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!

  • HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL OUR AMERICAN FRIENDS!

The SL is the sexiest camera Leica have ever made.

PeterA

Well-known member
OK -I putting it out there...I'm going on a limb...I know I'm going to get smashed in hr for saying this...

BUT

I don't care...

The SL - just judging by the photos I've seen is now officially the stand out most beautiful camera Leica have ever designed- I want it because it looks fantastic- I'm looking at ICONIC design...

I loved the R8/9 when it came out - it looked and handles so much better than other SLRS...
I love the M series in hand

but check this SL out - it is an S2 in user friendly size and it looks so damn hot and sexy...

Tell me I wrong - I dare you!
 

lambert

New member
OK -I putting it out there...I'm going on a limb...I know I'm going to get smashed in hr for saying this...

BUT

I don't care...

The SL - just judging by the photos I've seen is now officially the stand out most beautiful camera Leica have ever designed- I want it because it looks fantastic- I'm looking at ICONIC design...

I loved the R8/9 when it came out - it looked and handles so much better than other SLRS...
I love the M series in hand

but check this SL out - it is an S2 in user friendly size and it looks so damn hot and sexy...

Tell me I wrong - I dare you!
The Leica Man is never wrong!
 

turtle

New member
If you like it, that's all that matters. Personally, I find it fairly ugly from the front, but better from the top and behind. I think the R8/9, M cameras and S look great, however.


OK -I putting it out there...I'm going on a limb...I know I'm going to get smashed in hr for saying this...

BUT

I don't care...

The SL - just judging by the photos I've seen is now officially the stand out most beautiful camera Leica have ever designed- I want it because it looks fantastic- I'm looking at ICONIC design...

I loved the R8/9 when it came out - it looked and handles so much better than other SLRS...
I love the M series in hand

but check this SL out - it is an S2 in user friendly size and it looks so damn hot and sexy...

Tell me I wrong - I dare you!
 

MCTuomey

New member
Maybe not sexi-est to my eye, but it sure is right up there on my scale of sexiness.

Cool thread idea, in the spirit of fun and frolic, which tone is often missing when discussing gear, esp Leica.
 

Paratom

Active member
For me it looks like a mixture between S and Q.
If we only discuss how a camera looks like I would prefer the T, more straight forward IMO.
But I do like the SL design as well. Sexy? Mmmh..
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I do not want to smash anybody here, but for me the S looks much, Much, MUCH sexier. A mirrorless mini S would have been much preferably by me, but what does my opinion count :cool:
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
I'll pitch in. I like its brutality, but then I am a fan of jeeps and trucks. To me it looks like a T with stuff welded on where it was needed. Did you realize that the little raised part on the left top is the GPS antenna? Just like the ones on top of airplanes.

scott
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
It looks modern, neo-Bauhaus, sleek, and technical. Minimalist, no unnecessary perturbations, and clean. Sexy ... Hmm, I don't know. I'm never quite sure how to assign sexiness to a thing. But desirable ... Yes, to my eye.

The Leicaflex SL and R8/R9 carry a similar aesthetic to my eye. Certainly the modern Leica S as well.

The M cameras have a different kind of attractiveness to me. There's something a little more "old world" about their appeal, a little more gemütlichkeit, more akin to the look of a Rolleiflex TLR or Hasselblad V system, even the older Linhof Technicas. A Nikon F has some of the same "old world" look too. The latest M typ 240/246 have a little more of the smooth neo-Bauhaus appeal, particularly the M Edition 60, but they're still in that different class.

Thanks for starting this thread. It's interesting to look at these cameras as purely art design objects for a little bit. We get a bit over-the-top on specs, features, and function these days. :)

G
 

JMacD

New member
I always thought the M looked sexy, but with so many retro take offs of it by others, it's not as much as before. Actually I take that back, whenever I have someone's M in my hand, it looks very desirable.

I have the S, never thought it was sexy, just a solid tool and I appreciated that it was created digital from the ground up, yet the curves were more Canon than Leica. Yet the Canon D1 was sexy in it's time.

The T is a bit sexy.

Regarding the SL I wouldn't have thought that it was sexy, but I haven't held one, and I get fooled looking at just pictures ( of cameras, cars, even people )

I appreciate your starting this thread. I guess my definition of sexy would be "looks desirable" regardless of use, specifications, price or function?
 

Lars

New member
Clearly you need to get out more. :p

On a more serious note - R9 is arguably an epic industrial design. In my opinion, from a design innovation perspective nothing else from Leica comes near it. SL seems to be more of a utilitarian design - nothing wrong with that but it won't win any design contests. Just my opinion.
 

lambert

New member
Frankly, the SL looks a whole lot like an A7II with a red dot and brings to mind this little story by Simon Garfield in Esquire Magazine:

"The cult of Leica takes many different forms, but it may be best defined by one anecdote. An absurd story you may safely try at home. A couple of years ago, a man on an online forum was pondering what really made Leica, Leica? Why was the brand so indestructible and perennially appealing? Why would normally sensible people pay much more for a Leica than another camera capable of achieving comparable results? One can argue endlessly about the quality of the lenses, and about the solidity of manufacture, but the forum guy believed there was another factor: the red dot logo. He took this theory onto the streets. He put a red paper sticker on his digital Panasonic Lumix (which uses Leica lenses, and is, give or take a bit of lens coating, practically a Leica without the badge), and started taking photos.

He felt bolder. He felt more able to edge himself into situations from which he previously would have shrunk. When he reviewed his pictures later, he found them to be better than those he had taken before. All of which doesn’t say much for Leica cameras, but says rather a lot about their image. The tiny red dot enclosing the word “Leica” in flowery script is the smallest piece of successful branding in the history of photography. It may also be the most alluring piece of miniature branding in the history of luxury consumerism – some logos on watches are larger. Surprisingly, its presence on cameras is relatively new, and dates only from the mid-Eighties (for a decade before, the name within the dot read “Leitz”, the name of the parent company). When I recently mentioned the forum guy’s red dot story to Stefan Daniel, Leica’s head of product development, he said, "Maybe we should just sell red dots.""
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Sony have found its greatest champion!

You are doing a heck of a job! :thumbs:

Keep it up! :)
 
Frankly, the SL looks a whole lot like an A7II with a red dot and brings to mind this little story by Simon Garfield in Esquire Magazine:

"The cult of Leica takes many different forms, but it may be best defined by one anecdote. An absurd story you may safely try at home. A couple of years ago, a man on an online forum was pondering what really made Leica, Leica? Why was the brand so indestructible and perennially appealing? Why would normally sensible people pay much more for a Leica than another camera capable of achieving comparable results? One can argue endlessly about the quality of the lenses, and about the solidity of manufacture, but the forum guy believed there was another factor: the red dot logo. He took this theory onto the streets. He put a red paper sticker on his digital Panasonic Lumix (which uses Leica lenses, and is, give or take a bit of lens coating, practically a Leica without the badge), and started taking photos.

He felt bolder. He felt more able to edge himself into situations from which he previously would have shrunk. When he reviewed his pictures later, he found them to be better than those he had taken before. All of which doesn’t say much for Leica cameras, but says rather a lot about their image. The tiny red dot enclosing the word “Leica” in flowery script is the smallest piece of successful branding in the history of photography. It may also be the most alluring piece of miniature branding in the history of luxury consumerism – some logos on watches are larger. Surprisingly, its presence on cameras is relatively new, and dates only from the mid-Eighties (for a decade before, the name within the dot read “Leitz”, the name of the parent company). When I recently mentioned the forum guy’s red dot story to Stefan Daniel, Leica’s head of product development, he said, "Maybe we should just sell red dots.""
If a red dot can turn me into a better photographer, even if it's because it gives me the "confidence" to be bolder, put me down for three please! :p
 
Top