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!

New article: how to choose the best camera for you

vieri

Well-known member
I was happy with what you said until I came to:

My bag with two Leica SL bodies, 2-3 lenses, filters, batteries, memory cards etc. is light enough to hike pretty much anywhere.

I could do this with a couple of R4s a few decades ago, but no longer. The SL and the 24-90 are really heavy, I don't enjoy trudging around with them. They're more keep them in the boot (trunk) and go somewhere. And then probably use a tripod.
Robert,

thank you for your message and for proving my point: everyone has different requirements, and no kit is universally "best" for everyone. Personally, I am 48 today, and healthy / strong enough to carry my kit (2 SL, 2-3 lenses, filters, ALWAYS a tripod, bits and pieces, etc) for any length hikes I do. In a few years, inevitably, that will change - and so will my kit, accordingly.

Best regards,

Vieri
 

vieri

Well-known member
Thanks Vieri for your article. And you do make beautiful images.

I shall take a contrary view than most as expressed in this thread.

Writing an article, any article, and post it for public viewing takes a bit of courage. Coz, ridicule comes easy. Does not take much effort. Writing a thought out article does.
Thinking through, and putting one's thoughts, as objectively, as one might want to, takes effort. But subconscious bias is always there. Irrespective of the writer of any article.

Yes Vieri does use Leica. So does Jono Slack and Ming Thein and that guy who sells alligator skin bags for US$ 40,000/=, and our friend Ashwin Rao..
I have not read anyone on this forum criticizing any of the above writers for their efforts; but I have read unbridled praise. Even though I would consider some of the images accompanying their articles to be meh.
Oh my, let's not forget Mr. Erwin Puts. has he ever made an image. And posted it for general viewing?

No, I have never seen a SL let alone used one, or can ever afford one.

But I do believe Vieri's article is reasonable and faithfully puts in writing what he thinks one should be looking at in choosing a camera; and why, for him, the SL was the correct choice.

I do not believe the article was written there to compare a Leica SL with MFT, or Canikons or whatever. I could be wrong. I cannot read people's motives for writing an article. Not yet anyway.
If you want ' objective ' writing, I recommend Ken, Huff and others.

Buy whatever rocks your boat. And please post some of your writings. I might benefit from your objective takes. As I have from Vieri's article.

Disclaimer: I have met Vieri in Istanbul long time ago.
Hello rayyan,

great to hear from you, long time no hear, I hope you are doing great! :) Thank you for your message, you got the point of the article perfectly, and your analysis of the "internet publishing" situation is also spot on. I will write soon an article analysing the psychology behind what you just wrote, should be interesting ;)

Best regards,

Vieri
 

vieri

Well-known member
Vieri, Just a few threads down, we have this from you : https://www.getdpi.com/forum/leica/63302-fine-art-landscape-photography-leica-m10-review.html

Why change from one system to another?

Can we expect anything about the Leica S system few months down the road?

As always, outstanding images! :thumbs:
Vivek,

I never changed systems. The article starts with a question: "So, I always waited for the next iteration of digital Leica M in expectation: would the next one finally be the right one for my work?", and ends with "If, like me, you still need a Leica SL for the unique features it offers to us landscape guys, the features that make it my to-go camera of choice for my professional work, then the Leica M10 would make for a wonderful second camera and backup solution for your travels, and even more so if you are already using M or R lenses on your Leica SL. Dedicating the Leica SL to more “formal” tripod shooting, you could use your Leica M10 for documenting, street, candid and portrait shooting during your trips, with the added bonus that it can be used on your tripod as well in a pinch either when you are waiting for the Leica SL’s long exposure reduction, or when you need to work with two different lenses in hostile environments where changing lenses is not an option, or to take a different shot, and so on."

So, I am still using and preferring the Leica SL for pure landscape work. I do recommend the M10 as a viable tool for landscape work, especially if you already use and love the M system - to me, the M10 is the first digital M suitable for the kind of landscape work I do. That said, my preference is still for the SL, and I don't own a M10 anymore.

I understand that my articles are a bit on the long side and I apologise for that, but reading them from beginning to end before commenting about them would probably help avoiding misunderstandings and such :)

Best regards,

Vieri
 

vieri

Well-known member
Thanks, Vieri.

Based on the forum information, happy birthday!🎂
You are welcome Vivek, glad to be of help :) Yes, yesterday was my B'day and thanks to the great guys at NewOldCamera in Milan (http://www.newoldcamera.com/novita.aspx) look at what the courier guy brought me today: the new Leica Super-Vario-Elmar-SL 16-35mm ASPH is finally here!





As soon as the new FW is out, I'll start working on a review :)

Best regards,

Vieri
 

Photon42

Well-known member
You are welcome Vivek, glad to be of help :) Yes, yesterday was my B'day and thanks to the great guys at NewOldCamera in Milan (http://www.newoldcamera.com/novita.aspx) look at what the courier guy brought me today: the new Leica Super-Vario-Elmar-SL 16-35mm ASPH is finally here!

As soon as the new FW is out, I'll start working on a review :)

Best regards,

Vieri
They are indeed nice guys. I did visit their store last time I was in Milano. Congrats on your new lens. Well deserved. May retire one of the Voigtlanders.

Cheers
Ivo
 

vieri

Well-known member
They are indeed nice guys. I did visit their store last time I was in Milano. Congrats on your new lens. Well deserved. May retire one of the Voigtlanders.

Cheers
Ivo
Thank you very much Ivo! Yes, if the 16-35mm is all I expect it to be, I think the Voigtlander 15mm will enjoy a well-deserved rest... :) It has been my most-used focal length in these last couple of years, so the 16-35mm will have some big shoes to fill!

And yes, the guys at NOC are great - I am glad you had a good experience with them too!

Best regards,

Vieri
 

MCTuomey

New member
Vieri, I read your article carefully as I find photographers' thoughts on gear selection interesting and helpful, especially those whose work inspires.

Since you disclose your Leica relationship, I won't quibble on the issue of being conflicted concerning your praise and enthusiasm for the gear choices you've made. I find them useful and valid. I also appreciate your viewpoints on the debate re sensor resolution in relation to quality of optics as well, also the insights regarding how an all-Leica system benefits your work, not just in final result but also in important considerations such as ease of use, reliability, carrying weight, and post-processing. Previously, I had not appreciated the versatility the SL presents with a smart selection of MF and AF lenses.

For my purposes, the barrier is one of cost, unfortunately. But that fact doesn't detract from the general point you make that an SL-based system can be very flexible and effective for a working photographer. Other photographers in other disciplines, like wedding photographer Jay Cassario in the U.S., have a similar perspective.

Best,
Mike
 

vieri

Well-known member
Vieri, I read your article carefully as I find photographers' thoughts on gear selection interesting and helpful, especially those whose work inspires.

Since you disclose your Leica relationship, I won't quibble on the issue of being conflicted concerning your praise and enthusiasm for the gear choices you've made. I find them useful and valid. I also appreciate your viewpoints on the debate re sensor resolution in relation to quality of optics as well, also the insights regarding how an all-Leica system benefits your work, not just in final result but also in important considerations such as ease of use, reliability, carrying weight, and post-processing. Previously, I had not appreciated the versatility the SL presents with a smart selection of MF and AF lenses.

For my purposes, the barrier is one of cost, unfortunately. But that fact doesn't detract from the general point you make that an SL-based system can be very flexible and effective for a working photographer. Other photographers in other disciplines, like wedding photographer Jay Cassario in the U.S., have a similar perspective.

Best,
Mike
Hi Mike,

thank you very much for your comment, I am glad you enjoyed the article, and thank you very much indeed for your words about my work, much appreciated!

I am happy that you see my point about the need for finding an "integrated system", and for the search of a system that - albeit with all the compromises than every system forces us to accept - suits each of us and our individual needs the best. The SL is definitely a great system as far as flexibility and optical quality, which translates in image quality. is it perfect? Not for everyone, definitely. But, is it the best for me, today? Yes, definitely. Give me a SL II with more resolution, and I'll be even happier :D

Cost is definitely a consideration, for everyone including of course a working photographer like me. Most people see that backwards, thinking "Oh, you are a pro, you can buy whatever you want" but they don't consider that amateurs have - by definition - disposable income to use for their hobby (how much, it's a different question for course), while - for professionals - gear purchase must make business sense... That said, alternatives to the Leica SL in the Medium Format arena would be much more expensive anyway, if I'd want to have two bodies (a necessity for me) and cover the same focal range (even if it were possible, which is not). Alternatives in 35mm are indeed less expensive, pretty much all of them, and that is something to be kept into consideration - but out of the scope of my article, which was meant to give a method in a sort of "if money is no problem" world.

Thanks again, best regards

Vieri
 

Robert Campbell

Well-known member
...

Cost is definitely a consideration, for everyone including of course a working photographer like me. Most people see that backwards, thinking "Oh, you are a pro, you can buy whatever you want" but they don't consider that amateurs have - by definition - disposable income to use for their hobby (how much, it's a different question for course), while - for professionals - gear purchase must make business sense...
And that rather depends on exactly what 'amateurs' and 'professionals' are. In the UK, it was (still is?) the case that an 'amateur' made less than half his or her total income from photography. At a mini-medical course/club meeting in England a few years ago, a hospital consultant described his landscape photography work. He sold a lot of his images as prints, but could still claim to be an 'amateur'.
 

vieri

Well-known member
And that rather depends on exactly what 'amateurs' and 'professionals' are. In the UK, it was (still is?) the case that an 'amateur' made less than half his or her total income from photography. At a mini-medical course/club meeting in England a few years ago, a hospital consultant described his landscape photography work. He sold a lot of his images as prints, but could still claim to be an 'amateur'.
Very true Robert.

Best regards.

Vieri
 

vieri

Well-known member
The only Leica I'd buy is the Q. My choice the D850.
The Q is a great camera, and I have been trying to find a reason to justify it for my work since I'd love to get one - but couldn't so far - so I haven't got one yet and probably never will :) The D850 is no doubt a very competent camera, but doesn't beat my Leica SL for my particular work and requirements.

Best regards,

Vieri
 

peterm1

Active member
Hi Vieri - I have enjoyed your work and articles and you have graciously provided me with useful advice.

I am currently shooting with the M10 and Q, but am awaiting the announcement of the forthcoming Fuji GFX-50R rangefinder style medium format camera (hopefully next month). I am going to try to keep my M10 and Q as well for street shooting and when I want to travel light.

I bought the SL last year and used it with the 24-90mm and 90-280mm zooms as well as M lenses. I also had the GFX50S as well. As an informal personal experiment I shot each of them on Block Island in Rhode Island at different times doing landscape and other types of shooting. My own personal conclusion was asking myself why I would carry around the bulk of the SL system when to my eyes the files from the GFX50s were significantly better. I had a lot more keepers with the Fuji where I marveled at the quality of the files I was getting; I couldn’t say the same for the SL - they were good but didn’t make my jaw drop. Plus the tiltable lcd of the GFX50s was very handy when shooting low; something that frustrated me with the Sl. I shot with both cameras on many other occasions as well.

This is not to mention the MUCH higher costs of the SL lenses (especially right now with Fuji sales going on). While I really grew to like the SL controls and simplicity, in my humble opinion the files really don’t approach the quality of the GFX. A SL2 with a better sensor and resolution would be great, but who knows when that’s coming.

I’m not saying the SL sensor isn’t excellent - after all I am very happy with my M10 an Q. But for landscape shooting when I want the best quality files possible for making large prints and being able to crop when needed, there’s no question that I would go with the Fuji or Hasselblad. Just my humble opinion - obviously everyone has their own needs and desires but thought I would share my experience. To me the SL’s potential is held back by the sensor, especially if you want to print really big.

I look forward to seeing more of your work and blog posts.

Best,

Peter
 

vieri

Well-known member
Hi Vieri - I have enjoyed your work and articles and you have graciously provided me with useful advice.

I am currently shooting with the M10 and Q, but am awaiting the announcement of the forthcoming Fuji GFX-50R rangefinder style medium format camera (hopefully next month). I am going to try to keep my M10 and Q as well for street shooting and when I want to travel light.

I bought the SL last year and used it with the 24-90mm and 90-280mm zooms as well as M lenses. I also had the GFX50S as well. As an informal personal experiment I shot each of them on Block Island in Rhode Island at different times doing landscape and other types of shooting. My own personal conclusion was asking myself why I would carry around the bulk of the SL system when to my eyes the files from the GFX50s were significantly better. I had a lot more keepers with the Fuji where I marveled at the quality of the files I was getting; I couldn’t say the same for the SL - they were good but didn’t make my jaw drop. Plus the tiltable lcd of the GFX50s was very handy when shooting low; something that frustrated me with the Sl. I shot with both cameras on many other occasions as well.

This is not to mention the MUCH higher costs of the SL lenses (especially right now with Fuji sales going on). While I really grew to like the SL controls and simplicity, in my humble opinion the files really don’t approach the quality of the GFX. A SL2 with a better sensor and resolution would be great, but who knows when that’s coming.

I’m not saying the SL sensor isn’t excellent - after all I am very happy with my M10 an Q. But for landscape shooting when I want the best quality files possible for making large prints and being able to crop when needed, there’s no question that I would go with the Fuji or Hasselblad. Just my humble opinion - obviously everyone has their own needs and desires but thought I would share my experience. To me the SL’s potential is held back by the sensor, especially if you want to print really big.

I look forward to seeing more of your work and blog posts.

Best,

Peter
Hello Peter,

thank you for your comment and for your kind words about my work and about my articles, much appreciated.

I am glad that my article here served its purpose, and that you choose the system that works best for you according to your requirements, which was exactly my point when I wrote it :)

I already explained in the article why I choose the SL, and I most definitely don't want to make you change your mind. However, let me just answer a couple of your points, and try to explain why I didn't consider the GFX50.

1. Sensor. I know the GFX50's sensor very well, I used it for a long time in my Pentax 645Z before moving to the Leica SL, and I know how good it is. However, the sensor of the SL is amazing, and while I would love to have more resolution for now 24 Mp are good enough for what I need, so while waiting for the next iteration of the SL I am happy with it and what it does.
2. Lens' cost. If you get all the lenses you need with the Fuji to cover the 24-90mm, cost will not be as much higher on the SL as it might seems. On the contrary :)

But, more than everything:

3. Lenses. The GFX 50 is VERY limited compared to the SL in focal length's coverage, especially on the ultra-wide side. Nothing in the Fuji line-up covers what the 16-35mm covers, and no adapted lenses could compare with, say, the focal of the Voigt 10mm or the Laowa 12mm. I use ultra-wides a lot, and lack of options on the ultra-wide-angle side makes the GFX 50 (and the X1D) a no-go for me right from the start. On the long side, things are a bit better but, say, since you used the 90-280mm you know that there is nothing of comparable coverage.
4. Lenses. Leica glass is, IMHO, much better than Fuji when it comes to colour rendition and colour separation. I understand that this is personal, and it's something that many people don't look for, but for me it's very important.

and finally, though perhaps not so fundamental for others:

4. UI. I much prefer the SL's UI in the field, makes for a huge difference in speed and comfort of use, which makes me work better and therefore make better pictures.

In short, even if the GFX 50s sensor offers higher resolution than the SL's, a gain in resolution alone is not enough for me to even consider the GFX 50 as a possible replacement for my SL against all that I would loose in the switch - of which, the loss of ultra-wide angles (and the loss of Leica quality glass) is a show-stopper by itself.

Hope this helps clarifying why the Fuji GFX 50, as good as it is, is not for me. As I mentioned in the article, of course, this is just me and my work :)

Best regards,

Vieri
 
Top