The Leica SL: the new AF Leica
- Thread starter Bille
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 273
- Views 27K
harpofreely
Well-known
N
Ned Bojic
Guest
All I can say is that Leica is solidifying my love towards the M line (film, mind you).
And Give me all the old lenses with character. They actually contribute to my photography, not killing it like the otus and mastodon new lux.
And Give me all the old lenses with character. They actually contribute to my photography, not killing it like the otus and mastodon new lux.
Michael Markey
Veteran
Well I have to say that I feel the same , which surprises me a little ,but I`m failing to see the point in this latest offering.
Bille
Well-known
List price of 6.900 € body only. What are they thinking?
Thanks, I´ll take the a7 and a bag of lenses instead. Or two bags.
Thanks, I´ll take the a7 and a bag of lenses instead. Or two bags.
Michael Markey
Veteran
Well my local Leica dealer claims that the orders are "rolling in already" ... so what do I know. 🙂
fireblade
Vincenzo.
If they have an adapter for Nikon lenses i'll buy 3 of them, thanks 😀
DominikDUK
Well-known
The front isn't the prettiest but the back looks great so do the displays. The EVF seems to be great so what's not to like except the Price.
Want one but will have to sell one of my Kidneys to be able to afford it 🙁
Want one but will have to sell one of my Kidneys to be able to afford it 🙁
Corran
Well-known
For $4,000 less you can get a Nikon D4S and the new 24-70mm lens with constant f/2.8 and VR tech. Use that $4k to get a 70-200mm and a few fast primes. There's no way a full-time pro would buy this, and/or ditch their Nikon/Canon system for a Leica kit.
This camera is totally unrealistic IMO.
YYV_146
Well-known
The size is just insane. It has a larger footprint than some DSLRs. I can't even imagine putting a 35mm F2 ASPH or 24 Elmar on that thing.
If you're considering that size - and price range - already, why not just go for a S?
Leica, all you had to do was take the Q's lens off and replace it with a T mount to earn $4k of my money...instead, this.
If you're considering that size - and price range - already, why not just go for a S?
Leica, all you had to do was take the Q's lens off and replace it with a T mount to earn $4k of my money...instead, this.
fireblade
Vincenzo.
rbelyell
Well-known
but only focus peaking as manual focus aid? not even fujis digital split screen? wow, that is one of the big disappointments. back to your homes people, nothin to see here...
Monochrom
Well-known
TennesseJones
Well-known
I'm not sure I really understand this camera?
Terrifically expensive, in an established niche and quite large body/lenses.
Won't replace an M (unique type of camera).
Or a Sony A7 (size, price).
Or a Nikon D4 (lenses, indestructibility).
I understood the Q.
What is the SL's particular selling point?
Terrifically expensive, in an established niche and quite large body/lenses.
Won't replace an M (unique type of camera).
Or a Sony A7 (size, price).
Or a Nikon D4 (lenses, indestructibility).
I understood the Q.
What is the SL's particular selling point?
harpofreely
Well-known
I'll send cookies to whoever posts the first shot of this SL with a Hektor 28mm f6.3. Manicure optional.
fireblade
Vincenzo.
It has an O-ring seal around the battery thingy. That alone is worth the price..no?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Right size for what it is: a professional "S Light" model.
My R lenses will work perfectly on it.
New lenses would provide AF and other features.
Price is reasonable, less than my M-P.
Design looks brilliant in the same way the S is brilliant.
Not now, but in the future.
Bravo Leica!
G
My R lenses will work perfectly on it.
New lenses would provide AF and other features.
Price is reasonable, less than my M-P.
Design looks brilliant in the same way the S is brilliant.
Not now, but in the future.
Bravo Leica!
G
micromontenegro
Well-known
The photos MUST be misleading regarding size.
Otherwise, Leica went officialy bananas.
Otherwise, Leica went officialy bananas.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
The lenses, I guess?
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Its quite large, and quite expensive. I do hope to handle one someday. No question its a great-performing camera, etc. But I don't think I'll own one, not anytime soon.
Now, the original SL (the SL-2 actually) has been calling me lately. Between the 1 R lens I own, and an adaptall-2 for my Tamron lenses, I'm thinking of taking an SLR out for a spin again (haven't done that in years). I'll need to pick up the body first. Again, it will not be the new SL, my wife would shoot me, then put my body in the driveway and run it over a few times before dragging it to the dumpster (and who knows what else). You get the picture.......
Now, the original SL (the SL-2 actually) has been calling me lately. Between the 1 R lens I own, and an adaptall-2 for my Tamron lenses, I'm thinking of taking an SLR out for a spin again (haven't done that in years). I'll need to pick up the body first. Again, it will not be the new SL, my wife would shoot me, then put my body in the driveway and run it over a few times before dragging it to the dumpster (and who knows what else). You get the picture.......
Similar threads
