SlowDriver wrote:
It is kind of interesting that relatively few people seem to opt for the Leica SL.
In my mind the Leica SL was explicitly designed to complement the M, to work well with M-lenses and to keep Leica M customers in the Leica ecosystem.
The camera is just too large to match the purpose of M lenses. I recently tried the SL3, which is smaller than previous models, but it’s still a clunker. A Q-style camera would make more sense, but I doubt they’ll go there. Or putting decent MF aids in the next EV version (at $12,000?). Fact of the matter is that they’re losing this segment to cheap well-designed adapters.
I feared this before buying, but the core of the SL2-S body ignoring EVF and grip is only marginally larger than the M10. So far, my M lenses feel nearly at home on the SL. I would love a slight reduction in weight, but the body feels so much better in hand than my Sony A7R series cameras that I don't really mind.
andrew perkins wrote:
I feared this before buying, but the core of the SL2-S body ignoring EVF and grip is only marginally larger than the M10. So far, my M lenses feel nearly at home on the SL. I would love a slight reduction in weight, but the body feels so much better in hand than my Sony A7R series cameras that I don't really mind.
Sony ranks lowest on my list of ergonomics, so I can easily accept that.
johnvanr wrote:
The camera is just too large to match the purpose of M lenses. I recently tried the SL3, which is smaller than previous models, but it’s still a clunker. A Q-style camera would make more sense, but I doubt they’ll go there. Or putting decent MF aids in the next EV version (at $12,000?). Fact of the matter is that they’re losing this segment to cheap well-designed adapters.
The SL body is better fit for R lenses than it is for M lenses in my opinion. And it might take declining Q sales to make a smaller and lighter L-mount body possible, so probably another 10 years... The lack of focus confirmation is also a bit of a head-scratcher for a company that values manual focus so much. My Hasselblad has it, and my 7 year old 2019 Canon EOS R has excellent focus confirmation, but no Leica camera has it... I kind of understand for the M, as it has no PDAF, but for the Leica SL there really is no excuse for not having it, certainly not for the native L-mount lenses.
rscheffler wrote:
The size and weight of the SL bodies also seems to deter some. That design decision by Leica was likely to better pair the bodies with the size and weight of the original SL zooms - the 24-90 and 90-280, plus the very large 50 Lux. In my own experience with Canon's R cameras, the quite small R5II for example, without a grip or even a third party baseplate that makes the camera ~1cm taller, is rather uncomfortable to use with their chunky and heavy 28-70/2.
In the meanwhile the very large 50 Lux has already been discontinued, so that leaves two very large lenses... I shoot the smaller Canon EOS R with the 28-70/2. That is an even smaller body. Perhaps not ideal but I don't care too much. I prefer a smaller body to a larger body which I only occasionally need.
RoamingScott wrote:
It took them until FW 4.0 to make the camera decently usable, it's not a surprise to me at all. It's a huge camera with few upsides compared to the competition.
True. I bought and promptly sold my first SL3 at launch and didn't repurchase one again until 4.0. It's a decent camera now, though not at all a good value.
I was ok with the SL2-S size, so the SL3 being smaller doesn't feel too large to me.
I like how M lenses handle and focus on the SL3, but M lenses aren't the only lenses I need to be able to adapt. I don't want a camera body that's too small for some of the larger lenses I have. SLR era cameras had a huge mirror box, so the lenses have to sit pretty far forward when adapted. Without a chunky body and large grip, heavier lenses and lenses with more weight out toward the front element can be tiresome to use for too long adapted to a small camera.
In the end, and SL3 is not a logical choice given the price, but it is satisfying to use to me. The saying a fool and their money are soon parted probably applies to me here, but YOLO That said, a used SL2-S isn't that extravagant.
Like others have said, it does make a lot of sense to just adapt M lenses to the system you already have and make it work. IQ in some cases may suffer due to the thicker sensor stack, but most of us are shooting M lenses wide open for fun, not stopped down for serious landscape.
SlowDriver wrote:
I have 3 R6.2 bodies, probably my favorite film camera. I would love an R EV1 . Obviously never going to happen...
Who knows? Nikon's retro cameras have been pretty popular and Leica is never shy about playing on their brand nostalgia, though admittedly I have not come across a ton of R system nostalgia. As you've proven, it's there but likely not close to that of the M system. Panasonic just needs to release an EVF camera without a grip bulge where the battery would otherwise go and Leica could probably reskin it as a throwback R. Personally I would not object to such a camera in the form of the R8/R9, which strictly based on looks is my favorite R.
SlowDriver wrote:
In the meanwhile the very large 50 Lux has already been discontinued, so that leaves two very large lenses... I shoot the smaller Canon EOS R with the 28-70/2. That is an even smaller body. Perhaps not ideal but I don't care too much. I prefer a smaller body to a larger body which I only occasionally need.
I'm fine with a smaller body as long as I can add grip extension when needed with lenses like the 28-70/2.
highdesertmesa wrote:
True. I bought and promptly sold my first SL3 at launch and didn't repurchase one again until 4.0. It's a decent camera now, though not at all a good value.
I was ok with the SL2-S size, so the SL3 being smaller doesn't feel too large to me.
I like how M lenses handle and focus on the SL3, but M lenses aren't the only lenses I need to be able to adapt. I don't want a camera body that's too small for some of the larger lenses I have. SLR era cameras had a huge mirror box, so the lenses have to sit pretty far forward when adapted. Without a chunky body and large grip, heavier lenses and lenses with more weight out toward the front element can be tiresome to use for too long adapted to a small camera.
In the end, and SL3 is not a logical choice given the price, but it is satisfying to use to me. The saying a fool and their money are soon parted probably applies to me here, but YOLO That said, a used SL2-S isn't that extravagant.
Like others have said, it does make a lot of sense to just adapt M lenses to the system you already have and make it work. IQ in some cases may suffer due to the thicker sensor stack, but most of us are shooting M lenses wide open for fun, not stopped down for serious landscape....Show more →
That's a beautiful SL3 Reporter. It goes well with that Rokkor 58/1.2--a very special lens. At least no one will accuse you of using vintage SLR lenses to save money. Speaking of vintage lenses, there are some SLR lenses that also suffer from induced field curvature on cameras with thick sensor stacks, so it's not just the M lenses that have a performance benefit on the Leica bodies.
Leicas may be expensive in a relative sense, but the difference in price between an SL3 and, say, a used Canon Rebel is not all that much in absolute terms. $7500 doesn't buy much these days. As you say, you only live once. You might as well spend a few bucks to get a camera that you enjoy. I can think of far more extravagant purchases.
dan98 wrote:
That's a beautiful SL3 Reporter. It goes well with that Rokkor 58/1.2--a very special lens. At least no one will accuse you of using vintage SLR lenses to save money. Speaking of vintage lenses, there are some SLR lenses that also suffer from induced field curvature on cameras with thick sensor stacks, so it's not just the M lenses that have a performance benefit on the Leica bodies.
Leicas may be expensive in a relative sense, but the absolute difference in price between an SL3 and, say, a used Canon Rebel is not all that much in absolute terms. $7500 doesn't buy much these days. As you say, you only live once. You might as well spend a few bucks to get a camera that you enjoy. I can think of far more extravagant purchases. ...Show more →
The Rokkor 58/1.2 I have was mint with the matching serial number original box when I bought it. They're not super expensive, but they're hard to find in collector condition. And yeah, I wondered about the IQ being better on the SL sensors because it's a lot sharper wide open on my SL3 that it was on past cameras I've had like the GFX in 35mm crop mode, the Zf, R5, and the S5IIX.
"I'm fine with a smaller body as long as I can add grip extension when needed with lenses like the 28-70/2"
Maybe I missed it but with many suggesting the SL series of bodies may be best in terms of optical performance with M lenses (especially with wide angle M mt lenses) but feel the SL series bodies a bit too large...what about the rumored upcoming new Leica SL3-P body which is supposed to be smaller in physical size. This may address at least the size of an SL body with use of M lenses.
DandA123 wrote:
"I'm fine with a smaller body as long as I can add grip extension when needed with lenses like the 28-70/2"
Maybe I missed it but with many suggesting the SL series of bodies may be best in terms of optical performance with M lenses (especially with wide angle M mt lenses) but feel the SL series bodies a bit too large...what about the rumored upcoming new Leica SL3-P body which is supposed to be smaller in physical size. This may address at least the size of an SL body with use of M lenses.
I thought the P was supposed to be the same body as the SL3/SL3-S.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I have used the Z7 with a lot of manual focus lenses and I can confirm that Brad is right. You can set the focus box anywhere you want and it turns green when the camera judges that what is behind the focus box is in focus. In my experience the Z7 was good at recognizing focus using this system, but keep in mind the green box focus system is based on the Z7 AF system which was not as fully developed as Nikon's AF system in later models. I find the focus aid to miss not a lot but a noticeable amount of time with the Z7. I find the focus aid with my Canon R5 II to be clearly more accurate, but with the Z7 the green box system was still very useful....Show more →
True, but it's still highly usable and that sensor is such a delight. I see good, gently used copies going for around a grand and it feels like a no-brainer recommendation.
If you want to improve the confirmation accuracy and keep that wonderful sensor, the Z7II is quite the bargain. Before my guy's father passed, he gave me the Otus 55 I'd traded him for a couple of his R lenses, and he attached it to his Z7II and FTZII, so I took those out for a bit to test it out. It was so nicely spot on in both indoor and outdoor conditions, I tried it with my AF-D 80-200/2.8 and AF-S 300/4D (made manual by the broken AF motor) and found them to be equally solid. It only struggled when I put the 1.7x on the 300, and really only hitting mid-to-infinity. Mid-to-close it was highly accurate, but not perfect. A new one of those is only $200 more than the 5II and $250 less than the ZF.
rscheffler wrote:
Who knows? Nikon's retro cameras have been pretty popular and Leica is never shy about playing on their brand nostalgia, though admittedly I have not come across a ton of R system nostalgia. As you've proven, it's there but likely not close to that of the M system. Panasonic just needs to release an EVF camera without a grip bulge where the battery would otherwise go and Leica could probably reskin it as a throwback R. Personally I would not object to such a camera in the form of the R8/R9, which strictly based on looks is my favorite R.
I was thinking along the lines of a universal EVF body available in multiple mounts.
Kind of like Sigma and its lenses, Sigma allows you to swap the mount of a lens as a service, but then for bodies.
I read all 20 pages about the SL3-P on LUF yesterday. Lots of drama, one guy seems to have been banned from the platform, and I still have no clue what the camera is about...
My expectation is that it will be slightly smaller/lighter but not by much.
The lack of focus confirmation is also a bit of a head-scratcher for a company that values manual focus so much. My Hasselblad has it, and my 7 year old 2019 Canon EOS R has excellent focus confirmation, but no Leica camera has it... I kind of understand for the M, as it has no PDAF, but for the Leica SL there really is no excuse for not having it, certainly not for the native L-mount lenses.
That said, a used SL2-S isn't that extravagant.