Leica SL (601) ..Oct 20th?

[k-hawinkler]

Does anyone know if this camera will stop down R lenses when the eventual adapter arrives? In that case it could be considered a true 'R solution'.

I have not seen that point being addressed.
I know many folks really want that.
For me that wouldn't be enough to give up 42 MP and IBIS of the A7r2 though.

 

[hcubell]

I find it baffling that considering this is one of the big selling points of the SL, not one of the Leica appointed reviewers presented any images showing the effectiveness when shooting action at 11 fps. Their images are all of stationary subjects which could just as well have been taken with a Sigma DP1.

Not surprising. How many people who buy the SL will actually shoot 11 fps with it?

 

[Vivek]

I find it baffling that considering this is one of the big selling points of the SL, not one of the Leica appointed reviewers presented any images showing the effectiveness when shooting action at 11 fps. Their images are all of stationary subjects which could just as well have been taken with a Sigma DP1.

Quatro not DP1. :grin:

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Case in point . I just heard from a client that I shot wind turbines with. I shot it with my A7rII 42 mpx piece of crap that I keep hearing about and guess what they printed a image 8 FOOT x 21 Foot( and its cropped) for a wall entrance and my client is thrilled plus she said she can see every detail in it. Oh and i shot it handheld. 24 mpx I would be giving them back there money. LOL

Im not so sure Im joking about the 24mpx. I need bigger and for the value proposition that I seek the Sony wins. I shot it with the Batis 85mm too. 1200 dollars

That job almost paid for my camera. Yes I make my money back but here I do it far faster and I'm banking a profit now.

Back to making popcorn. Bottom line we all make choices we all have budgets and we all have certain needs we need to fill. Seriously if it was the same 42mpx I would have a different opinion.

 

[Zlatko Batistich]

I don't get the "this is expensive" argument. For a professional photographer who buys this camera and throws it into the dustbin after 150,000 exposures, the cost would be $0.05 per click. A typical event would for me equal a maximum of 2,000 clicks, which would then sum up to a camera cost of $100. Lens cost would be much lower, but let's say that other "hardware" costs are $100 too, and we are up to the grand sum of $200. If my income from photography can't cover that level of cost, I should look for other work (which I have, so I'm not a full time photographer anymore). For smaller jobs that require fewer exposure, portraiture for example, the mathematics look even more favourable.

Backup is of course an issue, but if this proves to be a reliable camera, a Leica T would be a great backup, although a separate WA lens would be needed to compensate for the crop factor.

Some claim that 24MP isn't sufficient, and that's fair enough, but I also think it's fair to say that users of the most common DSLR brand in the world, the one called Canon, haven't had access even to 24MP until very recently. Still, several of them have been able to make a living from their somewhat inferior cameras

"Expensive" is relative to a lot of things, including income, expenses, and the other equipment options out there. The SL is without doubt relatively expensive when compared with similar options from Canon, Nikon and Sony. I wish I could say the camera costs just $100 per event, but that calculation gets complicated by the relative costs of other options.

 

[T.Dascalos]

Sinar the last I looked they where out of business.

Hardly the case....

 

[algrove]

My belief is that the adapters shall be free with the camera, which will be shipped with one heavy zoom.

Nothing is free with Leica.

 

[msadat]

as an S owner, i want to know how fast does it focus the S lenses!

 

[T.Dascalos]

as an S owner, i want to know how fast does it focus the S lenses!

That's easy to answer... It should be as fast as it focuses with the SL-601 dedicated lenses (for the same lens speed & focal length), I say this because AF speed and accuracy relies only to the camera's AF system... My C645 lenses for instance, focus as fast as Leica S lenses on an S (via the S adapter) and as fast as Nikkor AF-S lenses on my Nikons (via the JAS adapter)... They are slow on their mother camera though because the AF system is ancient on the Contax.

 

[lambert]

Not surprising. How many people who buy the SL will actually shoot 11 fps with it?

Sure, but my point remains. Considering this is one of the big selling points, you would expect at least one test showing how it fares.

 

[JorisV]

as an S owner, i want to know how fast does it focus the S lenses!

According to Jono's review the AF of the T lenses on the SL is much faster than it is with the T itself, so I would expect the AF of S lenses on the SL also to be faster...

 

[lambert]

Nothing is free with Leica.

There's always a first ... the grip is free.

 

[algrove]

Technically it's a new lens system but in a common mount similar to how the E mount and FE mount are different systems but use a common mount. Maybe a branding strategy of naming the SL the "FT" (for FF T mount) or "TL" (for T mount Large) would make more sense from a system standpoint to many. I think SL (or S light as Jono mentioned) makes sense from a marketing/pricing standpoint in that this is a legitimate S system backup and a completely credible R solution (FINALLY) for R users.

As an M backup body I still think that a Leica Q that could mount lenses would make a great future Leica ML. People still want a camera like that as well.

I am not trying to pick an argument, but I have been happliy using my R lenses (Once Leica could get the M-R adapter out to the public which was 15 months from Photokina). What is not credible about the M240 platform using R lenses. IMHO, just because the EVF is crap on the M240 and superb on the SL does not bring credibility to the R lens solution.

 

[T.Dascalos]

There's always a first ... the grip is free.

So is the EVF....

 

[algrove]

Thats what I think is coming down the pike next. A Q type body with interchangable lenses who's native mount is the Leica M mount. It will incorporate a state of the art EVF or maybe a hybrid OVF/EVF and I suppose either a line of AF M mount lenses or possibly AF assist light in viewfinder. Whether the body will be considered as part of the M line or not, hard to say as crystal ball just went cloudy (running out to get more Windex as we speak ).

Dave (D&A)

You could be right about the M mount, but somehow it just seems to me it would better balanced using a T mount. Then we could use the T-M adapter for manual M lenses.Time will tell.

 

[T.Dascalos]

You could be right about the M mount, but somehow it just seems to me it would better balanced using a T mount. Then we could use the T-M adapter for manual M lenses.Time will tell.

The M mount is too far from the sensor and too narrow for the camera to be used on view cameras instead of an MFDB... This was a crucial factor in the new design as its main purpose is not to provide an M replacement, but to be integrated in a complete professional system that would be compatible with different photographic tasks (instead of an MFDB on a view camera included).

 

[algrove]

Does anyone know if this camera will stop down R lenses when the eventual adapter arrives? In that case it could be considered a true 'R solution'.

Reid said he had talked with Leica about implementing this feature for the adapter that is currently due out in 12 months. Just don't hold your breath if the M-R adapter time table is followed- 15 months.

 

[algrove]

The M mount is too far from the sensor and too narrow for the camera to be used on view cameras instead of an MFDB... This was a crucial factor in the new design as its main purpose is not to provide an M replacement, but to be integrated in a complete professional system that would be compatible with different photographic tasks (instead of an MFDB on a view camera included).

This topic is about what the Q ILC might use for a mount if one even comes out.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Are you out of your mind? We do not throw our cameras in the dustbin after 150k shots, we shoot them until they shutter must be replaced, and then keep shooting them. Many of my peers have not seen cause to dump the D3S. And then you have to put this abomination in the context of ROI. There is nothing the SL can do that a D810 isn't doing better for a working photographer (i'll leave video out). For the cost of one SL you get 2 bodies. For the cost of one variable aperture lens you get 2 pro zooms or primes. I may be able to afford the SL but it would be completely absurd! I'd be throwing money down the toilet and putting my clients at risk because I chose to work with an unproven system! Considering I've shot every format from 35mm to 8x10 & MFD backs I know what to expect from various cameras, and there is 0 chance that there will be enough mojo in the SL to differentiate it seriously from a Nikon and a good lens. As for back up, if I pulled out a Leica T after my SL went down I'd be thrown out of the studio! "Oh hey guys, my pro system is busted but this polished hunk of aluminum with a touch screen will be completely fine".

There seems to be confusion over the point that pro photographers can afford any piece of gear because we're all making money hand over foot and a tax break gives us all our investment back. Countless studios have closed over the last decade, photo journalist staffs have been fired en masse from major news institutions, and amateurs have flooded the market sweeping up all low end work or making it simply non-viable. This is a business. There is no ROI for this 1%er braggart machine. Leica makes some wonderful cameras, they really do, but lets not pretend that they're serving the industry. There is nothing wrong with that, but don't kid yourself.

So if the camera still has some value after 150k shots, it's even cheaper to run then

Yes, I can buy two D810 instead of an SL, and probably a D7200 too. And maybe even the D810 offers superior image quality. It's very good. I know that because I use it every day. Still, the value lost per day or per click wouldn't make much difference to my photography budget. Airline tickets, food and other costs do.

But if I want to do video (I do, that's part of my work), if I want to do manual focusing (I do, most of my lenses are manual) or if I want a long reach standard zoom that is (hopefully) better than the Nikkor 24-120mm, it doesn't help me that the D810 is half the price. As much as I love the Nikon, even a Panasonic G7 does a better job in certain areas. The SL, obvioulsy even more so.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Just to check in . I was thinking of making some popcorn. Anyone want some. :clap::bugeyes::facesmack::ROTFL::watch::watch:


Sinar the last I looked they where out of business.

Not according to this website:

http://www.sinar.ch/

But some popcorn would be great. Just attach them to an email.