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!
Personally I would never buy a Leica and choose Sony. And I would rather lose 25% of 10 than than 25% of 30. Been there done that with several bodies and lenses.
I can't wait to have fun with the Fuji GFX.
As they say horses for courses.
You're probably right, but it's also the way the Leica SL ergonomics fit my style. As I mentioned before, the fundamentals of having the right tool in your hand can make a difference in the inspiration that it brings. This is really personal and not always practical, but it's something that I get with certain cameras ( mostly film) and that ultimately helps me towards my goal. I'm going to rent it first obviously, and put it through its paces. thanks to all for great input.If 'how much' is the question - then the answer is simple.
However - a camera and its lenses are tools and how something works for you in your hand and with your eyes is to me the most important question - after which I look at price.
If a person already has tools he or she is happy with in hand and eye - then changing is much easier - because the new tool has to feel better and work better than previous.
If the only thing one considers is price - then the problem is one never gets a base line test of goodness of fit regarding the tool - all one has to refer to is price.
I am not one who is comfortable with the notion of changing my physical and psychological preferences - because of price, I'd rather keep what I have, than be dictaed to by something built to a price.
I think that price divided by time and quality and enjoyemnt and results isa different equation to price over megapixels.
Everyone's shooting preferences are unique to themselves - or they don';t knwo what they are doing and it matters not what they use anyway.
So after that long winded intro - here is my response to OP
If you are happy with Sony - then the last thing you should consider is switching to Leica because of the presence of two card slots - I wouldn't.
If you ever wear winter gloves while handling a camera the advantages of the SL's ergonomics will be apparent within a few seconds.... it's also the way the Leica SL ergonomics fit my style...
One local wedding photographer uses the SL. He loves it so far (it's only been half a season), and his work is outstanding.I know of very few wedding photographers using Leica as the cost is difficult to justify assuming they do not earn a living from other photography.
When I had Canon gear, an age and a day ago, I bought the highly regarded EF 24-70mm f/2.8L lens for it. Everyone working with Canon gear told me it was a superb performer. I took their word for how good a lens it was and ordered it.One local wedding photographer uses the SL. He loves it so far (it's only been half a season), and his work is outstanding.
The cost is what it is. Not all that different from a 1DX. He is using M lenses, so the size/weight is manageable.
OK, now I get you are Leica fanboy with rose colored glasses.One local wedding photographer uses the SL. He loves it so far (it's only been half a season), and his work is outstanding.
The cost is what it is. Not all that different from a 1DX. He is using M lenses, so the size/weight is manageable.
I guess if answering the question "does anybody use the SL for weddings?" makes me a fanboy, then I am guilty.OK, now I get you are Leica fanboy with rose colored glasses.
People shoot weddings with anything and everything. People shoot them with Canon Rebels and Phase One backs. The difference is whether you can evaluate what the camera is bringing to the table, it's return on investment, and value proposition.I guess if answering the question "does anybody use the SL for weddings?" makes me a fanboy, then I am guilty.
Next time I see my friend who uses an SL for weddings, I will relay the information that some guy from the internet thinks he is doing it wrong. I'm sure he will be impressed!
Doug, Thanks for the input and observations. That sucks that you have to go through that whole process just to click an image. Perhaps a fix will be in a new firmware upgrade. I am currently shooting with the a7r2 and it has silent shutter, I mean completely silent. I live along the Atlantic flyway migration route and we get some pretty cool visitors. We had a Northern Harrier skimming just feet above the meadows for days! Some Northern flickers, Woodcock, Bobolinks and even a Bald Eagle. The Eagle was scanning my chicken flock or my fuzzy slippers, but either way I realized, i need a zoom! Thanks for posting some great pics!.Now I'll try to explain why I'll send the SL and 90-280 back to Tony Rose at the end of the month. I had intended to ask him what it would take to keep it but I ran face-first into that #@!? stoopid automatic viewfinder brightness "feature" again. (and I wish that the stoopid automatic spelling corrector function would learn that I really do mean STOOPID).
Over the years I've found that spot metering in manual mode works best for me. My primary exposure concern is the subject, generally a critter of some kind. The background might be light, or dark, or somewhere in-between. The critter moves often from a spot with a bright background to one with a dark background and back again in a couple of seconds. Let the background fall where it may, the light on the animal doesn't change nearly as often as the background does. I want to set the exposure and make it stick, thus manual spot metering. I also like to keep detail in white plumage or fur; the live histogram in exposure preview mode is a huge benefit of an electronic viewfinder. Exposure preview mode also tells me without taking my eye off the critter if my exposure setting is grossly wrong. Automatic viewfinder brightness doesn't do that and the live histogram in automatic brightness mode shows the viewfinder's histogram, not the photo's histogram. Completely useless.
Today I spotted a coyote across the field behind my house. A few weeds between myself and the coyote were confusing the camera's AF (they're invisible when the coyote is in focus) so I wanted to use the magnified viewfinder and manual focus. This is not an uncommon scenario. The automatic viewfinder brightness was going wild as the coyote moved from dark tree backgrounds to bright dry weeds backgrounds so I touched the fn button which I'd set up to enable exposure preview mode.
Oops! Enabling exposure preview mode kicks the viewfinder back to normal magnification. So the sequence for every single exposure was
1) move left hand from focussing ring to camera back
2) press lower-left key on the back twice for maximum magnification
3) press fn button so I can see the coyote (do NOT do this before magnifying viewfinder!)
4) move left hand back to focussing ring
5) focus
6) press shutter release.
Every single damned exposure.
I so wanted to like this camera. 99.9% of what it does is so much better than the Sony, but this is a deal killer.
The Sony isn't nearly as quiet or responsive as the SL unless I enable the electronic first curtain, which limits the fastest practical shutter speed to about 1/1000 sec - but I prefer subdued light so this isn't something I run into often.
The Sony is terrible while wearing winter gloves for anything other than switching it on or off, but here in California's central valley the need for winter gloves is occasional at most.
The optical stabilization of the Leica 90-280 is a reasonable substitute for the Sony's sensor stabilization, at least in its focal length range. I'd planned to keep the Sony to use the 500mm lens.
The Sony's noise at higher ISO is ugly (my opinion, yours might differ) while the SL's noise is much more pleasing, but I rarely use any ISO above 400.
I'd much rather use ACR with the SL's files than C1 with the Sony's files. The Sony's files look much better when processed with C1, almost as good as the SL's files but the C1 interface and file handling is clunky. But it does make the Sony files look pretty good.
Bottom line for me is that the Sony's functional deficiencies are many but I encounter them infrequently, the SL has only one functional deficiency and it smacks me in the face nearly every time I look through the viewfinder. Damn. Add to this my recent experience with Leica service and I am highly disinclined to buy this camera.
I first complained about this over a year ago and so far no firmware update has included a fix for this.Doug, Thanks for the input and observations. That sucks that you have to go through that whole process just to click an image. Perhaps a fix will be in a new firmware upgrade. I am currently shooting with the a7r2 and it has silent shutter, I mean completely silent. I live along the Atlantic flyway migration route and we get some pretty cool visitors. We had a Northern Harrier skimming just feet above the meadows for days! Some Northern flickers, Woodcock, Bobolinks and even a Bald Eagle. The Eagle was scanning my chicken flock or my fuzzy slippers, but either way I realized, i need a zoom! Thanks for posting some great pics!.
With no bias one way or the other intended, that might mean your preferred way of operating the camera is a minority viewpoint. That said, I don't quite understand how you want the camera to operate.I first complained about this over a year ago and so far no firmware update has included a fix for this.