sflxn wrote:
DPR has studio comparisons for the SL now.
It's been a long time since Canikon had Fuji, Olympus, and Sony for dinner at the DSLR trough. Looks like Leica and Pentax has volunteered to be dinner. With all the DSLR lenses that Olympus and Sony had, they still got bitch slapped around. Good luck to Leica and Pentax. I think Canon and Nikon are stretching their fingers right now. There's a reason there is a word duopoly and none for tri and quad. There's a reason mirrorless exist. It wasn't just innovation. It was to escape getting bitch slapped so hard.
Sorry, but I don't think Leica would be seen going to dinner at Canikon's. They are having their own more exclusive party to which few will be invited. Like it or not--and I don't for the record--that is how Leica operates. They might say this camera is to compete with Canikon, but IMO what that means is that they want to pick up Leica M users who buy Canikon cameras as a second camera and hope to fully keep them in the Leica fold. The also hope that S users will buy this as a second camera to supplement their S system, and they hope to bring back people who once upon a time used R lenses. All these people they would love to sell more lenses. If a few people who shoot Canikon or Sony pick this camera that is gravy, but they couldn't even handle any movement from Canikon in enough numbers to matter to Canikon.
Spyro P. wrote:
am I the only one slightly underwhelmed by those raw files? Pushing a couple of stops from base iso and I see all shorts of gremlins in the shadows.
Not different from the M240 and canon. I think Sony sensors are quite remarkable in this respect.
True that... sony sensors do make you lose perspective, they're that good.
Begs the question though, how much should someone sacrifice just for a great evf and some extra lens compatibility. May as well go M and enjoy a real OVF.
Spyro P. wrote:
True that... sony sensors do make you lose perspective, they're that good.
Begs the question though, how much should someone sacrifice just for a great evf and some extra lens compatibility. May as well go M and enjoy a real OVF.
I'm starting to think the same.
Oct 29, 2015 at 07:10 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Spyro P. wrote:
True that... sony sensors do make you lose perspective, they're that good.
Begs the question though, how much should someone sacrifice just for a great evf and some extra lens compatibility. May as well go M and enjoy a real OVF.
If your priorities are the sensor and an OVF, then the SL surely won't be for you. If your priorities are a simple and responsive shooting experience and a good EVF, then it might be. Personally, I am willing to sacrifice a bit with the sensor. I am fine with 24mp (that is what my Sony A7 II is right now). I expect the shadow recovery to be a bit better than my Canon camera and worse than my Sony camera or a Nikon would be. It will have a 50 base ISO, which will be nice for increased DR, and decreased noise if you have the light to use it. At base ISO I expect it will have close to the DR of the Sony A7 II sensor and less noise. All in all, however, I expect it to be thoroughly middling as a FF sensor, and that is fine with me as a cutting edge sensor isn't a priority to me. As for an OVF, I personally much prefer an EVF most of the time (love being able to magnify for focus), so I am actually happy this camera has an excellent EVF and that is a huge draw for me.
it's not really middling though, it's towards the bottom as far as current FF chips go. And it hasn't even hit the shelves yet, imagine in 2 years.
Anyway I can see the niche for it, those who use long lenses and want the clearest TTL view, and those with S and R glass. Small niche, which is all that Leica needs really.
Spyro P. wrote:
it's not really middling though, it's towards the bottom as far as current FF chips go. And it hasn't even hit the shelves yet, imagine in 2 years.
So people are discovering it's a piece of cr@p? How surprising
I'm even surprised there is bending at base ISO. "A professional mirrorless system camera without compromise"...
To be honest this hardly matters. Nobody is going to buy into the SL "system", hardly any news.
But what about the new M? Is it gonna use the same amazing sensor? Probably.
Leica is so stupid they will "protect" their S system to remain the highest MP Leica sensor,
so M will not go higher than those lame 24MP...
I predict Leica is gonna prove they might be even more stupid than the worst predictions.
No reason they couldn't release an SL-R of some sort with higher resolution.
I own a Z3200 and am quite happy printing with 24MP files. I also had great success with 12MP files. I think the MP is a bit overrated unless you often crop.
As for EVF - I think the next M will release a Hybrid system where they shrink it and make their rangefinder mechanism digital. I think we also see a hybrid OVF/EVF eventually from Nikon.
Leica is so stupid they will "protect" their S system to remain the highest MP Leica sensor, so M will not go higher than those lame 24MP... I predict Leica is gonna prove they might be even more stupid than the worst predictions.
Don't hold back!
Really, although what you say might be somewhat harsh, it seems that there is something in it.
Perhaps it is because Leica can still as yet only produce so many cameras that they see their advantage in 'protecting' the assets of their buyers. There is no way that they could produce cameras in the quantities that Canikon do, and I expect that suits them at the moment - since they sell what they produce. It is a particular business model that maybe makes sense for them at the moment. If you have a rich customer base, then 'gouge them for all you can' seems to be Leica's motto. Just bring out anniversary this and a Lenny Kravitz that.
Obviously, they could build more exciting cameras if they were willing to cross compete with their own models and cannibalise sales - always a business risk. A Q with interchangeable M lenses, with the option of small high quality autofocus 'travel' zooms would obviously appeal to many, but they are reluctant to take sales away from the M. It could be a very stupid decision to avoid making such a camera or it could be a way to protect their M brand.
I expect they could put a hybrid OVF/EVF into an M so that wides and teles are easier to use, which I think would be very popular, but could they keep up with demand? They could buy a Sony 42mp sensor and add it to either of those mentioned bodies, but then what does that do to their S sales? Who would still bother with it?
The bottleneck here seems to be the S. Why have they not gone for the Sony 50MP MF sensor, or something even larger? Why cramp up the rest of their range? This is not about some silly megapixel race, it is about giving people reasons to move up to MF and to compete with the likes of Pentax who seem at the moment to have the much better camera, but with lenses not quite in the Leica S class. Something is rotten in the state of Leica.
The SL, which seems to have so many good features is still a middle ground pigs ear compromise.
Spyro P. wrote:
it's not really middling though, it's towards the bottom as far as current FF chips go. And it hasn't even hit the shelves yet, imagine in 2 years.
Anyway I can see the niche for it, those who use long lenses and want the clearest TTL view, and those with S and R glass. Small niche, which is all that Leica needs really.
Yeah, it really is pretty middling, if it is at all better than the m240, and it should be just by extending base ISO from 200 to 50--and it appears to be a real 50. That means at base ISO, it should have very close to the DR of the Sony A7II (probably with less ability to recover from the shadows, however) and way more DR than the Canon 6D or even the 5Ds. The noise performance of the M240 is already very close to the Sony A7 II and the Canon 6D--the lines are almost on top of each other at DXO if you look, the M240 is just handicapped because it only has 200 base ISO. At base ISO, its noise performance should actually be better than the Sony A7 II and the Canon 6D because it goes to ISO 50 and they only go to ISO 100. For colour sensitivity at base ISO 50 it should be close to the Sony A7II and be much better than Canon. So, overall it will have a very close performance to the Sony A7 II, with some wins and some losses. The A7 II's sensor, however, is thoroughly trumped by the A7r II sensor. This Leica sensor won't be nearly as good, but it will likely be better than a Canon sensor in everything except high ISO DR and noise--the Canon sensors are very good at that. So, I think thoroughly middling is a good characterization. The Sony made sensor in the A7r and D810 and A7r II are clearly better. This although having different strength in weaknesses will be close to the sensor in the Sony A7 II. It will be noticeably better in most things, however, than the sensor in the Canon 6D. So, yes, middling.
lightskyland wrote:
The banding on the DPReview samples is atrocious - hideous. Please tell me that's a defective camera!
Well, it is a preproduction camera and other images from the same serial number camera show no signs of banding (I did 5-stop pushes to a number of the other files). What this reminds me of is the preproduction M240 DNGs released back after it was announced. Some of those also showed hideous amounts of banding. But not surprisingly, once the camera shipped and I eventually got mine, I can't say I remember having any banding problems with it in 'normal' use. Sometimes ISO 1600 pushed, or over ISO 3200 is problematic...
The concern I would have about the SL banding examples is if it's indeed 'random' banding in the manner of the M9, where it seemed to depend on a happenstance of the specific camera, camera settings and/or type of memory card, etc. I'm hoping Leica have been able to shake that gremlin by now.
Gary Clennan wrote:
Ron - I completely agree with Derek. I have always been impressed by your ability to get the colors and contrast level just right (at least to my eye). You also have super consistant output amongst camera bodies. I am still practicing and one day will get it right... Maybe we need an LR Scheffler preset?
sebboh wrote:
i actually have Ron Scheffler preset in lightroom modeled off a few shots where he showed what he did. it only works on leica files in a certain kind of light though. makes my sony greens look crazy, haven't been able to get the color adjustment right for the scheffler look with sony files. i also have a ronny olson flower preset made from when my random fiddling came out with something that approaches his look.
Haha, too funny! I don't even have a 'Scheffler' preset for LR. For sure, what I apply to Leica DNGs generally doesn't translate well to my Canon CR2s, nor to the Sony files I shot when demoing those cameras. It's an area where the SL interests me, in that its apparent homogeneity with M240 DNGs would simplify my post workflow a fair amount. As it is now, when I shoot events with both Leica and Canon, I end up processing each camera separately from the other, then doing a visual check through the final take to ensure the differences aren't too obvious.
---------------------------------------------
rscheffler wrote:
...With the M240 and also the SL, I struggle a bit with the yellows and oranges, so tend to pull back saturation for both by varying amounts...
Mitch Alland wrote:
Ron, thanks for showing your processing of the dpreview DNG files from the SL. As you suggest, the shots by dpreview, in their usual manner, are not great for reaching any judgment. In any case, I am concerned about the SL yellow-orange rendition being somewhat like that of the M240, which, as you may recall, is what has always bothered me about the M240. I look forward to seeing more on the color renditions and to testing this camera, as well.
Well, it feels very similar to M240 at the moment, so maybe not such great news.
Regarding your possible safari outfit...
As an 'option 4' I would consider something like a D7200 and an 80-400, though you will give up some lens speed compared to a 70-200/2.8. But it would mean you won't need to bring the 400/6.8. Not being a Nikon shooter, I don't know how good the 80-400 is...
Or instead of a D300, a D7200 for double the megapixels and thus the additional reach/cropping ability. Maybe by that time the mythical D400 will appear?
The concern I would have with the SL and 90-280 is whether you feel 280mm is long enough. Yes, you could still use the 400, too. Cropped to APS-C and you're down to 10MP, which is still OK but maybe not as flexible as a 24MP APS-C body if you're indeed often reach-limited by your lenses
I would personally be wary of a Visoflex solution. As you said, it gives the impression of a very clunky assembly of odds and ends. And really isn't where the M system is at its best.
So Gary, you think those images look good? Are you gonna convince yourself they look good,
because it's Leica? Really confused
They would be trashed by everyone if they came from a brand new flagship Canon, Nikon or Sony.
Do I need some special glasses because this is Leica? Or a special section of my brain needs
to be unlocked to appreciate the greatness?
For safari, I can't think of a better place for Canikon OVF speed monster. Common guys, Canikon is just simply works. TBH. I can't imagine how happy I will be one day Leica can bring a camera as reliable, as responsive, as Canikon one day.
Wolfloid, I don't think Leica choose SL's 24M because of 36M S. If I am in the market of S, I wouldn't think of SL, vise versa. They two are different enough to attract different target people.
They just have to meet certain price point based on current technology and available sensor option. It can shoot faster, more smooth operating, review time, less heating, more frame per charge etc...
Do we have any other 36M FF available other than Sony? And Leica has many good reason to not use Sony.
As for 50M vs 36M, how much difference we are talking about. 1.18X linear increase? We should not loop ourselves again here talking about tech spec on Paper. It is never a ending game of upgrade cycle.
For good sensor with best on paper spec, D800 can be get as low as $1200, D810 at $2000ish, A7R 1000ish, if that is what you want. I will get one. resolution is cheap Nowdays, will be cheaper...
If manufacture didn't make something you want buy or pay, doesn't mean they are stupid, or incapable. I don't want to buy SL now, this doesn't mean it is a bad camera, actually I think this is best MILC camera to date.
Well, the same was discovered about the Q, kind of proves how bad both lens and sensor is...
Incredible for the company proud of the amazing tradition in "pure optics".
Haha, no surprise here. I was telling you guys, the best lens manufacture are Canikon. they have all kinds of limitation still be able make Lens like 11-24, 14-24, 16-35, 24-70. given them $5K budget for prime lens, they will make at least as good lens as OTUS or any lux WITH AF...
Maybe we need an LR Scheffler preset?
i also have a ronny olson flower preset made from when my random fiddling came out with something that approaches his look.
