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!

Why the SL?

aDam007

New member
Hi,
agree about your statement about using M glass on the M. At least for 35 and 50mm lenses. For longer glass it is different.

I have been usinging rangefinder for over 20 years, some years a M6 was my only camera. I did however experience focus inaccurancies again and again when using rangefinder. Some lenses have gone to calibration 3 times. Thats one of the reasons why I also decided to use Summicrons and slower lenses mainly (except my 35FLE for low light).

I also agree on your last sentence. But I believe thats a problem of customer request. Today winning testchart competitions and pixel peeping awards seems to have become a very important buyer decision factor. Also technology allows to produce lenses on a high level and a very "neutral" rendering. But those "perfect neutral" lenses without faults maybe dont show the "character" which gives the special thing to an image.

I have been close to buy one or 2 of the "Mayer Görlitz" re-incarnations of older lens designs for that reason. Maybe overpriced but probablyfun to experiment with.

Still i prefer a sharp lens with good bokeh without character (T-Zooms) over a mushy lens without caracter.

We still dont agree on the 35TL but I guess we dont have to agree on everything.

One word about the SL: If you criticize the modern lens designs having lost chracter, would be the SL a good way for you to be able to use all kinds of new and also older lenses from all kinds of brands?

I'm still happy with the M. And calibration issues are fine if they're fixed in a timely manner. Since honestly I understand the limitations of RF technology. Which is why I always had 3 M camera bodies on a job, with one sitting at home. And two of every lens that I NEEDED to do said job (mainly 35/50/75).

I am not a fan of the SL colors and IQ. Else I wouldn't mind using it with R lenses. Call me a dinosaur (even though I'm still quite young) but I'm more a fan of the R lenses on the D700 :D

That and I honestly still love RF focusing/shooting.
 

aDam007

New member
I understand: Adam has some issues with Leica due to some negative experiences with the equipment and/or the service. So he's pissed off at them.

There's no way to say this that doesn't come off sounding like a put-down, although that's not the intent: I see no reason why this should incite persistent claims that the lenses aren't so special. I mean, if you bought the equipment because the imaging qualities were wonderful, or you expected them to be wonderful, just because you had some bad experiences with the equipment or the company doesn't mean that those qualities changed. It's not good to get so emotionally involved and lose your objectivity.

I had a similar experience with Land Rover. My 2003 Freelander was a delightful piece of machinery, it performed as I expected most of the time. But it turned out to eat brake pads, had a transmission that I usually had to take manual control of to get it to shift reasonably, and service costs were out of sight. So while I enjoyed it and it met what I was looking for at the time, I'd never recommend it to others without informing them of my experiences in using it.

That's what I mean about addressing the question, "why did you choose the SL in the first place?" How well it met those expectations and notions is the follow up to that.



Exactly. If I want the technically most neutral and accurate rendering, I use the SL24-90. If I want a more classic, "characterful" imaging look (that is, one full of aberrations and technical problems that somehow aesthetically work together in a pleasing way), I fit my R and M lenses. It is this versatility that appeals to me strongly.

(R lenses are more ergonomic on the SL and handle better. While I can (and have) used my M lenses on the SL, I find I usually switch to the R lens instead.)

G

But wait... I'm not saying the SL is bad because I'm angry with Leica.. If that were the case I'd bash the M240 and M glass wouldn't I?

I'm saying that the SL sensor is crap, with crap colors. And the 24-90 zoom isn't special at all. The rendering is pretty terrible and the colors from that lens are equally as bad. Makes for a bad system IMHO.

Maybe you expect and need different things from Leica then I do.. But they're not providing me with what I would expect from Leica. I wouldn't even have cared if I paid twice as much as everybody on this forum. If the system was what I wanted, I would own two, heck three bodies no issues. It's just not what I want.

Maybe most of this is firmware, maybe it's getting fixed like the M240 got fixed (though I didn't have many issues with the M240 early on, I can concede that they did adjust it positively).


AND I've also mentioned many times that I am waiting to see how the 50 Lux pans out. EVEN with all my problems with Leica corporate I'd still be willing to give the 50Lux a chance.
 

aDam007

New member
You know.. I'm starting to think that either you all are crazy. Or I have a defective SL.
I'd send it in if I knew Leica would actually look at it :D

Anyway, that was the last thing I'm going to say about Leica until I have a 50Lux-SL in hand. Happy shooting everyone!
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I'm still happy with the M. And calibration issues are fine if they're fixed in a timely manner. Since honestly I understand the limitations of RF technology. Which is why I always had 3 M camera bodies on a job, with one sitting at home. And two of every lens that I NEEDED to do said job (mainly 35/50/75).

I am not a fan of the SL colors and IQ. Else I wouldn't mind using it with R lenses. Call me a dinosaur (even though I'm still quite young) but I'm more a fan of the R lenses on the D700 :D

That and I honestly still love RF focusing/shooting.
I am not unhappy with SL color but I never understood why people say the M sensor to be outdated and so much worse than the Q and SL sensor. Indeed I prefer the M 240 color over the SL color as well.
And like you I also still like RF + primes.

For my taste the 50/1.4 SL lens is too big and expensive by the way, so for now I think I will skip it.
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
You know.. I'm starting to think that either you all are crazy. Or I have a defective SL.
I'd send it in if I knew Leica would actually look at it :D

Anyway, that was the last thing I'm going to say about Leica until I have a 50Lux-SL in hand. Happy shooting everyone!
Don't know Adam ... I wonder if it is a Northern Latitude blue light thing ... I took a Q to Scotland and was gobsmacked at how good
the color rendition was ... plus great sharpness and contrast.

I ended up dialing up saturation and clarity to a level I have never ever done before as it just seems to work.

Bear in mind I was not shooting portraits but the camera lens and sensor seemed stellar. And they say it is similar of analogous to that of
the SL.

I love the EVF in the SL but you might as well carry MF due to its size ... and the AF lenses rival the S lenses for weight and size.

Give me a interchangeable lens Q with the new EVF and I will sell everything else.

Fuji seems to get color science correct for the most part ... probably all those years tailoring their emulsions for pros. Just too many little
things like small sensor X-Trans RAW developing for me.

Everyone has a differing sensitivity to color and some are much more acutely aware of subtle shifts ... I assume that you have either the
good fortune or the bad fortune to fall into that category ... great for work but makes choices difficult if things are not spot on.

I am hoping that the small X1D will have the packability of a travel camera and maintain decent color and usability. If not I may
settle for a M-D or MM1.

So many choices appear on a near distant horizon ... nothing at present is clear enough to decide.

Bob
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
But wait... I'm not saying the SL is bad because I'm angry with Leica.. If that were the case I'd bash the M240 and M glass wouldn't I?

I'm saying that the SL sensor is crap, with crap colors. And the 24-90 zoom isn't special at all. The rendering is pretty terrible and the colors from that lens are equally as bad. Makes for a bad system IMHO.

Maybe you expect and need different things from Leica then I do.. But they're not providing me with what I would expect from Leica. I wouldn't even have cared if I paid twice as much as everybody on this forum. If the system was what I wanted, I would own two, heck three bodies no issues. It's just not what I want.

Maybe most of this is firmware, maybe it's getting fixed like the M240 got fixed (though I didn't have many issues with the M240 early on, I can concede that they did adjust it positively).

AND I've also mentioned many times that I am waiting to see how the 50 Lux pans out. EVEN with all my problems with Leica corporate I'd still be willing to give the 50Lux a chance.
You're entitled to your opinion, but it doesn't match my experience at all. The SL and its native zoom make the Sony look like crap as far as I'm concerned, and the Sony is built like crap too, in comparison ... if you want to use such language. I don't normally. I think the Sony is a decent piece, but lacking in many ways that are important to me. Most important to me is how it works with my R system lenses ... they're much more valuable than an individual camera body, no matter what body you're talking about. I have not had a single problem with the in-camera JPEG colors, or with the raw files after processing them to my whim.

BTW: I have no idea why someone would ask someone in Leica corporate what independent vendors in Hong Kong are going to do regards pricing and selling equipment. Leica can't control that at all. Even if Leica refuses to sell gear to them, they'll get it some other way and there's no legal way to change that.

by Paratom: ... I am not unhappy with SL color but I never understood why people say the M sensor to be outdated and so much worse than the Q and SL sensor. ...
I agree with you on the sensor quality. The SL picks up a stop, maybe a little more, on sensitivity but isn't all that different otherwise. Both out-perform the A7 by a good bit with my lenses, which is why I ditched the A7 after I got the M-P; the SL and now the M-D continue that nicely.

G
 

algrove

Well-known member
Don't know Adam ... I wonder if it is a Northern Latitude blue light thing ... I took a Q to Scotland and was gobsmacked at how good
the color rendition was ... plus great sharpness and contrast.

I ended up dialing up saturation and clarity to a level I have never ever done before as it just seems to work.

Bear in mind I was not shooting portraits but the camera lens and sensor seemed stellar.Bob
Such a shame another was not announced at Photokina instead of a toy polaroid. Like you the Q has been stellar.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2016/01/leica-q-cuba-louis-foubare/
 

algrove

Well-known member
I buy cameras as tools and for me there is no utility in a hip toy which gives postage stamp sized prints.
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Yes quite hip ...

I will buy one for my daughter ... perhaps I will seem a bit more with it ... probably not.:ROTFL:

Mint I think.

Bob

- - - Updated - - -

I buy cameras as tools and for me there is no utility in a hip toy which gives postage stamp sized prints.
Stocking stuffer ... beats another lame tie.

Bob
 
V

Vivek

Guest
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!
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
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
 

aDam007

New member
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?)
 

aDam007

New member
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).
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
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
 

aDam007

New member
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.
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
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
 

algrove

Well-known member
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/
 
Top