bigger market and have let the S languish ... rather that have a recall on all bad AF mechanisms and
    replace the S corrosion sensors as a batch ... improve their response times and work at firmware and
    profiles that would match the S 006 better they have thrown a huge amount of effort into the SL.

    M and S owners have seen modest firmware upgrades ... little in the way of lenses that were suggested
    at the introduction of the S system.

    While the company needs to tend to its bottom line .... owners also need to be aware of their desires needs and
    expectations ... and assess if their money and energy is better spent elsewhere.

    I agree that the S 006 had superb color DR and in concert with a few of their lenses led to stellar pictures.

    Shame that they have not pursued it with the same passion that the owners of the cameras have done.

    This is not a negative post ... just an assessment of how things change and how we need to look forward.

    Regards,

    Bob

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    Will keep this Singapore advice in notes for using the S006. Thanks. Wait where did your post go?
    Decided it wasn't in anyones best interest. Keeping the post up would have meant that I would then want to defend my position with samples. And it would have just been a lot of work. And even with proof (sample images) some still may not agree for one reason or another. So it's easier to just let it be. Besides to be honest, I'm tired of fighting with Leica/over Leica. I'd rather just get back to enjoying my photography. And if that means putting the SL kit aside until I see a reason to pick it up and instead using my S-006 (until it breaks again) or using another system. Or heck, even buying a M240-P again (because honestly I regret selling my colour Ms). Then that's what I'm gonna have to do. Because otherwise it'll be all work photography and no fun photography. And I'm the only one who's really getting negatively impacted by these posts. Because I end up being the one that looks crazy, and if you don't see it, you just don't see it. I won't be able to sway anyone who doesn't wanna be swayed.

    I'm just going to enjoy my stay here in COLD Melbourne, with my X-T2 (first time I haven't traveled with something from Leica in maybe 5-10 years?)

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    Adam,

    Glad I had a chance to read the original post ... did not find it negative in any sense.

    But I respect your decision to pass on commenting on something that is so obvious to you.

    So much effort has been transferred from the S system to the SL ... assume that they are after
    a bigger market and have let the S languish ... rather that have a recall on all bad AF mechanisms and
    replace the S corrosion sensors as a batch ... improve their response times and work at firmware and
    profiles that would match the S 006 better they have thrown a huge amount of effort into the SL.

    M and S owners have seen modest firmware upgrades ... little in the way of lenses that were suggested
    at the introduction of the S system.

    While the company needs to tend to its bottom line .... owners also need to be aware of their desires needs and
    expectations ... and assess if their money and energy is better spent elsewhere.

    I agree that the S 006 had superb color DR and in concert with a few of their lenses led to stellar pictures.

    Shame that they have not pursued it with the same passion that the owners of the cameras have done.

    This is not a negative post ... just an assessment of how things change and how we need to look forward.

    Regards,

    Bob

    Bob, I seem to share the same thoughts. It really seems to me that Leica has almost shafted the S-system in favour of the SL. Because they believe it's the way forward. Be it issues with the S construction, cost of manufacturing vs market demand or whatever the reason.

    It's not Leica's fault, to be fair it was just bad timing. The S-system came out when DSLRs were on their way out. And no I don't mean the DSLR is dead, I just mean that no new system would be designed with a mirror at this stage in the game. Even Sony dragged their feet with the TMT camera update (A99II). And probably really only did it because they had the resources and know-how. And really just didn't want to shaft their customers. I liked the A99 for what it was, I had ALL the Zeiss-Sony lenses. But ultimately the system lasted less then a year in my kit, the urge to switch to the A7 series was to strong. And Sony made it so easy with that adapter. To be fair the A7 series didn't last to long in my bag either.. But I'm not really a fan of Sonys colours, that's not a surprise coming from me.

    Really what Leica will need to do moving forward is make a mirrorless MFD camera with an adapter for S lenses and an updated line of compact S lenses. But to be honest, I don't think they even have the resources to tackle that kind of a project right now. So the best we can hope for is adapting lenses to the SL. And good native SL lenses with an updated SL body down the road.

    To me, none of this adapting makes a lot of sense due to my issues with the sensor. And the fact that I'd rather my AF to be fast if I'm carrying something so big. So I think it's just easier for me to move back to my comfort zone and shoot on an M240-P + a select few M lenses. Anyway rangefinders make me the happiest. So that's probably what I'll do for my travel/fun photography.

    In the meantime I won't need to bother lusting over the newest and best from Leica since I'll have another system to handle my work needs. Probably the new GFX from Fuji by the looks of it. And the X-T2 for anything fast moving, since that little camera can hustle.


    BTW, something positive about the SL (I'm trying something new here)... I think the 35FLE really works well on that camera. It's one of the better lenses you can adapt IMHO. Something about the colour of the lens that really seems to jive with the sensor. And I guess another positive. The 75APO is defective by design. So having an EVF will allow you to learn/manage the flaws of the lens. Essentially being able to see the scene unfold, allows you to avoid catching the 75APO on bad angles. And believe me for anyone who's not used the 75APO, it can be one of the most amazing rendering lenses, and one of the worst pieces of metal and glass to ever come from Germany. You really just need to know how to handle it. That and if I ever get asked to do more corporate video work. I can just use the SL, since it supposedly has awesome video capabilities (I wouldn't be able to confirm or deny, as I've not really bothered with it to much yet).

  7. #57
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,509
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Video on the SL is stellar if you use an external recorder to capture 10bit ... otherwise the Log setting is ineffective. With 10 bit it looks stellar ... and if you use the C series Leica lenses ....

    Out of my league with the Summicrons at $15K and the Summiluxes at $32K per lens.


    Bob

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    Video on the SL is stellar if you use an external recorder to capture 10bit ... otherwise the Log setting is ineffective. With 10 bit it looks stellar ... and if you use the C series Leica lenses ....

    Out of my league with the Summicrons at $15K and the Summiluxes at $32K per lens.


    Bob
    Never really got a chance to fully test the Summicron-C lenses before I had a falling out with Leica. Now I'm not really interested in spending that kind of money on the brand anymore.

    I'll look into the external recorders for capturing better footage. I'm considering playing around with the video function as to not waste the camera.

  9. #59
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,509
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Odyssey 7 Q+ would be my recommendation .... beautifully made and they update firmware regularly ... it will handle 4K RAW ... essentially anything you can throw at it.

    Very easy to pull focus with and has waveform peaking and magnification while recording.

    Mount it on a Noga arm from the tripod and it does not affect the balance of the camera.

    Bob
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,594
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by aDam007 View Post
    Decided it wasn't in anyones best interest. Keeping the post up would have meant that I would then want to defend my position with samples. And it would have just been a lot of work. And even with proof (sample images) some still may not agree for one reason or another. So it's easier to just let it be. Besides to be honest, I'm tired of fighting with Leica/over Leica. I'd rather just get back to enjoying my photography. And if that means putting the SL kit aside until I see a reason to pick it up and instead using my S-006 (until it breaks again) or using another system. Or heck, even buying a M240-P again (because honestly I regret selling my colour Ms). Then that's what I'm gonna have to do. Because otherwise it'll be all work photography and no fun photography. And I'm the only one who's really getting negatively impacted by these posts. Because I end up being the one that looks crazy, and if you don't see it, you just don't see it. I won't be able to sway anyone who doesn't wanna be swayed.

    I'm just going to enjoy my stay here in COLD Melbourne, with my X-T2 (first time I haven't traveled with something from Leica in maybe 5-10 years?)
    Agree. After all itsn't it supposed to be about enjoying a passion or hobby or profession in any way we want and which suits our needs.

    We are all changing our tools as we see fit and no one should deride us for that. Heck, for landscape I had a P45+ until the fiddly wire to my Hasselblad V's just ticked me off all too often and got the 645Z which I loved UNTIL PO came out with something I wanted to try again as I liked their colors at lot. All the while I have had friends who used and still use and like the S006 and think they will only switch to the S007 once its price falls to an acceptable level for them. I surmise this is because they have invested heavily in S glass which they like.

    These same friends like the M240 for street and travel. So again that is their and my choice too, but we hold our gear all too often in too high esteem instead of concentrating on the ultimate goal-making great photographs. Great is interpreted by us all in very different ways, but we should all have, above all, fun with our photography.

    http://www.louisfoubare.com/portfolio/
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  11. #61
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by aDam007 View Post
    Bob, I seem to share the same thoughts. It really seems to me that Leica has almost shafted the S-system in favour of the SL. Because they believe it's the way forward. Be it issues with the S construction, cost of manufacturing vs market demand or whatever the reason.

    It's not Leica's fault, to be fair it was just bad timing. The S-system came out when DSLRs were on their way out. And no I don't mean the DSLR is dead, I just mean that no new system would be designed with a mirror at this stage in the game. Even Sony dragged their feet with the TMT camera update (A99II). And probably really only did it because they had the resources and know-how. And really just didn't want to shaft their customers. I liked the A99 for what it was, I had ALL the Zeiss-Sony lenses. But ultimately the system lasted less then a year in my kit, the urge to switch to the A7 series was to strong. And Sony made it so easy with that adapter. To be fair the A7 series didn't last to long in my bag either.. But I'm not really a fan of Sonys colours, that's not a surprise coming from me.

    Really what Leica will need to do moving forward is make a mirrorless MFD camera with an adapter for S lenses and an updated line of compact S lenses. But to be honest, I don't think they even have the resources to tackle that kind of a project right now. So the best we can hope for is adapting lenses to the SL. And good native SL lenses with an updated SL body down the road.

    To me, none of this adapting makes a lot of sense due to my issues with the sensor. And the fact that I'd rather my AF to be fast if I'm carrying something so big. So I think it's just easier for me to move back to my comfort zone and shoot on an M240-P + a select few M lenses. Anyway rangefinders make me the happiest. So that's probably what I'll do for my travel/fun photography.

    In the meantime I won't need to bother lusting over the newest and best from Leica since I'll have another system to handle my work needs. Probably the new GFX from Fuji by the looks of it. And the X-T2 for anything fast moving, since that little camera can hustle.


    BTW, something positive about the SL (I'm trying something new here)... I think the 35FLE really works well on that camera. It's one of the better lenses you can adapt IMHO. Something about the colour of the lens that really seems to jive with the sensor. And I guess another positive. The 75APO is defective by design. So having an EVF will allow you to learn/manage the flaws of the lens. Essentially being able to see the scene unfold, allows you to avoid catching the 75APO on bad angles. And believe me for anyone who's not used the 75APO, it can be one of the most amazing rendering lenses, and one of the worst pieces of metal and glass to ever come from Germany. You really just need to know how to handle it. That and if I ever get asked to do more corporate video work. I can just use the SL, since it supposedly has awesome video capabilities (I wouldn't be able to confirm or deny, as I've not really bothered with it to much yet).
    Adam, the 35FLE has been the lens I have used most between the 24-90. Excellent for low light.

    I dont really see the benefits of an EVF over the excellent OVF of the Leica S.
    I also find the lens range of the S very complete - besides my wish for a TS lens in the wide angle range.
    Lets see how compact the Fuji and Hassy lenses are compared to the S lenses.
    I still find the S system very very good, if they fix the AF motor issue and improve service in USA (my experience in Germany with service is good).
    The SL is a very good camera, flexible, fast etc. etc,
    My heart is still more with the M and the S.
    I even decided to get a M262 since I allways feel the M 240 feels a little like a brick.
    The simplicity of the M is always a joy for me. I use auto iso, then just set f-stop, focus, click, thats it.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Adam, the 35FLE has been the lens I have used most between the 24-90. Excellent for low light.

    I dont really see the benefits of an EVF over the excellent OVF of the Leica S.
    I also find the lens range of the S very complete - besides my wish for a TS lens in the wide angle range.
    Lets see how compact the Fuji and Hassy lenses are compared to the S lenses.
    I still find the S system very very good, if they fix the AF motor issue and improve service in USA (my experience in Germany with service is good).
    The SL is a very good camera, flexible, fast etc. etc,
    My heart is still more with the M and the S.
    I even decided to get a M262 since I allways feel the M 240 feels a little like a brick.
    The simplicity of the M is always a joy for me. I use auto iso, then just set f-stop, focus, click, thats it.

    I'm more a fan of OVF and RF then EVF. But also personal preference I guess.
    I also find the SF-64 flash works better in TTL mode on the S-006 then SL, which is funny/weird right?

    I'm fairly certain the Fuji lenses and Hassy lenses won't be as good as the S lenses.

    Does the M262 actually feel lighter but still solid? I was thinking M-D since I don't look at my screen. But gonna probably settle on another M240-P because I don't like the red dot and REALLY like sapphire glass. Since I've not had problems with it. Whereas I have with the regular glass screens.

    A few more photos with the 50Lux-SL are out and about on the net. Not really what I'm looking for in a lens. But also again, not really the best way to judge a lens. I will have to wait and play with one for myself.

    Wish the 100S was a faster to focus lens. And of course didn't break down every 6 months.

  13. #63
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    ...
    The SL is a very good camera, flexible, fast etc. etc,
    ...
    I even decided to get a M262 since I allways feel the M 240 feels a little like a brick.
    The simplicity of the M is always a joy for me. I use auto iso, then just set f-stop, focus, click, thats it.
    The SL is my primary tool these days. As I have said before, it does exactly what I'd wanted, I like the design a lot, and find that it performs brilliantly.

    I currently have both M-P typ 240 and M-D typ 262. Both are excellent, but the M-P is up for sale now. In the M line, I greatly prefer the utter simplicity of the M-D.

    G

  14. #64
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by aDam007 View Post

    Does the M262 actually feel lighter but still solid? I was thinking M-D since I don't look at my screen. But gonna probably settle on another M240-P because I don't like the red dot and REALLY like sapphire glass. Since I've not had problems with it. Whereas I have with the regular glass screens.
    The exposure metering of the M is far from Nikon or Olympus or the Leica SL.
    Therefore for me the display is important. When I shoot in a certain light I check exosure on the display and then set exp comp. I have some idea (-0.3/0.7 in bright contrast situations, +0/0.3 when shooting into light, and 0 in low light low contrast) but checking is more precise. I dont check for each image but just at the beginning of a series.
    Thats why the MD is not an option for me.
    I am pretty sure the 262 will still feel solid, but can tell you more next week.
    In a way its weird to buy a 262 when one has a 240, but it often just feels a little like a brick and I also never use the EVF anyways, so the 262 offers even more simplicity (less menue options, less buttons).
    Whenever I use the SL I think it works fine but I dont feel the simplicity of the M.
    However I also can say if I was pro and had to make sure I get each shot I would feel better to use the SL.

  15. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    The exposure metering of the M is far from Nikon or Olympus or the Leica SL.
    Therefore for me the display is important. When I shoot in a certain light I check exosure on the display and then set exp comp. I have some idea (-0.3/0.7 in bright contrast situations, +0/0.3 when shooting into light, and 0 in low light low contrast) but checking is more precise. I dont check for each image but just at the beginning of a series.
    Thats why the MD is not an option for me.
    I am pretty sure the 262 will still feel solid, but can tell you more next week.
    In a way its weird to buy a 262 when one has a 240, but it often just feels a little like a brick and I also never use the EVF anyways, so the 262 offers even more simplicity (less menue options, less buttons).
    Whenever I use the SL I think it works fine but I dont feel the simplicity of the M.
    However I also can say if I was pro and had to make sure I get each shot I would feel better to use the SL.

    Honestly the metering in the M has never bothered me. I suppose I just got use to it. Wouldn't have a problem with the M-D. Aside from being worried that the RF mechanism would fall out of alignment while I'm on assignment.

  16. #66
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,532
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    The exposure metering of the M is far from Nikon or Olympus or the Leica SL.
    Therefore for me the display is important. When I shoot in a certain light I check exosure on the display and then set exp comp. I have some idea (-0.3/0.7 in bright contrast situations, +0/0.3 when shooting into light, and 0 in low light low contrast) but checking is more precise. I dont check for each image but just at the beginning of a series.
    Thats why the MD is not an option for me.
    I am pretty sure the 262 will still feel solid, but can tell you more next week.
    In a way its weird to buy a 262 when one has a 240, but it often just feels a little like a brick and I also never use the EVF anyways, so the 262 offers even more simplicity (less menue options, less buttons).
    Whenever I use the SL I think it works fine but I dont feel the simplicity of the M.
    However I also can say if I was pro and had to make sure I get each shot I would feel better to use the SL.
    Hmm. I haven't had any problems with my M-D metering system setting the exposure right on the mark, even in direct comparison to the SL or Nikon D750. An exposure meter is an exposure meter ... understand what it sees and how it calculates exposure, use that to set exposure—you'll get it right every time.

    G

  17. #67
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    I like to nail it as much as possible in the first step. If i didnt have a display to check I woul probably underexpose 90% of my images by -0.3 just to make sure to make sure to not loose images throuh blown highlights. Anyways, 262 md is not an option for me even though I cansee its appealing for some.

  18. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    I like to nail it as much as possible in the first step. If i didnt have a display to check I woul probably underexpose 90% of my images by -0.3 just to make sure to make sure to not loose images throuh blown highlights. Anyways, 262 md is not an option for me even though I cansee its appealing for some.
    Ultimately I'd just pick up another M240-P if I were going to go back to the Leica M.
    I have no issues with the M246 aside from the fact that it's black and white Oddly enough though, it worked for it's intended purpose. I was trying to convince myself to like black and white images. And ever since owning and using the camera. I now convert more of my color photos to black and white, because I somehow like the look of black and white now. Whereas before I did it as last resort to salvage a good moment with terrible colours (like if a stupid videographer ran up with his terrible on camera light. Or someone guest was using AF assist lights or etc).

  19. #69
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Yesterday I went to a sports event (running) where my kids and friends took part. I brought my T which I normally like a lot. Mistake.
    For sports like this, where you want to hit these short moments (start/end etc.) I wished I had brought my SL and made me remember one of the reasons why I bought the SL. I really love the M, like the T, but for some things the SL helps to get the shot.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  20. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    613
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Yesterday I went to a sports event (running) where my kids and friends took part. I brought my T which I normally like a lot. Mistake.
    For sports like this, where you want to hit these short moments (start/end etc.) I wished I had brought my SL and made me remember one of the reasons why I bought the SL. I really love the M, like the T, but for some things the SL helps to get the shot.

    Not disputing the AF in good light. Like all modern cameras the AF is fast in good light. Dare I say almost the fastest I've used (w/the 24-90).
    Event lighting, that's a different story. I think the smaller aperture really hurts the SL for indoor shooting. Perhaps the 50LUX-L will be better suited for indoor shooting (using the 35TL however is not advised indoors with the SL, not a great performer AF wise, even outdoors if I'm being honest).

    The 60TL is actually faster then the 35TL if you're not going from near macro range to portrait distance (in that case it gets confused easily). If the 60TL is going from mid distance to candid to mid distance to candid etc.. It's actually faster then the 35TL by a noticeable amount. I wouldn't say sports fast, but it can definitely capture people walking down the street at a brisk pace. Whereas the 35TL I find is very hit or miss. I think they need an internal focus limiter for the 60TL. That would help the lens a lot. As in, a quick menu option on/off that disallows focusing closer then say 1m.

  21. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,270
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Hi Peter,
    I agree that focus accurancy with manual lenses on the SL is very good, at least for static subjects.
    The big disadvantage compared to a rangefinder is the fact that one can either use focus magnification and focus or frame, but not both at the same time.
    Once you have focused and back to framing you need to make/be sure that your subject doesnt move anymore. Or try to focus without magnification (which might work fine in some cases).
    In regards of Leica lenses vs Zeiss....if I would spend the money and carry the weight of a Otus55 or a Leica 50/1.4 SL, I would for sure prefer to have AF. No wait, I rather would carry a S+70mm. If I was using a manual focus lens on the SL I would prefer a M lens over big fat Otus. I think that M-lenses 35mm and longer work very good on the SL.
    But at the same time, if I was using a manual focus lens in the 35-50mm range I would prefer a Leica M body over the SL.
    One thing I eally like with the SL is face detection for AF. Just yesterday I took images of my kids in action and I believe to have caught some moments where I would have to have a lot of luck to catch those without AF.
    Tom
    I use the 24-90 Leica zoom for when I need autofocus, but most of my shooting is with manual M lenses. I must admit I have a 50mm 'fetish' I have the Nocti and the lux and I have an Otus551.4 - it is a killer lens tbh - but yes large. Some of the new Zeiss Milvus formulaitons in the wide angles ( 18 and 15 @ 2.8) look to be outstanding lenses - superior to the Leica M wides - and a lot cheaper. The Sl body makes manual focusing 'exotics' a pleasure.

    My Mp240 is hardly used these days- since the Sl purchase - I cant see much difference between the chips and their rencering wither on C1 or Lightromm to be honest. The rangefinder is fun - but the SL is easier and more accurate in most shooting circumstances if one cares about accurate focus with fast lenses.

    I wish the SL was 35 megapixels - my only criticism except for limitations about EVF modes.

  22. #72
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    67
    Post Thanks / Like

    Lightbulb Re: Why the SL?

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    Some of the new Zeiss Milvus formulaitons in the wide angles ( 18 and 15 @ 2.8) look to be outstanding lenses - superior to the Leica M wides - and a lot cheaper. The Sl body makes manual focusing 'exotics' a pleasure.

    My Mp240 is hardly used these days- since the Sl purchase - I cant see much difference between the chips and their rendering wither on C1 or Lightromm to be honest. The rangefinder is fun - but the SL is easier and more accurate in most shooting circumstances if one cares about accurate focus with fast lenses.
    I agree with most of this, but I don't think that you should take compactness (in the M lenses) for granted. That is their USP. The best bigger Zeiss / SL lenses perform at similar levels, but they're not much good if you can't be bothered to take the with you, or even change to them. http://www.dearsusan.net/2016/09/30/...and-your-back/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •