Leica SL , 24MP FF Mirrorless Camera

twist said:
I do, I also understand how they are taking the the P.
Click to expand...

If they are spending $12k on a camera and lens with the other lenses costing multiple thousands probably, then pointing out the accessories cost $500 isn't a big deal is it?
 
Beaten to within an inch of its life with the ugly stick, well they ain't getting my twelve grand for that, particularly dislike the red blob on the front, what's that all about?
 
Laudrup said:
If they are spending $12k on a camera and lens with the other lenses costing multiple thousands probably, then pointing out the accessories cost $500 isn't a big deal is it?
Click to expand...

So youre agreeing they are overcharging?
 
Laudrup said:
It seems like you are projecting your own insecurities and jealousy onto others. I don't think any Leica owner cares what you shoot.
Click to expand...

Thanks but I'm neither insecure nor jealous. I'm simply pointing out that a £500 mirrorless system can actually deliver 11fps with constant AF/exposure (yes, I know it's crop and not FF) against a $12500 system that potentially can't. I understand you are defending your brand but is there not a time when a bit of realism comes into play even for Leica users?
 
Last edited:
I have never really took any notice of anything Leica as way out of my price range, but to be honest this is one ugly machine!

Although I am not sure how any camera can be worth $12500?!
 
There's an interesting and positive write up on LL, here...

https://luminous-landscape.com/some-thoughts-on-the-leica-sl/

Ah, so... it's not a "mirrorless" camera. Of course not :D It's a EFC, electronic finder camera. Leica is obviously far too upmarket to be associated with mirrorless cameras. They're made by the likes of Panasonic :D

PS. As may have been mentioned here and there on line... a Panasonic version at a much lower price might be interesting :D
 
Last edited:
I've just read the first honest summary of the "worlds fastest AF of all professional cameras";

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...-typ-601-hands-first-look#Hfsog18jUf0cmutg.99

"Autofocus uses contrast detection, with the focus area selectable across almost the entire frame, and face detection available. Leica boldly asserts that it’s the fastest of any full-frame system camera, either CSC or DSLR, and while it remains to be seen whether this claim stands up in the real world, in our time spent hands-on with the camera it certainly seemed very snappy. Continuous shooting is available at fully 11fps with focus and exposure fixed, or at 7fps with live view, AF and autoexposure between frames."

I realise that I probably do sound jealous because there's no way I would (or could) ever pay $12500 for one body/lens but I find myself more frustrated in reality. The SL is being defended by Leica followers before all reasoning or logic. The tech specs of the camera overall match the early A7/A7ii apart from the EVF and 4K so all of the glowing reviews are spending time focussing on those rather than the package overall. Anyway, people will still buy this as a status symbol so I guess good luck to them.
 
manualfocus-g said:
That article on LL reads to me as a series of excuses :)
Click to expand...

It is rather positive at the same time though.

Just been reading comments in the Leica section of DPR, they seem divided and on balance rather negative.
 
stevelmx5 said:
I realise that I probably do sound jealous because there's no way I would (or could) ever pay $12500 for one body/lens but I find myself more frustrated in reality. The SL is being defended by Leica followers before all reasoning or logic. The tech specs of the camera overall match the early A7/A7ii apart from the EVF and 4K so all of the glowing reviews are spending time focussing on those rather than the package overall. Anyway, people will still buy this as a status symbol so I guess good luck to them.
Click to expand...

I could afford it and I say that only to avoid any accusation of jealousy being aimed at me... but there are limits to what I'd spend on a camera system and this exceeds my limit and apart from cost the bulk and weight would put me off. Actually I often buy used kit and I do enjoy having fun with cheap kit such as my Panasonic G1 and old macro lens which I'm sure is worth a fraction of your flash £500+ kit :D

The Leica's EVF seems to be one of the big plus points but I assume that this isn't made by Leica and that we'll see it in other cameras at some time unless Leica has paid a lot for some sort of exclusive contract but even so if they have an exclusive deal with (for example) Epson I'm sure there'll be a similar EVF from Sony or someone else sometime soon.
 
Last edited:
stevelmx5 said:
Thanks but I'm neither insecure nor jealous. I'm simply pointing out that a £500 mirrorless system can actually deliver 11fps with constant AF/exposure (yes, I know it's crop and not FF) against a $12500 system that potentially can't. I understand you are defending your brand but is there not a time when a bit of realism comes into play even for Leica users?
Click to expand...

It's a professional camera though that is being attached to high end lenses, not some random crop mirrorless. There can't be many people tossing up between this Leica SL and a £500 quid mirrorless you can get in Currys. Totally different markets. You're getting this if you have a lot of very expensive M and R glass lying about and don't fancy the size, ergonomics or smearing of the Sony A7 cameras or the rangefinder in the M cameras.
 
Laudrup said:
It's a professional camera though that is being attached to high end lenses, not some random crop mirrorless. There can't be many people tossing up between this Leica SL and a £500 quid mirrorless you can get in Currys. Totally different markets. You're getting this if you have a lot of very expensive M and R glass lying about and don't fancy the size, ergonomics or smearing of the Sony A7 cameras or the rangefinder in the M cameras.
Click to expand...

To be fair though I think there are people who'd still buy the Leica even if the £500 Curry's jobbie crushes it. I'm not knocking the Leica here, I just think that it's in a completely different market to the Olympus and Panasonic cameras and maybe even the Sony A7's too. I'm not sure what percentage of pro shooters will go for the Leica but I'd imagine that a fair few who do will not just be buying the best tool for the job, I'd imagine they'll also be buying the Leica badge and cachet too.
 
Laudrup said:
It's a professional camera though that is being attached to high end lenses, not some random crop mirrorless. There can't be many people tossing up between this Leica SL and a £500 quid mirrorless you can get in Currys. Totally different markets. You're getting this if you have a lot of very expensive M and R glass lying about and don't fancy the size, ergonomics or smearing of the Sony A7 cameras or the rangefinder in the M cameras.
Click to expand...

But that's the point, who defines 'professional'? As far as I can see, Leica have designated that themselves in their dreamy marketing as a way to attempt to join a specific market. Apart from the crazy price of the kit lens what makes it high end? It appears to be made from plastic, has no aperture ring and is pretty soft at the long end. The telephoto is equally lengthy and won't be out until spring 2016 and the 50/1.4 until the end of 2016.

I agree that very few people will be deciding between the two opposite ends of the budget scale but the actual photography market is the same. Good photographers are delivering results with the random crop mirrorless kit you're sneering at. Like I said, good luck to the people who are vainly overlooking the obvious negatives against the SL just to say they've put $12k down on a Panasonic you can buy in Jessops.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
What's their excuse for the 24-90? Easy peasy to make that a constant f/2.8. At that price I'd want a constant f/1.4 ;)

Even with the longer lens (? 90-280) they could have achieved a constant f/4. I'm sure at the price point they'll sell it for it would be achievable.
Click to expand...

i remmbered after i posted there is a sigma 100-300 f4, i guess customers are ment to see the lenses as being a mix of 2.8 and 4 high end, i think so lens designs are "constant" because the apature closes down as you zoom out :eek:
 
woof woof said:
To be fair though I think there are people who'd still buy the Leica even if the £500 Curry's jobbie crushes it. I'm not knocking the Leica here, I just think that it's in a completely different market to the Olympus and Panasonic cameras and maybe even the Sony A7's too. I'm not sure what percentage of pro shooters will go for the Leica but I'd imagine that a fair few who do will not just be buying the best tool for the job, I'd imagine they'll also be buying the Leica badge and cachet too.
Click to expand...

the pro guys ive spoken with on leica experience days went with the M and S, because of the lens look, and handling

other points, sony has/does want 70odd quid for batteries (lol)

evf that they used before was from olympus ? i think, or the oly one worked
 
boliston said:
surely a 90-280 f/2.8-f/4 is better than a 90-280 that is limited to f4 only? why would someone prefer a smaller aperture of f/4 at the wide end when they could have f/2.8?
Click to expand...
My mistake, I read it had a narrower aperture at the tele end!
 
The worst kind then.
 
pingu666 said:
other points, sony has/does want 70odd quid for batteries (lol)
Click to expand...

Not quite, $50USD or £50 for a Sony battery, now $500 is £325 but it rarely converts that was as can be seen from the Sony battery price conversion, which makes the Leica battery approx £500. TEN times as much!
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
What kind of monumental cock do you need to be in order to want to spend over seven grand on a 35mm camera?
Click to expand...

I don't get it either, but it's the same mentality as buying an American muscle car ;) Because you want one.
 
twist said:
Not quite, $50USD or £50 for a Sony battery, now $500 is £325 but it rarely converts that was as can be seen from the Sony battery price conversion, which makes the Leica battery approx £500. TEN times as much!
Click to expand...

I thought you said the battery was $250.
 
stevelmx5 said:
But that's the point, who defines 'professional'? As far as I can see, Leica have designated that themselves in their dreamy marketing as a way to attempt to join a specific market. Apart from the crazy price of the kit lens what makes it high end? It appears to be made from plastic, has no aperture ring and is pretty soft at the long end. The telephoto is equally lengthy and won't be out until spring 2016 and the 50/1.4 until the end of 2016.

I agree that very few people will be deciding between the two opposite ends of the budget scale but the actual photography market is the same. Good photographers are delivering results with the random crop mirrorless kit you're sneering at. Like I said, good luck to the people who are vainly overlooking the obvious negatives against the SL just to say they've put $12k down on a Panasonic you can buy in Jessops.
Click to expand...

The build, the specs, the price, the support would all be aimed at professionals. Go buy a set of their cine lenses and you are talking the price of a house, they made some $2 million dollar lens for an Arab, they don't really need to prove too much they are in the professional optics and camera business. What will make it high end is the design, the materials, the tolerances, the performance, the labour intensive costs. It isn't some 18-55 that is being chucked together in China.

Nobody said people weren't producing good photos with other cameras, your posts just reek of jealousy.
 
Laudrup said:
The build, the specs, the price, the support would all be aimed at professionals. Go buy a set of their cine lenses and you are talking the price of a house, they made some $2 million dollar lens for an Arab, they don't really need to prove too much they are in the professional optics and camera business. What will make it high end is the design, the materials, the tolerances, the performance, the labour intensive costs. It isn't some 18-55 that is being chucked together in China.

Nobody said people weren't producing good photos with other cameras, your posts just reek of jealousy.
Click to expand...

Ok, let's get the jealousy idea out of the way because I've already cleared that up.

I understand that Leica heritage (or at least most of it) is all those things but that doesn't instantly mean that a brand new body/lens/software also has that. I've never held or shot with the SL and I'm assuming neither have you so you're basing your posts on the same reviews/comments/advertising as I am. The only difference is that you appear to be blinkered to the negatives already raised in those reviews that aren't just fawning over it 'because it's a Leica'. I'm fully aware that Leica manufacture some insanely expensive lenses but Hasselblad bling'd up an Nex7 and tried to sell it for £10k so price isn't always an indication of quality.

Look, we're never going to agree. I think it's a unique looking camera with generally average specs outside of the EVF and you believe it's going to be amazing simply because it's expensive so it must be good.
 
Last edited:
Laudrup said:
jealousy.
Click to expand...

Oh god.....

Incredulity would be nearer the mark. Can someone please explain why this is £5000?

There's no photographic reason to buy this camera that I can understand.
 
Maybe it's this camera's soul that makes it so expensive?
 
HoppyUK said:
I don't get it either, but it's the same mentality as buying an American muscle car ;) Because you want one.
Click to expand...

Not really.. Mustangs are cheap as chips. That's part of the appeal.
 
Just to clarify my point about what makes the SL a 'Professional' camera;

The build - Yes, it's going to be very well made and have tight tolerances/sealing. However, the materials/build alone aren't important if it's not comfortable to hold or use. Every review I've read (even the fawning ones) have said the grip is uncomfortable, the buttons are awkward and the functions take some getting used to.

The Specs - Ok, so it's Contrast Detect AF only like an A7, it's got 39 focus points like an A7, it's got 24mp like an A7, it shoots 7fps with continuous AF/exposure so 2 more than an A7. It has a larger buffer but takes upwards of 90 seconds to actually write that to the card. As far as I can see, it's two unique points are the EVF which looks very good and dual card slots. I assume the EVF is a Panasonic unit so hopefully it may filter down to some of the more reasonably priced kit.

The lens has no aperture ring, is sharp at the wide end but appears to be soft on the long end and to my eyes it looks cheap in comparison to the body.

The price - No photographer worth their salt should be arsed about the price of their kit dictating how good their results are. If the SL body was priced at £2500 like an A7S would that mean it wouldn't be a pro body anymore?

Some of the Leica releases suggest photojournalists using the SL. Can you really see someone heading into a war zone with a blingy body and massive lens whilst trying to blend in?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top