Leica Anyone here bought the SL

I think the camera industry has decided that "bigger means better", and that the more expensive an item is- the bigger it needs to be to make it all worth it. A 58mm filter for a 50/1.8 lens seems excessive to me, there is a lot of empty space the Nikon 50/1.8 AF-S. The Nikon 58/1.4 AF-S uses a 72mm filter, same as a Canon 50/0.95.

Leica is following this tend it seems, bigger is better. It used to be that "Heavier means better" when Brass and Glass was used.

13678694053_bcc99f7202_o.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Two Leicas, Three Sonnars by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
 
Less than 6 months and I have started seeing some used SL for sale at below MSRP price. Wonder how this camera is really selling? I remember the first few months of Leica T where Leica just did not import enough (I wonder if it is by design) and no one can get their hands on one, temporarily inflating the price.
 
Wow, that's fast for used and below MSRP.

OK, let's hope that SL sales aren't a complete rout, and are in line with Leica's expectations. It may be that the SL is mostly meant to "establish the flagship" and that we'll see more enthusiast-oriented models soon enough. I could be wrong, but it's my best guess that they'll see the biggest profits from cameras aimed toward enthusiasts.

If it's going to be really, really expensive, make certain it's something we'll really, really, really want.
 
Such a large pro camera with a comparatively small sensor at 24 mp. I had a fantasy about buying it to use only with the 28-84 lens, providing Leica would create or order a case to fit it and protect the lens, but i knew it would never happen, so nothing was lost on my end. Now I can be more objective. I have a lot of landscape images that would look better with 40 mp, instead of the 24 mp I have now. Not to mention the other benefits of a larger sensor. Of course, I'm very happy to have the 24x36 - 24 mp sensor in a small camera like the 'Q' - very happy indeed - but realistically, the SL is going to be seen as having a bottleneck, like funneling 5 lanes of L.A. freeway traffic into 3 lanes at some point, because some genius thought the extra 2 lanes will always be taking the fork to the left or right.
 
Long time M user and I bought this a few weeks back, body and 24-90 mm lens. Happy so far, steep learning curve if you are an M user, the menus and 4 buttons are not as intuitive as you might expect, for example to get to focus peeking, you need to press the BR button N times depending on where you are.... Create user profiles for situations asap, they make the camera much more usable. I have one for portraits, one for landscapes etc...will save navigating the menus unless you have something in particular you need to change. Agree the camera is heavy, but no more so than a higher spec Nikon or Cannon. I changed the strap to something more substantial which made carrying easier. Most of what I do is travel and street photography, so the camera is a bit intrusive compared to the M, but I will use each where appropriate. The zoom is fine, I wish it was constant aperture across the zoom, f4 at 90mm isn't great. The best thing however is the ability to use my M lenses with the adapter. I have a substantial investment in M glass so this was vital. Focusing is EASY with the zoom in the viewfinder and focus peeking. To be honest image quality withe zoom is almost as good as the primes, with the exception of the fab bokeh with the 90mm at f2-f2.8. I'm hoping for a fast AF prime in this length at some time for portraits. Anything else, price, of course, the lens is expensive...start-up is SLOW if the wlan and gps are on, turn them off unless you need them. iPhone app is fun, trigger the camera from the phone when you want to be sneaky in taking a shot..
Will update as I use the camera more, Here's a shot from last weeks trip to Death Valley...
 

Attachments

  • L1000049.jpg
    L1000049.jpg
    180.2 KB · Views: 66
When it was first introduced, I was not really excited about this camera simply because I thought it look really ugly. After a few months, of reading reviews and seeing the images from this camera, I started getting the itch to try it out (meaning, buying it). Then I started to see the price drop on the used market. Great sign I thought. Maybe in a year, I will get this. Instead of the SL however, I decided to pick up a Nikon D810. Right now, I have a 50mm Summicron-R, 60 Elmarit R and 100mm APO Elmarit R that I converted to F mount. Great result so far. Only wished that there is some kind of focus peaking with the OVF. Using that little dot at the bottom is very inefficient. But at around $4K in price differential, not bad. For AF, I got the 135DC and the 70-200 VR II. Plus, I have the Nikon CLS to play with. The IQ is not bad too. Great DR. Overall, I think the camera can do a heck of a lot more than my capability so for now, the D810 is my not-Leica Leica.
 
Thanks for your thoughts on the SL so far, Colin. And welcome!

I'm getting the feeling that the SL is a camera that I'll really want, once I get it in my hands. Because I don't have the funds for one, I'd better not be given one to try then!

That 24-90 mm has such a useful range, most would rarely need to swap it out. Have you had a chance to shoot it into the sun so check it's sun flare control and sun star patterns?
 
Back
Top