YYV_146
Well-known
Today's SL announcement was deeply disappointing to me for a number of reasons. As far as I am concerned, Leica has not provided a single reason why this camera is fundamentally superior or more attractive than a number of other options.
Practically, who is going to buy this thing at $7,500? The first native prime in the system is due a whole year from now, and (in my opinion) the SL's size is far too large to comfortably use most M lenses.
Of course, we like to argue that Leica doesn't really care about photography or the photographers in its customer base. But it does seem reasonable for them to care about continuing the photography tradition in some way...reputation inevitably wears down without new, reputable photographers getting into the Leica game. Of course, that might just be the economist talking nonsense to the marketing guy.
So why not give a tiny bit more to the old-school rangefinder folks? A digital RF with some kind of simulated focusing aid? A new film RF that isn't $3,000? Actually updating some of the relatively weaker M options instead of churning out $7,000 super-lenses?
As for the "new age" crowd, I don't get Leica's strategy either. The fixed-lens bodies have been hit-and-miss. The Leica Q is objectively an awesome camera, but it's been out of stock for months and I don't even know how to get one. The Leica T looks good on paper, but ultimately prices itself far out of its league. And I think Leica realizes the importance of getting to "professionals", but will any professional ditch their trusty SLR system for a $12,000 package with one available lens?
I'm not a Leica hater by any stretch of imagination...to the contrary, I've invested deeply into the M system as a source of fast, exotic optics. And I would seriously considering buying a Q if I didn't have to put down a deposit and wait indefinitely for one. So what are the good people in Solms (or is it now Wetzlar?) thinking?
ellisson
Well-known
Probably a nice performing camera if you need 12 fps, which I can't see as something that takes it into the realm of sports action professional photography with currently available cameras/lenses and people who won't put out that kind of money when the alternatives are very good and less costly. And if you want the zoom lens they advertise, throw in another $4500+.
Guess I'll stick to medium format film cameras when I'm infected with the higher megapixel virus.
Guess I'll stick to medium format film cameras when I'm infected with the higher megapixel virus.
Last edited:
benmacphoto
Well-known
The same people who buy new M240s which cost $7200?
Doesn't the M240 have live view with focus peaking?
Most likely not many will switch, but the SL specifications look great for an all around camera. Ergonomics aside, we only have photos to judge by, the camera hit some high points with how and what I like to shoot.
Price disqualifies me from even thinking about one though.
JHP
Well-known
Like any pro sports shooter is going to sell their Canon/Nikon system, with all their lenses, to fund perhaps 1 body and 1 lens at that price.
:bang::bang:
Just my opinion.
YYV_146
Well-known
YYV_146
Well-known
Livesteamer
Well-known
It's a fine example of the law of diminishing returns. Not in my budget. Joe
GaryLH
Mentor
It's a Leica, never gonna happen.. High quality low volume sales strategy..
The Leica Q, X, & T are what I believe Leica has aimed at the low end price range.
If I want the Leica experience, I'll shoot film.
Gary
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
I'm not buying one (I have two Ms, and that's more than enough for my lack of spare time).
But a camera with an extremely compelling EVF (it's 4.2 megapixels!) and inbuilt ability to correct for every Leica M, R, or T lens ever made is nothing to sneeze at. I would like it a little better with phase-detect split-screen focus (like the X-T1 and X100T).
The one thing I don't get is why this went from being rumored to be a $5K camera (8 with lens) to being a $12K proposition. I think you would actually get a lot of older takers from the M ranks with something like this.
Dante
But a camera with an extremely compelling EVF (it's 4.2 megapixels!) and inbuilt ability to correct for every Leica M, R, or T lens ever made is nothing to sneeze at. I would like it a little better with phase-detect split-screen focus (like the X-T1 and X100T).
The one thing I don't get is why this went from being rumored to be a $5K camera (8 with lens) to being a $12K proposition. I think you would actually get a lot of older takers from the M ranks with something like this.
Dante
x-ray
Mentor
As a professional I would not buy this camera and guess there will be few that will. Its not as much about price as it is the lack of long fast glass and mature system. Also for those of us making a living with our equipment a professional support service such as Nikon Professional Seevices (NPS) and the Canon equivalent (CPS) are essential. Repairs do happen with any system and Nikon offers to full time pros 5 day turnaround and free loaners during repairs on both lenses and cameras. Also they will loan free of charge other than fedex shipping camera bodies and lenses for special projects. At major functions like the Kentucky Derby and dozens of other events Nikon sends a truck with a team of repair techs to fix anything on the spot if something fails or is damaged. If the can't fix it they have a truck full of all Of their lenses to loan free for the event. They have done this as long as Ive been a nikon user which is forty five years. I believe canon has a similar program.
What does Leica do for us pros? They do absutely nothing. I owned an M9 which spent months in the shop ( bought new and under warranty ) and a cash of new lenses and could not get them to loan me a body or lens despite having used their gear for almost 50 years. I guess that service is reserved for wealthy dentists.
Until Leica puts in place a full support system for pros comparable to Nikon and has a mature system of lenses from 14mm to 600mm with zooms they will never be widely used professionally.
Leica has to clean up its act with regard to reliability too. Sensor corrosion and freezing due to card incompatibility are unacceptable.
My personal opinion, why buy a camera like this to stick on the back of a huge 600mm f4 or a lens like the 14-24 2.8 Nikkor? There are too many superb cameras and lenses that are mature systems with readily available new and used equipment that are extremely reliable and reasonably priced.
The people that buy it will be the dedicated Leica base that must have what they perceive as the best. It will be the same people that buy the M240.
What does Leica do for us pros? They do absutely nothing. I owned an M9 which spent months in the shop ( bought new and under warranty ) and a cash of new lenses and could not get them to loan me a body or lens despite having used their gear for almost 50 years. I guess that service is reserved for wealthy dentists.
Until Leica puts in place a full support system for pros comparable to Nikon and has a mature system of lenses from 14mm to 600mm with zooms they will never be widely used professionally.
Leica has to clean up its act with regard to reliability too. Sensor corrosion and freezing due to card incompatibility are unacceptable.
My personal opinion, why buy a camera like this to stick on the back of a huge 600mm f4 or a lens like the 14-24 2.8 Nikkor? There are too many superb cameras and lenses that are mature systems with readily available new and used equipment that are extremely reliable and reasonably priced.
The people that buy it will be the dedicated Leica base that must have what they perceive as the best. It will be the same people that buy the M240.
willie_901
Mentor
If you can afford this system, you can also afford someone to carry it around for you.
These won't show up on NFL sidelines or other action photography venues.
Does anyone know if the EVF lag has been published?
These won't show up on NFL sidelines or other action photography venues.
Does anyone know if the EVF lag has been published?
FrozenInTime
Well-known
How long before we get a new M body with the SL/Q sensor ?
YYV_146
Well-known
A lot of us can technically "afford" this system...price-wise it's on par with the M system, although there isn't a standard zoom M lens to compare with the 24-90.
But why would you want to "afford" this? At least the M is a unique experience. This is the experience of an X-T1 plus the IQ of an 1st gen A7.
f16sunshine
Moderator
flyingpalm
Well-known
Ugly indeed.
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
It even looks like a Sony a7 at first glance. But upon second look, it's uglier. No one in their right mind, except for the aforementioned rich dentists, should consider buying this camera over a Sony. Okay, except a few rich fanboys too.
Exactly -- what the hell are they thinking??? The Q is a cute camera, a Q with interchangeable lenses would have made some sense in the scheme of things. This camera is BRAIN DEAD.
Exactly -- what the hell are they thinking??? The Q is a cute camera, a Q with interchangeable lenses would have made some sense in the scheme of things. This camera is BRAIN DEAD.
jarski
Mentor
guess reaction here is pretty much as expected.
looks like usable camera to me, no doubt it makes great photos too. but at what price, no thanks!
looks like usable camera to me, no doubt it makes great photos too. but at what price, no thanks!
BillBingham2
Registered User
Brain Farts Happen.......
Folks will buy it, perhaps there will be a Kardashian version, more folks will by that.........
B2 (;->
rscheffler
Well-known
I agree with you that Leica needs to seriously improve their service support to more closely match NPS and CPS. As a CPS member, my experience with Leica is leagues different. Leica is much, much too slow at turn arounds and is not necessarily consistent at fixing the problem the first time around.
That said I disagree with the sentiment of your point above. The M240 has merits that are unique in the photography market and has relevance to the needs of some working photographers.
When I first saw the SL and read the marketing fluff, I too was wondering who would buy it. But the more user feedback I've read (Leica Rumors, Kristian Dowling, Ming Thein, Jono Slack, etc.) the more I'm coming around to it. First of all, the technology/electronics package is quite impressive and bodes well for future Leica cameras. In some areas the SL is unmatched by competitors. There's no reason some or much of this can't make it's way into a future M (which of course will retain the optical RF/VF). Secondly, the SL addresses a niche in the mirrorless market not filled by Sony or anyone else. Many seem fixated on mirrorless = small. This doesn't have to be. As a longtime D/SLR user, I like a good-sized camera. I've used the Sony a7 series cameras, but have never bought one for myself in part because the ergonomics/UI is far from appealing, to me, despite the technical capabilities of the cameras. The SL is closer to what I would prefer with a feature set that makes sense to me (other than the omission of IBIS and possibly electronic first curtain shutter and/or fully electronic shutter).
As with many things Leica, the price doesn't necessarily make sense relative to the perceived value based on the spec sheet, meaning it's very easy to just disregard it. Whether the SL retains enough of the Leica 'shooting experience' in use is another matter, to be determined by each of us based on our own needs, wants and desires.
Richard G
Mentor
I am looking outside of RFF to get a balanced consideration of what this camera is really about.