The Devil Made Me Do it!!! Leica SL

[mkerouac]

I'm a long time Nikon shooter (39 years) and a shorter time Hasselblad Shooter (5 years). But, even with that outstanding kit, I've lusted after the Leica SL since April 17th of 2016. That was the day I was on a photo trek in Valley of Fire State Park in Nevada and one of my fellow Trekkers handed me the SL to try. I fell in love with the feel of the camera and the EVF. I have had the camera in and out of a B&H shopping cart ever since. Several weeks ago, I saw the price drop and once again loaded up the SL into my cart. But the Angel on my shoulder said, "Don't do it, your existing gear is more than enough." The Devil on my other shoulder spewed a puff of smoke and disappeared. Well today, the Angel must have taken the day off, because the Devil popped up onto my shoulder and said, "F%^K it, let's get the camera today. It will be here tomorrow and we can play all weekend." So the Devil made me do it. I filled up the shopping cart and hit the buy button. Only stomach acid was the extra battery. $250. Even for Leica that's highway robbery.

Any recommendations for a few M lenses to go along with the 24-90 SL lens? I'm not really interested in the 50mm 1.4 SL, I tried it at a Leica Boutique in Vegas. It's a beast and then some.

 

[SrMphoto]

Congratulations. As a fellow Nikon and Hasselblad shooter, I fully understand you.

I am happy with Tri-Elmar 16-18-21, and I heard that the 50mm Nokton .95 works really well with SL.

Recommend subscribing to Reid Reviews, he has excellent Leica camera and lenses reviews.

 

[vieri]

Congratulations, enjoy your Leica SL, my workhorse and a wonderful camera. As far as M lens recommendations, it all boils down to which focal lengths you favour; my personal favourites are (in order from ultra-wide up):

- Voigtlander 15mm v. III, an amazing little lens;
- Leica Elmarit 28mm f/2.8, extremely sharp, small, light, watch for flare; since 28mm is my most used focal for landscape I got one of these for when I want to travel light;
- Leica Noctilux 50mm f/1, the one before the current .95, for the extremely particular way of drawing;

and in Leica R mount:

- Leica Macro Elmarit 100mm f/2.8

Hope this helps, enjoy your SL! Best regards,

Vieri

 

[PeterA]

I'm a long time Nikon shooter (39 years) and a shorter time Hasselblad Shooter (5 years). But, even with that outstanding kit, I've lusted after the Leica SL since April 17th of 2016. That was the day I was on a photo trek in Valley of Fire State Park in Nevada and one of my fellow Trekkers handed me the SL to try. I fell in love with the feel of the camera and the EVF. I have had the camera in and out of a B&H shopping cart ever since. Several weeks ago, I saw the price drop and once again loaded up the SL into my cart. But the Angel on my shoulder said, "Don't do it, your existing gear is more than enough." The Devil on my other shoulder spewed a puff of smoke and disappeared. Well today, the Angel must have taken the day off, because the Devil popped up onto my shoulder and said, "F%^K it, let's get the camera today. It will be here tomorrow and we can play all weekend." So the Devil made me do it. I filled up the shopping cart and hit the buy button. Only stomach acid was the extra battery. $250. Even for Leica that's highway robbery.

Any recommendations for a few M lenses to go along with the 24-90 SL lens? I'm not really interested in the 50mm 1.4 SL, I tried it at a Leica Boutique in Vegas. It's a beast and then some.

You can use your Nikon mount lenses via a nice novoflex adaptor and actually get dead on accurate focus using the zoom function....I have a nice range of Milvus and Otus lenses I use on the SL...
M lenses are probably better because they are smaller, I use my 35 lux and 90AA a lot - and my Noctilux on the SL I describe as a marriage made in heaven...wide open at 0.95 and dead on focus accuracy - something which is just a fluke on any rangefinder M ( I know) - but no one wishes to admit it...
However what will surprise you is just how good the 24-90 is and how even better the 90-280 is....beautiful rendering from both.

The only thing the SL doesn't have is enough megapixels to be the complete camera -

Congrats and enjoy...
Pete

 

[Godfrey]

Enjoy your SL, it's a wonderful camera. I ordered mine a couple of days after the announcement when the local Leica rep showed it at the local dealer. It was everything I'd wanted in a versatile, full-system Leica to replace the Leica-Olympus-Nikon reflex cameras, and remains so.

While I do use M lenses on the SL occasionally, R lenses are a better match to it ergonomically. I have both of the SL zooms now and they are terrific lenses, but I find myself using the Super-Elmar-R 15mm, Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm, Summilux-R 50mm, and Summicron-R 90mm quite a lot of the time. Of my M lenses, what I use on the SL most is the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm, Summarit-M 75mm, and occasionally my lovely old Hektor 135mm.

I generally see little point to replicating the spread of focal lengths from 24 to 50 in primes because the SL24-90 is such a good performer in that range. With that in mind I sold off my R24 and R35 to help fund the SL90-280, and only rarely use the M35 or M50.

I also use the Focusing Bellows-R with its matching Elmar-R 100mm f/4 short mount or a Summicron-R 50mm a good bit.

Yeah, the battery tax is pretty heavy: I bought two spares. And true highway robbery: the remote cable (a $1 switch on a $199 plug...!). Happily, despite the price, they're all useful and used. I need to get the audio interface yet, and I probably should buy the R Adapter L (to mount R lenses instead of the M Adapter L with the R Adapter M stacked on top): a simpler, sturdier connection.

G

 

[Godfrey]

The only thing the SL doesn't have is enough megapixels to be the complete camera

That's a matter of opinion. 24Mpixel is just fine for me; I only very very rarely find myself wishing for any more. For a good deal of what I shoot and the size prints I make, 12 to 16 MPixel is enough.

G

 

[ptomsu]

That's a matter of opinion. 24Mpixel is just fine for me; I only very very rarely find myself wishing for any more. For a good deal of what I shoot and the size prints I make, 12 to 16 MPixel is enough.

G

The new norm is 45.7MP :clap:

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

I've had an SL since soon after they first appeared, and used it only with R and M lenses until recently. I would second Godfrey's comment that the SL handles and balances better with the R lenses, as the shorter focal length M lenses (Vieri's examples, the Leica Elmarit-asph 28 M and the 10, 12 and 15mm CV's are quite tiny lenses) are hard to find on the other side of that solid body. On the other hand, the 50 Lux feels just right to me, the APO 50 'Cron a bit small on the SL. And, if you consult the devil on your left shoulder, he might remind you that those smaller lenses are just perfect for use with the M10! I do recommend the use of the Leica R to SL adapter, since it passes the information on lens identity and focal length (for the R zooms) to the camera, and selects the right profile for each. The R lenses that I have worked with most are the medium telephotos: 80 Summilux R, 90 Summicron-asph R, and 100 Macro-Elmarit-asph R. While they overlap in uses, each has a particular strength. Also the Super-Elmarit 15 (which makes the SL the replacement of the Hasselblad SWC in many ways).

The 90-280 SL AF OIS zoom is in a class by itself, and makes some very nice long R telephotos seem less necessary. The SL Summicrons, without OIS, should be useful when they finally arrive. The SL also supports some nice, currently deeply discounted T lenses without requiring an adapter, and S lenses with an adapter. The S 120 Macro should be even sharper and clearer than the Elmarit 100, and has AF. Mine is currently safe and dry in Houston TX, but it will be a while before I can try it out. The rationale for the T lenses is 4K video. The best video obtainable from a camera bought mostly for stills has been with M43 or APS-C cameras, since that's the amount of chip used by professional digital cinema lenses. Leica seems to have supplied a pretty good APS-C 4K codec in the SL. Here's an example clip: https://flic.kr/p/XgvyvZ .

scott

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

The new norm is 45.7MP :clap:

Naah, 100 MPx, but I'm not going there anytime soon.

 

[Godfrey]

The new norm is 45.7MP :clap:

Naah, 100 MPx, but I'm not going there anytime soon.

I'm well known for ignoring what other people do. It's never been to my detriment...

 

[Godfrey]

...I do recommend the use of the Leica R to SL adapter, since it passes the information on lens identity and focal length (for the R zooms) to the camera, and selects the right profile for each. ...

Only for ROM equipped R lenses. I don't own any.

 

[mkerouac]

I've had an SL since soon after they first appeared, and used it only with R and M lenses until recently. I would second Godfrey's comment that the SL handles and balances better with the R lenses, as the shorter focal length M lenses (Vieri's examples, the Leica Elmarit-asph 28 M and the 10, 12 and 15mm CV's are quite tiny lenses) are hard to find on the other side of that solid body. On the other hand, the 50 Lux feels just right to me, the APO 50 'Cron a bit small on the SL. And, if you consult the devil on your left shoulder, he might remind you that those smaller lenses are just perfect for use with the M10! I do recommend the use of the Leica R to SL adapter, since it passes the information on lens identity and focal length (for the R zooms) to the camera, and selects the right profile for each. The R lenses that I have worked with most are the medium telephotos: 80 Summilux R, 90 Summicron-asph R, and 100 Macro-Elmarit-asph R. While they overlap in uses, each has a particular strength. Also the Super-Elmarit 15 (which makes the SL the replacement of the Hasselblad SWC in many ways).

The 90-280 SL AF OIS zoom is in a class by itself, and makes some very nice long R telephotos seem less necessary. The SL Summicrons, without OIS, should be useful when they finally arrive. The SL also supports some nice, currently deeply discounted T lenses without requiring an adapter, and S lenses with an adapter. The S 120 Macro should be even sharper and clearer than the Elmarit 100, and has AF. Mine is currently safe and dry in Houston TX, but it will be a while before I can try it out. The rationale for the T lenses is 4K video. The best video obtainable from a camera bought mostly for stills has been with M43 or APS-C cameras, since that's the amount of chip used by professional digital cinema lenses. Leica seems to have supplied a pretty good APS-C 4K codec in the SL. Here's an example clip: https://flic.kr/p/XgvyvZ .

scott

phenomenal info Scott, thank you. I bought the SL with the 24-90 and I'm not to crazy about the size. It's a beast and it's not internal focusing, so it's a long beast. I will look at the R glass. I am and have lusted after the M10 too. But I decided to wait for it to come into stock. I figured it wouldn't take more than a few months. I'm off by about a year.

 

[mkerouac]

Enjoy your SL, it's a wonderful camera. I ordered mine a couple of days after the announcement when the local Leica rep showed it at the local dealer. It was everything I'd wanted in a versatile, full-system Leica to replace the Leica-Olympus-Nikon reflex cameras, and remains so.

While I do use M lenses on the SL occasionally, R lenses are a better match to it ergonomically. I have both of the SL zooms now and they are terrific lenses, but I find myself using the Super-Elmar-R 15mm, Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm, Summilux-R 50mm, and Summicron-R 90mm quite a lot of the time. Of my M lenses, what I use on the SL most is the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm, Summarit-M 75mm, and occasionally my lovely old Hektor 135mm.

I generally see little point to replicating the spread of focal lengths from 24 to 50 in primes because the SL24-90 is such a good performer in that range. With that in mind I sold off my R24 and R35 to help fund the SL90-280, and only rarely use the M35 or M50.

I also use the Focusing Bellows-R with its matching Elmar-R 100mm f/4 short mount or a Summicron-R 50mm a good bit.

Yeah, the battery tax is pretty heavy: I bought two spares. And true highway robbery: the remote cable (a $1 switch on a $199 plug...!). Happily, despite the price, they're all useful and used. I need to get the audio interface yet, and I probably should buy the R Adapter L (to mount R lenses instead of the M Adapter L with the R Adapter M stacked on top): a simpler, sturdier connection.

G

Thank you Godfrey. This is very helpful. I'm wondering how my Nikon 105 1.4 would work with the F adapter. That lens is tremendous on the D810.

 

[Godfrey]

phenomenal info Scott, thank you. I bought the SL with the 24-90 and I'm not to crazy about the size. It's a beast and it's not internal focusing, so it's a long beast. I will look at the R glass. I am and have lusted after the M10 too. But I decided to wait for it to come into stock. I figured it wouldn't take more than a few months. I'm off by about a year.

I presume you meant "it's not internal zooming" because it is internal focusing.

Thank you Godfrey. This is very helpful. I'm wondering how my Nikon 105 1.4 would work with the F adapter. That lens is tremendous on the D810.

Glad to help.

I'm sure the Nikon lens will work very nicely. I've used a number of Nikkor lenses with the SL; I just decided to concentrate on the R and SL lenses with the SL body because I already had them and have been downsizing the equipment load in my closet. I've sold off almost all my Nikon gear now, only my plain-prism 1962 F and two lenses remain, for nostalgic reasons. I still occasionally use the Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 pre-AI with the SL: it produces superb results.

I've gotten much more comfortable with the SL24-90 in the past half year, and the SL90-280, as scott intimates, is an amazing lens despite its size. I nicknamed them Howitzer and Bazooka ...

G

 

[jonoslack]

The new norm is 45.7MP :clap:

Each time we go to Cornwall, I am once again confronted with A2 sized prints made with the 5mp Olympus E1 - they are lovely and detailed.

Then, when I get back here and go into my office there is a 6ft print of a bridge in China from an 18mp M9 file - you can see every little leaf if you stand close enough.

What, exactly, are you planning to do with a 45mp file Peter?

 

[jonoslack]

Any recommendations for a few M lenses to go along with the 24-90 SL lens? I'm not really interested in the 50mm 1.4 SL, I tried it at a Leica Boutique in Vegas. It's a beast and then some.

Congratulations - the SL gets better with familiarity - and the zooms are peerless.
As for M lenses - the 50 lux Asph and the 75 summicron APO are my most used lenses - but the WATE (16-18-21 tri-elmar) is a great lens, which I always carry with me.

 

[PeterA]

Congratulations - the SL gets better with familiarity - and the zooms are peerless.
As for M lenses - the 50 lux Asph and the 75 summicron APO are my most used lenses - but the WATE (16-18-21 tri-elmar) is a great lens, which I always carry with me.

Nice to see you posting jono - and I know you didn't ask me what I do with 50 megapixels but I'll answer anyway - Hence the XID ...
In a word ...to be able to CROP when required as I require ....and still have enough to print to the sizes you have alluded to above


Cheers
Pete

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Nice to see you posting jono - and I know you didn't ask me what I do with 50 megapixels but I'll answer anyway - Hence the XID ...
In a word ...to be able to CROP when required as I require ....and still have enough to print to the sizes you have alluded to above


Cheers
Pete

Interesting observation. I have recently been having fun shooting some old Zeiss lenses on the Hasselblad 500 C/M they were meant for, but with a 39 MPx 33x44 mm CCD imager behind it. I have no clear idea where the edges of the captured image will end up (well, I'm not THAT bad at it!) so I always end up cropping to about, oh, 24 MPx or so...

scott

 

[jdphoto]

I considered the SL too, but using manual M lenses seemed to negate the point of investing in this camera. 24mp seems to be just right for most lenses to resolve, but native ones seemed too big,imo. Regardless, the connection you get from a camera is very personal. You either want to shoot or you just go and shoot,. Leica has done this for me many times, especially the Q. Enjoy!

 

[Godfrey]

I have the SL lenses as well as the R and M lenses. I don't really like using M lenses on it very much, they're not best suited ergonomically unless you're working with the larger of them. The R lenses fit the camera beautifully—the lack of features doesn't bother me at all since I personally consider AF and multi-mode exposure automation to be conveniences rather than essentials—and perform superbly.

I love this camera, and these lenses. I use the SL zooms interchangeably with the R primes, occasionally an M lens, and hardly notice the difference. It's a great system.

G