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?

PeterA

Well-known member
I'm not a fan of the sensor. Or the company. But I'd say the EVF is pretty compelling. It looks nice looking through the SL. The ergonomics are subjective but I like them. The lenses would be my main draw to the system. Though I have yet to use lenses that draw me to the system. So in theory it's the native SL lenses that would make the system worth it. Let's just hope that the new ones are a step above the basic T and TL lenses I've been using.. As none of them IMHO (T and even SL zooms for that matter) are worth the Leica badge.
As a long time user of Leica lenses - I would have to disagree with that statement. Are you speaking of autofocus lenses- there are currently only two you can buy and both zooms are better than anything from Canikon- I know - because I've had to suffer using that stuff. Are you talking manual focus lenses via adaptor ( like all the M /R lenses) or the Zeiss manual focus optics in Milvus or Otus form ? - well the SL allows for a far better focusing experience than anything else out there- again I know because I use all that stuff. How about actually making a Noctilux no longer a lottery as far as focus goes - again the SL does that.

What it doesn't do is provide an infinitely customizeable user interface - yet nor does it offer the 40 megapixel chip in the Sony - yet. People are focusing in Sony comparisons - but Leica had Nikon and Canon more in its sights - for now.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
The Hasselblad X1D will end up costing about the same as the Leica SL does and is not as versatile due to it being a lens-shutter camera. I'd love the big sensor and its high pixel count for other reasons anyway, but it's not a competitor to the SL being a different format and system notion. It does feel for all the world like a slightly rounder version of the Leica SL in the hand. A lovely camera.. Hopefully it will be shipping soon.

The Sony A7 series is not at the same level on build quality, ergonomic design, or imaging performance with Leica R and M lenses. I've had both systems, and greatly prefer the Leica. When I had it, I tried several of the best Sony/Zeiss lenses and preferred the Leica R lenses to them. The all-up cost is not that different for me, since I already had the Leica R and M lenses and only bought the Leica SL24-90 in native mount for the SL. This lens outperforms anything I've seen in comparable focal length range/speed from Sony.

This is why I have the SL: better design, better build, better imaging, tremendous versatility, and compatibility with all my present lenses, as well as any lenses I'll buy in the future.

G
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Wrote a long response.. The short answer is easier. I still have the 35TL, one of the things I'm having a hard time selling off (not because I like it, because nobody wants to buy T lenses until they see the new T2 camera).

I don't think the rendering is special, but I do think the lens is pretty good considering the crop factor. But it's overpriced and the AF is to slow, even on the SL. So I'd rather use a 50Lux-asph and manual focus.
I see. What do you plan to use after selling all the Leica equipment if I may ask?
 

aDam007

New member
As a long time user of Leica lenses - I would have to disagree with that statement. Are you speaking of autofocus lenses- there are currently only two you can buy and both zooms are better than anything from Canikon- I know - because I've had to suffer using that stuff. Are you talking manual focus lenses via adaptor ( like all the M /R lenses) or the Zeiss manual focus optics in Milvus or Otus form ? - well the SL allows for a far better focusing experience than anything else out there- again I know because I use all that stuff. How about actually making a Noctilux no longer a lottery as far as focus goes - again the SL does that.

What it doesn't do is provide an infinitely customizeable user interface - yet nor does it offer the 40 megapixel chip in the Sony - yet. People are focusing in Sony comparisons - but Leica had Nikon and Canon more in its sights - for now.




I thought I made it clear when I said zooms and TL lenses.
You can disagree all you want. It's your choice. But as it stands right now, Leica needs to make lenses that bring people back into the fold. Because I haven't seen good lenses with interesting rendering from Leica since R and M. Heck I haven't seen good rendering from any brand lately.

Nothing about the SL other then ergonomics makes me want to pick it over a Canon or Nikon or Sony.. And especially not over an M.
I mean, the SL lenses aren't bad, but they're nothing special. Either are the T lenses.

Why not just use your M if you're going to shoot M glass? M glass works better on an M and rangefinder focusing should be easier then EVF focusing if you've been an M user long enough. I mean heck, a lot of people on here claim to be in bed with Leica for decades, but then cannot focus a rangefinder better then an EVF? I can focus my RF faster then the T lenses can AF.

I just don't get it. Until Leica produces some amazing glass, with great characteristics I'm not interested. And no the T lenses aren't great, they're basic with basic characteristics. Fuji has better glass then Leica T hands down.

As for the S-system. The lenses are good on the S-system.. The rendering of the S lenses works well with the larger sensor and the distance to subject benefits of the S. But once mounted on the SL, most of the S lenses loose a lot of that charm IMHO. And frankly AF is poor at best when mounted on the SL. Nothing aside from static subject shooting is feasible. Might as well just MF the lenses, in which case that can be done on any system with a dummy adapter (I made a dummy adapter that I was using on the SL for months before the SL adapter hit the market.)

What I'd love to see out of this new glass... M or R like rendering. Rather then Leica buying into the hype and producing lenses that look like Sigma Art series rendering just so you can win over DXO scores.


I'm Just gonna have to wait and see if the rendering is what I like. But with the insane pricing that you see in HK. I'll not be able to sell my SL+Zoom for any reasonable price anyway. So I'm in no hurry to sell the setup now, just going to keep it until a few more SL lenses have come out then reevaluate.
 

aDam007

New member
I see. What do you plan to use after selling all the Leica equipment if I may ask?
For the time being the XT-2 + Fuji lenses.. Great little setup, and I'm seeing less and less of a reason to stick with Leica these days. And to fulfil my Leica needs I'll probably buy another M9P or M240P and keep the 50Lux as a one lens solution for the times when I feel like using a rangefinder camera (just because I like rangefinders). And then my attachment to Leica will be minimal until their CS/repairs improve and their lens lineup sparks interest in the brand for me again.

Will keep on eye on future developments from Fuji with their medium format camera. And other makers like Hassy etc. because with the sale of all my Leica gear, I have tons of options open to me now.

And let's be honest, nobody really makes a bad camera these days.. And it seems that Leica isn't even making their own lenses now in the sense that these designs are being developed by Panasonic for the most part. What is Karbe doing.. Sipping Mai Tais on a beach somewhere?
 

Paratom

Well-known member
For the time being the XT-2 + Fuji lenses.. Great little setup, and I'm seeing less and less of a reason to stick with Leica these days. And to fulfil my Leica needs I'll probably buy another M9P or M240P and keep the 50Lux as a one lens solution for the times when I feel like using a rangefinder camera (just because I like rangefinders). And then my attachment to Leica will be minimal until their CS/repairs improve and their lens lineup sparks interest in the brand for me again.

Will keep on eye on future developments from Fuji with their medium format camera. And other makers like Hassy etc. because with the sale of all my Leica gear, I have tons of options open to me now.

And let's be honest, nobody really makes a bad camera these days.. And it seems that Leica isn't even making their own lenses now in the sense that these designs are being developed by Panasonic for the most part. What is Karbe doing.. Sipping Mai Tais on a beach somewhere?

wow, I was guessing you move to the Hassy x1, but I am surprised that you move to Fuji. Not because I think Fuji was a bad system (I think its excellent and as you say today many brands offer great systems), but because I really wonder if you find the special "mojo" you miss in the newer Leica lenses in the Fuji.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
I thought I made it clear when I said zooms and TL lenses.
You can disagree all you want. It's your choice. But as it stands right now, Leica needs to make lenses that bring people back into the fold. Because I haven't seen good lenses with interesting rendering from Leica since R and M. Heck I haven't seen good rendering from any brand lately.

Nothing about the SL other then ergonomics makes me want to pick it over a Canon or Nikon or Sony.. And especially not over an M.
I mean, the SL lenses aren't bad, but they're nothing special. Either are the T lenses.

Why not just use your M if you're going to shoot M glass? M glass works better on an M and rangefinder focusing should be easier then EVF focusing if you've been an M user long enough. I mean heck, a lot of people on here claim to be in bed with Leica for decades, but then cannot focus a rangefinder better then an EVF? I can focus my RF faster then the T lenses can AF.

I just don't get it. Until Leica produces some amazing glass, with great characteristics I'm not interested. And no the T lenses aren't great, they're basic with basic characteristics. Fuji has better glass then Leica T hands down.

As for the S-system. The lenses are good on the S-system.. The rendering of the S lenses works well with the larger sensor and the distance to subject benefits of the S. But once mounted on the SL, most of the S lenses loose a lot of that charm IMHO. And frankly AF is poor at best when mounted on the SL. Nothing aside from static subject shooting is feasible. Might as well just MF the lenses, in which case that can be done on any system with a dummy adapter (I made a dummy adapter that I was using on the SL for months before the SL adapter hit the market.)

What I'd love to see out of this new glass... M or R like rendering. Rather then Leica buying into the hype and producing lenses that look like Sigma Art series rendering just so you can win over DXO scores.


I'm Just gonna have to wait and see if the rendering is what I like. But with the insane pricing that you see in HK. I'll not be able to sell my SL+Zoom for any reasonable price anyway. So I'm in no hurry to sell the setup now, just going to keep it until a few more SL lenses have come out then reevaluate.
I guess the obvious question to ask if I were in your position of unhappiness - is why buy the camera in the first place? I took a year to decide whether I wanted to use this camera. I dont understand disagreements about cameras - people choose what they like and shoot with what they like.

Leica has delivered an fantastic lens mounting system for M and R glass as well as a future line of autofocus 35mm primes - already announced. One either likes the system its architecture and the easy access to a huge range of optics it provides ( already) or one doesn't. Clearly you don't which is fine, making mistakes in camera choices is all part of the journey - no system suits all people.

Perhaps you should cut your losses now and move back to Sony/Nikon or whatever gives you more pleasure, utility and fun?
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
aDam007,

So why did you buy the SL in the first place? That's what this thread should be exploring.

G
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
I would not presume to speak for Adam but following his blog and posts for a significant amount of time I wish
to speak on his behalf.

He was one of the strongest supporters of the S system and had wonderful compelling pictures with the
camera and lenses ... SL and M in addition to the S.

Then Leica ... don't live in the Fatherland don't expect much support seemed to raise its ugly head and
with a dealer who seemed to shirk any responsibility for support he essentially got the Leica shaft.

Months without feedback and then the ultimate blow ... response that you should feel lucky that you have
our most exclusively wonderful yet defective lens ... best in the world and when we deign it necessary we just might address your issues.

Nothing is more constraining than a wounded spirit or ego ... we end up making decisions that may be less than
rational.

Leica lenses and occasionally their cameras are stellar ... but with all the management upheaval a number of devotees
have been throw to the curb ... I assume that Adam is still nursing a number of existential bruises .... and may
not wish to pay homage to the Leica Clique that currently is mis managing the store.

Shame as he is a gifted photographer ... but one can only take so much abuse before he needs to clear the area.

I have parted ways with the S and M as you have Peter .... the Q confounds my low estimation of the hive mentality at
Leica ... as I assume the SL has for you.

Truth is any modern camera system can afford a decent image ... you just have to work at some harder than others.

And with corrosion and lens issues Leica needs to manage its store and reputation a bit better than it has ... for all of
us not in the EU .... professional or not no one will genuflect to a hierarchy that is above approach/rapproach.

And Adam ... we get it ... but the negative bias is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Wish Leica was more like the Apple store ... everyone goes home happy.

Sorry for the run-on ....

Regards and my utmost respect to both PeterA and Adam...

Bob
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I thought I made it clear when I said zooms and TL lenses.
You can disagree all you want
.......
Why not just use your M if you're going to shoot M glass? M glass works better on an M and rangefinder focusing should be easier then EVF focusing if you've been an M user long enough. I mean heck, a lot of people on here claim to be in bed with Leica for decades, but then cannot focus a rangefinder better then an EVF? I can focus my RF faster then the T lenses can AF.

I just don't get it. Until Leica produces some amazing glass, with great characteristics I'm not interested. And no the T lenses aren't great, they're basic with basic characteristics. Fuji has better glass then Leica T hands down.

As for the S-system. The lenses are good on the S-system.. The rendering of the S lenses works well with the larger sensor and the distance to subject benefits of the S. But once mounted on the SL, most of the S lenses loose a lot of that charm IMHO. And frankly AF is poor at best when mounted on the SL. Nothing aside from static subject shooting is feasible. Might as well just MF the lenses, in which case that can be done on any system with a dummy adapter (I made a dummy adapter that I was using on the SL for months before the SL adapter hit the market.)

What I'd love to see out of this new glass... M or R like rendering. Rather then Leica buying into the hype and producing lenses that look like Sigma Art series rendering just so you can win over DXO scores.


I'm Just gonna have to wait and see if the rendering is what I like. But with the insane pricing that you see in HK. I'll not be able to sell my SL+Zoom for any reasonable price anyway. So I'm in no hurry to sell the setup now, just going to keep it until a few more SL lenses have come out then reevaluate.
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?
 

Godfrey

Well-known 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.

..
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?
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
 
V

Vivek

Guest
It appears that the SL is good enough for a NASA project. :thumbup:

Perhaps some of you might have seen the report.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The US government continually makes bad buying decisions.
Lou, This has nothing to do with a US govt. purchase. The project was done by students from a Puerto Rican university in collaboration with Leica.

Sure, the SL payload was put on NASA rocket (most likely the ride was free).
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I guess the obvious question to ask if I were in your position of unhappiness - is why buy the camera in the first place? I took a year to decide whether I wanted to use this camera. I dont understand disagreements about cameras - people choose what they like and shoot with what they like.

Leica has delivered an fantastic lens mounting system for M and R glass as well as a future line of autofocus 35mm primes - already announced. One either likes the system its architecture and the easy access to a huge range of optics it provides ( already) or one doesn't. Clearly you don't which is fine, making mistakes in camera choices is all part of the journey - no system suits all people.

Perhaps you should cut your losses now and move back to Sony/Nikon or whatever gives you more pleasure, utility and fun?
Peter, I am not Adam but if I understand right it was not a problem of wrong decision but a problem of bad service from Leica. I understand his frustration in this regard and if I had such bad experience with service my reaction might be similar.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Peter, I am not Adam but if I understand right it was not a problem of wrong decision but a problem of bad service from Leica. I understand his frustration in this regard and if I had such bad experience with service my reaction might be similar.
Hi Paratom - yes there seems to be a lot of unhappy Leica S users out there - because of lens focus mechanism failure. Very poor quality control / parts sourcing from Leica - I too would be upset, hopefully Leica fix this issue for all owners- just as they have fixed the issue of corrosion in M9/MM chips.

However the negatives associated with the S system ( be what they may be for those who have experienced them) won't affect my view on the SL, a view which was formulated after careful testing over a year - before I bought into it. I no longer have a need for the M rangefinder apart from happy snaps and nostalgia - the rangefinder has found its focus limitations with the advent of 24 megapixel chips. if I want or need dead on accurate focus with 50mm and upwards lenses - they get put on the SL. The M (of course) still delivers better edge to edge performance in M wides - because the chip was designed to cater better for light fall off from M wides.

Which leads to the question - is a Zeiss Milvus 15/18 2.8 ( just announced) a better proposition than the superb Elmars or WATE on the SL ? IS the Otus 55 and 85 ( or Milvus 85 ) a better proposition than the M50 lux/ Nocti or 75 cron? Is the Milvus 100 planar better than than the 90AA on an SL?

I suspect the answer (from a purely technical point of view) is yes.

I am not convinced about the 'merits' of autofocus primes coming from Leica. The cost / performance differential between Leica and Zeiss in Nikon mount is extravagant. However all these opinions are personal. Everyone shoots differently.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Hi Paratom - yes there seems to be a lot of unhappy Leica S users out there - because of lens focus mechanism failure. Very poor quality control / parts sourcing from Leica - I too would be upset, hopefully Leica fix this issue for all owners- just as they have fixed the issue of corrosion in M9/MM chips.

However the negatives associated with the S system ( be what they may be for those who have experienced them) won't affect my view on the SL, a view which was formulated after careful testing over a year - before I bought into it. I no longer have a need for the M rangefinder apart from happy snaps and nostalgia - the rangefinder has found its focus limitations with the advent of 24 megapixel chips. if I want or need dead on accurate focus with 50mm and upwards lenses - they get put on the SL. The M (of course) still delivers better edge to edge performance in M wides - because the chip was designed to cater better for light fall off from M wides.

Which leads to the question - is a Zeiss Milvus 15/18 2.8 ( just announced) a better proposition than the superb Elmars or WATE on the SL ? IS the Otus 55 and 85 ( or Milvus 85 ) a better proposition than the M50 lux/ Nocti or 75 cron? Is the Milvus 100 planar better than than the 90AA on an SL?

I suspect the answer (from a purely technical point of view) is yes.

I am not convinced about the 'merits' of autofocus primes coming from Leica. The cost / performance differential between Leica and Zeiss in Nikon mount is extravagant. However all these opinions are personal. Everyone shoots differently.
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
 

aDam007

New member
I guess the obvious question to ask if I were in your position of unhappiness - is why buy the camera in the first place? I took a year to decide whether I wanted to use this camera. I dont understand disagreements about cameras - people choose what they like and shoot with what they like.

Leica has delivered an fantastic lens mounting system for M and R glass as well as a future line of autofocus 35mm primes - already announced. One either likes the system its architecture and the easy access to a huge range of optics it provides ( already) or one doesn't. Clearly you don't which is fine, making mistakes in camera choices is all part of the journey - no system suits all people.

Perhaps you should cut your losses now and move back to Sony/Nikon or whatever gives you more pleasure, utility and fun?

Leica M gives me the most pleasure, utility and fun. But I grew tired of shooting weddings with it. It gets tiring after a while. For corporate work the S-system is sufficient, and for travel/corporate travel the M can S will do what I need.
The S-006 would give me a lot of pleasure, utility and fun as well if it didn't break on me all the time. 120% failure rate on lenses, YAY!

As for the SL, to be honest I was told that they had fixed the pricing issues in HK (basically HK sells things for way lower then MSRP). And that the SL+Zoom would have a static price worldwide save for a few hundred $$ here and there for exchange rate fluxes and taxes. I took Leicas word on this (not the word of a sales man mind you, the word of a higher up). I bought the SL thinking I could sell it if it wasn't my cup of tea.. AS I was already hesitant to buy the zoom due to the fact that I'm not a zooms guy. And I actually ordered it sight unseen as I was away working on an assignment for 3 months. Turns out by the time I get the camera, it's $5,000 cheaper from my HK dealer. I was pretty annoyed but the price kept dropping and the SL sensor really didn't do it for me. I'm just not a fan of the colors and the way it renders at higher ISOs. And I'm pretty pissed off with Leica for lying to me.

Anyway, bottom line at this point if I sell it, it's an $8,000 minimum loss for a camera I rarely used. And all because I was lied to by Leica. So I'd rather just keep the camera and see how the 50Lux works out for me. Worse case scenario I sell it all cheap lesson learned. In fact I've already sold off most of my M lens kit, and most of my S lens kit. And some M bodies and S bodies.. I've minimised my Leica set to almost bare minimum for joy. And well under minimum work requirements (I'm now using back to using Nikon for work while I test Fuji extensively).


To be honest, Sony delivered that mounting system. We just get caught up with the Leica branding and fail to see it. Sure the A7II EVF isn't as good in low light, and it's not ergonomically fantastic. But with the filter stack mod, the A7II and the SL are almost identical colour wise and IQ wise. The edges aren't there yet, but Leica is already moving away from lens designs where a thin filter stack is an advantage. Which suggests that ultimately Leica is moving away from thin filter stacks themselves. BTW I've run the tests as I had both cameras and two sets of the 50APO lens. So I was able to shoot side by side in an organically instant fashion. It was shocking how identical they were with regards to colour.


Look at the end of the day, if you like the SL and the colours and the lenses... GREAT. I just don't.
 

aDam007

New member
wow, I was guessing you move to the Hassy x1, but I am surprised that you move to Fuji. Not because I think Fuji was a bad system (I think its excellent and as you say today many brands offer great systems), but because I really wonder if you find the special "mojo" you miss in the newer Leica lenses in the Fuji.

Not the same "mojo" but they have their own interesting quirks which put them above some of the newer lens offerings from other brands. And right now I'm really not sure what I'll end up with. I have the funds to pickup most anything now that my Leica gear has been for the most part sold off. So I might consider the new Fuji MFD if the lenses render in a pleasing way. The X1D doesn't have fast enough lenses for my preferences. That and no adaptability since it doesn't have a shutter and relies on the LS in the lenses.

To be completely honest, I'll probably end up buying back an M240-P and keeping the 50Lux-ASPH (even though the mid zone dip is a PITA). Selling the M246 and the remaining lenses 35FLE, 50APO, 75APO just because I want minimal involvement with Leica. And again if the 50Lux-SL performs I'll just keep the SL for use with it. And will use it when I'm sick of RF focusing, or when I'm on vacation and don't mind the added weight for the convenience of AF. BUT I have a feeling the 50Lux-SL won't be to my liking and I'll just end up selling the system off cheap and reverting back to the little M one lens kit.

And although the T+35 is a fair option.. I'm worried that A) I won't like the new T2 sensor and B) I don't really see an advantage over the Fuji System other then the fact that the T2 will probably look cooler and will have that Luxury (I make a lot of money) Red Dot, that to be honest I end up putting tape over anyway.
 

aDam007

New member
I would not presume to speak for Adam but following his blog and posts for a significant amount of time I wish
to speak on his behalf.

He was one of the strongest supporters of the S system and had wonderful compelling pictures with the
camera and lenses ... SL and M in addition to the S.

Then Leica ... don't live in the Fatherland don't expect much support seemed to raise its ugly head and
with a dealer who seemed to shirk any responsibility for support he essentially got the Leica shaft.

Months without feedback and then the ultimate blow ... response that you should feel lucky that you have
our most exclusively wonderful yet defective lens ... best in the world and when we deign it necessary we just might address your issues.

Nothing is more constraining than a wounded spirit or ego ... we end up making decisions that may be less than
rational.

Leica lenses and occasionally their cameras are stellar ... but with all the management upheaval a number of devotees
have been throw to the curb ... I assume that Adam is still nursing a number of existential bruises .... and may
not wish to pay homage to the Leica Clique that currently is mis managing the store.

Shame as he is a gifted photographer ... but one can only take so much abuse before he needs to clear the area.

I have parted ways with the S and M as you have Peter .... the Q confounds my low estimation of the hive mentality at
Leica ... as I assume the SL has for you.

Truth is any modern camera system can afford a decent image ... you just have to work at some harder than others.

And with corrosion and lens issues Leica needs to manage its store and reputation a bit better than it has ... for all of
us not in the EU .... professional or not no one will genuflect to a hierarchy that is above approach/rapproach.

And Adam ... we get it ... but the negative bias is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Wish Leica was more like the Apple store ... everyone goes home happy.

Sorry for the run-on ....

Regards and my utmost respect to both PeterA and Adam...

Bob

You said it better then I did. And yes, I'm pretty much done with Leica and Leica bashing. Sometime I get caught up... Thanks for the reminder that I should just move on and enjoy my photography again!
 
Top