Leica SL2 - for M mount lenses ?

justpix

justpix

Messages
13,494
Name
Immo
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, news for Leica lovers:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5674254990/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-new-leica-sl2?slide=2

Owning 30 Leica M mount lenses, I find this most interesting:

quoted from above, emphasis added: "The SL2 features a new 47MP full-frame sensor, and 'Maestro III' processor. One of the SL's original selling points was a special microlens array, tweaked to deliver optimal image quality when shooting with adapted M-series lenses. The SL2's sensor follows suit, making it potentially very appealing to M-series shooters looking for a practical mirrorless solution - especially for wide-angle lenses, which can vignette heavily when adapted to other systems."

But it is not only vignetting that must be corrected - Nikon Zs can do this, too - but colour shift and corner smearing.

Another question one might have: is the sensor the same as in the Panasonic SR1? If so, then this might be fairly good with M mount lenses, if Leica lets Panasonic use the M mount profiles.

Interesting developments!
 
Last edited:
Hi, again on Nikon Z here:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1622564/0#lastmessage

p1#5 (emphasis added):

"I'm using Leica M lenses on Nikon Z and have produced 105 color cast correction files (including vignette) for three lenses: Summicron 2/28, Summarit 2.4/50, Summarit 2.4/90. 35 per lens for 7 aperture values and 5 distances. The Summarit 2.4/90 at close distances is the only case that does not need a color cast correction, but the vignette correction is still useful, as you don't have EXIF data from the M lenses on Nikon Z. My take is that you need to test every M lens separately. My three lenses work with regard to resolution (corner smearing), but you need to test this - e.g. Elmarit 2.8/28 or Summilux 1.4/35 didn't work for me. Sometimes the same color cast is barely visible, sometimes its really detrimental to an image. So it depends on how much post-processing you are willing to do and what pictures you shoot. I'm right now trying to improve acquiring focus without using the Nikon EVF's zoom, but I don't know how successful this will be.

PS. Leica M bodies are best for Leica M lenses."

Now, the most interesting questions for me: How close comes the SL2 to Ms, or is it even better? And does this apply to all M mount lenses?

We can discard other contenders (Pana, Nikon) now, I think ... ---
 
At $6k I think I'd rather spend that sort of cash on an M10. The SL2 feels like it's got all the bells & whistles to attract the Canikon crowd but it's at a price point that's got them wondering "why not just get a Fuji GFX?"
 
Harlequin565 said:
At $6k I think I'd rather spend that sort of cash on an M10. The SL2 feels like it's got all the bells & whistles to attract the Canikon crowd but it's at a price point that's got them wondering "why not just get a Fuji GFX?"
Click to expand...

Hi, I do not like the new "heavy metal mirrorless". However, they offer some functionalities present Ms do not have. But native L lenses are heavy metal, too,
albeit with high performance.

At present, I do not see a compelling case for the SL2 with M mount lenses (for me).

But it is early days. There will be comparisons between the SL2 and Ms with Leica M glass by owners who have both, in the future, I hope ---
 
I'm a bit torn on using older lenses on newer cameras. I do it a lot with film era mass market primes and I see the appeal but I think that biasing a camera more towards lenses that have issues on more conventionally micro lensed and therefore less Leica lens friendly bodies may lead to newer lenses not performing as well...? Possibly? I assume that the micro lens array that helps old Leica (and other) lenses will still be in place when you fit something more modern so I wonder what the implications for those more modern lenses could be. Would a native modern lens need to be designed to take the old lens friendly micro array into account and if so this could put third parties off as it might be more trouble than it's worth.
 
Last edited:
Hi, I have some old(er) Leica lenses, but also current models. Both have difficulties when being adapted. My ZEISS Distagon 1,4/35 has been designed for the M sensor stack,
according to ZEISS.

As you said, it is even possible that M-friendly micro-lenses might lead to worse performance of L mount lenses on the SL2.

Perhaps a Sigma body might perform better with L mount lenses (because Sigma has no M heritage to consider) than an SL2.

Most interesting ... ---
 
Hi, I checked the SL2 manual. APS-C file-size is 20MP.

( https://de.leica-camera.com/Fotografie/Leica-SL/Leica-SL2/Downloads )

So, should Leica M lenses perform on the SL2 not without difficulties (color-shift, soft corners) there is always the fallback-position of using APS-C.

APS-C file-size seems not to be available for DNG. In that case, cropping is the fallback.

One could live with 20MP files, I think.

I am quite happy with my 18MP M9 files ... --- :)
 
Last edited:
But would you want to spend $6k on a 47Mpixel camera to only get 20MP cropped files?
 
magicolor1 said:
But would you want to spend $6k on a 47Mpixel camera to only get 20MP cropped files?
Click to expand...

Clearly not, if no Leica M mount lens works with the SL2 faultlessly.

But this is not to be expected. There will be lenses without problems, typically longer than 35mm, and others with mixed results ...

I had similar experiences in my M mount "adapting-days" with the SONY A7 and the A7R2.

So, it boils down to what M mount lenses you want to attach. An SL2 only for M mount does not make sense, to me ...

But, there may be people who have just one favourite 35, 50, or 75mm M mount lens, and they might be happy ---
 
Last edited:
Hi, M mount experiences here :

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1620836/3

quote from above p4, #17:

"Ron, I tested it with 21SEM and 28Cron and 50APO. I think the performance is very good, as good as I can expect for non-native platform. It is definitely better than Z and S1 I have to say. I can't do apple to apple comparison given SL2 is 47M and M10 is 24M at pixel level.(So was S1's 24M) I feel for 21 and 28, pixel level performance, SL2 is roughly one stop behind m10, consider the high density, this is not bad at all. The key is much less astigmatism behavior and FC compare to what you will see from thick sensor stack. 28mm Cron also show less focus shift compare to S1, there is still some but close to M10 performance here. Sony is the worst offender, S1 and Z are about the same but not free of them. (Z might be slightly better if I try hard to distinguish them, but it is also 45M and I have OEM adapter for L mount might give slightly better performance on S1, it hard to get perfect adapter for Z). I can post crop later, but you just have to trust my assessment.

Given there are so many variables to play here, I still strongly suggest anyone to do test themselves to determine if it is good enough. For me? more than enough
smiley.gif


I think this will be a perfect platform for my personal use for next few years. A very nice bridge product to connect all Leica product. I roughly took a look of the files, I like what I see, even slightly prefer to S1. (which I think it is good for portrait) I don't have S1R, don't know how they compare and obviously I haven't shoot SL2 much, but under night artificial light, the file seems robust for skin tone, even with different white balance temperature, the skin tone still looks pleasing and true to life. A very good sign based on my experience. Even I do slightly prefer Z7's landscape file to S1. I don't know how Z7 and SL2 compare. My Z7 went to Nikon to fix its skin and EVF cover problem.

There is still something I don't like about it, such as focus peaking have to be used with display option that show histogram and all other craps. You can't just turn it on or off.

I stand behind my original comment that I like SL2's EVF better than others. The difference between it and S1 is really small and I might just like the JPG feed of SL2 engine. Somehow, I still feel Z7's EVF give me more analog feel, less impressive than both SL2 and S1 but more OVF like, I don't know it is from sharper optics of EVF or Nikon has some special trick in signal processing but SL2's EVF feel more brighter. and peaking implementation is just better than Nikon. I think it is inherent from Panasonic.

This is almost a perfect camera for my use. The control is very similar between SL, S and M. That is also the reason I adapt myself quickly with S1 because it share so many features with S such as focus WO for AF glasses.

The more I use it the more I like it. Recommended for Leica users. "
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top