Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end
  

Archive 2015 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?

  
 
adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #1 · p.5 #1 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


120S what type of shots do you want to see?




Oct 28, 2015 at 04:02 AM
waterden
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #2 · p.5 #2 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


Interested to read all these posts about using the SL with M glass but hardly any mention of R lenses. While the AF ability is a big plus for the SL (and the 24-90, while big, will probably be stellar) the main interest for me is its ability to combine the use of R glass with an excellent EVF. I suspect that if this camera is a success (not guaranteed given the Sony competition) there may be a resurgence of interest in R lenses.


Oct 28, 2015 at 04:51 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #3 · p.5 #3 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?




waterden wrote:
Interested to read all these posts about using the SL with M glass but hardly any mention of R lenses. While the AF ability is a big plus for the SL (and the 24-90, while big, will probably be stellar) the main interest for me is its ability to combine the use of R glass with an excellent EVF. I suspect that if this camera is a success (not guaranteed given the Sony competition) there may be a resurgence of interest in R lenses.

That's because R lenses have no issues to speak of on the SL, apart from some uses requesting an auto stop down adapter. M lenses will be slightly affected by the sensor cover of the SL hence the interest.



Oct 28, 2015 at 04:56 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #4 · p.5 #4 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


Lee Saxon wrote:
To me the bigger factor than comparing weight here would be comparing price. I'd be interesting to set a certain price limit and see how much better of a lens kit you could get with a A7r II than with a SL.

For example, you could get an SL + 50 Summilux or an A7r II + 50 APO-Summicron. The latter is actually $500 less, in fact, which I presume is more than enough for a Kolari mod. That's crazy guys.

Just curious, why you have a Leica or a ZM option at 21, 24, & 90 but only a ZM
...Show more

Hi Lee,

The price thing is interesting, but it gets complicated. For example, I would rather have the 50 lux ASPH than the 50 cron AA, which isn't to say that I wouldn't love to have the 50 cron AA--I would--I just love the rendering of the 50 Lux ASPH. Said another way when you start mixing the camera and lens you have two factors the value of the camera and the value of the lenses and to me that can make it pretty hard to sort things out.

By the way, the reason I only gave the ZMs at 35mm and 50mm is that these are clearly comparable with the two Loxia lenses at the same focal lengths. They are essentially the same lenses--one pair tuned to the Leica and one pair tuned to the Sony. With the other lenses it is less clear what is the best lens to compare to the lens on Sony. For example, even the Loxia 21 f/2.8 doesn't have an exact comparison. The ZM 21 f/2.8 has the same max aperture, but the Loxia is a totally new lens and probably has at least a bit better performance. The Leica 21 f/3.4, however, ought to be very competitive with the Loxia for performance but is a half stop slower. The Batis lenses are even more difficult to find proper comparisons.

Regarding auto-aperture you are right that it only works well when there is no focus shift, but lenses that have floating elements in general don't have problems with focus shift and that includes almost all macros and all the one's being discussed here. I can't think of a macro that has problems with focus shift. So, for macro I do much prefer focus auto-aperture.



Oct 28, 2015 at 06:11 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #5 · p.5 #5 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


hiepphotog wrote:
CV 125 Canon and Sony have auto aperture. I'm not sure about the Nikon version. But otherwise, I can't really say anything else cause I have not really followed the S 120.


Yeah, you are right I forgot about that. I should have remembered too as I once looked for a Canon version for over two years without any luck. They do exist, but can be very hard to find.



Oct 28, 2015 at 06:15 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #6 · p.5 #6 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


waterden wrote:
Interested to read all these posts about using the SL with M glass but hardly any mention of R lenses. While the AF ability is a big plus for the SL (and the 24-90, while big, will probably be stellar) the main interest for me is its ability to combine the use of R glass with an excellent EVF. I suspect that if this camera is a success (not guaranteed given the Sony competition) there may be a resurgence of interest in R lenses.


I think the people that already have a good collection of R glass are in a great position, but if you haven't looked lately there has already been a strong resurgence of interest in R glass and prices have risen quite strongly--I think this is at least partly fuelled by people converting R glass to use in video (R glass is excellent for that). The current prices make buying R glass a bit of a hard sell at times. For example the R 19 f/2.8 v. II now regularly sells for over $3,000, and the same for a R 35 Lux, but a Zeiss C/Y 21mm f/2.8 sells for about $1,500 and the Zeiss C/Y 35 f/1.4 sells for about $1,200. The difference in price between the R and C/Y lenses has definitely grown over the years and for the best R glass is pretty high right now. As another example, the R 90 AA is now more expensive than the M 90 AA, and as these are basically the same lens in different mounts it is surprising that the lens costs more for the mount that can't be used with a Leica camera (at least until now). This is of course great if you have R glass, but may not be so great if you are looking to buy it. Personally, I would love to see Leica make some more R glass, but I don't have any hope that is actually going to happen.



Oct 28, 2015 at 06:26 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #7 · p.5 #7 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


zhangyue wrote:
Steve, you made me almost want get 120S now I need look for more samples. That is maybe a better money spend than on SL. 100cron also interesting. Brought 135 Zeiss with me in recent trip but I found I really like shooting 80-100 range more than 135. So either 120 or 100 will be fine. I need a WA though. This gonna be a heavy kit for sure.


I think the 100 cron looks great too and ought to be great on the SL. If you want a wide angle the 24 f/3.5 looks fantastic. Yeah, it will be a heavy kit, but the S lenses are great and I am envious of your set up.



Oct 28, 2015 at 06:53 AM
Arka
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #8 · p.5 #8 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?




hiepphotog wrote:
Or you can just compare them with their respective native lenses. If we stray to adapting non-native, things get blurred real fast. In this game of comparing size and weight without looking at the price tag, Leica M will always win hand-down. And the best platform to use those M lenses is the M cameras, not SL.


I'm not convinced that's 100% true. I love my M, but increasingly believe that there are better ways to focus an M lens than a rangefinder. The RF mechanisms are finicky, require frequent maintenance, and often are fooled by focus-shifting lenses like the Sonnar 50/1.5 or even the previous generation Noctilux. I used the SL with an M lens recently and was pleasantly surprised at how easily I could focus using the crystal-clear EVF. Maybe a bit heavier than an M, but a compelling proposition just the same. If the SL were about $2000 less, I might seriously consider one. Add to the advantages the fact that you could get the Leica SL optics if you didn't care about lens weight, and thereby obtain an AF camera.



Dec 04, 2015 at 03:49 PM
hiepphotog
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #9 · p.5 #9 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


Arka wrote:
I'm not convinced that's 100% true. I love my M, but increasingly believe that there are better ways to focus an M lens than a rangefinder. The RF mechanisms are finicky, require frequent maintenance, and often are fooled by focus-shifting lenses like the Sonnar 50/1.5 or even the previous generation Noctilux. I used the SL with an M lens recently and was pleasantly surprised at how easily I could focus using the crystal-clear EVF. Maybe a bit heavier than an M, but a compelling proposition just the same. If the SL were about $2000 less, I might seriously consider one.
...Show more

I meant if you want to squeeze the most out of your M lenses in term of performance. Certainly EVF works better with focus shifting lenses, but those are the minority. I'm using my M lenses on a Sony body cause as nice as the RF system is, it's just not flexible enough for my use.



Dec 04, 2015 at 04:33 PM
JaKo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #10 · p.5 #10 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


k-h.a.w wrote:
Why not use two A7r2 cameras, one modified for Leica M lenses?


That would be a good idea since not even all Leica and Zeiss RF lenses work perfectly on all Leica M bodies, not to mention SL.

Steve, you clearly do want to get SL camera, but if you have a temp/half-satisfying body to shoot for the next few months I would just wait a little while and see some real [non pro-bloggers] captures to surface.

Having two separate camera bodies for native and adopted lenses is a great thought, similar to having Kolari modded body for adopted WA RF and A7RM2 for the rest, but I have a gut feeling that upcoming Zeiss releases may change the desire for adaptable RF small glass.

Just look at Charles_k's shots who turned 'mad' and traded his uber Leica glass. If I sell my Leica lenses with minimal losses I do the same.



Dec 04, 2015 at 08:43 PM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #11 · p.5 #11 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


Steve Spencer wrote:
I think the people that already have a good collection of R glass are in a great position, but if you haven't looked lately there has already been a strong resurgence of interest in R glass and prices have risen quite strongly--I think this is at least partly fuelled by people converting R glass to use in video (R glass is excellent for that). The current prices make buying R glass a bit of a hard sell at times. For example the R 19 f/2.8 v. II now regularly sells for over $3,000, and the same for a R
...Show more

Exactly right: the last R 50/1.4 is now more expensive than the 50 Lux ASPH by 400+ There are a few "deals" left, but it's the M lenses which are getting significantly more affordable.

I also await the A7r2 Kolari results with great interest. The trouble is the lack of ability to do any corrections in camera, but maybe that won't be a big deal. We will have to see.

I already own the "poor man's" S, and it' s pretty good (A7.mod), I don't need corrections on my M glass, including ZM 18 SEM 21 28cron ZM35/2. The A7r is a more problematic Kolari, I am thinking. But the r2 may be awesome.

Obviously the Leica still has a host of advantages, but while the S with M is similar to the A7r2 with FE like the 25/2, the Kolari with M is really smaller and lighter. Of course the 240 is pretty close, and costs nearly the same as A7r2 Kolari.



Dec 04, 2015 at 11:12 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #12 · p.5 #12 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


JaKo wrote:
That would be a good idea since not even all Leica and Zeiss RF lenses work perfectly on all Leica M bodies, not to mention SL.

Steve, you clearly do want to get SL camera, but if you have a temp/half-satisfying body to shoot for the next few months I would just wait a little while and see some real [non pro-bloggers] captures to surface.

Having two separate camera bodies for native and adopted lenses is a great thought, similar to having Kolari modded body for adopted WA RF and A7RM2 for the rest, but I have a gut feeling that upcoming
...Show more

I am going to use a temporary body for a six or eight months and then make my decision. I still really like the SL, but I think it is good to see what the new M will be as well as what Sony and Zeiss do. For Zeiss lenses for the FE mount. I expect a 28mm Loxia and an 18mm and 50mm f/1.4 Batis. I don't think we will get more from Zeiss next year. They are deliberate in bring out lenses. Those lenses will add a lot of functionality, but wouldn't be a game changer for me. It would also give either Loxia or Batis lenses at 18mm, 21mm, 25mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm.



Dec 05, 2015 at 07:57 AM
Arka
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #13 · p.5 #13 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


I'm curious about the new M as well, but found the SL to be far more attractive as an M-lens platform. Indeed, it is much better in person than on paper. I found it much easier to focus my M optics using that gorgeous EVF. Too bad I have zero interest in the SL system optics. The 24-90 is gigantic, and if the other lenses are going to be around the same size, I'll definitely stick to M lenses, and just replace the M240 with the SL.


Dec 06, 2015 at 10:18 PM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #14 · p.5 #14 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


Arka wrote:
I'm curious about the new M as well, but found the SL to be far more attractive as an M-lens platform. Indeed, it is much better in person than on paper. I found it much easier to focus my M optics using that gorgeous EVF. Too bad I have zero interest in the SL system optics. The 24-90 is gigantic, and if the other lenses are going to be around the same size, I'll definitely stick to M lenses, and just replace the M240 with the SL.


I guess now focus shift and calibration are moot for you

I have not seen the EVF, it must be really something.




Dec 06, 2015 at 11:11 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #15 · p.5 #15 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


I remember the time, not so long ago, when many Leica shooters derided the A7 family for its lack of native lenses. They pointed to a paper by Roger Cicala (LensRentals), highlighting how any imperfection, however slight, with the then-necessary adapter, ruined IQ.
Now that the situation has reversed itself, with good native glass for the A7, and only one very large zoom for the SL, the adapter issue that was supposed to doom adapted lenses on the Sony is no longer discussed.
But back to the main topic. Early on, the Sony mirrorless approach (NEX) was very Smart-like (reduce to the max!). RX-1 followed, even more spectacularly small for a FF camera. Small had become beautiful, and a valid reason for leaving heavy DSLRs behind.
Then the ground shifted, and the A7 was introduced. Actually no longer quite that small nor light, and the second generation even less so.
So why do people buy A7, if absolute smallness isn't that important any more? Sony sensors and related hardware (IBIS) on the one hand, EVF for MF lenses on the other. And also the ablity to mount the largest possible array of adapted lenses.
That is pretty much the target that Leica seem to have had in mind with the SL. While Leica touted its compactness with the M, small size is clearly not the SL's credo, but EVF and adapted lenses are.
That is where the issue gets more complicated. An EVF is a huge help with MF lenses, and much less so with autofocus glass. And all adapted lenses are MF. Oh wait, that is no longer true. Electronic adapters offer good AF on Sony's A7R II for Canon and soon Nikon glass. At which point the last ring-fence protecting legacy manufacturers is breached. So small is no longer the only way to be beautiful for mirrorless.
The question is then, in this new head-to-head confrontation, will the SL have enough native lenses, and enough performance with adapted lenses, and enough hardware performance, and enough "Leica factor", to justify its not inconsiderable price tag?



Dec 07, 2015 at 12:45 AM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #16 · p.5 #16 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


philber wrote:
I remember the time, not so long ago, when many Leica shooters derided the A7 family for its lack of native lenses. They pointed to a paper by Roger Cicala (LensRentals), highlighting how any imperfection, however slight, with the then-necessary adapter, ruined IQ.
Now that the situation has reversed itself, with good native glass for the A7, and only one very large zoom for the SL, the adapter issue that was supposed to doom adapted lenses on the Sony is no longer discussed.
But back to the main topic. Early on, the Sony mirrorless approach (NEX) was very Smart-like (reduce to the
...Show more

What did that Otus cost, again? And why did you need it?

The only reason for "native" on the SL is AF. How does that work with the Otus and Batis?

The leica adapter recognises the M lenses and corrects. They are "native" on the SL. While there are some differences vis a v M, overall they shoot great by all reports. That 28 lux (better)? What would you rather carry, Otus 28 on A7r2 or 28 Lux on SL?

What adapter are you talking about, Philippe? You mean the 2mm "glass in the path"?

As for lenses, the SL can shoot a ton great. M: LTM, R, soon S. And Nikon too. The Sony loves one 21 one 25, a couple 35s, two 55s, an 85 and a 90. Some have remarkable copy variation. Yes there are good adapted lenses, but 50 lux and 75 lux it doesn't like that much, I guess, not to mention the issues 35 and wider.

What do you do wider than 21? CV 15 v3 is pretty good, but better on the M240. Where is the ZM18? Coming someday.

If you like lens variety, it's no contest, without modification for the Sony. But the files are looking much nicer these days, when somebody like you puts the right lens on there

But I do agree, a smaller SL would be nicer yet. All great cameras and their makers can stand some honest critique. Do we really have to pretend they are perfect?



Dec 07, 2015 at 12:50 AM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #17 · p.5 #17 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


I don't understand your post, Charlie, or maybe you don't understand mine. Let me try to be clearer.
The way I see it, Sony moved away from their initial "smaller is better" approach to mirrorless to one where mirrorless (a) is the camera which incorporates their best sensor, (b) offers an EVF for the largest number of adapted MF lenses, and (c) even supports valid AF for Canon and soon Nikon.
What I am saying is that I see Leica moving pretty much in the same direction with the SL. (a) moving away from "small is beautiful" and the rangefinder, which have been their credo for years (that holds for the SL, not the simplified M), (b) offering a great EVF for MF adapted lenses.
Both companies keep a minimalist offering in parallel with these "super-mirroless", the Leica Typ 246 and the Sony RX-1RII.
So I see Sony and Leica moving in the same direction, which was unexpected, to me at least.
Oh, and by the way, I am sure that someone will adapt an Otus on a Leica SL



Dec 07, 2015 at 02:11 AM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #18 · p.5 #18 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


uhoh7 wrote:
What adapter are you talking about, Philippe? You mean the 2mm "glass in the path"?


i believe he is referring to the fact that using an adapter basically doubles mount related tolerance error with regard to alignment. this means that if you test 100 lenses of equal theoretical optical performance on adapters and on their native mount that the native lenses will have better corners on average. this is certainly true measuring on an optical bench, but the real world differences don't seem to be worth talking about (to me).

uhoh7 wrote:
Yes there are good adapted lenses, but 50 lux and 75 lux it doesn't like that much, I guess, not to mention the issues 35 and wider.


the 75 lux doesn't work well on the a7?

i think if you are comparing the a7* to the SL you might as well compare the sensor modded version since it doesn't really impact the price difference between the two.




Dec 07, 2015 at 02:40 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #19 · p.5 #19 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


philber wrote:
I don't understand your post, Charlie, or maybe you don't understand mine. Let me try to be clearer.
The way I see it, Sony moved away from their initial "smaller is better" approach to mirrorless to one where mirrorless (a) is the camera which incorporates their best sensor, (b) offers an EVF for the largest number of adapted MF lenses, and (c) even supports valid AF for Canon and soon Nikon.
What I am saying is that I see Leica moving pretty much in the same direction with the SL. (a) moving away from "small is beautiful" and the rangefinder, which
...Show more

You make a very good point, Phillipe. I think what both companies are trying to offer both a small package for those who want it and even higher image quality with a larger size for those who want it. For Leica the small size comes in their M series lenses with M cameras, and the ultimate in image quality comes with their S lenses and the S medium format camera. The SL can take advantage of both. For Sony, small is going to be covered by Zeiss Loxia lenses and certain of their AF lenses (a kit with the Loxia 21, Sony FE 28, Sony/Zeiss 35 f/2.8 or Loxia 35 f/2, and Loxia 50 f/2 is a great start on a small kit) as well as the RX1. For ultimate image quality Sony is relying on the Sony Batis and certain Sony/Zeiss and Sony G lenses (a kit with the Batis 25, Sony/Zeiss 35 f/1.4, Batis 85, and Sony G 90 macro is a also a great start on a high performance kit and if they add a Batis 18, 50 f/1.4, Sony G 85 f/1.4 , and Sony/Zeiss 135 f/1.8 next year as I expect it will be pretty top notch). Still the ultimate in image quality for Sony will come when adapting Otus lenses as you do, and yes I am sure some will adapt Otus lenses for the SL. My plan is to have that option available when I want the highest IQ, but I still expect that my every day kit will be M lenses for the balance of size and performance. I see this development of small on one hand and big with super high IQ on the other as a good thing and will allow more people to get more of what they want although I am sure some people will still be displeased.



Dec 07, 2015 at 08:52 AM
RCicala
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #20 · p.5 #20 · Is a Sony A7r II kit smaller and lighter than a Leica SL (601) kit?


sebboh wrote:
i believe he is referring to the fact that using an adapter basically doubles mount related tolerance error with regard to alignment. this means that if you test 100 lenses of equal theoretical optical performance on adapters and on their native mount that the native lenses will have better corners on average. this is certainly true measuring on an optical bench, but the real world differences don't seem to be worth talking about (to me).



I'll just chime in that this is EXACTLY what I was talking about when I wrote about adapters. At the time, a couple of review sites had started reviewing lenses by mounting them all to adapters and testing on the same camera. The point I was making was that those reviews made the lenses in question look worse than they were. Most of the time it has no noticeable effect on photographs, but it did have a noticeable effect on lab numbers.

Roger



Dec 07, 2015 at 09:13 AM
1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end




FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.