SlowDriver wrote: RustyBug wrote: old-gregg wrote: 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!
Nothing can be everything ... Leica opts to lean into IQ vs. Speed (number of bands being processed, etc.) for their approach.
With all respect, It is hard to justify a Leica SL over Canon/Nikon/Sony based on image quality alone.
You can justify an SL based on user experience in my opinion, of if you are an M shooter by its support for M-lenses.
Any other justification is according to me really hard.
And on Leica not trying to be a speed demon, that is not what the marketing material for the SL3-P says...
IMO, one should also not justify a camera on technical specs or technical IQ alone. I believe that one makes better images with cameras that one enjoys more. I acknowledge that some do not feel the difference between shooting with a Sony, Nikon, Canon, Pentax or Leica (missed a couple brands 😁.
I agree with that, which is why I have an issue with people heralding this model as something it isn't. If you enjoy the SL line, good for you. Just don't act as if this camera is going to beat anything comparable from the other brands. Is isn't. It's a lesser camera for more money, period. If you still want to buy it, sure, go ahead.
Personally, I think Sony cameras are pretty decent rationally, but I don't enjoy Sony gear so I don't use it and I don't want it. Doesn't mean I'm going to state here that MY camera of choice is somehow unique where it rationally isn't. It's just the camera I prefer.
Jun 27, 2026 at 11:30 AM
Previous versions of johnvanr's message #17062497 « New Leica SL3-P Rumors »
.