DPR allows some Leica SL and A7RII comparisons

[thompsonkirk]

I don't often look at DPR, but I glanced and saw this preliminary review, which others may have seen before:

Studio tests and samples: Leica SL: Digital Photography Review

It allows you to look at 100% test files with SL and RII (or Nikon, Canon, etc., models) for resolution and dynamic range. The resolution tests are necessarily a bit skewed because they had only the SL's zoom lens, whereas the RII is a prime. Nevertheless the Sony resolution looks noticeably higher in the magnified files. And the dynamic range tests are affected only to a small degree by the lens, and they show more noise at high ISO with SL. I'm not so interested in high ISOs, but the same data means more processing latitude with RII.

I wasn't about to get on a list for an SL. But it's nice to be reassured there'd be no reason for it, from the standpoint of these two aspects of IQ.

Kirk

 

[k-hawinkler]

Many thanks Kirk. I know the A7r2 was the correct decision for me.

Here http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/56138-a7r-a7r2-why-im-keeping-both-2.html#post666428 post #97 are some shots with the WATE. :grin:

 

[ptomsu]

I posted this below already on the Leica SL thread, but think it is worth showing it here again - and YES, the A7RII seems to be a great camera after looking into all these comparisons:

The reviews from dpreviw do not look too exciting. I myself downloaded lot of the RAW studio samples, imported in LR and compared to other cameras and I was not amused. Definitely all the other 24MP cameras hold pretty nicely up to the SL, sometimes look even sharper. If this is a result of the different sensors or also a negative impact coming from the 24-90 zoom I cannot say.

Once comparing to samples from D810, 5DSR or A7RII, the differences become of course even more obvious, as with their higher resolution sensors these cameras offer much more detail - at least in lower ISO ranges. The optimum IQ seems to come from the A7RII, followed by the D810 (although they are pretty much on par) and then the 5DSR.

If looking at the dpreview real world SL samples (also downloaded RAWs and imported in LR) most of the samples look definitely impressive IMHO, maybe resulting from the fact that there is no direct comparison possible. So overall my conclusion from that is, the SL seems to be a pretty capable camera, but definitely not better than most of the competition and definitely with disadvantages in overall resolution compared to the higher MP-models, but with a much higher price than all the others - well no wonder about that, as it is a Leica and also should have the overall qualities to justify that higher price.

What remains then is the fact that the SL seems to be a great tool for using M, R and S glass and I have no doubts with the availability of native SL lenses, especially primes, it will excel. But these SL lenses are more than 1 year out, so if there is no immediate need to bring the other M, R, S glass to life, then the steep price of the SL seems to be hard to justify - at least for me and at least for now.

But the overall move of Leica to develop such a FF mirrorless camera is definitely a bold move and sure enough this is a great camera, if one can make the right use of it (see my concerns above). And hopefully this will finally wake up the CaNikon's!

 

[seb]

Motivated by these results I tried to get hold of an A7RIi here in Austria, but it is still everywhere either not listed, or listed as to be ordered. Which is kind of weird given the obvious big success of this camera all over the world - or am I missing something?

That's strange. I know at least four stores in Zurich that has it in stock since release except between mid of august till beginn of september. I've bought my A7RII directly on the first day of release without preordering it. Zurich is switzerland and not austria but still too close for this difference.

 

[ptomsu]

That's strange. I know at least four stores in Zurich that has it in stock since release except between mid of august till beginn of september. I've bought my A7RII directly on the first day of release without preordering it. Zurich is switzerland and not austria but still too close for this difference.

I was surprised myself.

 

[seb]

I was surprised myself.

I wish you good luck to find any soon. It's a great camera.

 

[ohnri]

I don't often look at DPR, but I glanced and saw this preliminary review, which others may have seen before:

Studio tests and samples: Leica SL: Digital Photography Review

It allows you to look at 100% test files with SL and RII (or Nikon, Canon, etc., models) for resolution and dynamic range. The resolution tests are necessarily a bit skewed because they had only the SL's zoom lens, whereas the RII is a prime. Nevertheless the Sony resolution looks noticeably higher in the magnified files. And the dynamic range tests are affected only to a small degree by the lens, and they show more noise at high ISO with SL. I'm not so interested in high ISOs, but the same data means more processing latitude with RII.

I wasn't about to get on a list for an SL. But it's nice to be reassured there'd be no reason for it, from the standpoint of these two aspects of IQ.

Kirk

My Samsung NX1 also appears to beat the SL in the DR comparison tool.

Of course, the Samsung has an insanely good APS-C BSI sensor in it.

-Bill

 

[4season]

SL looks like a respectable performer, somewhat better than my A7 and similar to the D750.

 

[DougDolde]

From the DP Review comparison the SL looks like a Leica failure.

 

[thompsonkirk]

Presumably not all the way to insane. DPR offered two points of evidence – resolution and processing latitude are just two variables. The resolution test was skewed, as I mentioned, by lack of a prime to use for the test. And DPR isn't my favorite 'authority.'

The point seems simply that the A7RII was in no way embarrassed in the comparison, and is the better current choice for many because it exists, whereas it'll take a long time for the SL to become a workable system (for those who don't pair it with an S, or don't own a shelf of R lenses).

I'm still loyal to Leica lenses and use A7RII mainly with WATE and MATE, which are one version of the best of both worlds.

Kirk

PS, I assume that by the time the SL system matures, there'll be a number of iterations – SL-2, SL-3, SL-N...– as with the R series. In other words, a sane course of development.

 

[k-hawinkler]

Presumably not all the way to insane. DPR offered two points of evidence – resolution and processing latitude are just two variables. The resolution test was skewed, as I mentioned, by lack of a prime to use for the test. And DPR isn't my favorite 'authority.'

The point seems simply that the A7RII was in no way embarrassed in the comparison, and is the better current choice for many because it exists, whereas it'll take a long time for the SL to become a workable system (for those who don't pair it with an S, or don't own a shelf of R lenses).

I'm still loyal to Leica lenses and use A7RII mainly with WATE and MATE, which are one version of the best of both worlds.

Kirk

I agree on the WATE, please see post #2 above how it performs on my A7r2.
I don't own the MATE, either version. :grin:
The A7r2 also works brilliantly well with my Leica R lenses. :thumbs:

 

[Viramati]

I agree on the WATE, please see post #2 above how it performs on my A7r2.
I don't own the MATE, either version. :grin:
The A7r2 also works brilliantly well with my Leica R lenses. :thumbs:

A sad day for me as I put my WATE up for sale today as I no longer have the M and for me it feels a bit like the end of an era. The only leica M mount lens I have left is the apo/telyt 135. I have loved the WATE for many years but just wasn't satisfied with it's corner behaviour on the A7rII and now have the CV25 mkIII which is excellent and will get the new Zeiss loxia 21 when it comes out. In time I will probably get a 2nd A7rII as though I have the A7s I miss having 2 cameras with the same size sensors

 

[Vivek]

PS, I assume that by the time the SL system matures, there'll be a number of iterations – SL-2, SL-3, SL-N...– as with the R series. In other words, a sane course of development.

Assuming there are no Hermes, Honky tOnk, Hello Kitty, etc versions. I hope they sell a few to make it to SL (type xxx)- they dont do 2, 3, 4 etc anymore.

 

[Zony user]

A sad day for me as I put my WATE up for sale today as I no longer have the M and for me it feels a bit like the end of an era. The only leica M mount lens I have left is the apo/telyt 135. I have loved the WATE for many years but just wasn't satisfied with it's corner behaviour on the A7rII and now have the CV25 mkIII which is excellent and will get the new Zeiss loxia 21 when it comes out. In time I will probably get a 2nd A7rII as though I have the A7s I miss having 2 cameras with the same size sensors

Wow, never heard of any corner issues with the A7's and the WATE. Could you elaborate a bit on it because I have no issues with my A7II and WATE.

 

[uhoh7]

Given the choice I will take the Leica SL over any Sony body, with or without the caveat I could not sell it.

For me the Leica is superior to any Sony body available today. By a large margin. It should be considering the price :bugeyes:

Today I have two main camera bodies, M9 and a7.mod. I know the Sonys very well. I've also followed the release of the SL closely.

If your like your Sony and are happy with it, more power to you. Why go after the Leica SL? But if some insist on claiming any Sony is obviously superior to the SL, be prepared to hear about the less than perfect aspects of the Sony. They are legion.

Do I see lots of great shots from Sony shooters? Yes I do. I see wonderful photography from all sorts of systems.

 

[hiepphotog]

Given the choice I will take the Leica SL over any Sony body, with or without the caveat I could not sell it.

For me the Leica is superior to any Sony body available today. By a large margin. It should be considering the price :bugeyes:

Today I have two main camera bodies, M9 and a7.mod. I know the Sonys very well. I've also followed the release of the SL closely.

If your like your Sony and are happy with it, more power to you. Why go after the Leica SL? But if some insist on claiming any Sony is obviously superior to the SL, be prepared to hear about the less than perfect aspects of the Sony. They are legion.

Do I see lots of great shots from Sony shooters? Yes I do. I see wonderful photography from all sorts of systems.

Charlie, you keep insisting on claiming this yet-released Leica to be superior than any Sony body available today, and I, honestly, can't see it. Both have their pros and cons, and for my style of shooting, the SL doesn't offer anything appealing. This kind of Leica superiority talk might be more fitting to post in a Leica forum. I don't find myself going to Canikon or Leica forum claiming my Sony is superior to any of their body.

 

[thompsonkirk]

"For me the Leica is superior to any Sony body available today."

Your timeline seems mixed up, or you mean some other model of Leica, or you haven't read this particular thread very closely?

(a) Zero Leica SLs are "available today." Bodies with one lens are promised for the future.

(b) The Sony is available today as a limited, growing, and useful system.

(c) The forthcoming Leica SL is not demonstrably superior to the present Sony with regard to at least two important variables: (a) resolution and (b) dynamic range/processing latitude.

(d) The T autofocus lens lineup that will comprise an SL system does not have a clear or proximate timeline. In the meantime available prime lenses are only R, S, and some M.

(e) By the time an "available today" SL system exists, neither the original SL body nor the A7rII is likely to be either company's current offering.

These are trying to be factual statements. Are there any you actually disagree with?

Kirk

BTW, had you noticed that many (most?) of the folks who've posted on this thread use both Sony and Leica?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Given the choice I will take the Leica SL over any Sony body, with or without the caveat I could not sell it.

For me the Leica is superior to any Sony body available today. By a large margin. It should be considering the price :bugeyes:

Today I have two main camera bodies, M9 and a7.mod. I know the Sonys very well. I've also followed the release of the SL closely.

If your like your Sony and are happy with it, more power to you. Why go after the Leica SL? But if some insist on claiming any Sony is obviously superior to the SL, be prepared to hear about the less than perfect aspects of the Sony. They are legion.

Do I see lots of great shots from Sony shooters? Yes I do. I see wonderful photography from all sorts of systems.

Honestly you seem angry in your post. Just comes across that way but this body is not out yet to get a really good idea about it.

 

[uhoh7]

Charlie, you keep insisting on claiming this yet-released Leica to be superior than any Sony body available today, and I, honestly, can't see it. Both have their pros and cons, and for my style of shooting, the SL doesn't offer anything appealing. This kind of Leica superiority talk might be more fitting to post in a Leica forum. I don't find myself going to Canikon or Leica forum claiming my Sony is superior to any of their body.

First off, let's be clear. I am not insisting it is the better body for Guy, you, or anyone but me and my lenses

It is not about "Leica superiority". I was never a fan of the Crop Leicas. I was a Sony fan before I was ever a Leica fan. Calling someone who likes a lens or camera system a fanboy, which I get all the time, is just an excuse not to consider their point of view. Sure, there are people who just like every Chevy. Not me. Takes me quite a awhile to work up to real admiration. And I am not afraid to withdraw it when my experience says it's not deserved.

Posts about "Leica Failure" draw no comment, but mine is in the wrong place in a thread about comparing the two cameras?

Seriously?

Why would that not be frustrating?

In general and not thinking of anybody in particular; I'm really not sure which is more silly: puppydog love for a system or blind antipathy towards one. Intentionally or not even the thread title is a slur against the SL. I think Leica did a good job on the SL, in many ways, and deserves a defense. To controversial to make the case?

Since the thread is about comparison, there is really no way around looking at why somebody like me really might prefer the SL, is there?

Unless of course, it's just about "us and them".

 

[mark1958]

I don't have any corner issues with mine. Perhaps a little vignetting but that is it.

Wow, never heard of any corner issues with the A7's and the WATE. Could you elaborate a bit on it because I have no issues with my A7II and WATE.