A Prediction - The Leica SL-2 is Coming Soon

Archlich said:
I wonder where did the SL2 having "microlenses being optimized for M lenses" statement come from? Doesn't seem to be explicitly mentioned by Leica anywhere.
Click to expand...
It's not. People are just making it up to rationalize purchasing an SL2 for their M glass. Then once they acquire the SL2, they'll rationalize their purchase of SL glass on already having the SL2 body. It's all a game. Does any of this make them better photographers? Doubtful.
 
ptpdprinter said:
It's not. People are just making it up to rationalize purchasing an SL2 for their M glass. Then once they acquire the SL2, they'll rationalize their purchase of SL glass on already having the SL2 body. It's all a game. Does any of this make them better photographers? Doubtful.
Click to expand...


This is what I am trying to stay away from. Staying with M cameras may be for me a better route to take. Getting an SL or SL2 will most likely make me want to use SL lenses.
 
raid said:
I am watching the interview. He stresses the importance of taking photos.
The tolerances of the SL lenses cannot be topped. Very impressive.
Click to expand...

Raid,

Consider the Leica "S."

I went to a workshop held at the Leica Store Soho where a demonstration of using "S" glass on a SL was the program.

I was wondering who and why that would be done, so I went. Leica makes a "L" to "S" adapter, and the lens used for the demo was a 100/2.0 S-lens.

John Kreider the Leica Specialist for the S and SL took some shots of me and the SL was tethered to an Apple laptop. Then he zoomed into the corner of my eye.

Understand that I owned a SL, so I know what the camera can do, but the skin tone and detail took things to the next level.

The "Mike the Skinny Hipster" who is a working pro fashion photographer, who happens to live right above me in my building gives me a call to come up because he just borrowed a three lens Leica "S" kit from Leica.

Mike is a Canon DSLR shooter, and pretty much he knocked on a door on the Lower Eastside and this guy handed him a Pelican case like a 70's drug deal.

So it was easy to see that the SL was derived from the Leica S. Even the menus were similar. This was before the M10 was released. Pretty much the M10 is the SL as a rangefinder.

Currently there are rumors about a new S3. I'm pretty sure thereafter a SL3, and then finally a M11.

Right now the SL2 has a Maestro 3 processor. The M10 only a Maestro 2 processor, the same processor that is in my SL.

Knowing how the technology transfers down allows one to see a bigger picture. Keep an eye on the S3 announcement.

Also know that I have a friend who just acquired a Leica "S." I told him about how the SL uses the "sweet-spot" of Leica "S" glass for large format like detail.

Cal
 
Thanks for this information, Cal. This race for better cameras and lenses can be less inspiring to me. I long for the old times when I was using Canon FD film cameras and lenses. Life was simple then. I believe you when you say that "skin tone and detail took things to the next level;"

SL-SL2-SL3 ....who knows what will be next.

Camera technology has become like computer technology, and it is a fact that moving forward is the only direction to take for many. Once I learned of the SL2, getting an SL suddenly became less attractive. Once there will be an M11, I bet that the M10 will also become less of a target for me.

It makes sense to slow down and use again some film cameras.
 
raid said:
Thanks for this information, Cal. This race for better cameras and lenses can be less inspiring to me. I long for the old times when I was using Canon FD film cameras and lenses. Life was simple then. I believe you when you say that "skin tone and detail took things to the next level;"

SL-SL2-SL3 ....who knows what will be next.

Camera technology has become like computer technology, and it is a fact that moving forward is the only direction to take for many. Once I learned of the SL2, getting an SL suddenly became less attractive. Once there will be an M11, I bet that the M10 will also become less of a target for me.

It makes sense to slow down and use again some film cameras.
Click to expand...

Raid,

I still own my MM which I bought new. I still love this camera warts and all. Still a great camera. Likely the most unforgiving digital camera: CCD sensor; no chance of recovering highlights; but then again I learned a lot about precision and became a better photographer.

I believe the MM will be a cult classic of sorts.

The way I see it, because I understood where the development of the SL came from (the Leica "S") I knew that the bigger advances would be into the SL first and at a faster pace.

I can't stress that to unwind the advancing technology there is a great consolation that in the Leica glass that they are being "future proofed" well into the future by 3-4 generations of bodies that are yet to be developed. Knowing that L-glass has long legs makes needing to upgrade L-glass unlikely, and actually in my book makes sense over the longer run and the big picture.

Now what if Leica made a SL2M. That would be a game changer. A pretty big step towards large format perhaps. A 47 MP CMOS sensor would be like a much higher resolution sensor without a Bayer Filter Array. Not so hard for Leica to develop.

This eventually will be a game changer, and know I already own the glass.

Cal
 
raid said:
I understand what you are saying, Huss and Cal, but reality is that the M Kingdom is being set aside for the L Kingdom by Leica. Canon went through something similar whan they switched away from the FD mount. Not the same, but kinda "similar".

I wonder what is lost when using SL lenses on an M compared with using such lenses on an SL2. It leaves a negative feeling in the end, doesn't it.
Click to expand...

Sorry Raid you are wrong. M is Leica. RF cameras are Leica. EVF cameras are there to insure the health of the company and that M can prosper.

It’s like saying Porsche will get rid of the 911 because they sell way more SUVs.
Porsche is the 911. The SUVs they sell are there to make sure the company stays healthy.
 
Raid..why not get the original SL when it goes on sale..and bargain them down further..

Maybe just..not buy into all the SL2 hype..
Use M glass on it..and when you want to put some SL giant perfect glass on it..get the 35 APO..
You will have weather proofing..and a nice video camera..
And less $$ in the bank too..lol..
Personally..I would wait for the M11..
Unless I wanted that SL glass..
Or really needed to be up to date..
Which I dont..
These do just fine..
LBlOwsn.jpg
 
Huss said:
Sorry Raid you are wrong. M is Leica. RF cameras are Leica. EVF cameras are there to insure the health of the company and that M can prosper.

It’s like saying Porsche will get rid of the 911 because they sell way more SUVs.
Porsche is the 911. The SUVs they sell are there to make sure the company stays healthy.
Click to expand...

Not completely accurate, Huss.
People wanting to drive a 911 usually don't consider instead getting an SUV.
Yes, Leica wants/needs to survive as a company.
 
Emile de Leon said:
Raid..why not get the original SL when it goes on sale..and bargain them down further..

Maybe just..not buy into all the SL2 hype..
Use M glass on it..and when you want to put some SL giant perfect glass on it..get the 35 APO..
You will have weather proofing..and a nice video camera..
And less $$ in the bank too..lol..
Personally..I would wait for the M11..
Unless I wanted that SL glass..
Or really needed to be up to date..
Which I dont..
These do just fine..
Click to expand...

What you are suggesting is reasonable, Emile.

Getting an SL for right now and then waiting it out for a future buy of an SL lens.
 
Calzone said:
Raid,

I still own my MM which I bought new. I still love this camera warts and all. Still a great camera. Likely the most unforgiving digital camera: CCD sensor; no chance of recovering highlights; but then again I learned a lot about precision and became a better photographer.

I believe the MM will be a cult classic of sorts.

The way I see it, because I understood where the development of the SL came from (the Leica "S") I knew that the bigger advances would be into the SL first and at a faster pace.

I can't stress that to unwind the advancing technology there is a great consolation that in the Leica glass that they are being "future proofed" well into the future by 3-4 generations of bodies that are yet to be developed. Knowing that L-glass has long legs makes needing to upgrade L-glass unlikely, and actually in my book makes sense over the longer run and the big picture.

Now what if Leica made a SL2M. That would be a game changer. A pretty big step towards large format perhaps. A 47 MP CMOS sensor would be like a much higher resolution sensor without a Bayer Filter Array. Not so hard for Leica to develop.

This eventually will be a game changer, and know I already own the glass.

Cal
Click to expand...

You are correct here, Cal.
This is reality.

You are in a good position for future purchases to get the best for your needs.
 
raid said:
What you are suggesting is reasonable, Emile.

Getting an SL for right now and then waiting it out for a future buy of an SL lens.
Click to expand...

Raid,

When I first bought my SL the only native lenses available were the zooms.

I used my M-glass and a Noct-Nikkor and 50 Lux-R "E60" as my fast primes.

In use I would depress the joystick and use the magnification to focus, then tap the shutterbutton to get the full frame.

Pretty much a SLR like experience.

Cal
 
I can see myself using an SL with my M lenses. I also want to use lenses by Zeiss in QBM mount (35/1.4-50/1.4-85/1.4). Focusing the 75/1.4 Lux wide open should be easier with the SL's EVF, I think.
 
raid said:
I can see myself using an SL with my M lenses. I also want to use lenses by Zeiss in QBM mount (35/1.4-50/1.4-85/1.4). Focusing the 75/1.4 Lux wide open should be easier with the SL's EVF, I think.
Click to expand...

Raid,

A SL with a 75 Lux would kill. The magnification and the VF'er as I outlined above provides a high hit ratio. Also M-lenses seem small on a SL, but the 75 Lux would balance well.

You should also know that under low light conditions the electronic gain of the VF'er is a godsend for night shooting. In this regard it is better than an optical VF'er. Kinda like nightvision built into the camera.

Like I said the 75 Lux would be a killer rig. So good that I might ask, "Why would you need other lenses?" except maybe a wide.

Ely at the Leica Store SoHo mounted the 75 Noctilux on my SL. Now this lens has a very-very shallow DOF, so little that I don't think F1.2 is practical.

A 75 Lux though has this dreamy F1.4 that is magical.

Cal
 
raid said:
Thanks Cal!
Such words make me want an SL.
I have a 35 Lux too.
Click to expand...

Raid,

I once owned a 75 Lux V.2 before I owned the SL.

I owned a 35 Lux-R that was "E60" like your 75 Lux, and the body of my 35 Lux-R was the same size as my 75 Lux, so I do know how a 75 Lux would feel on a SL.

Also the 35 Lux-R had that same dreamy like F1.4 with that Mandlar signature.

I can tell you that for manual focus lenses a 35 Lux-R and a 75 Lux-M would be a killer kit.

My 28 Cron is "E46" and I have the limited edition vented scalloped hood. It is a tiny bit shorter than a 35 Lux Pre-ASPH I owned. In fact this hood served both lenses. My 28 Cron V1 does well on the SL. BTW it looks evil. LOL.

I will warn you that many m-lenses that are E39 will feel too small, and the focus throw will feel awkward.

Cal
 
I have to use the M Lux and not an R Lux, Cal. I also like using the Canon 1.5 trio (35-50-85). Focusing should be easier with an SL.
 
raid said:
Not completely accurate, Huss.
People wanting to drive a 911 usually don't consider instead getting an SUV.
Yes, Leica wants/needs to survive as a company.
Click to expand...

A lot of people go to a Porsche dealership thinking they want a 911 but end up with an SUV because it is easier, more practical but still has the Porsche badge.

Which sums up the SL. It is Leica’s SUV.
 
raid said:
I wonder whether the introduction of the SL2 also impacts M10 market value or not.
Click to expand...

Why would it? It is a very different camera. People buy the M because it is a traditional stripped down RF camera. The SL is nothing like it. The M11 will affect the value of the M10..

The SL/SL2 will not work as well as the M cameras with M lenses because it was not designed for it. The sensor does not have micro lenses, because then it would not work as well with the actual lenses designed to be used with the SL/SL2.
I wonder why people keep claiming the SL2 has micro lenses? Because someone started a rumor? Same thing happened with the original SL, then actual users saw that it did not work as well with M glass as the M cameras.

You obviously want an SL (or SL2). Nothing wrong with that. But M cameras aren't going anywhere.
If anything it will be the other way around judging by the sales of the original SL and thus Leica discounting them. Once you step up to mirrorless cameras you are competing directly with the Japanese, and they offer much more (for better or worse) for a lot less money, with far better customer service and service network than what Leica offers.

You should rent an SL. For 90mm and shorter lenses an M is much easier and faster to focus. The SL is very precise but you need to take your time (as with all EVF cameras in manual focus) as you frame, focus magnification pops up to nail focus precisely, then you go back to the full view. With an RF camera - frame, focus, done.
Some people can't get comfortable with RFs and for those EVF, SLR, or AF would be better.
 
Huss said:
The SL/SL2 will not work as well as the M cameras with M lenses because it was not designed for it. The sensor does not have micro lenses, because then it would not work as well with the actual lenses designed to be used with the SL/SL2.
I wonder why people keep claiming the SL2 has micro lenses? Because someone started a rumor? Same thing happened with the original SL, then actual users saw that it did not work as well with M glass as the M cameras.
Click to expand...

Huss,

What you wrote above is news to me. Do you have a source to back up these claims? Specifically how is optical IQ compromised by using M-glass on a SL.

In my 4 years of use I have not taken notice of any lower IQ. The reason to buy a SL or SL2 is to use it as a multiplatform, and to utilize all kinds of Leica glass without compromise.

As for the claim of SL2 micro lenses being rumor for optimization for M-lenses goes, I kinda believe David Farkas because in his 23 minute 28 second video on The Red Dot Forum he compares the SL and SL2. Somewhere after the first minute he begins and mentions specifically how the SL2 has micro lenses to specifically to deal with the "high incedence angle" of M-glass and mentions "a unique micro lens structure."

David then mentions "weak corner performance" by other cameras made by other manufacturers and specifically mentions how this is more pronounced with wides.

Know that David Farkus is a "Leica Specialist" like my friend John Kreider. If this is a rumor, then it is coming from Leica. Perhaps Leica is making stuff up that is untrue or making false claims. LOL.

Here is the link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMvMqGCHUSM

Cal
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom