Based on the DPReview hands-on review, it generally sounds like a Canon R6 level camera with more resolution. That's generally not a bad thing as the 6 series is a versatile camera. It's just not quite the all-rounder powerhouse of the R5II (or Nikon Z8), as also noted in their review.
The image sample gallery that accompanies the review unfortunately has only a few photos with the new 50 Lux, and of those, none were shot wide open, and only one at f/2. But the photo of the model in the car is very sharp at f/5.6.
What absolutely did not impress me was how the 100-400 performed for the car racing photos. It's just not sharp, even in static images where AF should not be a factor, compared to the 24-90 photos. Maybe it was a bad copy of the lens?
tzhang4284 wrote:
The filter stack on the Leica is thinner. I think Reid reviews did a test a few years ago and showed that both Leica sl apo and even Panasonic lenses perform better on Leica sl cameras vs panasonic cameras.
As for Sigma lenses, I currently own the 500mm f5.6 now and I had the leica 28-70mm before returning it for the 24-90mm. I was not as blown away by these as the lenses I mentioned above. I've also tried quite a few Sigma ART lenses on Sony - they were good but not anything like the SL APOs in terms of sharpness and overall rendering.
Also the idea that M lenses hold their value is a myth. That $5k msrp lens resales for $3500 used. The only time items keep their value is during initial scarcity - eg leica 35mm noctilux....Show more →
Re: hold their value – I mean way down the road not after 6 months for a change of mind sale. Leica is always raising their prices, so eventually you do ok. The risk with SL gear is it goes the way of the S system. I guess the main reason I'd prefer to "invest" (not the right word) in M over SL lenses is I can use the M lenses if I get another M body.
You're right about the filter stack. I suppose if you want to squeeze every last bit out of the SL APOs that makes sense. I've found it even helps with older vintage lenses. Both my Minolta SR and Zeiss C/Y lenses seem sharper on my SL3 than they do on my GFX in 35mm crop mode. Haven't tested that, though.
Interesting your take on the Sigmas. My experience has been with their 28-45 f/1.8, 35 f/2 Contemporary, 70-200 f/2.8, and 60-600. They performed about as well as my top Canon RF glass did on the R5: the 28-45 performed like the RF 28-70 f/2 (without the awful corner vignetting of the RF) and the 70-200 like the same on Canon (Canon has a bit nicer color, IMO). The Sigma 60-600 though was quite a step above the already great RF 100-500. I guess it should be since it about requires a monopod to use for more than a few shots in a row.
Fred Miranda wrote:
This is a great compilation. It's hard to completely dismiss the possibility of some level of corroboration. It doesn't prove anything, but when so many reviewers keep reaching the same glowing conclusions, it's fair to wonder how much access, perks, and industry relationships influence the narrative.
Oh, they have to walk a fine line between satisfying the manufacturer to be able to get access in the future and telling us in a somewhat balanced way how good something is.
They will never say something is bad, unless it’s from a small manufacturer they don’t really care about. If something is bad, they most likely will not review it for publication.
It has always been that way in any trade publication that depends both on access to gear, media contacts and also depends on advertising from the same companies. I used to be a reporter for a major international financial news service before I switched to trade press. The lack of critical questions in the trade press is astounding and always has been.
OwlsEyes wrote:
Gordon, I so respect your passion for your Leica SL gear, and I sincerely wish it would live up to the hype, but after giving it a go for a year, I felt as if it did not come close to the Nikon gear I've been using for years. I have no doubt the SL APO lenses are amazing, but they don't reveal any magic in 20x30 (and larger prints) that is not visible in the Nikon files. Like you, I sell prints for home and publications. My best selling picture is a lowly 15MP crop from a D500, and this speaks to the content of the image instead of the maximum possible quality extractable from a camera. So while the new gear expands our opportunities with AF improvements, nothing beats a quality image that tugs at the heart and eyes. I looked at the introduction of the SL3-P as a possible return to the Leica SL system with the Sigma 300-600 as my primary wildlife lens, but the absence of a partially stacked sensor was a real disappointment.
As for your opinion about the merits of Sony vs Nikon, I think just about everything negative you claimed about the Nikon bodies explains my aversion to the Sony system. While both companies make amazing lenses, it is not the lenses that keep me away from Sony, it is the tiny bodies that feel cheap in the hand, sharp corners on the top plate, fiddley buttons that are all in the wrong place, the backwards mounting system, the uncomfortable ergonomics that don't fit my hands, and the requirement to attach a large vertical grip in order to have a day's shooting without battery changes
To each his/her own... Were I forced to shift to a different system to support my nature photography business, I'd choose Canon over Sony any day of the week because their ergonomic work for these hands...
The day Leica offers a specialized high performance FF sports and wildlife "dedicated" camera and lens system at the level of the competition e.g., Sony, Canon, Nikon is the day I'll eat all my...vegetables.
Yes. Many of us with some experience can and do capture high performance sports and BIF with just about any camera, even a Leica rangefinder or the CDAF only Leica SL2 with the right technique as I have proven to myself with my own rangefinders and SL cameras--just like many did for decades before AF and modern super sonic AI-juiced AF technology and stacked sensors and high speed processors etc. And yes, Leica pushes Leica's own( not the market's) envelope with regards to addressing the fast action photography category with the new SL3-P and I am positive some maybe many, will take some great fast action photos with the SL3-P. Just as Leica intends.
As someone who very much enjoys the rangefinder and the SL system, my Sony A1 remains my specialized, high performance kit that also takes on most all other forms of photography with equally excellent results.
Personally, I have high hopes for the new SL3-P. One more camera model added to the SL system with the hopes that its success will continue to progress one of my personal favorite camera systems.
rscheffler wrote:
Based on the DPReview hands-on review, it generally sounds like a Canon R6 level camera with more resolution. That's generally not a bad thing as the 6 series is a versatile camera. It's just not quite the all-rounder powerhouse of the R5II (or Nikon Z8), as also noted in their review.
The image sample gallery that accompanies the review unfortunately has only a few photos with the new 50 Lux, and of those, none were shot wide open, and only one at f/2. But the photo of the model in the car is very sharp at f/5.6.
What absolutely did not impress me was how the 100-400 performed for the car racing photos. It's just not sharp, even in static images where AF should not be a factor, compared to the 24-90 photos. Maybe it was a bad copy of the lens?...Show more →
I think I read in the comments that Richard said something along the lines of him not paying as much attention to shutter speed than he should have. FWIW, there has also been an ongoing discussion for a few years now about some of the longer Lmount lenses and shutter shock occurring on the SL cameras and there are those disappointed the SL3-P does not have EFCS.
^ That wouldn't fully explain the image quality deficits with the 100-400. First of all, there are shots in the pits/paddock area that are basically static and are not what I would consider acceptably sharp yet images with the 24-90 are. Thinking of some of the on-track shots - cars coming straight at the camera, a shutter speed of 1/1000 is sufficient but again nothing in the image is critically sharp. Here the other explanation could be heat coming off the track, which certainly will be somewhat of a factor. Having shot motorsports myself, I'm aware of the challenges and while his panning technique needs practice, I didn't see any obvious technique faults in the more conventional head-on car shots.
As for the camera itself: I think it reveals that Leica/Panasonic just need access to a competitive stacked sensor and processor package to potentially release a camera that can perform at the level of the R5II, Z8/Z9, a1/a9, etc.
Sony provided Nikon with a stacked sensor that rivals the one in the a1 series. I'm curious what, if anything, is preventing similar access for Leica/Panasonic? Based on previous discussions here, it sounds like Leica wants to source their own sensors in the future. Maybe access roadblocks are a reason?
rscheffler wrote:
If anything, the SL3-P shows that Leica/Panasonic just need access to a competitive stacked sensor and processor package to potentially release a camera that can perform at the level of the R5II, Z8/Z9, a1/a9, etc.
Sony provided Nikon with a stacked sensor that rivals the one in the a1 series. I'm curious what, if anything, is preventing similar access for Leica/Panasonic? Based on previous discussions here, it sounds like Leica wants to source their own sensors in the future. Maybe access roadblocks are a reason?
I'm guessing Leica/Panasonic still lack the in-house technical resources to design and work with some of the latest technology and probably lack the camera production volume to get their hands on the latest greatest sensors at a reasonable cost for Leica/Panasonic's business model.
Interestingly, Gerald Undone ( the recently retired YT camera reviewer) stated in his SL3-P video that he did some testing and consulting for Leica. Hmmmm
rscheffler wrote:
^ That wouldn't fully explain the image quality deficits with the 100-400. First of all, there are shots in the pits/paddock area that are basically static and are not what I would consider acceptably sharp yet images with the 24-90 are. Thinking of some of the on-track shots - cars coming straight at the camera, a shutter speed of 1/1000 is sufficient but again nothing in the image is critically sharp. Here the other explanation could be heat coming off the track, which certainly will be somewhat of a factor. Having shot motorsports myself, I'm aware of the challenges and while his panning technique needs practice, I didn't see any obvious technique faults in the more conventional head-on car shots.
As for the camera itself: I think it reveals that Leica/Panasonic just need access to a competitive stacked sensor and processor package to potentially release a camera that can perform at the level of the R5II, Z8/Z9, a1/a9, etc.
Sony provided Nikon with a stacked sensor that rivals the one in the a1 series. I'm curious what, if anything, is preventing similar access for Leica/Panasonic? Based on previous discussions here, it sounds like Leica wants to source their own sensors in the future. Maybe access roadblocks are a reason?...Show more →
To your edited comment. This is not the first time I've seen some questionable IQ images posted made with some non Leica APO L-Mount zooms for some time now both before and after the SL3-P. Could be due to many reasons of course to include the lens itself, I don't know. But as mentioned there have been numerous complaints about shutter shock with some of these zooms.
A stacked sensor SL would be hard for me to ignore. I think it’d pull a surprising number of enthusiasts away from Sony, Canon, and Nikon too. Probably Not working pros, but the people already buying flagship bodies because they love photography. That’s Leica’s customer. IMO.
Pros buy tools. Enthusiasts buy experiences.
I still want to get my A1 II before that happens. The SL system feels like my retirement camera. Few more years.
johnvanr wrote:
Oh, they have to walk a fine line between satisfying the manufacturer to be able to get access in the future and telling us in a somewhat balanced way how good something is.
They will never say something is bad, unless it’s from a small manufacturer they don’t really care about. If something is bad, they most likely will not review it for publication.
It has always been that way in any trade publication that depends both on access to gear, media contacts and also depends on advertising from the same companies. I used to be a reporter for a major international financial news service before I switched to trade press. The lack of critical questions in the trade press is astounding and always has been....Show more →
I love the honesty of this review. Right from the opening lines he says, "Pixii didn't send us this camera for review, nor did we buy it because it's too expensive…" Then he goes on to give a genuinely balanced review, pointing out both the strengths and the weaknesses, even flat-out saying, "I did not like it". Without perks or other incentives, you tend to get more honest, journalistic reviews. That's refreshing.
Surfnsun wrote:
A stacked sensor SL would be hard for me to ignore. I think it’d pull a surprising number of enthusiasts away from Sony, Canon, and Nikon too. Probably Not working pros, but the people already buying flagship bodies because they love photography. That’s Leica’s customer. IMO.
Pros buy tools. Enthusiasts buy experiences.
I still want to get my A1 II before that happens. The SL system feels like my retirement camera. Few more years.
Now that I see what one firmware update did to significantly improve the SL3's AF and tracking capabilities and now with the SL3-P, I am encouraged there could be some sort of stacked sensor in Leica's future. With the announcement that Leica is working with a new company to design and manufacture Leica specialized sensor(s) I am definitely intrigued with what could/might be.
LBJ2 wrote:
Now that I see what one firmware update did to significantly improve the SL3's AF and tracking capabilities and now with the SL3-P, I am encouraged there could be some sort of stacked sensor in Leica's future. With the announcement that Leica is working with a new company to design and manufacture Leica specialized sensor(s) I am definitely intrigued with what could/might be.
Manufacturers don't like to reveal who makes their sensors, for whatever reason. For example, Panasonic has used Sony sensors in the past, but they haven't disclosed who manufactures the 43MP full-frame BSI CMOS sensor.. Most people believe it's still Sony, but as far as I know, that hasn't been confirmed.
LBJ2 wrote:
Now that I see what one firmware update did to significantly improve the SL3's AF and tracking capabilities and now with the SL3-P, I am encouraged there could be some sort of stacked sensor in Leica's future. With the announcement that Leica is working with a new company to design and manufacture Leica specialized sensor(s) I am definitely intrigued with what could/might be.
The in house designed Leica sensor will be super fast and high resolution. It is the prime focus of the development effort.
