Just wondering what folks think is the fastest / most responsive AF acquisition combination in the SL3 + L mount glass?
I presently have my Panny 85/1.8, and the Siggy 500/5.6 ... and a recent acquisition of the Siggy 24-70/2.8 II
Curious to hear of what folks think of other lenses (prime or zoom) for fast AF performance (any FL / any aperture). I anticipate that none of the SL APO's will be barn burners or speed demons.
Just for clarification, I'm not looking for high FPS, just quick to find / lock on (single AF-S is fine, AF-C not a priority). And, the comments about Sony / Canon / Nikon aren't needed, because I'm not on those platforms, and won't be switching to them. Just looking to understand the quickest in the Leica / L mount galaxy, not the entire photographic universe.
Sigma 70-200 2.8 is the fastest I’ve seen that’s not a wide angle. Most of my lenses improved dramatically with V4 and I haven’t tested all of them. The 60-600 is now a solid performer. Even the 90-280 isn’t rubbish AF anymore.
More importantly is that the new software has also improved accuracy.
flash wrote:
Sigma 70-200 2.8 is the fastest I’ve seen that’s not a wide angle. Most of my lenses improved dramatically with V4 and I haven’t tested all of them. The 60-600 is now a solid performer. Even the 90-280 isn’t rubbish AF anymore.
More importantly is that the new software has also improved accuracy.
Gordon
Thanks Gordon. I demo'd the Siggy 70-200 2.8 (in store yuck lighting only) before the firmware update on an SL3 (or -S). It was respectable ... not up to Sony level that I compared it with, of course. That lens is on my radar ... so, I am also considering if / what else might be on my radar (non-wides) if there are others. Could influence sequence order of purchase, etc.
I demo'd the Siggy 200 2.0 also. AF performance was pretty close to same as 70-200 (again, in store yuck lighting).
Siggy 135 / 1.4 (on paper)
SL 75 APO (expected to be slower, but wondering how much of a bump it got) sounds like it might be similar to your 90-280 bump.
I wish the V4 firmware upgrade could benefit my SL2-S to see how my Panny 85/1.8 bumps things. But, it seems like an SL3 or SL3-S is destined to be in my future for the AF gains. With the Triple Resolution + Pixel Shift options in the SL3 ... it seems like it would be the more versatile approach, than the SL3-S (if the AF performance is reasonably similar in both). I'm not a video centric shooter, so the hybrid leaning aspect of the SL3-S isn't a big sell for me, unless there remains a strong advantage in AF with SL3-S. From what I can gather, the AF gap between the SL3 vs. SL3-S AF performance is narrow, now that the V4 Firmware is in play.
RustyBug wrote:
Thanks Gordon. I demo'd the Siggy 70-200 2.8 (in store yuck lighting only) before the firmware update on an SL3 (or -S). It was respectable ... not up to Sony level that I compared it with, of course. That lens is on my radar ... so, I am also considering if / what else might be on my radar (non-wides) if there are others. Could influence sequence order of purchase, etc.
I demo'd the Siggy 200 2.0 also. AF performance was pretty close to same as 70-200 (again, in store yuck lighting).
Siggy 135 / 1.4 (on paper)
SL 75 APO (expected to be slower, but wondering how much of a bump it got) sounds like it might be similar to your 90-280 bump.
I wish the V4 firmware upgrade could benefit my SL2-S to see how my Panny 85/1.8 bumps things. But, it seems like an SL3 or SL3-S is destined to be in my future for the AF gains. With the Triple Resolution + Pixel Shift options in the SL3 ... it seems like it would be the more versatile approach, than the SL3-S (if the AF performance is reasonably similar in both). I'm not a video centric shooter, so the hybrid leaning aspect of the SL3-S isn't a big sell for me, unless there remains a strong advantage in AF with SL3-S. From what I can gather, the AF gap between the SL3 vs. SL3-S AF performance is narrow, now that the V4 Firmware is in play.
You said not to mention Sony. I did compare to my A7R5 directly as I have some Sigmas in both mounts. Sony has the edge but it closer than it should be. Neither reaches the level of the A1ii, of course but the SL3 and A7R5 are close relatives, sensor wise so, that it keeps up, mostly, is excellent.
In the current environment there’s zero reason to buy a SL3-S. The S1ii stomps it in every metric. Lovely build quality form the Leica of course. But it’s a S5ii clone.
While the AF improvements are the headline V4 also brings better camera responsiveness. Start up is much faster. Menus are smoother. More touch stuff.
The top left dial is still useless though. No extra functions added. I still don’t like the way profiles are implemented (no option to hide the default profile which is way too easy to set.) General tracking is disabled when subject detect is on. One user is having some card issues but I don’t know if nit’s wide spread. My cameras a fine.
flash wrote:
You said not to mention Sony. I did compare to my A7R5 directly as I have some Sigmas in both mounts. Sony has the edge but it closer than it should be. Neither reaches the level of the A1ii, of course but the SL3 and A7R5 are close relatives, sensor wise so, that it keeps up, mostly, is excellent.
In the current environment there’s zero reason to buy a SL3-S. The S1ii stomps it in every metric. Lovely build quality form the Leica of course. But it’s a S5ii clone.
While the AF improvements are the headline V4 also brings better camera responsiveness. Start up is much faster. Menus are smoother. More touch stuff.
The top left dial is still useless though. No extra functions added. I still don’t like the way profiles are implemented (no option to hide the default profile which is way too easy to set.) General tracking is disabled when subject detect is on. One user is having some card issues but I don’t know if nit’s wide spread. My cameras a fine.
Well, if it "splits the difference" between the Sony A7R5 and SL3 I demo'd in the store ... that would be welcome. If it's "closer than it should be", that's a bonus (imo).
Yeah, the SL3-S isn't calling to me right now. I'm not sure how the AF / buffer performance is when you Triple Res down to the medium or smaller files (event shooting) ... but, that's the only thing coming to mind that could make an SL3-S on the radar. Open to understanding more, but SL3 vs. SL3-S seems pretty one side right now (if there's no performance diff). I reckon battery life might be different, but not sure what else could lean toward the SL3-S.
I hear ya on paper for the S5ii vs. clone. But, I'm thinking the SL3 is calling to me the most right now.
flash wrote:
You said not to mention Sony. I did compare to my A7R5 directly as I have some Sigmas in both mounts. Sony has the edge but it closer than it should be. Neither reaches the level of the A1ii, of course but the SL3 and A7R5 are close relatives, sensor wise so, that it keeps up, mostly, is excellent.
In the current environment there’s zero reason to buy a SL3-S. The S1ii stomps it in every metric. Lovely build quality form the Leica of course. But it’s a S5ii clone.
While the AF improvements are the headline V4 also brings better camera responsiveness. Start up is much faster. Menus are smoother. More touch stuff.
The top left dial is still useless though. No extra functions added. I still don’t like the way profiles are implemented (no option to hide the default profile which is way too easy to set.) General tracking is disabled when subject detect is on. One user is having some card issues but I don’t know if nit’s wide spread. My cameras a fine.
Why is top left dial useless? Maybe I am missing something. I use it for aperture when shooting Leica AF lenses like APO-SL. When shooting Sigma AF or Leica M lenses with aperture rings on the lenses I use the ring. My prfered way to adjust aperture. I think Leica leaves aperture rings off in order to acheive its weather sealing rating.
1bwana1 wrote:
Why is top left dial useless? Maybe I am missing something. I use it for aperture when shooting Leica AF lenses like APO-SL. When shooting Sigma AF or Leica M lenses with aperture rings on the lenses I use the ring. My prfered way to adjust aperture. I think Leica leaves aperture rings off in order to acheive its weather sealing rating.
Because you shouldn’t have to change your grip to use the exposure triangle, ever. It’s in the wrong spot for the three functions it offers.
I use aperture on the rear dial and shutter on the front with ISO on the rear dial (push function). I tried ev, aperture and ISO on the top left dial and found all a PITA. You need to stop shooting to adjust using the dial which completely rules out the exposure triangle for me.
Also the implementation of switching between auto and manual ISO using the dial is daft, The rear dial (push) is much faster. I Av or Tv I have ev comp on the rear dial primary on the front and ISO on the push. No need to remove the camera from your eye for shooting.
Leica could simply add more functions to the top left dial. Why can’t I use it to select a profile? Or drive mode or subject recognition? Or a dozen others.
Leica finally got the play button in the right spot and then promptly added another weirdly restricted dial……
flash wrote:
Because you shouldn’t have to change your grip to use the exposure triangle, ever. It’s in the wrong spot for the three functions it offers.
I use aperture on the rear dial and shutter on the front with ISO on the rear dial (push function). I tried ev, aperture and ISO on the top left dial and found all a PITA. You need to stop shooting to adjust using the dial which completely rules out the exposure triangle for me.
Also the implementation of switching between auto and manual ISO using the dial is daft, The rear dial (push) is much faster. I Av or Tv I have ev comp on the rear dial primary on the front and ISO on the push. No need to remove the camera from your eye for shooting.
Leica could simply add more functions to the top left dial. Why can’t I use it to select a profile? Or drive mode or subject recognition? Or a dozen others.
Leica finally got the play button in the right spot and then promptly added another weirdly restricted dial……
I shoot full time in manual. I primarily use aperture as an artistic choice based on subject being shot. So don't tend to use it as exposure triangle tool. Same goes with Shutter Speed. Sometimes I do use it as exposure control. It's position on the top right dial works fine for this. That leaves ISO as my primary exposure triangle adjustment control. I use highlight weighted metering most of the time. I pretty much always want to use the lowest possible ISO for IQ reasons. I find that Auto ISO usually does this perfectly and instantly. Often I do want to fine tune exposure plus or minus. So, I set the rear scroll wheel to Exposure Compensation. This gives me six stops of fine tuning exposure, 3 stops in either direction of metered exposure. More than enough the vast majority of the time. Since both aperture and shutter speed are in manual on dials, the only attribute Exposure Compensation has to work with is ISO. Essentially the rear scroll wheel is a 6 stop limited ISO control. The push function is set to ISO for when I want full manual control which is usually when doing landscapes on a tripod, fast moving subjects across light and shadow areas, or when shooting strobes.
All this works very well for me and I am able to get consistent exposure in all circumstances.
In this setup the top left dial is a great place to control aperture.
This same setup works perfectly on my M11 as well. This makes shooting either camera the same muscle memory workflow except setting aperture on the lens.
I would rather have EV comp on the rear dial and either aperture, ISO or SS set to a button than the left dial. At least this way I can use the camera without lowering it all the time.
I did compare to my A7R5 directly as I have some Sigmas in both mounts. Sony has the edge but it closer than it should be. Neither reaches the level of the A1ii, of course but the SL3 and A7R5 are close relatives, sensor wise so, that it keeps up, mostly, is excellent.