Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.7 #14 · Leica SL images and specs. Looks somehow familiar... | |
hiepphotog wrote:
Let me quote that whole paragraph to see if I mischaracterized it:
"For me then, the $64,000 dollar question was whether the Leica SL would perform well enough with Leica M lenses. To that end I dusted down my tripod and headed to the Suffolk coast with my Leica M240, the Leica SL, and my son Silas’s Sony A7 mark 2, together with a selection of Leica lenses which have proved problematic. I took a leaf out of Sean Reid’s book, and did this properly, shooting at f2.8, f4, f5.6 and f8 with each lens, with focus bracketing for each set. I am intending to post the original files and the comparison between the Sony A7 mark 2 and the Leica SL in a later article, but suffice to say, that although the edges and corners of the M240 were slightly better than the SL, the results for the SL were hugely better than those from the Sony A7 mark 2. Sadly, I didn’t have a Sony A7r mark 2, but the cover glass is the same thickness as that on the A7, and there is no reason to suppose that the results will be any better than the A7 mark 2."
He actually used his tripod to do an aperture test, instead of the usual Steve Huff's "non technical" opinion. I think that is pretty conclusive there. I just paraphrased what he said really.
So the champ of Alt lenses? If we actually list all the non-native platforms each camera can actually work with (in the case, you will see. We have working AF adapters for Contax N, Canon EF, Nikon F (prototype), Contax G, Contax 645.
As soon as Leica releases their working Leica S to L adapter, we would no doubt have one for Sony soon by reverse engineering. Sony will be, at least in the near future, a much more popular platform that third party adapter makers would spend more R&D on it. It's hasty at this point to say Leica SL can do more. We're not even sure if it's going to last long. The difference is again academic at best since this Leica is not going to dominate the market by any measure....Show more →
So, he says it is hugely better than the stock Sony and the M240 is slightly better in the edges and corners here and later he says the SL is excellent with M lenses and compares well with his M240, and you paraphrase that as the M240 is better than the SL. Sorry, IMO, that paraphrase is a mischaracterization and doesn't paint the full picture of what he is saying. The SL is much better than the Sony A7 II and very close to the performance of the M240 would be a much fairly characterization. And this characterization is important, IMO, because it strongly suggests that the SL has thin cover glass. Your paraphrase can and I think did lead some to believe the SL has thick cover glass.
As far as whether what makes something a king of alt lenses, it is clear we have very different ideas. You seem to be suggesting that wide spread adoption is what will make something the king of alt lenses. From my perspective alt lenses has never been and will never be about wide spread adoption.
Instead for the king of alt lenses I just mean the system that can use the widest array of non-native lenses. I think it is clear that the Leica SL will be that system. It can use M lenses more effectively--to use Juno Black's words it is hugely better. It can use S lenses, and I have some serious doubts that there will ever be third party adapters for the Sony to Leica S. Is there really enough money in S adapters to bother with reverse engineering an adapter for Sony? I kind of doubt it given how many of these lenses are on the market, but I guess we will see. So, IMO, the SL is the most adaptable system out there. The Sony is great for alts and the IBIS is very nice, but being able to use all the wide Ms well, IMO, certainly tips the crown to the SL. A win on points to be sure and not a knock out, but still a win in my book.
|
