rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
flash wrote:
So pick your toy and go enjoy using it. Specs are fun but mostly, they aren’t the whole story. This is what reviewers never get, for some bizarre reason.
Reviewers can't tell their audiences this because it won't sustain their channels.
RustyBug wrote:
I realize that nobody else "geeks out" to consider this ... but, for me, that was a SPECIFIC ENGINEERING DECISION that they chose, when they could have chosen something "speedier". Being the "speediest" Leica to date ... and being the speed demon of the other cameras that made different readout decisions ... imo, those are TWO different things. BUT, again, most folks are going to take that into consideration that it was Leica's intentional decision to land it there. The world basically hears "speed" and immediately goes into SoNiCan territory, and then here we go again.
Because I have studied the relationships of the readout build decisions from the spreadsheet ... I get they yin / yang relationship of that decision, and I recognize that this has always been a Leica ethos thing, regarding why they chose to land it ... i.e. marching to THEIR OWN TUNE of where THEY want to land it. Bottom line, Leica makes the basis of their decisions from a different perspective than many would like ... yup, that's Leica. I have zero expectation that they will do what the world clamors for ... instead, they do what they aspire to do. And, if this is where they have "drawn the line" for their quid pro quo of performance vs. IQ ... their call, I'd expect nothing less of Leica, to lean into their historic ethos ... even while making the SL3-P THEIR fastest ... not to be confused with on par with THE fastest.
That's just life with Leica, imo. I don't try and "fight" it anymore ... rather, I seek to understand it (to the degree that I can).
 ...Show more →
The total readout speed is still limited by the number of pixels (and bit depth). Bottom line is that the sensor and/or processor has limitations that won't allow Leica to push a faster readout while still producing files with a certain level of technical quality.
Leica also can't silo themselves off entirely from the rest of the market. They're still affected by what other brands do and don't do, though they are more insulated than other brands that compete against each other based on specs and price points. Hence their success with the M system; no one else does it. Not that no one else could, they just don't. And there are some Leica users who apparently would very much welcome more speed to make the SL system their 'one' system, as Gordon just wrote.
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 ... "
Yup, Leica isn't ...
OTOH, Leica is ...
...Show more →
Agreed, generally, as someone whose Leica stable is the M9 and M240. Neither are speed demons, but both are fast in that when I press the shutter release, there are no processes that delay the shutter release timing (advanced metering, like what is in the M11, is turned off on the M240). It's fast where I want it to be fast. And I use these M cameras for their strengths, niche as those may be, despite their many quirks and general 'on paper' weaknesses.
Yet the current M system could benefit from a faster sensor and processor package. It would enable more broadly usable e-shutter that some here want (like me), not because it would make the camera into a speed demon, but because it would make the M an ultimate stealth system - small, discreet, totally silent and broadly usable in e-shutter.
I think Leica makes great gear despite the outsized focus on luxury placement, special editions, etc. Those pay the bills. But I also think there is significant room for photographer 'quality of life' improvements through more powerful hardware/software enjoyed by other systems. But not because I want Leica to be 'on paper' competitive with those systems. I just want an even better Leica experience. (Yes, 'better' is very subjective!)
|
