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!

My Take on the new Leica SL2

Robert Campbell

Well-known member
Bit of a simplification. R-R Cars are part of BMW group (licensing the name for use on cars from Rolls Royce PLC, the much larger power generation group). Pretty well all the oily and silicon bits of Rolls Royce cars are designed and built by BMW in Germany but on a unique platform, not shared with any BMW (that was not true of the previous generation Ghost which was pretty heavily based on the BMW 7 series). Final assembly is at Goodwood in England which basically contributes the cabinet making, upholstery and paintwork - that sort of thing.

Bentley is a bit different. It has a similar autonomy within the VW group to Seat, Skoda or Porsche, so basically Crewe designs and engineers and assembles Bentleys but using the VW group parts bin. The previous generation Continental/Flying Spur were heavily based on the VW Phaeton but Bentley had as much input into the shared platform used for current models as Porsche. Crewe is the only place in the VW Group making 12 cylinder engines (originally designed for said Phaeton which was not a commercial success). The V8 engine used in the Mulsanne is actually a derivative of the legacy RR/Bentley V8 (not to be confused with generic VW group V8 used by Porsche, Bentley etc).

I presume you also believe the Bugatti Cheyron (also part of VW group) is a re-skinned VW Golf GTI

This is modern day manufacturing - the parallels with the L mount Alliance are evident.
A simplification perhaps. I preferred the L-series V8 and all that went with it. RR and B stopped being 'original' in the early noughties.
 

ron787

Member
M lenses, as great as they are, aren’t the pinnacle of lens design they once were. The SL lenses are better (technically anyway) by every sense of the measure and many competitors have exceeded Leica or gotten close enough to lens design that it’ll likely take pixel peeping to tell the difference. In any case I think much of the debate is purely for the photographers enjoyment so to that I say use what makes you happy and don’t look back. Those M lenses could easily fund your next kit should you choose to sell.
I couldn't agree more, in regards to the optical quality of the SL lenses vs M.
But referencing the new SL2, yesterday, I had the opportunity to play with a neighbors just arrived SL2. I had brought along my SL 24-90 Zoom and promptly snapped it into the camera's mount. Before I'd even powered up, something immediately struck me as odd; I, like many photographers, are accustomed to supporting heavy camera/lens combinations with my/our left hand beneath the lens. And when I did that I realized that I cannot effectively use the left sided, rear mounted buttons, and to do so I had to substitute my left hand with my right, an inefficient use of time and energy. While the left sided design might work well for the lighter APS-C Leica that can be managed in a one-handed fashion, no so with the SL2. Anyone else find this an issue?
 

PeterA

Well-known member
I couldn't agree more, in regards to the optical quality of the SL lenses vs M.
But referencing the new SL2, yesterday, I had the opportunity to play with a neighbors just arrived SL2. I had brought along my SL 24-90 Zoom and promptly snapped it into the camera's mount. Before I'd even powered up, something immediately struck me as odd; I, like many photographers, are accustomed to supporting heavy camera/lens combinations with my/our left hand beneath the lens. And when I did that I realized that I cannot effectively use the left sided, rear mounted buttons, and to do so I had to substitute my left hand with my right, an inefficient use of time and energy. While the left sided design might work well for the lighter APS-C Leica that can be managed in a one-handed fashion, no so with the SL2. Anyone else find this an issue?
Are you referring to the Play|Fn|Menu buttons? if so:

I find the three button system on my SL2 much easier to navigate and use than the previous four button with multiple press combinations to remember and use. However this 'much easier' is pretty redundant for my shooting style since I don't muck around with any buttons/dials when composing and shooting except for those associated with the exposure triangle and focus - so when it comes to SL or SL2 shooting - I use the joystick to choose focus point ( right hand) and shutter speed/aperture/EXpComp all are accessed via right hand dials or buttons. As far as the three buttons on left - they are largely redundant in shooting circumstances and the excellent GUI interface makes them almost totally redundant in set up processes.
 

ron787

Member
Are you referring to the Play|Fn|Menu buttons? if so:

I find the three button system on my SL2 much easier to navigate and use than the previous four button with multiple press combinations to remember and use. However this 'much easier' is pretty redundant for my shooting style since I don't muck around with any buttons/dials when composing and shooting except for those associated with the exposure triangle and focus - so when it comes to SL or SL2 shooting - I use the joystick to choose focus point ( right hand) and shutter speed/aperture/EXpComp all are accessed via right hand dials or buttons. As far as the three buttons on left - they are largely redundant in shooting circumstances and the excellent GUI interface makes them almost totally redundant in set up processes.
Yes, the 3 buttons on the left. If they result in redundancy, then it may be a non issue but, if not, their placement is awkward for those accustomed to supporting a long and heavy lens from its underside with their left hands. Left hand underside lens support is an approach that I've used for my past 60 or more years in photography, and it has served me well.

Beyond that, from a personal perspective, I find physical buttons and levers to be more effective for outdoor work than touch screens. No matter how hard the developers try, LCD screens offer poor visibility in direct sunlight, while in a normally lit studio they are fine. But that is where choice comes into play, and we are fortunate to have numerous photographic options available to us. And while I had owned and used just about every Leica film camera and pre-SL2 digital, I have lost interest in Leica's philosophical approach and, with the exception of my remaining SL lenses, have moved on.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I was someone voting to keep the 4 button design, but must say the new button design of Leica works relativly well for me so I got used to the 3 buttons.
The 2 front buttons are very very well placed for my hands. The 2 buttons which I find to small are the ones on the top plate.

I still find that the old M8/M9 with dedicated ISO/WB/Play buttons in one row was a very clear design.
 
Top