Re: Leica SL images and specs. Looks somehow familiar...
sebboh wrote: Lee Saxon wrote: uhoh7 wrote:
Some nice views of the camera by Kristian Dowling:
Lee Saxon wrote:
Funny how much smaller it looks when you hold it correctly :P
sebboh wrote:
still looks huge to me...it\'s a bit wider than a d810 but not as thick. the camera + lens is noticeably larger than the d810 + 24-120 VR and the d810 is pretty much as big as dslrs come without built in vertical grips.
Well, you\'re welcome to your opinion that \"almost as big as the D810\" is too big (which I of course disagree with, especially since it\'s becoming clear that high performance mirrorless lenses aren\'t going to be smaller than DSLR equivalents).
My point was that the first pictures made it look bigger than it actually is.
i didn\'t say too big, i said it was huge. as big as the d810 is big. period. if that\'s what you want it\'s not too big.
for me the q is too big.
i didn\'t find that first pic to be non representative of actual size, but ming\'s does a much better job.
Well, the D810 is about the same width (the Leica SL is 1mm wider), but it is quite a bit taller (19mm and quite a bit wider probably about 25mm, and it weigh 133g more). To you that may seem the same, but fir me the D810 is clearly bigger. The dimension that I hate most in DS:R\'s is the width, but I may be alone in that. Anyway on width both my Sony and the Leica SL are similar and considerably better than my DSLRs. I actually like that the Leica SL is taller than my Sony, but I am glad it isn\'t as tall as the D810. So, on height I really like the size of the SL, but on width it is wider than i need my Sony A7 II is plenty wide enough for me. But we are unlikely to ever get exactly what we want and i would be happy with both the Sony A7 II series and the Leica SL for size and weight.
Oct 24, 2015 at 09:28 PM
Previous versions of Steve Spencer's message #13258235 « Leica SL images and specs. Looks somehow familiar... »
