Rangefinderforum.com

Rangefinderforum.com (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/index.php)
-   Leica SL (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=235)
-   -   SL or SL2? (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170106)

raid 11-28-2019 18:26

SL or SL2?
 
Which is a better move up from an M9:

SL + APO Summicron 50/2 SL

or

SL2 + M adapter ( and then use my M ;enses) ?

I am unable to get an SL2 with the APO Cron.

BillBlackwell 11-28-2019 19:05

I'd go for the SL2. Obtaining that camera (at its current price) to use with my M lenses would be a great temptation had I not purchased an M10-P just days prior to the SL2's release.

Doug 11-29-2019 00:01

I sympathize with your position, Raid. I too have bought expensive gear not because of professional need but because I wanted it. And indeed I've enjoyed using this gear and don't regret the expense.

So... I would suggest you get what you really want. The Summicron-L is apparently an exquisitely rendering lens but you may find it easier to acquire later. The SL/SL2 is not ideal with M lenses and you lose AF too. Still, I think you'd probably regret not getting the SL2 at the outset, with the feeling you'd chosen second-best.

That's how I'd think about it, I think. :) I bought a Q, but it was before the Q2 was known, so I harbor no regrets. It would be different now!

leicapixie 11-29-2019 01:37

Raid the camera and it's native lenses is way larger than M gear!
I am old and can no longer drag stuff like that around..
When I was a pro, with my Pentax or later Nikon kit, i was paid..
Think about these large and unnecessary lenses..
Your photography is and has always been better than about equipment..
I loved images with Pentax gear and your lovely family.

Out to Lunch 11-29-2019 02:26

Rent it for a week or so and see whether or not you can handle the bulk and weight.

steveyork 11-29-2019 03:23

Definitely the Leicaflex SL. You're talking about those cameras, right? :)

splitimageview 11-29-2019 05:19

Depends on the price differences, but digital bodies depreciate a lot, lenses not so much especially if you buy used , if that matters.

raid 11-29-2019 05:27

The more I think about it all, the better it looks not to buy anything now. A low cost option is to get an SL with M adapter, and stop with this purchase. Someone at the Leica Forum posted yesterday that he bought an SL für $2000.

I am not a professional photographer. I can see the point to get AF and IS when you get paid for your photography,

robert blu 11-29-2019 05:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2926633)
...

I am not a professional photographer. I can see the point to get AF and IS when you get paid for your photography,

...or when your eyes get older...but yours are still young Raid :)

raid 11-29-2019 05:47

Thank you Robert. I am lucky that I do not need to wear glasses or contacts yet.

Ko.Fe. 11-29-2019 06:01

You have M8 and M9. Keep same pattern, get CL and SL. :)

Godfrey 11-29-2019 06:21

Having owned the SL and loved it, using SL, R, and M lenses on it, and sold it all for lack of use ... if I were to buy another SL series camera I'd go with the SL2 body first and use whatever lenses M or R lenses I had on it, then buy whichever SL series lenses I wanted afterwards.

I don't care what anyone else says about what works best regarding M or R lenses. I've used the camera extensively with both. Both series lenses perform extremely well, the difference is in ergonomics primarily. The R lenses' ergonomics suit the body's layout a bit better, and M lenses constrain somewhat the use of the camera's excellent TTL focusing/viewing capabilities due to their relatively limited close focus abilities, but both of these are minor issues.

Using the SL/SL2 with M or R lenses does not support AF, or Program mode, or Shutter priority mode. Again, IMO, it's easier to focus with the SL than it is with the M—the viewfinder is that good, and you have superb focusing aids*(both peaking and magnification) that you don't have with the M. So, for me, the lack of AF is far less significant than many seem to imply: I have (always had) crappy eyes and I can prove that my focusing with the SL always outperforms my focusing ability with the M cameras by pointing to several thousands of exposures with both. :)

Regards weight and size, the SL is a larger, heavier camera. It's 10mm wider, and 30mm taller to the top of the EVF hump, compared to the M. The body measured in absolutes is deeper too, due to the protusion of the viewfinder ocular and the built-in grip, but where you grip it is actually about the same depth other than the grip itself. The largest difference is that it's about a half to 3/4 pound heavier, kind of the typical difference between any M and a professional grade SLR body (like a Nikon F4 or Canon F-1 whatever) historically. The additional of lens weight depends on what lens you use, of course, and many M lenses are both small physically and light in consequence. Summary: If you like how a pro-grade SLR or DSLR feels, the SL fits your hands the same way.

Should you spend the money for one? This is the key question, of course, and only you can make answer to that. What are you looking for? Why is such a purchase of interest to you, personally?

I loved the SL and, when I bought it, its capabilities and advantages over any other digital camera I had used were an immediate win for my photography. As time went on, and I retired, and I closed down my still existing but small photo business, I found myself not using it other than for specific niche capabilities in macro, tabletop, and long lens work that the M is simply unsuited for. I decided that such an expensive collection of equipment as an SL body and a pair of superb SL zooms that I had was foolish to hold onto if I wasn't going to use them a lot and sold them off. I bought a CL body to use with my R lenses for those niche capabilities ... the smaller format and lighter/smaller body were actually a plus for them over using the SL in some ways. Over time, I've found that the CL does what I want for such a large portion of my photography such that I hardly used the M-D at all any more, and I sold the M-D262 as well.

There is a still extant bit of my photography that could benefit from a larger format camera and after much rumination and consideration, I decided that I needed a larger format to really address it the way I want to. And by larger, I mean larger than the difference between APS-C and FF. Since I already have a complete Hasselblad 500CM film camera kit, the sensible thing for me to do was to extend that with Hasselblad medium format digital equipment rather than buy back into FF format digital gear. It's a personal choice, both objective and emotional, but I simply prefer the Hasselblad "box with a lens on the end" form factor over the hand-held 35mm SLR or RF form factor for that work. I look forward to when the 907x Special Edition I ordered arrives.. And I've taken the 500CM out of its long storage and been shooting with it, have revisited how much I love it. It's the right thing for me to do.

You have to come to grips with what you want, and what's going to do your photography the most good. Sometimes, buying nothing is the biggest plus, putting your energy into seeing, traveling, and thinking of photographs rather than what equipment is best. And sometimes, getting that special camera that inspires you to see differently is the right thing.

Good luck! :D

G

"No matter where you go, there you are."


Hasselblad 500CM + Distagon 50mm f/4 T*

raid 11-29-2019 06:40

Thank you Godfrey.
It is a good time for reflection on what I want.

jsrockit 11-29-2019 06:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2926586)
SL + APO Summicron 50/2 SL

I would go for this. It is a sufficient upgrade to the M9 and you'll have a native lens to use with your body. You don't appear to be the high res type, and 24mp is still a small upgrade. I do like your decision to maybe do nothing a bit more though. For M lenses, I still think it is best to stick to an M body.

raid 11-29-2019 06:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit (Post 2926649)
I would go for this. It is a sufficient upgrade to the M9 and you'll have a native lens to use with your body. You don't appear to be the high res type, and 24mp is still a small upgrade. I do like your decision to maybe do nothing a bit more though. For M lenses, I still think it is best to stick to an M body.

Switching over to using SL lenses (only) would remove the enjoyment of using the older M or LTM lenses. The size of the SL or SL2 camera is a problem too. It is not an optimal solution to just leave the M cameras and use SL or similar.

For extra details I can use my Rolleiflex TLR or the SWC.

raid 11-29-2019 07:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godfrey (Post 2926644)
Having owned the SL and loved it, using SL, R, and M lenses on it, and sold it all for lack of use ... if I were to buy another SL series camera I'd go with the SL2 body first and use whatever lenses M or R lenses I had on it, then buy whichever SL series lenses I wanted afterwards.

I don't care what anyone else says about what works best regarding M or R lenses. I've used the camera extensively with both. Both series lenses perform extremely well, the difference is in ergonomics primarily. The R lenses' ergonomics suit the body's layout a bit better, and M lenses constrain somewhat the use of the camera's excellent TTL focusing/viewing capabilities due to their relatively limited close focus abilities, but both of these are minor issues.

Using the SL/SL2 with M or R lenses does not support AF, or Program mode, or Shutter priority mode. Again, IMO, it's easier to focus with the SL than it is with the M—the viewfinder is that good, and you have superb focusing aids*(both peaking and magnification) that you don't have with the M. So, for me, the lack of AF is far less significant than many seem to imply: I have (always had) crappy eyes and I can prove that my focusing with the SL always outperforms my focusing ability with the M cameras by pointing to several thousands of exposures with both. :)

Regards weight and size, the SL is a larger, heavier camera. It's 10mm wider, and 30mm taller to the top of the EVF hump, compared to the M. The body measured in absolutes is deeper too, due to the protusion of the viewfinder ocular and the built-in grip, but where you grip it is actually about the same depth other than the grip itself. The largest difference is that it's about a half to 3/4 pound heavier, kind of the typical difference between any M and a professional grade SLR body (like a Nikon F4 or Canon F-1 whatever) historically. The additional of lens weight depends on what lens you use, of course, and many M lenses are both small physically and light in consequence. Summary: If you like how a pro-grade SLR or DSLR feels, the SL fits your hands the same way.

Should you spend the money for one? This is the key question, of course, and only you can make answer to that. What are you looking for? Why is such a purchase of interest to you, personally?

I loved the SL and, when I bought it, its capabilities and advantages over any other digital camera I had used were an immediate win for my photography. As time went on, and I retired, and I closed down my still existing but small photo business, I found myself not using it other than for specific niche capabilities in macro, tabletop, and long lens work that the M is simply unsuited for. I decided that such an expensive collection of equipment as an SL body and a pair of superb SL zooms that I had was foolish to hold onto if I wasn't going to use them a lot and sold them off. I bought a CL body to use with my R lenses for those niche capabilities ... the smaller format and lighter/smaller body were actually a plus for them over using the SL in some ways. Over time, I've found that the CL does what I want for such a large portion of my photography such that I hardly used the M-D at all any more, and I sold the M-D262 as well.

There is a still extant bit of my photography that could benefit from a larger format camera and after much rumination and consideration, I decided that I needed a larger format to really address it the way I want to. And by larger, I mean larger than the difference between APS-C and FF. Since I already have a complete Hasselblad 500CM film camera kit, the sensible thing for me to do was to extend that with Hasselblad medium format digital equipment rather than buy back into FF format digital gear. It's a personal choice, both objective and emotional, but I simply prefer the Hasselblad "box with a lens on the end" form factor over the hand-held 35mm SLR or RF form factor for that work. I look forward to when the 907x Special Edition I ordered arrives.. And I've taken the 500CM out of its long storage and been shooting with it, have revisited how much I love it. It's the right thing for me to do.

You have to come to grips with what you want, and what's going to do your photography the most good. Sometimes, buying nothing is the biggest plus, putting your energy into seeing, traveling, and thinking of photographs rather than what equipment is best. And sometimes, getting that special camera that inspires you to see differently is the right thing.

Good luck! :D

G

"No matter where you go, there you are."


Hasselblad 500CM + Distagon 50mm f/4 T*




Thanks for sharing your experience with your own cameras, such as the SL. Since the M9's sensor issues have been resolved (it seems), there is no rush to get a new model camera with high MP. I take mainly photos of static objects at daylight, so the M9 is still doing well in such an environment.

I will try to avoid GAS this year, and maybe during the spring I will know better what I want to do regarding getting a camera or lens or any other items.

Ko.Fe. 11-29-2019 08:33

I hope you are going to make it, Raid. Something like 33 days left to hold this year GAS.

jsrockit 11-29-2019 09:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2926652)
Switching over to using SL lenses (only) would remove the enjoyment of using the older M or LTM lenses. The size of the SL or SL2 camera is a problem too. It is not an optimal solution to just leave the M cameras and use SL or similar.

For extra details I can use my Rolleiflex TLR or the SWC.

I agree completely, but you asked the question! ;)

raid 11-29-2019 09:10

Asking the question can help get some issues clarified.
Maybe the SL system is not meant for me now.

jsrockit 11-29-2019 09:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2926685)
Asking the question can help get some issues clarified.
Maybe the SL system is not meant for me now.

Of course sir. I wasn't being combative in any way. That is what the forum is for. What made you decide against the M240 (or something similar)?

raid 11-29-2019 09:46

Leica gave me an M240 as a loaner for 8 months. This camera is rock solid and functions well. However, it feels like brick. It is too thick.

Emile de Leon 11-29-2019 10:33

Unless the camera definitively fills a niche or pro $$ factor..or just for your innate happiness..
Why bother..whipping out the card..
As most of us have more than enough cams already..to make art..

I sure do..have enough cams that is..

If I had that superwide Hassie..I probably would make it my main cam for personal projects..as well as the M9..

And leave most all the the other digital stuff for a working/$$ context..
But if you get the SL..why not just go whole hog..and get the most recent..

Get it and that 35mmm apo..if you need weather proofing..
Which I would imagine living in FL..would be a plus..
And start lifting weights..lol..

raid 11-29-2019 15:41

I am content with my lenses and cameras. Maybe I am OK with what I already own and use. I love using the SWC, by the way. My Hologon in M mount is also very special.

Archiver 11-29-2019 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by raid (Post 2926691)
Leica gave me an M240 as a loaner for 8 months. This camera is rock solid and functions well. However, it feels like brick. It is too thick.


If the M240 feels like a brick, how would you be with a SL? Would the grip make it more comfortable?


When I handled the SL a long time ago, it felt really heavy, and the edges were sharp, unlike the nice smooth roundness of the M9. A couple of weekends ago, I played with the SL2 with APO Summicron 35 at the Leica store, and it felt better than the SL2, although still largeish and solid. The indentation in the SL2's grip does make a difference to how it feels.


I feel like a SL would be an upgrade from the M9, and the SL2 is a definite upgrade in terms of tech and performance, but what about overall shooting? What about weight and carry? Is there are reason why you are choosing between a SL with 50 Summicron L or SL2 with M adapter? Why not just get a SL with M adapter and use your existing M lenses?


Secondhand SLs can be had for a reasonable money, and you get to discover if it is right for you. If you buy from a dealer with a return policy, you could try it for a few days and figure out if the jump to SL would be worth it, or if the SL makes you happy as it is.

raid 11-29-2019 16:18

You are right about the logical choice of the SL and not the costly SL2. It is also true that the larger sized SL may not be what I will enjoy using. The M10 makes more sense.

Ko.Fe. 11-29-2019 17:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archiver (Post 2926750)
...

I feel like a SL would be an upgrade from the M9, and the SL2 ...


The only upgrade from M9 is M10. SL is update from Sony A7 (for colors).

raid 11-29-2019 18:54

I view the SL as a DSLR and not an improved M9.
Could be a complementary camera to the M9.

Eric T 11-30-2019 08:43

Raid,
I would get the SL2 and use with M-glass or Panasonic L-mount glass. The Leica glass is way too heavy and expensive for my tastes. The Panasonic L-mount looks great but I haven't used it myself.
I just got a Sigma fp and am using it with the Sigma 45mm f2.8 and adapted Sigma SA lenses. I am very happy with the images and appreciate the small size of the Sigma fp.
But either way, SL or SL2, you can't go wrong.
Eric

Emile de Leon 11-30-2019 10:33

OT...
Quote:

I just got a Sigma fp and am using it with the Sigma 45mm f2.8 and adapted Sigma SA lenses. I am very happy with the images and appreciate the small size of the Sigma fp.
This is the one to get imo..
I'm still thinking about it..
If it only had a place to put a finder on top..I would have already gotten it..
How is it with M WA glass?

Huss 11-30-2019 10:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. (Post 2926679)
I hope you are going to make it, Raid. Something like 33 days left to hold this year GAS.

Thoughts and prayers for Raid’s GAS.

Has anyone on this site posted this many ‘what should I buy’ threads?

The honest answer is it wouldn’t make any difference.
Think about it...

oldwino 11-30-2019 13:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emile de Leon (Post 2926847)
OT...
This is the one to get imo..
I'm still thinking about it..
If it only had a place to put a finder on top..I would have already gotten it..
How is it with M WA glass?

You could put an OVF in the hot shoe attachment.

Emile de Leon 11-30-2019 13:37

Quote:

You could put an OVF in the hot shoe attachment.
I would want to keep it small...and use as a super wide angle point and shoot cam..w/o any attachments except viewfinder..
So I'm holding off on it for now..

Eric T 12-01-2019 12:20

For some reason, I can't get manual M mount lenses to work on the Sigma fp. I know others have no issues so I suspect there is a setting I am missing. Ofter mirrorless cameras have a setting that says something like "shoot without lens" but I don't see that in the Sigma fp menu. I am using an LM to LT adapter.
I was put off by the lack of viewfinder at first. But I noticed that I am getting perspectives without a viewfinder that I would miss with one.
The IQ out of the Sigma fp is terrific. You will be pleased.

mervynyan 12-01-2019 12:40

SL2 off course

Emile de Leon 12-01-2019 13:11

Quote:

For some reason, I can't get manual M mount lenses to work on the Sigma fp
.
Thx for the M lens info on the fp..
If this changes let me know!
Cheers

jsrockit 12-01-2019 15:20

Plenty of people using M lenses on the Fp around the internet...I'd ask elsewhere how to do it.

padam 12-24-2019 00:26

You can also have something from the EOS R, Nikon Z or Sony A7 family (and Nikon and all but the oldest Sony cameras do have IBIS) and have it modified by Kolari Vision, after that the cameras will play well with Leica M glass and even with that they still cost a lot less than an SL2.

shawn 12-24-2019 04:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric T (Post 2927027)
For some reason, I can't get manual M mount lenses to work on the Sigma fp. I know others have no issues so I suspect there is a setting I am missing. Ofter mirrorless cameras have a setting that says something like "shoot without lens" but I don't see that in the Sigma fp menu. I am using an LM to LT adapter.
I was put off by the lack of viewfinder at first. But I noticed that I am getting perspectives without a viewfinder that I would miss with one.
The IQ out of the Sigma fp is terrific. You will be pleased.

I don’t have the FP but make sure you are in MF mode. Also try changing to release priority. The camera should work fine with adapted lenses, Sigma’s video of it shows it with a Summicron on it. FP look great with all the AR options it has. Upcoming Foveon L mount should be a great camera.

Shawn

Calzone 12-30-2019 04:44

Rumored is a M-EVF.

Pretty much a SL in a smaller body optimized for M-lenses?

Let's see...

Cal

Calzone 12-30-2019 05:54

Rumor also about a Q2 Monochrom.

Perhaps this is a baby-step towards a SL2-Monochrom.

Cal


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:06.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.