johnvanr wrote:
They are unique niche products, with little or no real competition. They are the benchmarks for their segment and thus have real staying power, esp. since that segment is still too small for the larger camera manufacturers to care about. So, it's actually more a niche segment in which they are king. A pond no one else wants to swim in.
The SL, on the other hand, is a niche within an overall very large segment and it will never be more than a niche because it's not as good as the competition and it's more expensive. Any other brand but Leica would not be able to play in that field in that way and Leica can only do it because they are believed to be a premium brand, whether that's based on reality or on the fact that Cartier-Bresson and his buddies used Leica eons ago.
And the fact that Leica can't pull off the same trick in the S medium format line is that there the competition includes Hasselblad, which has the same historical reputation as Leica and thus Leica can't pull off its 'we're special' trick without having to match Hasselblad prices. And those are most likely only possible because DJI owns Hasselblad and is an aggressive company that actually wants to build marketshare and gladly does that by giving away $10,000 camera kits to any YouTuber with more followers than his friends and family (I'm kidding, but you get the gist...)....Show more →
I hear what you are saying, and I don't disagree with what you are saying, but I still believe that if Leica stuck to its M principals of "high image quality in a small package" it would be able to create a profitable niche market for itself. As long as it continues to see the SL purely as a complement to the M, i.e. to do what the M cannot do, as is the case right now, and explicitly avoiding the areas in which the M is strong like size/weight, the SL will continue to struggle in my opinion.
Medium format is a completely different thing... Leica actually created the "portable" medium format market with the Leica S2. The Leica S2 was a very innovative product when it was released. But (and very similar to the APS-C product lines) bad product management, no investment, no innovation, etc decided differently. When Leica discontinued the S system in 2023 it really hadn't invested in the S system for almost a decade. The last S lens was released in 2014... In the meanwhile Hasselblad and Fuji released a mirrorless solution, both companies (unlike Leica) listen to their customers, make the right improvements, are more innovative than Leica and additionally work at a faster pace. Both companies have excellent products. Leica simply would have been able to compete. It is actually surprising that they kept up appearances for so long...
Some things just can’t be justified. I call it passion. Cheesy, but I’ll own it.
Some people drive a Prius. I drive something that’ll hit 60 in about 3 seconds. Both get us to Costco. One just gets there with a slightly bigger grin.
Not to dunk on Leica, I had an M11 and now an M EV1. I tried an SL2 a while ago but I just can't get enthused about the SL3-P. I see these videos with "wow, faster focus!", "Wow 20ms readout speed" and have to think have these people only used M cameras?
My Nikon Z8 has 3ms readout speed and I'm pretty sure would demolish the SL3-P in any contest. It's fine to talk about a lens advantage but the Nikkor Z lenses are pretty phenomenal for the high end lenses (and everything is still half the cost of any Leica equivalent or less). I was intrigued by the rumors but I see zero to entice anyone with a high end Nikon, Canon, Sony here. And that is Leica's problem, the SL has huge competition unlike the M.
Hey now, there is one really hilarious bullet point in all of this, and it’s that the 3-P has internal anamorphic desqueeze before the Nikon ZR.
bcaslis wrote:
Not to dunk on Leica, I had an M11 and now an M EV1. I tried an SL2 a while ago but I just can't get enthused about the SL3-P. I see these videos with "wow, faster focus!", "Wow 20ms readout speed" and have to think have these people only used M cameras?
My Nikon Z8 has 3ms readout speed and I'm pretty sure would demolish the SL3-P in any contest. It's fine to talk about a lens advantage but the Nikkor Z lenses are pretty phenomenal for the high end lenses (and everything is still half the cost of any Leica equivalent or less). I was intrigued by the rumors but I see zero to entice anyone with a high end Nikon, Canon, Sony here. And that is Leica's problem, the SL has huge competition unlike the M. ...Show more →
RoamingScott wrote:
Hey now, there is one really hilarious bullet point in all of this, and it’s that the 3-P has internal anamorphic desqueeze before the Nikon ZR.
All the SL3 cameras do now. Only SL3-P and SL3-S have open gate to make full use of it, though. SL3 does have 4:3 APS-C.
Panasonic is rumored to be adding desqueeze for anamorphic stills, too
bcaslis wrote:
Not to dunk on Leica, I had an M11 and now an M EV1. I tried an SL2 a while ago but I just can't get enthused about the SL3-P. I see these videos with "wow, faster focus!", "Wow 20ms readout speed" and have to think have these people only used M cameras?
My Nikon Z8 has 3ms readout speed and I'm pretty sure would demolish the SL3-P in any contest. It's fine to talk about a lens advantage but the Nikkor Z lenses are pretty phenomenal for the high end lenses (and everything is still half the cost of any Leica equivalent or less). I was intrigued by the rumors but I see zero to entice anyone with a high end Nikon, Canon, Sony here. And that is Leica's problem, the SL has huge competition unlike the M. ...Show more →
The enthusiasm is because Leica is finally and somewhat catching up. Even us dumb M shooters know it's not fast compared to the big three.
highdesertmesa wrote:
The enthusiasm is because Leica is finally and somewhat catching up. Even us dumb M shooters know it's not fast compared to the big three.
My irritation wasn't with people in forums but the annoyingly breathless YouTube reviewers.
bcaslis wrote:
Not to dunk on Leica, I had an M11 and now an M EV1. I tried an SL2 a while ago but I just can't get enthused about the SL3-P. I see these videos with "wow, faster focus!", "Wow 20ms readout speed" and have to think have these people only used M cameras?
My Nikon Z8 has 3ms readout speed and I'm pretty sure would demolish the SL3-P in any contest. It's fine to talk about a lens advantage but the Nikkor Z lenses are pretty phenomenal for the high end lenses (and everything is still half the cost of any Leica equivalent or less). I was intrigued by the rumors but I see zero to entice anyone with a high end Nikon, Canon, Sony here. And that is Leica's problem, the SL has huge competition unlike the M. ...Show more →
You should understand why some choose Leica when the specs don't seem competitive. It is a more holistic system preference. After all, you choose Nikon which lags well behind on specifications for what must be similar reasons.
bcaslis wrote:
Not to dunk on Leica, I had an M11 and now an M EV1. I tried an SL2 a while ago but I just can't get enthused about the SL3-P. I see these videos with "wow, faster focus!", "Wow 20ms readout speed" and have to think have these people only used M cameras?
My Nikon Z8 has 3ms readout speed and I'm pretty sure would demolish the SL3-P in any contest. It's fine to talk about a lens advantage but the Nikkor Z lenses are pretty phenomenal for the high end lenses (and everything is still half the cost of any Leica equivalent or less). I was intrigued by the rumors but I see zero to entice anyone with a high end Nikon, Canon, Sony here. And that is Leica's problem, the SL has huge competition unlike the M. ...Show more →
I believe the Z8 is more like 3.73ms. Details, details.
At some point the spec differences no longer make a relevant difference to the end result. This of course is different for each of us. Whenever I get to this point with gear options, then the overall user experience takes priority. In this respect I'd rank Leica more highly than a lot of other camera options. That said, as someone who prioritizes speed, they aren't yet at the stage where I'd consider them as my primary mirrorless system.
rscheffler wrote:
At some point the spec differences no longer make a relevant difference to the end result.
Agreed. But we haven't reached that point though. The fundamentals are still missing. I pick up a lens made by Nikon or Leica. I try to locate an aperture ring. No aperture ring?! I throw it on the ground! Do they think I'm a joke? I ain't gonna be part of their system!
old-gregg wrote:
Agreed. But we haven't reached that point though. The fundamentals are still missing. I pick up a lens made by Nikon or Leica. I try to locate an aperture ring. No aperture ring?! I throw it on the ground! Do they think I'm a joke? I ain't gonna be part of their system!
Shoot what ya like ... it's that simple.
I also have a preference for an aperture ring. So, I load up an M Mount lens on the SL ... or use a Siggy variant ... in my case, that's presently, either the 24-70/2.8 or the 500/5.6. As to SL Leica glass, the 75/2 is on my radar, but I've not gone there yet.
The drama of whether or not someone is going to be customer / consumer of brand X vs. Y ... it always returns every time Leica releases a product. Old news, boring ... yawn.
Folks like shooting a speed demon, then shoot a speed demon. Simple. Leica isn't trying to be a speed demon, and those who are thinking that they SHOULD be ... you're just setting yourself up for dissatisfaction. It's like me saying that a Cadillac doesn't handle the corners as good as a Ferrari or Porsche. Cadillac isn't trying to be Ferrari or Porsche. Leica isn't trying to be SoNiCan .. they are trying to be Leica. Whether or not someone wants SoNiCan for their speed demon, not a concern for Leica.
Yet, the non-Leica universe is always trying to perceive Leica's expectations from a non-Leica perspective. And, it generally results in dis-satisfaction for what it ISN'T ... rather than folks coming to understand what it IS. Some folks enjoy Leica for what it IS, rather than what it ISN'T.
Nothing can be everything ... Leica opts to lean into IQ vs. Speed (number of bands being processed, etc.) for their approach. That's their jam, their vibe, their ethos. When folks come to terms with that understanding of where they "draw the line", the expectation that they'll produce (ummm, look at the number of variants Sony / Nikon have ranging from IQ > Speed) the same things that others do, the less angst folks will have regarding what Leica has chosen. That said, folks will still gyrate through the same brand gymnastics of "Leica isn't ... "
I wonder if the SL3-P fixes the EVF issue when using MF lenses? When I went from the SL2 to the SL3 and adapted M lenses I couldn't believe how much worse the experience was during magnification. I sold the camera. I asked Gajan Balan to tell Leica it needed to addressed. He agreed. I haven't seen any reviewer mention it on the SL3-P but it's still early. I'll bet a guy like Cam Mackey will notice it quickly and call it out. I see he purchased one.
RustyBug wrote:
Shoot what ya like ... it's that simple.
I also have a preference for an aperture ring. So, I load up an M Mount lens on the SL ... or use a Siggy variant ... in my case, that's presently, either the 24-70/2.8 or the 500/5.6. As to SL Leica glass, the 75/2 is on my radar, but I've not gone there yet.
The drama of whether or not someone is going to be customer / consumer of brand X vs. Y ... it always returns every time Leica releases a product. Old news, boring ... yawn.
Folks like shooting a speed demon, then shoot a speed demon. Simple. Leica isn't trying to be a speed demon, and those who are thinking that they SHOULD be ... you're just setting yourself up for dissatisfaction. It's like me saying that a Cadillac doesn't handle the corners as good as a Ferrari or Porsche. Cadillac isn't trying to be Ferrari or Porsche. Leica isn't trying to be SoNiCan .. they are trying to be Leica. Whether or not someone wants SoNiCan for their speed demon, not a concern for Leica.
Yet, the non-Leica universe is always trying to perceive Leica's expectations from a non-Leica perspective. And, it generally results in dis-satisfaction for what it ISN'T ... rather than folks coming to understand what it IS. Some folks enjoy Leica for what it IS, rather than what it ISN'T.
Nothing can be everything ... Leica opts to lean into IQ vs. Speed (number of bands being processed, etc.) for their approach. That's their jam, their vibe, their ethos. When folks come to terms with that understanding of where they "draw the line", the expectation that they'll produce (ummm, look at the number of variants Sony / Nikon have ranging from IQ > Speed) the same things that others do, the less angst folks will have regarding what Leica has chosen. That said, folks will still gyrate through the same brand gymnastics of "Leica isn't ... "
Actually, while I agree with you overall on camera choices, I think with this release Leica is saying they’ve produced a speed demon…and people are saying it isn’t.
johnvanr wrote:
Actually, while I agree with you overall on camera choices, I think with this release Leica is saying they’ve produced a speed demon…and people are saying it isn’t.
I think a big step for "Leica". Not the market, but for Leica. The new SL3-P is reportedly "Leica's" best-ever performance camera and from what I've read so far...I think that is how Leica is marketing the SL3-P as their best camera in the performance category.
Different tools for different tasks. It’s the same in the fire service. Young firefighters often try to do a job with the wrong tool, and it usually ends up harder than it needs to be.
Leica is a successful company. They’re offering a breadcrumb to customers who want one camera that does everything. I get why. They did their research. I’m just not that customer.
For me, Leica means the M.
I use a Sony A9 for sports and action. Then I have my M setup for everything else. My choice.
It took me decades to arrive at that understanding. Once I stopped expecting one camera to excel at everything, I became a much happier photographer.
