rscheffler
Well-known
I was ambivalent about the SL at first too. I've since had a chance to try it twice for very brief periods. IMO, it improves on all the Sony a7 handling/UI shortcomings and is the best mirrorless I've used to date, in respect to responsiveness, ease of use, feel, logical design, etc. I was very impressed with the EVF when I tried it with my range of M lenses. Anything 50mm and longer was super easy to focus and I was nailing wide open focus with those lenses without any peaking or magnification.
Where I have some reservations about the SL is WA M lens performance. The results with my 28 Cron (v1) and 21 SEM showed some edge sharpness degradation/smearing reminiscent of using WA lenses on the Sony cameras, though not quite as bad. But still not as good at wider apertures as on the M9 or M240. I suspect this is one reason for the recent 28mm and 35 Cron refresh.
If I did not currently need to maintain a comprehensive Canon DSLR system for action/sports work, as well as events where their wireless radio flash system is at times very useful, I'd seriously consider adding an SL to my M kit because I feel it nicely augments some M shortcomings. But as it stands now, an SL would sit somewhere between the M and DSLR in feature-set and capabilities, without replacing either. Rather, I will wait to see what the next M body offers in respect to enhanced live view and add-on EVF capability. It very well may be similarly specced to the SL, yet retain the RF characteristics I greatly value.
In any case, I really enjoyed your photos, irrelevant of the camera used. As with the Lensrentals comparison, it's 99.99999% of the time going to be irrelevant to the viewers of your photos. IMO, where it will most make a difference is in your enjoyment of the process of creating images. How the cameras feel, how transparent they become in the process by not interfering when you get into a flow with your shooting. This is why I'm a big fan of Leica gear even though I believe Leica will never win a spec-sheet shootout with any other popular brand. You just can't determine 'shooting experience' without trying the gear first. Unfortunately most never give Leica a fair chance due to the cost of entry.
Where I have some reservations about the SL is WA M lens performance. The results with my 28 Cron (v1) and 21 SEM showed some edge sharpness degradation/smearing reminiscent of using WA lenses on the Sony cameras, though not quite as bad. But still not as good at wider apertures as on the M9 or M240. I suspect this is one reason for the recent 28mm and 35 Cron refresh.
If I did not currently need to maintain a comprehensive Canon DSLR system for action/sports work, as well as events where their wireless radio flash system is at times very useful, I'd seriously consider adding an SL to my M kit because I feel it nicely augments some M shortcomings. But as it stands now, an SL would sit somewhere between the M and DSLR in feature-set and capabilities, without replacing either. Rather, I will wait to see what the next M body offers in respect to enhanced live view and add-on EVF capability. It very well may be similarly specced to the SL, yet retain the RF characteristics I greatly value.
In any case, I really enjoyed your photos, irrelevant of the camera used. As with the Lensrentals comparison, it's 99.99999% of the time going to be irrelevant to the viewers of your photos. IMO, where it will most make a difference is in your enjoyment of the process of creating images. How the cameras feel, how transparent they become in the process by not interfering when you get into a flow with your shooting. This is why I'm a big fan of Leica gear even though I believe Leica will never win a spec-sheet shootout with any other popular brand. You just can't determine 'shooting experience' without trying the gear first. Unfortunately most never give Leica a fair chance due to the cost of entry.