Leica SL , 24MP FF Mirrorless Camera

[stevelmx5]

Even ignoring the price for the time being, the review from Ming Thein was less than impressed. Even if it was a pre-production unit I can't see Leica giving him a duff $5k lens for his test that's going to get them huge publicity.

Also, isn't anybody concerned about just how cheap looking the lens is? The body is cut from a single block of aluminium (or is it unobtainiam?) yet the lens appears to have been cut from a single block of ZXSpectrums

 

[stevelmx5]

They are catering to different markets. The Nikon 24-70 is a good workhorse but not going to be competing with lenses much more expensive and better corrected. You are getting what you pay for from materials to QC to after service.

Sorry but that's a ridiculous statement. The market this Leica is aiming at is the rich Asian buyer aiming for a status symbol alongside their Hasselblad. If they were genuinely interested in making something unique they wouldn't be claiming they invented the EVF or posting misleading AF stats to gain admiration from blinded fans.

 

[twist]

They are catering to different markets. The Nikon 24-70 is a good workhorse but not going to be competing with lenses much more expensive and better corrected. You are getting what you pay for from materials to QC to after service.

I hadn't realised the CaNikon 24-70s are put together so poorly and performed so badly....

Heres some info regarding the Leica kit lens...
Optically, it’s also quite solid. Despite the number of elements, one has to try very hard to make the lens flare. The wide end is outright impressive: microcontrast is good and resolving power is high across the frame at all apertures; there is almost no improvement from f2.8 to f8. The telephoto end is a very mixed bag. I experienced serious forward focus shift when stopping down, resulting in much softer images than expected (not reflected on the top panel info). This does not help matters because though the centre is strong at f4, you really need to stop down to bring the corners to match. In addition, the telephoto end somewhat lacks bite – I suspect this has something to do with the number of elements. I can only hope this behaviour is attributable to the lens being a preproduction unit. Otherwise, there was little lateral or longitudinal chromatic aberration (software correction, perhaps?), and mostly smooth out of focus areas. IS worked well (and it would be nice to have a 1/0.5x option for auto-ISO to take advantage of this, not just 1/1x and 1/2x) though it seemed somewhat less effective in portrait orientation than landscape. I wonder if this is evidence of shutter vibration. Additionally, there was evidence of blooming under strongly backlit situations (though without visible chromatic aberration).

 

[twist]

Sorry but that's a ridiculous statement. The market this Leica is aiming at is the rich Asian buyer aiming for a status symbol alongside their Hasselblad. If they were genuinely interested in making something unique they wouldn't be claiming they invented the EVF or posting misleading AF stats to gain admiration from blinded fans.

A bit like those ridiculous Sony knock offs with the wooden grips

 

[stevelmx5]

What do you mean, they're also highly unique and catering for a more discerning market.

 

[twist]

What do you mean, they're also highly unique and catering for a more discerning market.

Totally, the superior materials (wood) justify the additional cost. Ive actually just glued a bit of kindling to my Nikon to make it far superior than anything else on the market.

 

[Laudrup]

Sorry but that's a ridiculous statement. The market this Leica is aiming at is the rich Asian buyer aiming for a status symbol alongside their Hasselblad. If they were genuinely interested in making something unique they wouldn't be claiming they invented the EVF or posting misleading AF stats to gain admiration from blinded fans.

I don't think you know what you are talking about.

The 'digital R' has been the Leica equivalent of the Nikon D400 for a long time now and this SL goes someway to rectify that. I don't know why only 'rich Asians' would want what looks like a high end mirrorless camera with top optics and the ability to use M and R glass. It seems like a well specced camera and will no doubt be paired with top glass for those that can afford it or are already invested in the system.

 

[Laudrup]

I hadn't realised the CaNikon 24-70s are put together so poorly and performed so badly....

Heres some info regarding the Leica kit lens...
Optically, it’s also quite solid. Despite the number of elements, one has to try very hard to make the lens flare. The wide end is outright impressive: microcontrast is good and resolving power is high across the frame at all apertures; there is almost no improvement from f2.8 to f8. The telephoto end is a very mixed bag. I experienced serious forward focus shift when stopping down, resulting in much softer images than expected (not reflected on the top panel info). This does not help matters because though the centre is strong at f4, you really need to stop down to bring the corners to match. In addition, the telephoto end somewhat lacks bite – I suspect this has something to do with the number of elements. I can only hope this behaviour is attributable to the lens being a preproduction unit. Otherwise, there was little lateral or longitudinal chromatic aberration (software correction, perhaps?), and mostly smooth out of focus areas. IS worked well (and it would be nice to have a 1/0.5x option for auto-ISO to take advantage of this, not just 1/1x and 1/2x) though it seemed somewhat less effective in portrait orientation than landscape. I wonder if this is evidence of shutter vibration. Additionally, there was evidence of blooming under strongly backlit situations (though without visible chromatic aberration).

Yes I know I read it earlier and paraphrased it. Just because the 24-70 is the best lens you've used doesn't mean it's the best lens there is. It's all relative.

 

[odd jim]

Sorry, that's a comedic size!

 

[stevelmx5]

I don't think you know what you are talking about.

The 'digital R' has been the Leica equivalent of the Nikon D400 for a long time now and this SL goes someway to rectify that. I don't know why only 'rich Asians' would want what looks like a high end mirrorless camera with top optics and the ability to use M and R glass. It seems like a well specced camera and will no doubt be paired with top glass for those that can afford it or are already invested in the system.

I'm no expert on Leica systems but is this the 'digital r'? If so, I don't see how it's anywhere near a D400 equivalent?


http://photo.net/equipment/leica/dmr/

I realise we're obviously different people but if the Leica SL was priced anywhere near other mirrorless kit it would be judged directly against them and come out below. As it is, Leica have a strong enough following to be able to put crazy prices on their kit and have their fans justify it as if it's a bargain. The review from a seasoned professional photographer (as the SL is apparently aimed at) has already stated that the lens is poor at the long end even though it's very good at the wide so how can anyone defend its $5k price tag I don't understand?

 

[odd jim]

Yes I know I read it earlier and paraphrased it. Just because the 24-70 is the best lens you've used doesn't mean it's the best lens there is. It's all relative.

But this £5k Leica kit lens doesn't look very good at all.

 

[FruitFlakes]

Sorry, that's a comedic size!

The body is the same size as a D800/5D. The 'in hand' images that have been going around are pretty misleading.

 

[odd jim]

The body is the same size as a D800/5D. The 'in hand' images that have been going around are pretty misleading.

Maybe it's because the design is so square and slab sided. It looks like the designer has gone for some kind of cliched cartoon almost Lego like look. It's truly awful!

 

[stevelmx5]

I've just seen an interesting comment on the original article posted in the OP. Spot the difference with the "Leica" flashgun;





I assume they've had in house engineers toiling for hours to work out the right way to remove the Nissin logo and squeeze another Red dot on there? Should be good for another $1k I reckon.

 

[Laudrup]

But this £5k Leica kit lens doesn't look very good at all.

Leica don't really make bad lenses at this price and spec.

 

[odd jim]

I've just seen an interesting comment on the original article posted in the OP. Spot the difference with the "Leica" flashgun;

View attachment 48845

View attachment 48846

I assume they've had in house engineers toiling for hours to work out the right way to remove the Nissin logo and squeeze another Red dot on there? Should be good for another $1k I reckon.

Nissin flash is now worth £3k

 

[odd jim]

Leica don't really make bad lenses at this price and spec.

It looks like they just did.

 

[Laudrup]

I'm no expert on Leica systems but is this the 'digital r'? If so, I don't see how it's anywhere near a D400 equivalent?


http://photo.net/equipment/leica/dmr/

I realise we're obviously different people but if the Leica SL was priced anywhere near other mirrorless kit it would be judged directly against them and come out below. As it is, Leica have a strong enough following to be able to put crazy prices on their kit and have their fans justify it as if it's a bargain. The review from a seasoned professional photographer (as the SL is apparently aimed at) has already stated that the lens is poor at the long end even though it's very good at the wide so how can anyone defend its $5k price tag I don't understand?

It's a preproduction model that's had limited testing, it's hardly definitive. The DMR back is not the digital R that was hoped for, that was the R10 which looked like vaporware, a bit like the D400. This is aimed at pros, people who maybe can't focus an M now or who want autofocus and those with money in R and M glass or film makers with Cine glass that costs $20k a lens.

 

[Laudrup]

It looks like they just did.

What zoom lens are you using that barely improves from f/2.8 to f/8?

 

[FruitFlakes]

Maybe it's because the design is so square and slab sided. It looks like the designer has gone for some kind of cliched cartoon almost Lego like look. It's truly awful!

Yeah it's a pretty ugly camera and that straight grip will cause cramps after a while. Don't know why they didn't just shrink the S2 which is actually ergonomic and looks like a Leica.

 

[stevelmx5]

What zoom lens are you using that barely improves from f/2.8 to f/8?

...at the wide end

 

[twist]

Yes I know I read it earlier and paraphrased it. Just because the 24-70 is the best lens you've used doesn't mean it's the best lens there is. It's all relative.

It's not the best I've used. But great assumption.

 

[twist]

1860mah battery a steal at 250 usd

External battery charger 250 usd

Surely worth the money.

 

[boliston]

1860mah battery a steal at 250 usd

External battery charger 250 usd

Surely worth the money.

The type of person who can afford this camera will not worry about a small bit of "pocket change" to pay for these accessories

 

[Laudrup]

1860mah battery a steal at 250 usd

External battery charger 250 usd

Surely worth the money.

Dropping $12,000 on a camera and lens and you are going on about $500. You don't really understand their target market.

 

[Laudrup]

...at the wide end

What equivalent Canikon zoom lens have you used that does that at any focal length? Even the primes don't. It's a Leica Asph lens costing multiple thousands, worrying about its quality is like worrying if your 36Mp will be enough for putting up on facebook.

 

[frod]

No. There's clearly an argument that there can be a level of production tolerance that could justify the camera and lens prices, but those battery and charger prices are ludicrous. The nissin flash is hilarious.

 

[stevelmx5]

What equivalent Canikon zoom lens have you used that does that at any focal length? Even the primes don't. It's a Leica Asph lens costing multiple thousands, worrying about its quality is like worrying if your 36Mp will be enough for putting up on facebook.

The fact it's got a Leica badge and a crazy price doesn't give it free range to be anything less than perfect "because you just don't understand the market". The fact it is a Leica Asph means I should worry about the quality in return for its cost even more than just accepting anything less. Anybody who pays $5k and accepts less is an idiot blinded by a re-badged Panasonic.

It does feel a little like being a Leica owner automatically comes with an air of arrogance, because owners are clearly better than other photographers. Emperors new clothes springs to mind.

Anyway, I don't think we'll find a middle ground on this so I'll just have to go back to my pauper kit that actually delivers 11fps with AF and auto exposure. It's embarrassingly less than £500 though so I'll keep it away from the SL for fear of offending it.

 

[Ruffmeister]

I'd like to see what one is like in the flesh and to use. Not that I can afford one nor does it really appeal to me over any other mirrorless system. I certainly wouldn't use the term "revolutionary" to describe it.

The appeal to me originally when I purchased a mirrorless system was that it was compact with top quality and good lenses. This just looks too big with that lens and ergonomically doesn't even look that comfortable.

The Leica M (both film and digital) are great cameras to use. They seem to have it spot on with those.

 

[odd jim]

What zoom lens are you using that barely improves from f/2.8 to f/8?

Poor argument, there's no point latching on to the only positive at the expense of the rest.

And a £5k for a variable aperture lens? That's the final insult from Leica to their customers. For that money, at the very least I'd expect f/2.8 across the whole zoom. But then imagine how soft it would be at the tele end

Looking at the new lenses coming out for it, these are variable aperture too at huge cost (90-280 being one). Leica really do take the p*** with their pricing but fools and their money are easily parted.

For $12k (or whatever the inflated UK price will be) you'll get a much better performer from the likes of Canon, Nikon or Sony, that can't be refuted. The badges won't be worth as much though.

 

[pingu666]

no one makes lenses with that fstop and range though?
you get 70-200 2.8 or f4,or 4ish to 5.6 or 6.3 with70/75 to 200-300

id like to hold it, but yeah it might be like the t, not great to hold

 

[odd jim]

no one makes lenses with that fstop and range though?
you get 70-200 2.8 or f4,or 4ish to 5.6 or 6.3 with70/75 to 200-300

id like to hold it, but yeah it might be like the t, not great to hold

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.

 

[twist]

Dropping $12,000 on a camera and lens and you are going on about $500. You don't really understand their target market.

I do, I also understand how they are taking the the P.

 

[frod]

I know a couple of insanely rich guys and they are the tightest folk I've ever known. I guess you don't get rich by wasting money. I can see them buying this camera and getting third party batteries

 

[woof woof]

The richest people I've ever known were also some of the tightest with some things.

Actually I don't think it's the cost that would put them off as I pointed a well heeled ex of mine at this and she thought it was too big and hideous. I'm sure this Leica will sell but maybe to the faithful, smaller and more stylish might pull in more rich folk who aren't into the badge for its own sake.

 

[stevelmx5]

I read on one of the news comments someone defending the SL said it's only 'slightly' bigger than the A7..



http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/look-here-leica-sl-vs-a7-size-comparison/

I have to wonder who signed off on this? I understand the technology inside is what delivers the results but seriously!

 

[boliston]

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.

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?

 

[Laudrup]

The fact it's got a Leica badge and a crazy price doesn't give it free range to be anything less than perfect "because you just don't understand the market". The fact it is a Leica Asph means I should worry about the quality in return for its cost even more than just accepting anything less. Anybody who pays $5k and accepts less is an idiot blinded by a re-badged Panasonic.

It does feel a little like being a Leica owner automatically comes with an air of arrogance, because owners are clearly better than other photographers. Emperors new clothes springs to mind.

Anyway, I don't think we'll find a middle ground on this so I'll just have to go back to my pauper kit that actually delivers 11fps with AF and auto exposure. It's embarrassingly less than £500 though so I'll keep it away from the SL for fear of offending it.

It seems like you are projecting your own insecurities and jealousy onto others. I don't think any Leica owner cares what you shoot.

 

[Sassafras]

. Leica really do take the p*** with their pricing but fools and their money are easily parted.

Thanks!

 

[Laudrup]

Poor argument, there's no point latching on to the only positive at the expense of the rest.

And a £5k for a variable aperture lens? That's the final insult from Leica to their customers. For that money, at the very least I'd expect f/2.8 across the whole zoom. But then imagine how soft it would be at the tele end

Looking at the new lenses coming out for it, these are variable aperture too at huge cost (90-280 being one). Leica really do take the p*** with their pricing but fools and their money are easily parted.

For $12k (or whatever the inflated UK price will be) you'll get a much better performer from the likes of Canon, Nikon or Sony, that can't be refuted. The badges won't be worth as much though.

So that would be no equivalent zoom lens then? The size, weight, cost and correction of a constant aperture would more than likely be impractical. It is hardly an insult when the medium format Leica 30-90mm f/3.5-5.6 Vario-Elmar-S ASPH lens costs $11,000 and had a waiting list to get one. Canon and Nikon aren't making anything like this yet, Sony are sort of, but the lenses won't be in the same class.